nach oben

Tipp

Aggregation biases in empirical Euler consumption equations: evidence from Spanish data

verfasst von: Antonio Cutanda, José M. Labeaga, Juan A. Sanchis-Llopis

Erschienen in: Empirical Economics | Ausgabe 3/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

This paper investigates the implications of aggregation in empirical analyses of Euler equations for consumption. We compare the results obtained after estimating the same model using total and non-durable microeconomic consumption data, from the maximum aggregation level (Spanish National Accounts) to household data from the Spanish Expenditure Survey (Encuesta Continua de Presupuestos Familiares). We use this survey to build cohort and aggregate data to test the model using different aggregate measures for consumption. The results we obtain confirm the theoretical predictions summarised in Blundell and Stoker (J Econ Lit 43:347–391, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1257/0022051054661486) as well as in previous empirical evidence, i.e. aggregation turns out to be crucial to empirically study Euler equations for consumption (Attanasio and Weber in Rev Econ Stud 60:631–649, 1993. https://doi.org/10.2307/229812) or when simulating real business cycle models (Guvenen in J Monet Econ 53:1451–1472, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2005.06.001). The estimated elasticity of intertemporal substitution (EIS) with aggregated data is biased as compared with the corresponding estimate using microeconomic data. Further, we find that the size of the bias increases with the level of aggregation. Finally, our estimates confirm Hall (J Polit Econ 96:339–357, 1988. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2704067) result that the EIS is not statistically different from zero, unless panel data are used.

Vorheriger Artikel Drink and smoke; drink or smoke? The interdependence between alcohol and cigarette consumption for men in China

Nächster Artikel Convergence of consumption patterns in the European Union

Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt 90 Tage mit der neuen Mini-Lizenz testen!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt 90 Tage mit der neuen Mini-Lizenz testen!

Jetzt informieren

In this framework, Lucas (1976) critique can be considered as the last strike over the empirical aggregate Keynesian consumption functions, and the most relevant impulse to the empirical analyses of consumption with individual data to estimate Euler equations. This is reflected in Hall (1978). Additionally, Geweke (1985) points out that the Lucas critique is equally valid for the parameters of the aggregator function used, an aspect usually not considered in the empirical analysis.

Indeed, diversity (age, race, education, place of residence…) is very important, so that, it is hard to justify models that do not allow for the presence of both observable and unobservable individual effects, which are usually correlated with income and consumption variables (Deaton 1992). The effects of heterogeneity on consumption constitute an issue, which even with the availability of individual data, is far from being solved (see, for instance, Alan et al. 2018).

As noted by Deaton (1992), no one who has looked at the year-to-year variation in reported consumption and income in a microeconomic data set comes away without being convinced that much of the variation is measurement error.

For instance, the Family Expenditure Survey in the UK, which has been collecting annual data on about 7000 households yearly since 1954.

For some purposes, and with large subsamples, sample averages may be precise enough to be analysed as if they were panel data. Otherwise, the sampling errors can be explicitly considered using an appropriate error in variables estimator (Deaton 1992).

We use this survey as it has the longest time span for households and would allow building household cohort data.

For simplicity, from now onwards we drop the index G labelling the group of goods.

Cutanda and Labeaga (2001) provide an example on this issue with Spanish data.

In Eq. (5), r is the interest rate at the aggregate level and δ is the aggregated discount rate.

There remain some differences between these two sets of aggregated variables (see Table 1) due to several reasons. First, the period available for each series is different for the three statistical reports: private consumption is available from 1970.1 to 1998.4, while expenditure on food and beverages is available only for the period 1980.1–1998.4. All data from the ECPF are available for the period 1985.1–1997.1. Second, the two first components of expenditures considered correspond to national aggregates, while the information from the ECPF is individual data. Therefore, we have to average individual information from the ECPF by quarters to get the corresponding and comparable national aggregates. For doing this, we use the grossing-up factors provided in the ECPF (there is a detailed explanation on the construction of these factors in the methodological guide of the survey).

There is an aggregate variable for food expenditure in the Regional Accounts data, but it is only trustworthy and available from 1985 onwards. For comparative purposes, we report statistics for this aggregate in Table 1.

We should point out that the results we get using this variable are in line with those obtained both for total and non-durable expenditure, at different levels of aggregation, for the Spanish economy (see, for example, Cutanda and Labeaga 2001).

Cohorts are constructed using the same methodology as Browning et al. (1985), Deaton (1985) and Blundell et al. (1994).

Cohort and panel data estimates are performed using the within-group estimator. In all cases, we cannot reject the null that individual effects are not correlated with the rest of covariates.

The lack of a good quality non-durable expenditure variable for the entire sample considered, prevents to check Ogaki and Reinhart (1998) hypothesis for the Spanish economy.

We do not introduce demographic variables in the NA specification, although we estimate the equations in per capita terms (see Attanasio and Weber 1993).

This exercise follows Campbell and Mankiw (1989) second approach, that is appropriate for micro-data (and can also be performed with aggregate data). However, it is different from their first approach which can only be applied with fully aggregated data.

As before, we have tested the validity of the instrument sets using the three tests mentioned before. We get that the tests perform properly for the cohort and panel data estimates, but not for the aggregate estimates.

In the cross section grouping we include all the individuals; the intermediate (young and old) age cohort includes all households where the age of the head of the household is between 30 and 45 (20 and 30, 40 and 50) years old in 1985.

We have assumed that the interest rate is endogenous but we have not explicitly assumed if the correlation comes from correlated effects or from simultaneity. Now, we assume that the correlation comes from correlated effects as the proper interest rate should be an after-tax interest rate, but we cannot calculate this variable, as we do not have information on household marginal tax rates.

Alan S, Browning M (2010) Estimating intertemporal allocation parameters using synthetic residual estimation. Rev Econ Stud 77:1231–1261. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-937X.2010.00607.x CrossRef

Alan S, Browning M, Ejrnæs M (2018) Income and consumption: a micro semi-structural analysis with pervasive heterogeneity. J Polit Econ. https://doi.org/10.1086/699186 CrossRef

Attanasio OP (1999) Consumption. In: Taylor JB, Woodford M (eds) Handbook of macroeconomics. Elsevier Science, North Holland, pp 741–812 CrossRef

Attanasio OP, Low H (2004) Estimating Euler equations. Rev Econ Dyn 7:406–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.red.2003.09.003 CrossRef

Attanasio OP, Weber G (1993) Consumption growth, the interest rate and aggregation. Rev Econ Stud 60:631–649. https://doi.org/10.2307/229812 CrossRef

Attanasio OP, Weber G (1995) Is consumption growth consistent with intertemporal optimization? Evidence from the consumer expenditure survey. J Polit Econ 103:1121–1157 CrossRef

Banks J, Blundell R, Tanner S (1998) Is there a retirement-savings puzzle? Am Econ Rev 88:769–788

Battistin E, Blundell R, Lewbel A (2009) Why is consumption more log normal than income? Gibrat’s law revisited. J Polit Econ 117:1140–1154. https://doi.org/10.1086/648995 CrossRef

Benito A (2006) Does job insecurity affect household consumption? Oxf Econ Pap 58:157–181. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpi041 CrossRef

Biederman DK, Goenner CF (2008) A life-cycle approach to the intertemporal elasticity of substitution. J Macroecon 30:481–498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmacro.2006.05.002 CrossRef

Blundell R, Stoker TM (2005) Heterogeneity and aggregation. J Econ Lit 43:347–391. https://doi.org/10.1257/0022051054661486 CrossRef

Blundell R, Browning M, Meghir C (1994) Consumer demand and the life-cycle allocation of household expenditure. Rev Econ Stud 61:57–80. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297877 CrossRef

Browning M, Deaton AS, Irish M (1985) A profitable approach to labor supply and commodity demands over the life-cycle. Econometrica 53:503–543 CrossRef

Campbell JY, Mankiw NG (1989) Consumption, income, and interest rates: reinterpreting the time series evidence. NBER Macroecon Ann 4:185–216 CrossRef

Carroll CD (2001) Death to the log-linearized consumption Euler equation! (and very poor health to the second-order approximation). Adv Macroecon. https://doi.org/10.2202/1534-6013.1003 CrossRef

Chamberlain G (1984) Panel Data. In: Griliches Z, Intrilligator MD (eds) Handbook of econometrics. Elsevier Science, North Holland, pp 1247–1318 CrossRef

Crossley TF, Low HW (2011) Is the elasticity of intertemporal substitution constant? J Eur Econ Assoc 9:87–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1542-4774.2010.01001.x CrossRef

Cutanda A, Labeaga JM (2001) Simulación de Perfiles de Consumo a partir de un Pseudo-Panel de la ECPF. Rev Econ Apl-Spain 26:95–123

Deaton AS (1985) Panel data from time series of cross sections. J Econom 30:109–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(85)90134-4 CrossRef

Deaton AS (1992) Understanding consumption. Clarendon Press, Oxford CrossRef

Debreu G (1974) Excess demand functions. J Math Econ 1:15–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4068(74)90032-9 CrossRef

Friedman M (1957) A theory of the consumption function. Princeton University Press, New Jersey CrossRef

Geweke J (1985) Macroeconomic modelling and the theory of the representative agent. Am Econ Rev 75:206–210

Gorman WM (1959) Separable utility and aggregation. Econometrica 27:469–481 CrossRef

Gourinchas PO, Parker JA (2002) Consumption over the life cycle. Econometrica 70:47–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00269 CrossRef

Grant C (2007) Estimating credit constraints among US households. Oxf Econ Pap 59:583–605 CrossRef

Guariglia A, Rossi M (2002) Consumption, habit formation, and precautionary saving: evidence from the British Household Panel Survey. Oxf Econ Pap 54:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/54.1.1 CrossRef

Guvenen F (2006) Reconciling conflicting evidence on the elasticity of intertemporal substitution: a macroeconomic perspective. J Monet Econ 53:1451–1472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2005.06.001 CrossRef

Hall RE (1978) Stochastic implications of the life cycle-permanent income hypothesis: theory and evidence. J Polit Econ 96:971–987 CrossRef

Hall RE (1988) Intertemporal substitution in consumption. J Polit Econ 96:339–357. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2704067 CrossRef

Hildebrand W (1998) How relevant are specifications of behavioral relations on the micro-level for modelling the time path of population aggregates? Eur Econ Rev 42:437–458 CrossRef

Jappelli T (1990) Who is credit constrained in the U.S. Economy? Q J Econ 105:219–234 CrossRef

Kirman AP (1992) Whom or what does the representative individual represent. J Econ Perspect 6:117–136 CrossRef

Lucas RE (1976) Econometric policy evaluation: a critique. In: Brunner K, Meltzer AH (eds) The Phillips curve and labour markets. Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 19–46

Mantel R (1974) On the characterization of aggregate excess demand. J Econ Theory 7:348–353 CrossRef

Mundlak Y (1978) On the pooling of time series and cross-section data. Econometrica 46:69–85 CrossRef

Ogaki M, Reinhart CM (1998) Measuring intertemporal substitution: the role of durable goods. J Polit Econ 106:1078–1098 CrossRef

Patterson KD, Pesaran B (1992) The intertemporal elasticity of substitution in consumption in the United States and the United Kingdom. Rev Econ Stat 74:573–584 CrossRef

Runkle DE (1991) Liquidity constraints and the permanent-income hypothesis. evidence from panel data. J Monet Econ 27:73–98 CrossRef

Sonnenschein H (1972) Market excess demand functions. Econometrica 40:549–563 CrossRef

Sonnenschein H (1973) Do “Walras” identity and continuity characterize the class of community excess demand functions? J Econ Theory 6:345–354 CrossRef

Stock JH, Yogo M (2005) Testing for weak instruments in linear IV regression. In: Andrews DWK (ed) Identification and inference for economic models. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 80–108 CrossRef

Toda AA, Walsh K (2015) The double power law in consumption and implications for testing Euler equations. J Polit Econ 123:1177–1200 CrossRef

Verbeek M, Nijman T (1992) Can cohort data be treated as genuine panel data. Empir Econ 17:9–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01192471 CrossRef

Yogo M (2004) Estimating the elasticity of intertemporal substitution when instruments are weak. Rev Econ Stat 86:797–810 CrossRef

Zeldes SP (1989) Consumption and liquidity constraints: an empirical investigation. J Polit Econ 97:305–346 CrossRef

Titel: Aggregation biases in empirical Euler consumption equations: evidence from Spanish data
verfasst von: Antonio Cutanda
José M. Labeaga
Juan A. Sanchis-Llopis
Publikationsdatum: 04.10.2018
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Empirical Economics / Ausgabe 3/2020
Print ISSN: 0377-7332
Elektronische ISSN: 1435-8921
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-018-1571-z

Springer Professional

Tipp

Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen

Aggregation biases in empirical Euler consumption equations: evidence from Spanish data

Abstract

Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Premium Partner

Springer Professional

Tipp

Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2020

Hysteresis losses in the Preisach framework

Network analysis to measure academic performance in economics

The role of human capital in energy-growth nexus: an international evidence

Drink and smoke; drink or smoke? The interdependence between alcohol and cigarette consumption for men in China

Forecasting precious metal returns with multivariate random forests

On the relationship between political alignment and government transfers: triple differences evidence from a developing country

Premium Partner