Title
Bayesian Estimates of Potential Output and NAIRU for Taiwan
Shin-Hui Chen (陳馨蕙)Department of Economics,
National Dong Hwa University
Jin-Lung Lin (林金龍 )Department of Finance
National Dong Hwa University
Motivation and Framework
Section2
Section3
Section4e
Section5le
This paper aims to develop the corresponding Bayesian sampling algorithms for Watson’s decomposition method and Apel and Jansson’s systems approach.
2
SectionSection
1 Introduction
Econometric Models2
3Sampling Algorithms forBayesian State Space Models
The Monte Carlo Simulation4
5Application to Taiwan’s SeasonallyUnadjusted Data
2. Econometric Models
2.1 A Summary of SSM and Kalman Filter
2.2 Watson’s Decomposition
2.3 Apel and Jansson’s decomposition
A Brief Summary of SSM and Kalman Filter• A general state space model can be written as:
where θt, Yt, Vt, Wt are the state variables, observed variables measurement
error terms, and disturbance terms, respectively. Ft and Gt are known
matrices and could be time-varying or time-invariant.
The state variables t is assumed to follow Gaussian distribution and 0 has initial prior
System Equation
Observation Equation
Dt−1 denote the information provided by set of past observations Y1, · · · , Yt−14
A Summary of SSM and Kalman Filter (Cont.)Our interest is to compute the conditional densities p(θs|Dt).
When s = t, the Kalman Filter recursion is applied to compute the conditional densities, p(θs|Dt).
If θt−1|Dt−1~N(mt−1,Ct−1), then the Kalman Filter for model (1) is
5
A Summary of SSM and Kalman Filter (Cont.)
When s < t, the concept of smoothing is applied. If
then the smoothing recursion for model (1) is
Excellent exposition of DLM can be found in West and Harrison (1997), Koopman and Ooms (2006) and Petris, Petrone and Campagnoli (2009). 6
Watson’s DecompositionWatson (1986) decomposed observed GDP as the sum
of potential GDP and output gap and the model is listed below
For seasonally unadjusted series, we frequently observe seasonal unit root rather than regular unit root
We replace the random walk equation with seasonal unit root equation and keep the specification of output gap unchanged
7
Watson’s Decomposition in Sate Space Form
8
Apel and Jansson’s DecompositionApel and Jansson (1999) added inflation rates and unemployment to the model. Output and employment is linked via Okun’s law while the relationship between output and inflation is governed by Phillips curve.
9
2.3 Apel and Jansson’s Decomposition
10
3. Sampling Algorithms for Bayesian State Space Models
3.1 Sampling the States from p(θ0:T |ψ, y1:T ): FFBS Algorithm
3.2 Sampling the Unknown Parameters from p(ψ|θ0:T , y1:T )
3.3 Algorithm for Watson’s Model
3.4 Algorithm for Apel and Jansson’s Model
),|( :1:0 TT yp
MCMC and Gibbs Sampling• Consider a general DLM model as model (1), our primary
interest is the joint conditional distribution of the state vectors and the unknown parameters given the data
where y1:T and θ0:T denote the data (y1, · · · , yT ) and (θ0, · · · , θT ), respectively.
To achieve greater efficiency, Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) and in particular Gibbs sampling algorithm are used for approximating the joint posterior p(θ0:T , ψ|y1:T ).
12
Algorithm 1 Gibbs Sampling Algorithm
13
FFBSConjugated Priors
M-H Algorithm
Forward Filtering Backward Sampling (FFBS)
14Note that the last factor in the product, p(θT |DT ), is exactly the Kalman filter.
The Forward Filtering Backward Sampling (FFBS) algorithm (Carter and Kohn,1994; Fruhwirth-Schnatter,1994) provides a more efficient way to sample the full set θ0:T from the complicated and high-dimensional full posterior.
Algorithm 2: FFBS Algorithm
15
FFBSConjugated Priors
M-H Algorithm
FFBS is essentially a simulation version of the smoothing recursions.
Excellent summaries of FFBS can be found in Doucet, Logothetis and Krishnamurhty(2000), Petris, Petrone and Campagnoli (2009) and Cargnoni, Muller and West (2010).
Conjugate Priors—Normal Gamma Priors
Unknown Parameters Conjugate Priors
The disturbance (σ2) If we assume that σ2 ~ IG(c/2, s/2) then
The unknown coefficients (β).
The full posterior distributions will be
where β| · · · ~ (mn, Cn) and V = (σ2)I .16
Typically, we can decompose the unknown parameters into two components, the unknown coefficients (β) and the disturbance (σ2).
When were known (drawn by FFBS algorithm), the state space model would reduce to a normal linear regression model and the unknown parameters are conditionally conjugated (see e.g., Durbin and Koopman, 2002; Koop, 2003 §4).
)(:0iT
]2/)(,2/)[(~...)|(1
22
n
iiusncIGp
The Metropolis-Hastings Algorithm
However, in practice the unknown coefficients (β) can be multidimensional and their posterior distribution depends heavily on the model specification.
In Stock and Watson’s model, for example, the potential GDP follows a random walk while the output gap is an AR(2) process.
In this case, p(1|2) does not have a standard form and is difficult to simulate from.
17
Algorithm 3 Metropolis-Hastings Algorithm
18
This is not the first paper that samples an intractable posterior distribution arises in a stationary AR(2) process by Metropolis-Hastings algorithm. For example, see Chib and Greenberg (1994).
3.3 Algorithm for Watson’s Model
19
3.4 Algorithm for Apel and Jansson’s ModelEmpirical analysis indicates that inflation and output
depend negatively on lagged cyclical unemployment by the parameters (η1, η2) and (1, 2), respectively (see e.g., Apel, 1999; Schumacher, 2008).
20
4. The Monte Carlo Simulation
4.1 A Simulation Study for Watson’s Model
4.2 A Simulation Study for for Apel and Jansson’s Model
4.1 A Simulation Study for Watson’s Model
22
Fig 1: Estimated results of Watson’s model with simulated data
23
Simulated Estimated
Figure 2: Diagnostic plots for simulatedWatson’s model
24
Table 2: Model Calibration and the Estimating Results of Apel’s model
25
Figure 3: Estimated Results of Simulated Apel and Jansson’s model
26
Simulatedoutput gap
Simulatedunemployment gap
EstimatedEstimated
The evolution of estimated the output gap and the unemployment gap are almost identical to their respective simulated series.
Table 2: Model calibration and the estimating results of Apel’s model
27
First note that the posterior means of δ’s, η’s and ’s are much closer to their true values than the ML estimates.
Second, the ML estimates of the standard deviations, σ’s, tend to be smaller than their corresponding posterior means.
This example indeed shows that our Bayesian sampling algorithms are practical and flexible and do not merely duplicate the ML estimates.
Figure 4: Prior and posterior distribution of parameters
28
These summaries demonstrate that the initial prior brief has onlya modest effect on the posterior shrinkage.
The bivariate scatterplots of (1, 2), (δ1, δ2) and (η1, η2), together with their corresponding marginal histograms show that there is a strong dependence between (1, 2), (δ1, δ2) and (η1, η2). This confirms that drawing these pairs of parameters simultaneously is essential in improving the mixing of the chain.
5 Application to Taiwan’s Seasonally Unadjusted Data
5.1 Results for Watson’s Model
5.2 Results for Apel and Jansson’s Model
Lin and Chen (2010) document that there appears to be a rising trend in the Taiwan’s unemployment gap, possibly as a result of structural changes or the periodicity of the cycle become longer.
Distinct classes of NAIRU specifications are implemented to mitigate the concern about implausible estimates and misspecification.
