Skip to main content
Log in

The duration of trade revisited

Continuous-time versus discrete-time hazards

  • Published:
Empirical Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The recent literature on the duration of trade has predominantly analyzed the determinants of trade flow durations using Cox proportional hazards models. The purpose of this article is to show why it is inappropriate to analyze the duration of trade with continuous-time models such as the Cox model, and to propose alternative discrete-time models which are more suitable for estimation. In brief, the Cox model has three major drawbacks when applied to large trade data sets. First, it faces problems in the presence of many tied duration times, leading to biased coefficient estimates and standard errors. Second, it is difficult to properly control for unobserved heterogeneity, which can lead to parameter bias and bias in the estimated survivor function. Third, the Cox model imposes the restrictive and empirically questionable assumption of proportional hazards. In contrast, with discrete-time models there is no problem handling ties; unobserved heterogeneity can be controlled for without difficulty; and the restrictive proportional hazards assumption can easily be bypassed. By replicating an influential study by Besedeš and Prusa (J Int Econ 70:339–358, 2006b), but employing discrete-time models as well as the original Cox model, we find empirical support for each of these arguments against the Cox model. Moreover, when comparing estimation results obtained from a Cox model and our preferred discrete-time specification, we find significant differences in both the predicted survivor functions and the estimated effects of explanatory variables on the hazard. In other words, the choice between models affects the economic conclusions that can be drawn.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbring JH, van den Berg GJ (2007) The unobserved heterogeneity distribution in duration analysis. Biometrika 94: 87–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison PD (1982) Discrete-time methods for the analysis of event histories. Sociol Methodol 13: 61–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amemiya T (1981) Qualitative response models: a survey. J Econ Lit 19: 1483–1536

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker M, Melino A (2000) Duration dependence and nonparametric heterogeneity: a Monte Carlo study. J Econometrics 96: 357–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Besedeš T (2008) A search cost perspective on formation and duration of trade. Rev Int Econ 16: 835–849

    Google Scholar 

  • Besedeš T, Prusa TJ (2006a) Ins, outs and the duration of trade. Can J Econ 39: 266–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Besedeš T, Prusa TJ (2006b) Product differentiation and duration of US import trade. J Int Econ 70: 339–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Besedeš T, Prusa TJ (2007) The role of extensive and intensive margins and export growth. NBER Working Paper No. 13628

  • Brenton P, Pierola MD, von Uexküll E (2009) The life and death of trade flows: understanding the survival rates of developing-country exporters. In: Newfarmer R, Shaw W, Walkenhorst P (eds) Breaking into new markets: emerging lessons for export diversification. The World Bank, Washington, pp 127–144

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenton P, Saborowski C, von Uexküll E (2009) What explains the low survival rate of developing country export flows. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 4951

  • Breslow N (1974) Covariance analysis of censored survival data. Biometrics 30: 89–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burr IW (1942) Cumulative frequency functions. Ann Math Stat 13: 215–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler JS, Moffitt R (1982) A computationally efficient quadrature procedure for the one-factor multinomial probit model. Econometrica 50: 761–764

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron AC, Trivedi PK (2005) Microeconometrics: methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cox DR (1972) Regression models and life-tables (with discussion). J R Stat Soc Ser B 34: 187–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox DR, Oakes D (1984) Analysis of survival data. Chapman & Hall/CRC, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolton P, van der Klaauw W (1995) Leaving teaching in the UK: a duration analysis. Econ J 105: 431–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Efron B (1977) The efficiency of Cox’s likelihood function for censored data. J Am Stat Assoc 72: 557–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fugazza M, Molina AC (2009) The determinants of trade survival. HEID Working Paper No. 05/2009

  • Görg H, Kneller R, Muraközy B (2007) What makes a successful export? CEPR Discussion Paper No. 6614

