THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU
BỘ GIÁO DỤC VÀ ĐÀO TẠO t to ng hi ep w n lo ad ju y th yi pl n ua al n va ll fu oi m at nh z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm an Lu n va ey t re 2013 - Ă I T ỒC Í SĨ Ă L Ậ THÂM THÂM C T T C I G ĐẠI T t to ng BỘ GIÁO DỤC VÀ ĐÀO TẠO hi ep T G ĐẠI C I T T C w n lo ad ju y th yi pl n ua al n va THÂM ll fu THÂM oi m nh T - at C z z k jm ht vb 60340201 SĨ om Ă l.c gm L Ậ an Lu : PGS.TS S n va - Ă 2013 ey I t re T ỒC Í t to L ng hi ep T w n lo ad ju y th TÁC GIẢ LUẬ VĂ yi I U I pl n ua al D n va ll fu oi m at nh z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm an Lu n va ey t re L t to T B ng hi ọ T p Ả Gá Đ ồC ạ Đạ ọ T Đạ ề ọ p ep w T T ầ C T n y th p ju T ầ – PGS.TS Đ yi ồC ọ p al óp ý p n ll fu ! va ề è n ọ ua ỉ k T pl T X T ad T ọ lo T Đạ oi m Tá at nh z z D k jm ht vb om l.c gm an Lu n va ey t re t to L ng hi ep Trang p ụ T L w n lo ụ ụ ad ụ D ụ D ụ ý ị ua al ề n ọ p áp ll p ĩ ề nh ụ at B ễ oi Ý m Đ fu n va ụ ắ pl Ầ Lý ẽ yi L ữ ju y th D z z vb ụ ó ụ k jm ề ht 1.1 Cá ý 1.1.2 Lý ề ụ ó ơ p ầ quan h t h â m hụt n thâm hụ 10 ey 10 ng t re 1.2.1 Thâm hụt tài khóa tác ó thâm n ềm va 1.2 Cá lý hụt an Lu ó thâm hụt 1.1.3 Thâm hụt om ụ l.c ề gm 1.1.1 Lý ó Thâm ụ 1.2.2 Thâm hụ t to có m không uan h 11 ng 1.2.3 Cá ụ ụ hi ep ó 13 1.3 Đá á w ề ụ ó ụ n 15 lo ad 21 y th 2.2 21 ju 2.1 p áp yi 22 ị pl 2.2.1 22 C ữ n ua ị al 2.2.2 ỗ ị ht G 51 k í gm 4.1 Cá p á 4.3 ý p ề 53 54 n 55 va Ả 52 an Lu 4.4 ó om ý 51 l.c 4.2 H L 49 jm ế L 41 vb ị ỉ z ( Error Correction Mechanism - ECM) 3.4 37 z 3.3 31 31 at ị ệ nh 3.2 ự oi p ữ ế q ả m 3.1 T 29 ll ữ ệ G fu n ị va 2.2.3 27 ey t re Ý Ữ Ắ / GDP t to , ng hi ep IMF Q ỹ ề GDP Tổ TDGDP w n FDGDP p ẩ B thâm ụ / B thâm ụ / lo B INF B V ầ ad LnEX ju y th FDI ua al ị A ị -Fuller test va p n V D p n ODA ĩ ỉ Mô h PP p pl ADF p yi ECM ó / GDP ll fu oi m at nh z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm an Lu n va ey t re BẢ ,B Ể t to ng hi ep 3.1 T B 3.2 B 3.3 ị B w lo 37 f ị ad f p - ị f nh Phillips-Perron không xu yi 40 pl ễ2 al f ua ị 3.6 p - 41 nh 45 at f z ị oi óp p -Perron không xu z f p - ắ óp G 50 óp 51 n G 47 va (robust) C an Lu 3.13 om 3.12 (robust) B l.c óp B 3.11 gm B 46 k ễ2 jm ht ị 45 vb 3.10 42 m p ầ ễ2 B ó ll 3.8 T 3.9 C fu C n p va 3.7 B ó n ễ2 B ó 39 ju 3.5 B p -Perron khơng có y th ễ2 B 36 38 3.4 B ữ ễ2 n B ey t re ÁC Ồ t to Đồ ị 3.1 Thâm ụ Ị P ổ C L Á ng hi 2012 ep Đồ 32 ị 3.2 Thâm ụ ó ổi C Á w 2012 32 n ị 3.3 Lạ p ị 3.4 T lo Đồ ad y th Đồ ổ C Á ổ C 2012 Á 33 33 ễ2 64 ju 2012 yi ị TDGD pl ụ ụ 1: al ị I ụ ụ 4: ị ụ ụ 5: ị ụ ụ 6: ị ụ ụ : ị I ụ ụ : ị L ụ ụ :K ị DTDGD n ua ụ ụ 3: ễ2 n va L X 64 ễ2 ó ễ2 66 ó ễ2 67 ll fu TDGD 65 m oi ó z vb ễ2 jm ht 68 ễ2 69 k ó gm óp om l.c C p ầ 69 an Lu C 70 ị ó ễ2 70 71 ey ụ ụ 14: ễ2 t re ị n ụ ụ 13: va 68 ó ụ ụ 12 T 67 ễ2 z X ó DTDGD ụ ụ 11: ễ2 at ị nh ụ ụ 10: DGD 71 ng hi ep 72 DGD w n G cho óp ụ ụ 17: Hồ 71 DTDGD Granger óp ụ ụ 16: Hồ t to p ó C ắ ụ ụ 15 lo ad ju y th yi pl n ua al n va ll fu oi m at nh z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm an Lu n va ey t re 58 Panel Data Approach, Working Papers, WP 24/2009/DE/UECE t to 33 Freeman, John R., 1983, Granger Causality and the Time Series Analysis of ng Political Relationships, American Journal of Political Science, 27:327-58 hi ep 34 Gale, W., G., and Orszag, P., R., 2003, Budget Deficits, National Saving, and w Interest Rates, Brookings Institution and Tax Policy Center n lo 35 Granger, C W J., 1969, Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric ad y th Models and Cross-spectral Methods, Econometrica, Vol 37, No 3, pp 424-438 ju 36 Granger, C W J and Newbold, P., 1974, Spurious Regressions In yi pl Econometrics, Journal of Econometrics 2, pp 111-120 al n ua 37 Gregory, A.W., Hansen, B.E., 1996a, Residual-based tests for cointegration n va in modelswith regime shifts, Journal of Econometrics 70, 99–126 ll fu 38 Gregory, A.W., Hansen, B.E., 1996b, Tests for cointegration in models with 560 oi m regime and trend shifts Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 58, 555– at nh 39 Grier, K., Ye, H., 2009, Twin sons of different mothers: the long and short of z z the twin deficits debate, Economic Inquiry 47, 625–638 vb jm ht 40 Harris, R.D.F and Tzavalis, E., 1999, Inference for unit roots in dynamic k panels where the time dimension is fixed, Journal of Econometrics, 91:201–226 gm l.c 41 Hassan, M., 2004, Budget Deficits and the Current Account Balance: New Evidence from Panel Data, Journal of Econimics and Finance; Spring 244; 28, om 1, Proquest central, Pg.39 an Lu 42 Heng, T.K, 1997, Public capital and crowding in, The Singapore Economic n va review 42 44 Hurlin, 2004, Testing Granger causality in heterogeneous panel data models ey twin deficit behaviour Research in Economics 65, 271–277 t re 43 Holmes, M.J., 2011, Threshold cointegration and the short-run dynamics of 59 with fixed coefficients, Mimeo, University of Orléans t to 45 Hurlin and Vernet, 2001, Granger causality tests in panel data models with fixed ng coefficients, Working Paper Eurisco2001-09, Université Paris IX Dauphine hi ep 46 Islam B T D f p Atlantic w Economic Journal 26: 121-128 n lo 47 James, T and Willem, B., 1980, Fiscal and Monetary Policies, Capital ad y th Formation, and Eco- nomic Activity, in von Furstenberg, George M., editor, The ju Government and Capital Formnation, Cam- bridge: Ballinger yi pl 48 Hansen, B.E., 1996, Inference When a Nuisance Parameter Is Not Identied al ua Under the Null Hypothesis, Econometrica Vol 64, pp 413-430 n 49 Katja F., and Christiance N., 2006, Does fiscal policy matter for the trade va n account ? A panel cointegration study, European Central Bank, occasional paper fu D B 2013 I T oi m 50 ll series no 620 D f p T nh z Management, Pune at Role of Inflation and Money supply, Symbiosis Institute of Business z vb 51 Mankiw, N., 2006, Reflections on the trade deficit and fiscal policy, Journal k jm ht of Policy Modeling, 28, 679–682 gm 52 Nickel, C and Vansteenkiste I., 2008, Fiscal policies, the current account and om l.c ricardian equivalence, Working Paper Series No 935, European Central Bank 53 Kevin, A.C, 2005, The Phantom Menace: Omitted Variable Bias in an Lu Econometric Research, Conflict Management and Peace Science, 22:341–352, 2005 ey 55 Khalid, A.M and Teo, W G., 1999, Causality Tests of Budget and t re Development Studies 34: 60-84 n va 54 Kelly, T., 1997, Public Expenditures and Growth, Journal of 60 Current Account Deficits: Cross-Country Comparisons, Empirical t to Economics, vol 24, pp 389-402 ng 56 Kouassi, Mougoue, & Kymm, 2004, Causality tests of the relationship between hi ep the twin deficits, Empirical Economics 29: 503-525 w 57 Kumhof M., Laxton D., 2009, Fiscal Deficits and Current Account n lo Deficits, International Monetary Fund Working Paper, No 09/237 ad y th 58 Im, K.S., Pesaran, M.H and Shin,Y., 2003, Testing for unit roots in ju heterogeneous panels, Journal of Econometrics 115: 53–74 yi pl 59 Leachman, L.L., Francis, B., 2002 Twin deficits: apparition or reality? al n ua Applied Economics Letters 34, 1121–1132 va 60 Levin, A., Lin C and Chu, C J, 2002 Uni t Root Test in Panel Data: n Asymptoti c and Finite Sample Properties, Journal of Econometrics 108, 1-24 fu ll David, D., WW., Sense of Community: A Definition and Theory, oi m f L I at nh 61 McMillin, 1986, The I p Human, Louisiana State University, Department of economics working paper series z z jm Country Analysis, Working Paper ht vb 62 Martin B and Michel N., 2009, Do Tax Cuts Generate Twin Deficits? A Multi- k 63 Martin, B., J., 1971, National Income and the Price Level, 2nd edition, gm l.c New York: McGraw Hill om 64 Miller, S.M., Russek, F.S., 1989 Are the twins deficits really related? an Lu Contemporary Policy Issues 8, 91–115 65 Mundell, R., 1963, Capital Mobility and Stabilization Policy under Fixed and Political n va Flexible Exchange Rates, Canadian Journal of Economics and t re Science, November ey 66 Newey, W K and Kenneth D W., 1987, A Simple Positive Semi-De¯nite, Heteroscedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix", 61 Econometrica, 50, 703-708 t to 67 Normandin, M., 1998, Budget deficit persistence and the twin deficits ng hypothesis, Journal of International Economics, 49 (1999) 171–193 hi ep 68 Onafowora, O., 2003, Exchange rate and trade balance in East Asia: Is there a J- w curve Economic Bulletin, Vol 5, No.18, pp 1-13 n lo 69 Papadogonas, T and Stournaras, Y., 2006, Twin Deficits and Financial ad 595-602 ju y th Integration in EU Member-States, Journal of Policy Modeling, vol 28, no 5, pp yi pl 70 Patillo, C., Romer, D and Weil, D.N., 2002, External debt and growth, IMF al n ua Working Paper, No 02/69 va 71 Patillo, C., Romer, D and Weil, D.N., 2004, What are the channels through n which external debt affects growth?, IMF Working Paper, No 04/15 ll fu oi m 72 Pedroni, P., 1995), Panel Cointegration: Asymptotic and Finite Sample Properties of Pooled Time Series Tests with an Application to the PPP Hypothesis, nh at Indiana University Working Paper in Economics No 95-013 z z 73 Piersanti, G., 2000, Current Account Dynamics and Expected Future Budget vb Finance,vol 19, pp 255-171 k jm ht Deficits: Some International Evidence, Journal of International Money and gm 74 Phillips, P.C.B., Perron, P., 1988, Testing for a unit root in time series om l.c regression, Biometrika, 75, 335–345 75 Reisen, H., 1998, Domestic Causes of Currency Crises: Policy Lessons for Crisis an Lu Avoidance, OECD Development CentreWorking Papers 136, OECD Publishing va 76 Robel B., Massimo G., and Franc K., 2007, The Effects of Public Spending ey t re Amsterdam n Shocks on Trade Balances and Budget Deficits in the European Union, University of 62 77 Rosensweig, J A and Tallman, E W, 1993, Fiscal Policy and Trade t to Adjustment: Are the Deficits Really Twins?, Economic Inquiry, 580-594 ng 78 Salm S., 2003, The Budget Deficit and Economic Performance: A survey, hi ep Economic working paper series, No 03-12, University of Wollongong T 2002 I w 79 f n lo Journal of Policy Modeling, 24, 437-452 ad y th 80 Siddiqui A., 2007, India and South Asia Economic Developments in The ju Age of Globalization, M.E Sharpe, New York yi pl 81 Summers, L.H., 1988, Tax Policy and International Competitiveness, in J al n ua Frenkel(ed.) International Aspects of Fiscal Policies, Chicago University Press va 82 Soyoung, K and Nouriel R., 2008, Twin Deficits or Twin Divergence? n Fiscal Policy, Current Account, and Real Exchange Rate in the U.S., Journal fu ll of International Economics, Vol 74 oi m 83 Thompson, Henry, 2000, International Economics: Global Markets & nh at International Competition River Edge, NJ, USA: World Scientific Publishing z z Company, Incorporated pp111 vb jm ht 84 Toshiki, Y., 1987, Ricardiane quivalence in the presence of capital market imperfections, Journal of Monetary Economics, 20 (September):411-36 k gm 85 Vasarthani M., Brissimis S., Papazoglou Ch., Tsaveas N and Chondroyiannis l.c G., 2010, Factors Determining the Eurozone Current Account Imbalances: ” T C A C of an Lu Disequilibrium and Policy Implications, Bank of Greece f G om p ey Mathematical Society, 54, 426-482 t re when the number of observations is large, Transactions of the American n va 86 Wald, A., 1943, Tests of statistical hypotheses concerning several parameters 63 87 Wooldridge, J., 2002, Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data, t to The MIT Press ng 88 World Development Indicators hi ep 89 White, H and Xun, Lu., 2010, Robustness Checks and Robustness Tests in w Applied Economics, Department of Economics University of California, San Diego n lo 90 Yellen, J.L, 1989, Symposium on the Budget deficit, Journal of Economic ad ju y th Perspective yi pl n ua al n va ll fu oi m at nh z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm an Lu n va ey t re 64 Ụ LỤC t to ng ụ ụ 1: ị TDGD ễ2 hi ep Fisher-type unit-root test for TDGDP Based on Phillips-Perron tests Number of panels = Avg number of periods = 25.00 w Ho: All panels contain unit roots Ha: At least one panel is stationary n lo AR parameter: Panel means: Time trend: Newey-West lags: ad Asymptotics: T -> Infinity ju y th Panel-specific Included Not included lags p-value 12.7965 0.0342 0.3494 0.1626 0.3840 0.5136 0.6355 0.4354 yi Statistic P Z L* Pm pl Inverse chi-squared(12) Inverse normal Inverse logit t(34) Modified inv chi-squared ua al n P statistic requires number of panels to be finite Other statistics are suitable for finite or infinite number of panels n va ị ễ2 FDGDP, không x ll fu ụ ụ 2: oi m Fisher-type unit-root test for FDGDP Based on Phillips-Perron tests nh Number of panels = Avg number of periods = 25.00 AR parameter: Panel means: Time trend: Newey-West lags: Asymptotics: T -> Infinity at Ho: All panels contain unit roots Ha: At least one panel is stationary z 0.0002 0.0000 0.0001 0.0000 an Lu P statistic requires number of panels to be finite Other statistics are suitable for finite or infinite number of panels om 37.6884 -4.0241 -4.1957 5.2436 l.c p-value gm Statistic k jm ht P Z L* Pm vb Inverse chi-squared(12) Inverse normal Inverse logit t(34) Modified inv chi-squared z Panel-specific Included Not included lags n va ey t re 65 ụ ụ 3: ị I ễ2 t to Fisher-type unit-root test for INF Based on Phillips-Perron