Skip to main content
Log in

Testing for and dating structural break in smooth time-varying cointegration parameters, with an application to retail gasoline price and crude oil price long-run relationship

  • Published:
Empirical Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper outlines a methodology to test for structural break in a smooth time-varying cointegration model. We show how such a problem can be brought down to the standard procedure proposed by Hansen (J Bus Econ Stat 10:321–335, 1992). As an application, we investigate the long-run relationship between the crude oil price and the gasoline retail price for Switzerland.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See Bierens (1997) for technical details on Chebyshev time polynomials.

  2. Notice that the authors do not provide a formal proof of this consistency.

  3. If equation (1) includes an intercept, this matrix should be \(M_{[T\tau ]}=\sum _{t=1}^{[T\tau ]}(x_t-\bar{x})(x_t-\bar{x})^{\prime }\).

  4. Notice that the supremum is also favored here to minimize the consequences of the end-point problem, inherent to polynomial regression technics.

  5. The values used for our experiments are the following: \(\xi =(1.5,0.2)^\prime \) and \(\xi _c=(0.2,-0.7)^\prime \) for \(m=1; \xi =(1.5,-1.2,0.2)^\prime \) and \(\xi _c=(-0.7,-0.1,0.2)^\prime \) for \(m=2\).

  6. The crude oil recorded a price equals to 144USD in July 2008.

References

  • Bai J, Lumsdaine RL, Stock JH (1998) Testing for and dating common breaks in multivariate time series. Rev Econ Stud 65:395–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balke HS, Fomby TB (1997) Threshold cointegration. Int Econ Rev 38:627–645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee A, Lumsdaine RL, Stock JH (1992) Recursive and sequential tests of the unit-root and trend-break hypotheses: theory and international evidence. J Bus Econ Stat 10:271–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Bierens HJ (1997) Testing the unit root with drift hypothesis against nonlinear trend stationarity, with an application to the US price level and interest rate. J Econom 81:29–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bierens HJ, Martins LF (2010) Time-varying cointegration. Econom Theory 26:1453–1490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enders W, Siklos PL (2001) Cointegration and threshold adjustment. J Bus Econ Stat 19:166–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalo J, Pitarakis PY (2006) Threshold effects in multivariate error correction models. In: Mill TC, Patterson K (eds) Palgrave handbook of econometrics, vol 1. Palgrave Macmillan, Hampshire, pp 578–609

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory AW, Hansen BE (1996) Residual-based test for cointegration in models with regime shifts. J Econom 70:99–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory AW, Nason JM, Watt D (1996) Testing for structural breaks in cointegrated relationships. J Econom 71:321–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen BE (1992) Tests for parameter instability in regressions with I(1) processes. J Bus Econ Stat 10:321–335

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen BE, Seo B (2002) Testing for two-regime threshold cointegration in vector error-correction models. J Econom 110:293–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnakumar J, Neto D (2011) Testing the inaction corridor in a three-regime threshold error correction model: an application to a Buffer-Stock model for U.S. money demand. Econ Notes 40:29–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnakumar J, Neto D (2012) Testing uncovered interest rate parity and term structure using three-regime threshold unit root VECM: an application to the Swiss interest rates islet. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 74:180–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon JG (2010) Critical values for cointegration tests. Queen’s Economics Department Working Paper, 1227

  • Neto D (2012) Testing and estimating time-varying elasticities of Swiss gasoline demand. Energy Econ 34:1755–1762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park JY, Phillips PCB (1988) Statistical inference in regressions with integrated processes: part I. Econom Theory 4:468–497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park JY (1992) Canonical cointegrating regression. Econometrica 60:119–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park JY, Hahn SB (1999) Cointegrating regressions with time varying coefficients. Econom Theory 15:664–703

    Google Scholar 

  • Park SY, Zaho G (2010) An estimation of U.S. gasoline demand: a smooth time-varying cointegration approach. Energy Econ 32:110–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perron P (1989) The great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica 57:1361–1401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips PCB, Hansen BE (1990) Statistical inference in instrumental variables regression with I(1) processes. Rev Econ Stud 57:99–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips PCB (1995) Fully modified least squares and vector autoregression. Econometrica 63:1023–1078

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurozumi E, Arai Y (2005) Efficient estimation and inference in cointegrating regressions with structural change. J Time Ser Anal 28:545–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seo M (2006) Bootstrap testing for the null of no cointegration in a threshold vector error correction model. J Econom 134:129–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao Z, Phillips PCB (2002) A CUSUM test for cointegration using regression residuals. J Econom 108:43–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao Z (2009) Functional-coefficient cointegration models. J Econ 152:81–92

  • Zivot E, Andrews DWK (1992) Further evidence on the great crash, the oil-price shock, and the unit-root hypothesis. J Bus Econ Stat 10:251–270

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Neto.