  • Heckman JJ, Singer B (1984) A method for minimizing the impact of distributional assumptions in econometric models for duration data. Econometrica 52: 271–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess W (2009) A flexible hazard rate model for grouped duration data. Working Paper No. 2009:18, Department of Economics, Lund University

  • Hsieh FY (1995) A cautionary note on the analysis of extreme data with Cox regression. Am Stat 49: 226–228

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins SP (1995) Easy estimation methods for discrete-time duration models. Oxford B Econ Stat 57: 129–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalbfleisch JD, Prentice RL (1980) The statistical analysis of failure time data. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauermann G, Tutz G, Brüderl J (2005) The survival of newly founded firms: a case-study into varying-coefficient models. J R Stat Soc Ser A 168: 145–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster T (1979) Econometric methods for the duration of unemployment. Econometrica 47: 939–956

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster T, Nickell S (1980) The analysis of re-employment probabilities for the unemployed. J R Stat Soc Ser A) 143: 141–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lechner M, Lollivier S, Magnac T (2008) Parametric binary choice models. In: Md́ftyd́fs L, Sevestre P (eds) The econometrics of panel data: fundamentals and recent developments in theory and practice. Springer, Berlin, pp 215–245

    Google Scholar 

  • McCall BP (1994) Testing the proportional hazards assumption in the presence of unmeasured heterogeneity. J Appl Econom 9: 321–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier L, van de Geer S, Bühlmann P (2008) The group lasso for logistic regression. J R Stat Soc Ser B 70: 53–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer BD (1990) Unemplyment insurance and unemployment spells. Econometrica 58: 757–782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mroz TA, Zayats YV (2008) Arbitrarily normalized coefficients, information sets, and false reports of “biases” in binary outcome models. Rev Econ Stat 90: 406–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicoletti C, Rondinelli C (2010) The (mis)specification of discrete duration models with unobserved heterogeneity: a Monte Carlo study. J Econometrics 159: 1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nitsch V (2009) Die another day: duration in German import trade. Rev World Econ 145: 133–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ondrich J, Rhody SE (1999) Multiple spells in the Prentice-Gloeckler-Meyer likelihood with unobserved heterogeneity. Econ Lett 63: 139–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prentice RL (1975) Discrimination among some parametric models. Biometrika 62: 607–614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prentice RL (1976) A generalization of the probit and logit methods for dose response curves. Biometrics 32: 761–768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prentice RL, Gloeckler LA (1978) Regression analysis of grouped survival data with application to breast cancer data. Biometrics 34: 57–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salant SW (1977) Search theory and duration data: a theory of sorts. Q J Econ 91: 39–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheike TH, Sun Y (2007) Maximum likelihood estimation for tied survival data under Cox regression model via Em-algorithm. Lifetime Data Anal 13: 399–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld D (1982) Partial residuals for the proportional hazards regression model. Biometrika 69: 239–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer JD, Willett JB (1993) It’s about time: using discrete-time survival analysis to study duration and the timing of events. J Educ Stat 18: 155–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sueyoshi GT (1995) A class of binary response models for grouped duration data. J Appl Econom 10: 411–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tadikamalla PR (1980) A look at the Burr and related distributions. Int Stat Rev 48: 337–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Train KE (2003) Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Trussell J, Richards T (1985) Correcting for unmeasured heterogeneity in hazard models using the Heckman-Singer procedure. Sociol Methodol 15: 242–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Berg GJ (2001) Duration models: specification, identification, and multiple durations. In: Heckman JJ, Leamer E (eds) Handbook of econometrics, vol 5. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 3381–3460

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaupel JW, Yashin AI (1985) Heterogeneity’s ruses: some surprising effects of selection on population dynamics. Am Stat 39: 176–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaupel JW, Manton KG, Stallard E (1979) The impact of heterogeneity in individual frailty on the dynamics of mortality. Demography 16: 439–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wolfgang Hess.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hess, W., Persson, M. The duration of trade revisited. Empir Econ 43, 1083–1107 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-011-0518-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-011-0518-4

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation