The impact of measurement error on estimating the demand for diesel fuel by farmers in the United States

This paper deals with two diagnostics that are useful in evaluating regression results when one of the explanatory variables contains either random or systematic measurement error. The two diagnostics discussed are regression-coefficient bounds and the bias correction factor. The first is useful because such bounds indicate the impact on the estimated regression coefficients not only of the random component in the dependent variable but also of the random component of the explanatory variable (that contains the measurement error). The bias correction factor is useful because, depending on the type of measurement error present, it will indicate the extent of the difference between the true population parameter and the estimated value of the parameter. In an application of the two diagnostics, the demand for diesel fuel by farmers in the United States is explored. Given that the data on the price of diesel fuel contain random measurement error, it is illustrated that the responsiveness of the quantity of diesel fuel demanded by farmers ranges between -1.77 and -0.26% for each 1% change in the price of diesel fuel. In terms of bias arising from measurement error, the responsiveness of the quantity of diesel fuel demanded due to a change in the number of acres planted is under-estimated by 36%. The responsiveness of the quantity demanded due to a change in precipitation is under-estimated by 63%.

[1]  John H. Herbert,et al.  A note on bias from proxy variables with systematic errors , 1989 .

[2]  J. Herbert,et al.  Specifying and evaluating aggregate monthly natural–gas demand by households , 1989 .

[3]  G. Judge,et al.  The Theory and Practice of Econometrics , 1981 .

[4]  R. Allen,et al.  Statistical Confluence Analysis by means of Complete Regression Systems , 1935 .

[5]  Bennett T. McCallum,et al.  Relative Asymptotic Bias from Errors of Omission and Measurement , 1972 .

[6]  E. Hirst,et al.  ORNL engineering-economic model of residential energy use: structure and results , 1978 .

[7]  J. MacKinnon,et al.  Several Tests for Model Specication in the Pres-ence of Alternative Hypotheses , 1981 .

[8]  Burke K. Burright,et al.  Econometric Models of the Demand for Motor Fuel , 1975 .

[9]  Noel D. Uri,et al.  Energy substitution in agriculture in the United States , 1988 .

[10]  James G. MacKinnon,et al.  A MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD PROCEDURE FOR REGRESSION WITH AUTOCORRELATED ERRORS , 1978 .

[11]  Jonathan D. Jones,et al.  The price elasticity of export demand for US agricultural commodities reconsidered , 1988 .

[12]  Edward E. Leamer,et al.  Consistent Sets of Estimates for Regressions with Errors in All Variables , 1984 .

[13]  Steven Garber,et al.  EXTENDING THE CLASSICAL NORMAL ERRORS-IN-VARIABLES MODEL , 1980 .

[14]  John W. Pratt,et al.  Bounding the Effects of Proxy Variables on Regression Coefficients , 1986 .

[15]  J. Muellbauer,et al.  Economics and consumer behavior , 1980 .

[16]  E. Heady.  Economic Impacts of Energy Prices on Agriculture , 1984 .

[17]  A. Satorra,et al.  Measurement Error Models , 1988 .

[18]  Lester D. Taylor,et al.  The demand for electricity: a survey , 1975 .

[19]  AGRICULTURAL POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF CHANGING ENERGY PRICES AND SUPPLIES , 1977 .

[20]  M. L. Baughman,et al.  Energy consumption and fuel choice by residential and commercial consumers in the United States , 1975 .