Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 2SLS (IV) with fractional outcome variable and spatially autocorrelated error terms

    I face the challenge of estimating a 2SLS (IV) model with a fractional (ranging between 0 and 1) outcome variable and spatially autocorrelated error terms (the data is spatially explicit, i.e. for each observation I have coordinates).

    So far I achieved doing so but without accounting for the residual spatial autocorrelation by a first stage OLS regression, the fitted values of which are then regressed against the y in a fractional, probit-linked regression. I also bootstrapped the coefficients to correct for the bias stemming from the splitting of the to stages of the 2-stage-least-squares regression, is this right?

    Literature-wise I found Lee (2003) paper titled "Best Spatial Two‐Stage Least Squares Estimators for a Spatial Autoregressive Model with Autoregressive Disturbances", but this goes into the theory without (at least to my awareness) then producing a statistical software script to replicate the methodology.

  • #2
    A further attempt I am considering is running a GS2SLS regression, which allows accounting for the residual spatial autocorrelation and performing IV regression, but here I don't capture the fact that the y is a fractional variable. Seems I can only tackle 2 out of 3 issues with either methodology. Any piece of advice to handle all of them?

    Comment


    • #3
      Dear Giacomo,

      I believe what you are doing is a "forbidden regression"; see here:

      https://www.statalist.org/forums/for...ndent-variable

      Best wishes,

      Joao

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Joao Santos Silva View Post
        Dear Giacomo,

        I believe what you are doing is a "forbidden regression"; see here:

        https://www.statalist.org/forums/for...ndent-variable

        Best wishes,

        Joao
        I see. Do you have any piece of advice on how I could tackle the specification challenge?

        Comment


        • #5
          I would just use GMM.

          Best wishes,

          Joao

          Comment

          Working...
          X