Unit Root Tests Allowing for a Break in the Trend Function at an Unknown Time Under Both the Null and Alternative Hypotheses

Perron [Perron, P., 1989. The great crash, the oil price shock and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica 57, 1361-1401] introduced a variety of unit root tests that are valid when a break in the trend function of a time series is present. The motivation was to devise testing procedures that were invariant to the magnitude of the shift in level and/or slope. In particular, if a change is present it is allowed under both the null and alternative hypotheses. This analysis was carried under the assumption of a known break date. The subsequent literature aimed to devise testing procedures valid in the case of an unknown break date. However, in doing so, most of the literature and, in particular the commonly used test of Zivot and Andrews [Zivot, E., Andrews, D.W.K., 1992. Further evidence on the great crash, the oil price shock and the unit root hypothesis. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 10, 251-270], assumed that if a break occurs, it does so only under the alternative hypothesis of stationarity. This is undesirable since (a) it imposes an asymmetric treatment when allowing for a break, so that the test may reject when the noise is integrated but the trend is changing; (b) if a break is present, this information is not exploited to improve the power of the test. In this paper, we propose a testing procedure that addresses both issues. It allows a break under both the null and alternative hypotheses and, when a break is present, the limit distribution of the test is the same as in the case of a known break date, thereby allowing increased power while maintaining the correct size. Simulation experiments confirm that our procedure offers an improvement over commonly used methods in small samples.

[1]  Mark C. Strazicich,et al.  Minimum Lagrange Multiplier Unit Root Test with Two Structural Breaks , 2003, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[2]  Antonio Montañés.  Level shifts, unit roots and misspecification of the breaking date , 1997 .

[3]  P. Perron,et al.  Testing For A Unit Root In A Time Series With A Changing Mean , 1990 .

[4]  D. Andrews,et al.  Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis , 1992 .

[5]  Christina D. Romer.  The Prewar Business Cycle Reconsidered: New Estimates of Gross National Product, 1869-1908 , 1986, Journal of Political Economy.

[6]  Paul Newbold,et al.  Spurious rejections by Dickey-Fuller tests in the presence of a break under the null , 1998 .

[7]  Paul Newbold,et al.  Behaviour of the standard and symmetric Dickey–Fuller‐type tests when there is a break under the null hypothesis , 2000 .

[8]  A. Maddison,et al.  Phases of capitalist development , 1983 .

[9]  A Multicountry Characterization of the Nonstationarity of Aggregate Output , 1990 .

[10]  T. Vogelsang,et al.  A Note on the Asymptotic Distributions of Unit Root Tests in the Additive Outlier Model With Breaks , 1993 .

[11]  Alain Hecq,et al.  Misspecification tests, unit roots and level shifts , 1993 .

[12]  Antonio Montañés,et al.  Misspecification of the breaking date in segmented trend variables: effect on the unit root tests , 1999 .

[13]  Pierre Perron,et al.  Structural breaks with deterministic and stochastic trends , 2005 .

[14]  Helmut Lütkepohl,et al.  Test Procedures for Unit Roots in Time Series with Level Shifts at Unknown Time , 2003 .

[15]  Serena Ng,et al.  Unit Root Tests in ARMA Models with Data-Dependent Methods for the Selection of the Truncation Lag , 1995 .

[16]  Antonio Montañés,et al.  The asymptotic behaviour of the Dickey-Fuller tests under the crash hypothesis , 1999 .

[17]  Lawrence J. Christiano,et al.  Searching for a Break in Gnp , 1988 .

[18]  Mark C. Strazicich,et al.  Break Point Estimation and Spurious Rejections With Endogenous Unit Root Tests , 2001 .

[19]  Paul Newbold,et al.  Innovational Outlier Unit Root Tests with an Endogenously Determined Break in Level , 2001 .

[20]  W. Fuller,et al.  Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root , 1979 .

[21]  Pierre Perron,et al.  Additional Tests for a Unit Root Allowing for a Break in the Trend Function at an Unknown Time , 1998 .

[22]  P. Phillips.  Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series Regression , 1988 .

[23]  Antonio Montañés,et al.  Structural breaks, unit roots and methods for removing the autocorrelation pattern , 2000 .

[24]  H. White,et al.  Cointegration, causality, and forecasting : a festschrift in honour of Clive W.J. Granger , 1999 .

[25]  Timothy J. Vogelsang,et al.  Wald-Type Tests for Detecting Breaks in the Trend Function of a Dynamic Time Series , 1997, Econometric Theory.

[26]  P. Perron,et al.  Further Evidence on Breaking Trend Functions in Macroeconomic Variables. , 1997 .

[27]  D. Andrews,et al.  Optimal Tests When a Nuisance Parameter Is Present Only Under the Alternative , 1992 .

[28]  P. Perron,et al.  The Great Crash, The Oil Price Shock And The Unit Root Hypothesis , 1989 .

[29]  P. Perron,et al.  Nonstationarity and Level Shifts With an Application to Purchasing Power Parity , 1992 .

[30]  Jushan Bai,et al.  A NOTE ON SPURIOUS BREAK , 1998, Econometric Theory.

[31]  Pierre Perron,et al.  Testing for Shifts in Trend With an Integrated or Stationary Noise Component , 2007 .

[32]  D. Dickey,et al.  Testing for unit roots in autoregressive-moving average models of unknown order , 1984 .

[33]  P. Perron,et al.  Testing for a Unit Root in a Time Series with a Changing Mean: Corrections and Extensions , 1992 .

[34]  Marcelo Reyes,et al.  EFFECT OF A SHIFT IN THE TREND FUNCTION ON DICKEY–FULLER UNIT ROOT TESTS , 1998 .

[35]  Spurious Rejections by Perron Tests in the Presence of a Break , 2000 .

[36]  Paul Newbold,et al.  Testing for Unit Roots with Breaks: Evidence on the Great Crash and the Unit Root Hypothesis Reconsidered , 1997 .