Advertisement

The Annals of Regional Science

, Volume 61, Issue 1, pp 73–93 | Cite as

Conditional and joint tests for spatial effects in discrete Markov chain models of regional income distribution dynamics

Original Paper
  • 128 Downloads

Abstract

Spatial effects have been recognized to play an important role in transitional dynamics of regional incomes. Detection and evaluation of both spatial heterogeneity and spatial dependence in discrete Markov chain models, which have been widely applied to the study of regional income distribution dynamics and convergence, are vital, but under-explored issues. Indeed, in this spatiotemporal setting, spatial effects can take much more complex forms than that in a pure cross-sectional setting. In this paper, we address two test frameworks. The first is a conditional spatial Markov chains test framework, which can be used to detect spatial heterogeneity and temporally lagged spatial dependence; the second is a joint spatial Markov chains test framework, which tests for contemporaneous spatial dependence. A series of Monte Carlo experiments are designed to examine size, power and robustness properties of these tests for a range of sample sizes (spatial \(\times \) temporal dimensions), for different levels of discretization granularity and for different number of regimes. Results indicate that all tests display good size property except when sample size is fairly small. All tests for spatial dependence are similar in almost all aspects—size, power and robustness. Conditional spatial Markov tests for spatial heterogeneity have highest power for detecting spatial heterogeneity. Granularity of discretization has a major impact on the size properties of the tests when sample size is fairly small.

JEL Classification

C12 O47 R11 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported in part by National Science Foundation Grant SES-1421935.

Supplementary material

168_2017_859_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (77 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (pdf 77 KB)

References

  1. Anderson TW, Goodman LA (1957) Statistical inference about Markov chains. Ann Math Stat 28(1):89–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anselin L (1990) Some robust approaches to testing and estimation in spatial econometrics. Reg Sci Urban Econ 20(2):141–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anselin L, Rey SJ (1991) Properties of tests for spatial dependence in linear regression models. Geogr Anal 23(2):112–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arbia G, Basile R, Piras G (2006) Analyzing intra-distribution dynamics: a reappraisal. ERSA conference papers, European Regional Science AssociationGoogle Scholar
  5. Bickenbach F, Bode E (2003) Evaluating the Markov property in studies of economic convergence. Int Reg Sci Rev 26(3):363–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bulli S (2001) Distribution dynamics and cross-country convergence: a new approach. Scott J Polit Econ 48(2):226–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Debarsy N, Ertur C, LeSage JP (2012) Interpreting dynamic space–time panel data models. Stat Methodol 9(1–2):158–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Elhorst JP (2001) Dynamic models in space and time. Geogr Anal 33(2):119–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ertur C, Gallo JL, Baumont C (2006) The European regional convergence process, 1980–1995: do spatial regimes and spatial dependence matter? Int Reg Sci Rev 29(1):3–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Guihenneuc-Jouyaux C, Robert CP (1998) Discretization of continuous Markov chains and Markov chain Monte Carlo convergence assessment. J Am Stat Assoc 93(443):1055–1067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hammond GW (2004) Metropolitan/non-metropolitan divergence: a spatial Markov chains approach. Pap Reg Sci 83(3):543–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Le Gallo J (2004) Space-time analysis of GDP disparities among European regions: a Markov chains approach. Int Reg Sci Rev 27(2):138–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. LeSage JP, Cashell BA (2015) A comparison of vector autoregressive forecasting performance: spatial versus non-spatial Bayesian priors. Ann Reg Sci 54(2):533–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. LeSage JP, Krivelyova A (1999) A spatial prior for Bayesian vector autoregressive models. J Reg Sci 39(2):297–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Liao FH, Wei YD (2012) Dynamics, space, and regional inequality in provincial China: a case study of Guandong province. Appl Geogr 35(12):71–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lütkepohl H (2005) New introduction to multiple time series analysis. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Magrini S (1999) The evolution of income disparities among the regions of the European Union. Reg Sci Urban Econ 29(2):257–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Parent O, LeSage JP (2012) Spatial dynamic panel data models with random effects. Reg Sci Urban Econ 42(4):727–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pu Y, Ma R, Ge Y, Huang X (2005) Spatial-temporal dynamics of regional convergence at county level in Jiangsu. Chin Geogr Sci 15(2):113–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Quah DT (1996) Empirics for economic growth and convergence. Eur Econ Rev 40(6):1353–1375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rey SJ (2001) Spatial empirics for economic growth and convergence. Geogr Anal 33(3):195–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rey SJ (2015) Discrete regional distribution dynamics revisited. J Reg Urban Econ 1(2):83–103Google Scholar
  23. Rey SJ, Sastré Gutiérrez ML (2015) Comparative spatial inequality dynamics: the case of Mexico and the United States. Appl Geogr 61:70–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rey SJ, Mack EA, Koschinsky J (2012) Exploratory space–time analysis of burglary patterns. J Quant Criminol 28:509–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rey SJ, Kang W, Wolf L (2016) The properties of tests for spatial effects in discrete Markov chain models of regional income distribution dynamics. J Geogr Syst 18(4):377–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Silos P (2006) Assessing Markov chain approximations: a minimal econometric approach. J Econ Dyn Control 30(6):1063–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tauchen G (1986) Finite state Markov-chain approximations to univariate and vector autoregressions. Econ Lett 20(2):177–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wolf LJ, Rey SJ (2015) On the lumpability of regional income convergence. Lett Spat Resour Sci 9:265–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Geographical Sciences and Urban PlanningArizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  2. 2.Center for Geospatial Sciences, School of Public PolicyUniversity of California, RiversideRiversideUSA

Personalised recommendations