Additional information

The author was a Post-Doctoral Research Assistant at the Department of Economics, University of Geneva, when an early version of this paper was written.

Appendix

Appendix

The limiting distribution of \(\text {CS}_T\) under time-varying cointegration can be obtained using Lemma 2 in Bierens and Martins (2010) and Theorem 1 of Xiao and Phillips (2002).

Lemma A.1

Under the assumption of \(\Delta x_{t}\) being a strictly stationary zero-mean \(p\)-variate process such that \(\Delta x_{t}=e_{t}\) with \(e_{t}\) i.i.d \((0,\varOmega )\), defining \(Z_{t}\) as in equation (7) and denoting \(\varOmega ^{\frac{1}{2}}\) as the Cholesky factorization of \(\varOmega \), i.e. \(\varOmega =\varOmega ^{\frac{1}{2}}\varOmega ^{\frac{1}{2}\prime }\), using Lemma 2 of Bierens and Martins (2010), it comes the following limiting distributions:

$$\begin{aligned}&\frac{1}{T} \sum _{t=1}^{T} Z_{t}^{\prime }e_{t} \Longrightarrow \varOmega ^{\frac{1}{2}} \int _{0}^{1} S^{(m)\prime }(r) dW_2(r),\\&\frac{1}{T^{2}} \sum _{t=1}^{T} Z_{t}^{\prime }Z_{t} \Longrightarrow \varOmega ^{\frac{1}{2}} \left( \int _{0}^{1} S^{(m)\prime }(r) S^{(m)}(r)\text {d}r \right) \varOmega ^{\frac{1}{2} \prime }, \end{aligned}$$

where \(S^{(m)}(r)\) is defined as:

$$\begin{aligned} S^{(m)}(r)^{\prime }=\left( W_2(r)^{\prime }, \sqrt{2}\cos (\pi r)W_2(r)^{\prime },\ldots , \sqrt{2}\cos (m\pi r)W_2(r)^{\prime }\right) , \end{aligned}$$

where \(W_2(r)\) is a \((p-1)\) vector Brownian motion.

Note that the above results are immediate if \(e_{t}\) is serially correlated such as \(e_{t}=\Phi (L)v_t=\sum _{s=0}^{\infty }\Phi _se_{t-s}\), and we assume that \(\sum _{s=0}^{\infty }s|\phi ^{(s)}_{ij}|<\infty \) for each i,j=1,...,n for \(\phi ^{(s)}_{ij}\), the row i, column j element of \(\Phi _s\) and that \((v_t)\) is an i.i.d. sequence with mean 0, variance \(\varOmega _v\) with the factorization \(\varOmega _v=\varOmega _v^{\frac{1}{2}}\varOmega _v^{\frac{1}{2}\prime }\), finite fourth moments. We have in this case:

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{1}{T} \sum _{t=1}^{T} Z_{t}^{\prime }e_{t} \Longrightarrow \varLambda ^{\frac{1}{2}} \left( \int _{0}^{1} S^{(m)\prime }(r) dW_2(r)\right) \varLambda ^{\frac{1}{2}\prime }+\sum _{k=1}^\infty \varOmega _k; \end{aligned}$$

and

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{1}{T^{2}} \sum _{t=1}^{T} Z_{t}^{\prime }Z_{t} \Longrightarrow \varLambda ^{\frac{1}{2}} \left( \int _{0}^{1} S^{(m)\prime }(r) S^{(m)}(r)\text {d}r \right) \varLambda ^{\frac{1}{2} \prime }, \end{aligned}$$

where \(\varOmega _s=\mathbb {E}(e_te_{t-s}^\prime )=\sum _{k=0}^\infty \Phi _{s+k}\varOmega _v\Phi _{k}^\prime \) for \(s=0,1,2,\ldots \), and where \(\varLambda ^{\frac{1}{2}}=\Phi (1)\varOmega _{v}^{\frac{1}{2}}\) with \(\Phi (1)\) nonsingular.

Using the previous results and following Phillips and Hansen (1990) and Phillips (1995) to establish the limiting distribution of \(1/\sqrt{T}\left| \sum _{t=1}^{[Tr]}\hat{u}^+_t\right| \), with \(r\in [0,1]\), the convergence (12) can be stated, which is similar to the standard time-invariant case presented in Theorem 1 of Xiao and Phillips (2002). \(\square \)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Neto, D. Testing for and dating structural break in smooth time-varying cointegration parameters, with an application to retail gasoline price and crude oil price long-run relationship. Empir Econ 49, 909–928 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-014-0907-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-014-0907-6

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation