<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Understanding INSTRUMENT statement for dynamic panel models (PROC PANEL) in SAS Forecasting and Econometrics</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/Understanding-INSTRUMENT-statement-for-dynamic-panel-models-PROC/m-p/315319#M2086</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you bobby_sas!!!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I feel much better having these points confirmed.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regarding the current (practical) limitation of PROC PANEL to AR(1) models, that's an important point to know! &amp;nbsp;I wish it were noted in the document (or, if I missed it, noted more prominently). &amp;nbsp;In any case I'll probably be working with an AR(1) anyhow, so it's fine for my present purposes &amp;nbsp;&lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2016 19:39:22 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>TBeans</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-11-29T19:39:22Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Understanding INSTRUMENT statement for dynamic panel models (PROC PANEL)</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/Understanding-INSTRUMENT-statement-for-dynamic-panel-models-PROC/m-p/313598#M2057</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I'm running a dynamic panel model. &amp;nbsp;I've read through the PROC PANEL &lt;A href="https://support.sas.com/documentation/onlinedoc/ets/132/panel.pdf" target="_self"&gt;documentation here&lt;/A&gt;.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm relatively familiar with the Arellano/Bond/Bover and Blundell/Bond System GMM procedures for dynamic panels, but I want to make sure I understand exactly what is being in SAS. &amp;nbsp;In particular, the relationship between the INSTRUMENT and MODEL statements is unclear. &amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;Could someone please confirm or correct my intiution outlined below?&lt;/STRONG&gt; &amp;nbsp;Thanks in advance!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;*********&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;the INSTRUMENT statement (p. 1386-7) gives the following example:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE class=" language-sas"&gt;proc panel data=test;
    &lt;BR /&gt;/* Call this model (1) */&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;    INSTRUMENTS depvar pred=(x1 x2) exog=(x3 x4 x5) correlated=(x3 x4 x5);
    model y = y_1 x1 x2 / gmm1 maxband=6 nolevels ginv=g4 artest=5;
    &lt;BR /&gt;/* And this model (2) */&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;    INSTRUMENTS pred=(x2 x4) exog=(x3 x5) correlated=(x3 x4);
    model y = y_1 x2 / gmm1 maxband=6 nolevels ginv=g4 artest=5;
    &lt;BR /&gt;    id cs ts;
run;&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Here's what I understand is happening:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;the &lt;FONT face="courier new,courier"&gt;NOLEVELS&lt;/FONT&gt; option specifies that only the equation in First Differences is estimated. &amp;nbsp;Thus, if&amp;nbsp;&lt;FONT face="courier new,courier"&gt;NOLEVELS&lt;/FONT&gt; is&amp;nbsp;&lt;U&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;not&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/U&gt; specified, then the One-Step estimator (because of&amp;nbsp;&lt;FONT face="courier new,courier"&gt;GMM1)&lt;/FONT&gt;&amp;nbsp;is the so-called "System GMM", in which the differenced equations are stacked on top of the level equations. &amp;nbsp;Corrrect?&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;The&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;depvar&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;option in INSTRUMENTS in Model (1) uses lagged levels of &lt;STRONG&gt;y&lt;/STRONG&gt; as an IV for the AR regressor, &lt;STRONG&gt;y_1&lt;/STRONG&gt;. &amp;nbsp;And this is done automatically because SAS recognizes the naming convention in the MODEL statement...?&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;The documentation says&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;depvar&lt;/STRONG&gt; automatcially selects the correct lag order to act as an instrument. &amp;nbsp;Thus were Model (1) to inclue &lt;STRONG&gt;y_1&lt;/STRONG&gt;, &lt;STRONG&gt;y_2&lt;/STRONG&gt; and &lt;STRONG&gt;y_3&lt;/STRONG&gt; then older lag orders would be automatically selected as IVs, correct? &amp;nbsp;Again, this is because INSTRUMENTS recognizes the naming convention in the MODEL statement....?&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;The&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;exog[enous]&amp;nbsp;&lt;/STRONG&gt;option states these variables (&lt;STRONG&gt;x3&lt;/STRONG&gt;, &lt;STRONG&gt;x4&lt;/STRONG&gt;, &lt;STRONG&gt;x5&lt;/STRONG&gt; in Model 1) are instruemental variables for &lt;STRONG&gt;y_1&lt;/STRONG&gt;, and &lt;U&gt;only&lt;/U&gt; for &lt;STRONG&gt;y_1&lt;/STRONG&gt;. &amp;nbsp;However, these exongeous regressors would be IVs for &lt;STRONG&gt;y_2&lt;/STRONG&gt;, &lt;STRONG&gt;y_3&lt;/STRONG&gt;, etc., &lt;EM&gt;&lt;U&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;if&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/EM&gt; these autoregressive components were also specified in MODEL. &amp;nbsp;Is that correct?&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;And the&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;correlated&amp;nbsp;&lt;/STRONG&gt;specification for&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;x3&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;, &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;x4&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;, &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;x5&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt; in Model 1 makes these IVs for the equation in differences (and they wouldn't be IVs for the equations in levels -- only the &lt;STRONG&gt;depvar&amp;nbsp;&lt;/STRONG&gt;lags would be in that case). &amp;nbsp;But isn't this redundant because the &lt;FONT face="courier new,courier"&gt;NOLEVELS&lt;/FONT&gt; option is specified?? &amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;The dynamic panel options seem really fantastic in PROC PANEL but I gotta say I've found the documentation&amp;nbsp;to a little murky in places, especially with respect to the specification of instrumental variables.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;(NOTE: I've cross-posted this question on StackOverflow:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="http://stackoverflow.com/questions/40752195/understanding-instrument-statement-for-dynamic-panel-models-proc-panel" target="_blank"&gt;http://stackoverflow.com/questions/40752195/understanding-instrument-statement-for-dynamic-panel-models-proc-panel&lt;/A&gt;)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2016 21:44:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/Understanding-INSTRUMENT-statement-for-dynamic-panel-models-PROC/m-p/313598#M2057</guid>
      <dc:creator>TBeans</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-11-22T21:44:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Understanding INSTRUMENT statement for dynamic panel models (PROC PANEL)</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/Understanding-INSTRUMENT-statement-for-dynamic-panel-models-PROC/m-p/315311#M2085</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;To answer your questions,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;1. This is correct. &amp;nbsp; By default (NOLEVELS not specified), both difference and level equations are used.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;2. This is correct.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;3. This is not correct. &amp;nbsp;PROC PANEL assumes an AR(1) model in developing the instruments. &amp;nbsp;Making this work with higher-order AR models would require some coercion of the INSTRUMENTS statement. &amp;nbsp;In my experience, it would be difficult to get the full instrument matrix just right because PROC PANEL won't innately recognize the higher orders. &amp;nbsp;This is an area where could improve PROC PANEL in the future.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;4. This is not correct. See 3.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;5. Correct. &amp;nbsp;When you specify NOLEVELS, the CORRELATED option plays no role for the reason you described.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2016 19:15:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/Understanding-INSTRUMENT-statement-for-dynamic-panel-models-PROC/m-p/315311#M2085</guid>
      <dc:creator>bobby_sas</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-11-29T19:15:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Understanding INSTRUMENT statement for dynamic panel models (PROC PANEL)</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/Understanding-INSTRUMENT-statement-for-dynamic-panel-models-PROC/m-p/315319#M2086</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you bobby_sas!!!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I feel much better having these points confirmed.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regarding the current (practical) limitation of PROC PANEL to AR(1) models, that's an important point to know! &amp;nbsp;I wish it were noted in the document (or, if I missed it, noted more prominently). &amp;nbsp;In any case I'll probably be working with an AR(1) anyhow, so it's fine for my present purposes &amp;nbsp;&lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2016 19:39:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/Understanding-INSTRUMENT-statement-for-dynamic-panel-models-PROC/m-p/315319#M2086</guid>
      <dc:creator>TBeans</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-11-29T19:39:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