Lin and Chen (2010) documented that specifying the unemployment gap as an integrated AR(1) process leads a dramatic decline in the sum of δ’s and both the unemployment gap and output gap became more stable.
.
Previous Literature on Taiwan’s Potential Output and NAIRU
30
Estimating potential output and NAIRU for Taiwan with conventional, methods is problematic !!!
The Application to TaiwanWith appropriate priors, prior information about
the structure of the economy based on theory and country-specific circumstance can be embedded in models (Waliszewski, 2010)
We take Lin and Chen’s (2010) estimates as a reference for the prior means but leave a considerable amount of uncertainty around
the prior variances.
31
Results of Watson’s model with real data—Table3 and Figure 5
32
Comparison of the posterior means of σz and σy show that the transitory component plays a major role in the output fluctuations.
First, when seasonal unit root is explicitly considered, the estimates of the states exhibit no seasonal fluctuation.
Figure 6: Estimated Results of Apel and Jansson’s Model with Real Data
33
First, when seasonal unit root is explicitly considered, the estimates of the states exhibit no seasonal fluctuation.
The recession in the 2000s appears to be very severe compared to Watson’sunivariate model.
The financial crisis of 2008 further induced sharp increase in the NARIU.
Table 4: Empirical results of Apel’s model
34
Table 4 shows that the 95% posterior interval traps the ML estimates for mostunknown coefficients (δ’s, η’s, ’s and α).
The posterior standard deviations of unknown parameters and their corresponding standard errors generally exceed the standard errors reported by the ML
Table 4: Empirical results of Apel’s model
35
1. Traditional Kalman filter (ML) puts too little weight on the variance of the permanent component.2. Bayesian estimates also allow for
more stochastic variation in the cyclical component, the unemployment gap and output gap.
Figure 7: Comparison between the Bayesian State Estimates and the ML State Estimates
36
Red line : Bayesian(AR2), the Bayesian estimates with AR(2) cyclical unemployment.Black line : ML(AR2) denotes the maximum likelihood estimates with AR(2) cyclical unemployment. Blue line: ML(DAR1) the maximum likelihood estimates with an integrated AR(1) process.
Figure 7: Comparison between the Bayesian State Estimates and the ML State Estimates
37
The similarity between the Bayesian output gap and the ML(DAR1) output gap demonstrates that the Bayesian framework is rich enough to cope with model misspecification and identification problems.
What is particularly striking is that without any particular model specification, the path of the Bayesian output gap is almost the same as the path of ML(DAR1) output gap (the blue line).
Compared to the ML(AR2) output gap (black line), the Bayesian(AR2) output gap is slowly trending downwards and contains a more pronounced cyclical pattern.
Comparison between the Bayesian State Estimates and the ML State Estimates
38
Although the posterior means of δ’s are almost the same as the ML estimates, we find that the posterior distribution indeed allows for more parameter uncertainty
Figure 7: Comparison between the Bayesian State Estimates and the ML State Estimates
39
All the unemployment gap estimates show that the economy has experienced a significant increase in the unemployment gap during 2000s.
Even with same model specification, the Bayesian(AR2) output gap is slowly trending upwards and presents a significantly morenegative unemployment gap during 1987 to 1999.
SummaryThis paper develops the corresponding Bayesian
sampling algorithms for Watson’s decomposition method and Apel and Jansson’s system approach.
Simulation and empirical analyses show that our Bayesian sampling algorithms are flexible and do not merely duplicate the maximum likelihood estimates.
We find that the maximum likelihood generally understates the parameter variability and puts too little weight on the variance.
40
SummaryWhile a Bayesian approach allows for more stochastic
variation in the permanent and cyclical component
Our results demonstrate that the posterior distribution facilitates assessment of the parameter uncertainty.
A Bayesian approach is rich enough to cope with model
specification issues and provides more relevant information for conducting monetary and fiscal policies .
41
謝謝您的聆聽
Thank You for Your
Listening!
42