tests ng hi ep Ho: All panels contain unit roots Ha: At least one panel is stationary Number of panels = Avg number of periods = 25.00 Asymptotics: T -> Infinity w AR parameter: Panel-specific Panel means: Included Time trend: Not included Newey-West lags: lags n lo ad p-value 51.0344 -5.0763 -5.7525 7.9679 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ju y th Statistic yi Inverse chi-squared(12) P Inverse normal Z Inverse logit t(34) L* Modified inv chi-squared Pm pl n ua al n va P statistic requires number of panels to be finite Other statistics are suitable for finite or infinite number of panels fu ị L ll X ễ2 oi m ụ ụ 4: at nh Fisher-type unit-root test for lnEX Based on Phillips-Perron tests Number of panels = Avg number of periods = 25.00 AR parameter: Panel-specific Panel means: Included Time trend: Not included Newey-West lags: lags Asymptotics: T -> Infinity z k jm ht vb 2.1612 1.8145 2.0883 -2.0083 0.9991 0.9652 0.9748 0.9777 n va ey t re P statistic requires number of panels to be finite Other statistics are suitable for finite or infinite number of panels an Lu p-value om Statistic l.c gm Inverse chi-squared(12) P Inverse normal Z Inverse logit t(19) L* Modified inv chi-squared Pm z Ho: All panels contain unit roots Ha: At least one panel is stationary 66 ụ ụ 5: ị TDGD ó ễ2 t to Fisher-type unit-root test for TDGDP Based on Phillips-Perron tests ng hi ep Ho: All panels contain unit roots Ha: At least one panel is stationary w AR parameter: Panel means: Time trend: Newey-West lags: Number of panels = Avg number of periods = 25.00 n lo ad Panel-specific Included Included lags Asymptotics: T -> Infinity ju y th P Z L* Pm p-value 6.2880 1.1834 1.1883 -1.1659 0.9009 0.8817 0.8785 0.8782 yi Inverse chi-squared(12) Inverse normal Inverse logit t(34) Modified inv chi-squared Statistic pl ua al n P statistic requires number of panels to be finite Other statistics are suitable for finite or infinite number of panels n va ll fu ị DGD oi m ụ lụ 6: ễ2 at nh Fisher-type unit-root test for FDGDP Based on Phillips-Perron tests ó z Number of panels = Avg number of periods = 25.00 AR parameter: Panel means: Time trend: Newey-West lags: Asymptotics: T -> Infinity z Ho: All panels contain unit roots Ha: At least one panel is stationary k jm 28.3215 -2.9231 -2.9559 3.3316 0.0050 0.0017 0.0028 0.0004 n va ey t re P statistic requires number of panels to be finite Other statistics are suitable for finite or infinite number of panels an Lu p-value om Statistic l.c gm P Z L* Pm ht Inverse chi-squared(12) Inverse normal Inverse logit t(34) Modified inv chi-squared vb Panel-specific Included Included lags 67 ụ ụ ị : I ó ễ2 t to Fisher-type unit-root test for INF Based on Phillips-Perron tests ng hi ep Ho: All panels contain unit roots Ha: At least one panel is stationary w AR parameter: Panel means: Time trend: Newey-West lags: Number of panels = Avg number of periods = 25.00 n lo ad Panel-specific Included Included lags Asymptotics: T -> Infinity ju y th P Z L* Pm p-value 45.3166 -4.5929 -5.0518 6.8007 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 yi Inverse chi-squared(12) Inverse normal Inverse logit t(34) Modified inv chi-squared Statistic pl ua al n P statistic requires number of panels to be finite Other statistics are suitable for finite or infinite number of panels n va ị : L X ó ễ2 ll fu ụ ụ oi m Fisher-type unit-root test for lnEX Based on Phillips-Perron tests nh Number of panels = Avg number of periods = 25.00 AR parameter: Panel means: Time trend: Newey-West lags: Asymptotics: T -> Infinity at Ho: All panels contain unit roots Ha: At least one panel is stationary z an Lu P statistic requires number of panels to be finite Other statistics are suitable for finite or infinite number of panels om 0.0000 0.0012 0.0000 0.0000 l.c 72.4241 -3.0262 -10.1457 12.3340 gm p-value k Statistic jm ht P Z L* Pm vb Inverse chi-squared(12) Inverse normal Inverse logit t(19) Modified inv chi-squared z Panel-specific Included Included lags n va ey t re 68 ụ ụ ị : DTDGD ó ễ2 t to Fisher-type unit-root test for DTDGDP Based on Phillips-Perron tests ng hi ep Ho: All panels contain unit roots Ha: At least one panel is stationary Number of panels = Avg number of periods = 23.83 Asymptotics: T -> Infinity w AR parameter: Panel-specific Panel means: Included Time trend: Not included Newey-West lags: lags n lo ad ju y th yi pl 101.5481 -8.2819 -11.5720 18.2789 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ua al p-value n Inverse chi-squared(12) P Inverse normal Z Inverse logit t(34) L* Modified inv chi-squared Pm Statistic va n P statistic requires number of panels to be finite Other statistics are suitable for finite or infinite number of panels ll fu ị DTDGD ó ễ2 oi m ụ ụ 10: at nh Fisher-type unit-root test for DTDGDP Based on Phillips-Perron tests Number of panels = Avg number of periods = 23.83 AR parameter: Panel means: Time trend: Newey-West lags: Asymptotics: T -> Infinity k jm ht 90.6994 -7.2642 -10.2371 16.0644 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 an Lu P statistic requires number of panels to be finite Other statistics are suitable for finite or infinite number of panels om p-value l.c Statistic gm P Z L* Pm vb Inverse chi-squared(12) Inverse normal Inverse logit t(34) Modified inv chi-squared z Panel-specific Included Included lags z Ho: All panels contain unit roots Ha: At least one panel is stationary n va ey t re 69 ụ ụ 11: C óp t to ng hi ep Number of obs = Number of groups = 150 R-sq: within = 0.3016 between = 0.0019 overall = 0.0883 Obs per group: = avg = max = 17 25.0 27 Fixed-effects (within) regression Group variable: Id w n lo F(3,5) Prob > F ad corr(u_i, Xb) = -0.2136 = = 10.65 0.0130 y th ju (Std Err adjusted for clusters in Id) yi Robust Coef Std Err n -5.21 0.99 -0.04 -1.11 P>|t| [95% Conf Interval] 0.003 0.366 0.966 0.316 -1.985528 -.6740973 -.1006679 2274356 -.0001379 0001332 -2.991619 1.182033 n va 2550843 0638189 0000527 8118107 ua fu 6.6022541 4.5765277 67545035 (fraction of variance due to u_i) ll oi m sigma_u sigma_e rho -1.329812 0633838 -2.35e-06 -.9047929 al FDGDP INF lnEX _cons t pl TDGDP at nh z C Min Max Observations om l.c an Lu overall -2.86e-08 7.384262 -14.65421 21.56589 N = 150 between 6.602254 -8.65165 8.339896 n = within 4.451973 -15.3296 13.226 T-bar = 25 gm Res Mean Std Dev k Variable jm ht vb óp p ầ z ụ ụ 12: T n va ey t re 70 ụ ụ 13: ị ễ2 t to Fisher-type unit-root test for Res Based on Phillips-Perron tests ng hi ep Number of panels = Avg number of periods = 25.00 AR parameter: Panel means: Time trend: Newey-West lags: Asymptotics: T -> Infinity Ho: All panels contain unit roots Ha: At least one panel is stationary w n Panel-specific Included Not included lags lo ad y th ju Inverse chi-squared(12) Inverse normal Inverse logit t(34) Modified inv chi-squared Statistic p-value 38.9590 -3.4345 -4.0084 5.5030 0.0001 0.0003 0.0002 0.0000 yi P Z L* Pm pl ị ó va ụ ụ 14: n ua al P statistic requires number of panels to be finite Other statistics are suitable for finite or infinite number of panels n Fisher-type unit-root test for Res Based on Phillips-Perron tests ễ2 ll fu Number of panels = Avg number of periods = 25.00 AR parameter: Panel means: Time trend: Newey-West lags: Asymptotics: T -> Infinity oi m Ho: All panels contain unit roots Ha: At least one panel is stationary nh z om l.c P statistic requires number of panels to be finite Other statistics are suitable for finite or infinite number of panels gm 0.0058 0.0302 0.0152 0.0006 k 27.8517 -1.8774 -2.2592 3.2357 jm p-value ht Statistic vb P Z L* Pm z Inverse chi-squared(12) Inverse normal Inverse logit t(34) Modified inv chi-squared at Panel-specific Included Included lags an Lu n va ey t re 71 ụ ụ 15 ắ C óp t to ng hi ep Number of obs Number of groups = = 143 R-sq: within = 0.2829 between = 0.0943 overall = 0.1369 Obs per group: = avg = max = 16 23.8 26 Fixed-effects (within) regression Group variable: Id w n F(4,5) Prob > F lo corr(u_i, Xb) = -0.7221 ad 12.93 0.0076 (Std Err adjusted for clusters in Id) y th Coef ju DTDGDP = = Robust Std Err t yi [95% Conf Interval] 0.006 0.065 0.835 0.009 0.047 -1.372454 -.0059904 -.0001037 -.5223482 004259 -.3728173 1414089 000123 -.1240335 4129809 n 2.2099128 3.1191434 33420869 -4.49 2.36 0.22 -4.17 2.62 ua sigma_u sigma_e rho 1944378 0286704 0000441 0774756 0794999 al -.8726357 0677093 9.66e-06 -.3231909 20862 pl DFDGDP DINFLA DlnEX LRes _cons P>|t| n va ll fu (fraction of variance due to u_i) m oi ụ ụ 16: Hồ nh DTDGD at G óp = = 26.29 0.0017 t P>|t| [95% Conf Interval] 0.005 0.068 0.002 -1.068158 -.0608657 2005934 -.3310244 1.206262 4896827 _cons 5114747 3736074 1.37 0.229 -.4489138 1.471863 sigma_u sigma_e rho 40401588 3.3396397 01442407 ey -4.88 2.32 6.14 t re 1433787 2464672 0562303 n -.699591 5726983 3451381 va FDGDP L1 L2 an Lu Coef om Robust Std Err DTDGDP l.c (Std Err adjusted for clusters in Id) gm = = k F(3,5) Prob > F jm corr(u_i, Xb) = -0.1377 15 22.7 25 ht Obs per group: = avg = max = vb R-sq: within = 0.1779 between = 0.1352 overall = 0.1744 136 z Number of obs Number of groups z Fixed-effects (within) regression Group variable: Id (fraction of variance due to u_i) 72 t to ụ ụ 17: Hồ óp ng G DGD hi ep Fixed-effects (within) regression Group variable: Id w R-sq: within = 0.0897 between = 0.2901 overall = 0.0487 n lo Number of obs = Number of groups = 129 Obs per group: = avg = max = 14 21.5 24 ad F(3,5) Prob > F ju y th corr(u_i, Xb) = -0.0480 = = 7.80 0.0248 (Std Err adjusted for clusters in Id) yi [95% Conf Interval] -0.65 0.545 -1.35 0.234 -2.10 0.090 -.2719484 -.390158 -.2377573 n va -.0548115 0844699 -.1345203 0994474 -.1068991 0509061 n fu -2.056881 0221692 -92.78 0.000 1623253 1211174 0239592 -2.113868 -1.999893 ll m 1.5869105 2.1500944 35264216 (fraction of variance due to u_i) oi at nh sigma_u sigma_e rho P>|t| ua _cons t al DTDGDP L1 L2 Robust Coef Std Err pl FDGDP z z k jm ht vb om l.c gm an Lu n va ey t re
Ngày đăng: 28/07/2023, 16:20
Xem thêm: