Kalman Filter or VAR Models to Predict Unemployment Rate in Romania?

  • Mihaela Simionescu
Keywords: forecasts, accuracy, Kalman filter, Hodrick-Prescott filter, VAR models, unemployment rate

Abstract

This paper brings to light an economic problem that frequently appears in practice: For the same variable, more alternative forecasts are proposed, yet the decision-making process requires the use of a single prediction. Therefore, a forecast assessment is necessary to select the best prediction. The aim of this research is to propose some strategies for improving the unemployment rate forecast in Romania by conducting a comparative accuracy analysis of unemployment rate forecasts based on two quantitative methods: Kalman filter and vector-auto-regressive (VAR) models. The first method considers the evolution of unemployment components, while the VAR model takes into account the interdependencies between the unemployment rate and the inflation rate. According to the Granger causality test, the inflation rate in the first difference is a cause of the unemployment rate in the first difference, these data sets being stationary. For the unemployment rate forecasts for 2010–2012 in Romania, the VAR models (in all variants of VAR simulations) determined more accurate predictions than Kalman filter based on two state space models for all accuracy measures. According to mean absolute scaled error, the dynamic-stochastic simulations used in predicting unemployment based on the VAR model are the most accurate. Another strategy for improving the initial forecasts based on the Kalman filter used the adjusted unemployment data transformed by the application of the Hodrick-Prescott filter. However, the use of VAR models rather than different variants of the Kalman filter methods remains the best strategy in improving the quality of the unemployment rate forecast in Romania. The explanation of these results is related to the fact that the interaction of unemployment with inflation provides useful information for predictions of the evolution of unemployment related to its components (i.e., natural unemployment and cyclical component).

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Mihaela Simionescu

Romanian Academy, National Institute for Economic Research, Institute for Economic Forecasting, Bucharest, Romania
E-mail: mihaela_mb1@yahoo.com

References

Afxentiou, P. C., & Serletis, A. (1991). Exports and GNP Causality in the Industrial Countries: 1950–1985. Kyklos, 44(2), 167–179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6435.1991.tb02095.x

Afxentiou, P. C., & Serletis, A. (2000). Output growth and variability of export and import growth: international evidence from Granger causality tests. Developing Economies, 38(2), 141–163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1049.2000.tb00874.x

Ahmad, J., & Kwan, A. C. C. (1991). Causality between exports and economic growth. Empirical evidence from Africa. Economics Letters, 37, 243–248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0165-1765(91)90218-A

Asafu-Adjaye, J., & Chakraborty, D. (1999). Export-led growth and import compression: further time series evidence from LDCs. Australian Economic Papers, June, 164–175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8454.00049

Awokuse, T. O. (2007). Causality between exports, imports, and economic growth: Evidence from transition economies. Economics Letters, 94, 389–395. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2006.08.025

Balassa, B. (1978). Exports and economic growth: Further evidence. Journal of Development Economics, 5, 181–189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-3878(78)90006-8

Bhagwati, J. N. (1978). Anatomy and consequences of exchange control regimes. New York: Ballinger Publishing.

Biswal, B., & Dhawan, U. (1998). Export-led growth hypothesis: cointegration and causality analysis for Taiwan. Applied Economics Letters, 5, 699–701. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/135048598354159

Chen, S-W. (2007). Exactly what is the link between export and growth in Taiwan? New evidence from the Granger causality test. Economics Bulletin, 6(7), 1–10.

Croatian Bureau of Statistics. (2014). CBS Databases. Retrieved from http://www.dzs.hr/default_e.htm

Doyle, E. (1998). Export-output causality: The Irish case 1953–93. Atlantic Economic Journal, 26(2), 147–161. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02299357

Dritsaki, C., & Stiakakis, E. (2014). Foreign direct investments, exports, and economic growth in Croatia: A time series analysis. Procedia Economics and Finance, 14(14), 181–190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00701-1

Edwards, S. (1998). Openness, productivity and growth: What do we really know? Economic Journal, 108(447), 383–398. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00293

Ekanayake, E. M. (1999). Exports and economic growth in Asian developing countries: Cointegration and error-correction models. Journal of Economic Development, 24(2), 43–56.

Engle, R. F., & Granger, C. W. J. (1987). Co-integration and error correction: Representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica, 55(2), 251–276. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1913236

Giles, J. A., & Williams, C. L. (2000). Export-led growth: A survey of the empirical literature and some noncausality results part 1. Econometrics Working Paper EWP0001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09638190050086177

Granger, C. W. J. (1969). Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica, 37(3), 424–438. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1912791

Greenway, D., Morgan, W., & Wright, P. (1999). Exports, export composition and growth. The Journal of International Trade and Economic Development, 8(1), 41–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09638199900000004

Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1990). Comparative advantage and long-run growth. American Economic Review, 80, 796–815.

Hsiao, M. W. (1987). Tests of causality and exogeneity between exports and economic growth: The case of Asian NICs. Journal of Economic Development, 12(2), 143–159.

Inotai, A. (2013). Sustainable growth based on export-oriented economic strategy. Sofia: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.

Khalafalla, K. Y., & Webb, A. J. (2001). Export-led growth and structural change: evidence from Malaysia. Applied Economics, 33, 1703–1715. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00036840010015066

Kónya, L. (2004a). Export-led growth, growth-driven export, both or none? Granger causality analysis on OECD countries. Applied Econometrics and International Development, 4(1), 73–94.

Kónya, L. (2004b). Unit-root, cointegration and Granger causality test results for export and growth in OECD countries. International Journal of Applied Econometrics and Quantitative Studies, 1(2), 67–94.

Kónya, L. (2006). Exports and growth: Granger causality analysis on OECD countries with a panel data approach. Economic Modelling, 23, 978–992. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2006.04.008

Krugman, P. R. (1984). Import protection as export promotion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Liu, X., Burridge, P., & Sinclair, P. J. N. (2002). Relationships between economic growth, foreign direct investment and trade: evidence from China. Applied Economics, 34, 1433–1440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00036840110100835

McCarville, M., & Nnadozie, E. (2001). Causality tests of export-led growth: The case of Mexico. Atlantic Economic Journal, 23(2), 140–145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02300439

Narayan, P. K., Narayan, S., Prasad, B. C., & Prasad, A. (2007). Export-led growth hypothesis: evidence from Papua New Guinea and Fiji. Journal of Economic Studies, 34(4), 341–351. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443580710826380

Paul, S., & Chowdhury, K. (1995). Export-led growth hypothesis: some empirical testing. Applied Economics Letters, 2, 177–179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/135048595357384

Ram, R. (1987). Exports and economic growth in developing countries: evidence from time series and cross–section data. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 36, 51–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/451636

Ramos, F. F. R. (2001). Exports, imports, and economic growth in Portugal: evidence from causality and cointegration analysis. Economic Modelling, 8, 613–623. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0264-9993(00)00055-9

Shan, J., & Sun, F. (1998). Export-led growth hypothesis for Australia: an empirical re-investigation. Applied Economics Letters, 5, 423–428. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/135048598354555

Shan, J., & Tian, G. G. (1998). Causality between exports and economic growth: the empirical evidence from Shanghai. Australian Economic Papers, June, 195–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8454.00015

Sharma, S. C., & Dhakal, D. (1994). Causal analyses between exports and economic growth in developing cou0ntries. Applied Economics, 26, 1145–1157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00036849400000112

Sung-Shen, N., Biswas, B., & Tribedy, G. (1990). Causality between exports and economic growth: An empirical study. Journal of Economic Development, 15(1), 47–61.

Tang, T. C. (2006). New evidence on export expansion, economic growth and causality in China. Applied Economic Letters, 13, 801–803. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13504850500425303

Valdec, M., & Zrnc, J. (2014). The direction of causality between exports and firm performance: microeconomic evidence from Croatia using the matching approach. Financial Theory and Practice, 1.

World Bank. (1993). The East Asian miracle: Economic growth and public policy. New York: Oxford University Press.

Živković, S., Živković, I., & Grdinić, M. (2014). A VECM approach to detangling growth, exports, imports and FDI knot in selected CEE countries. Croatian Operational Research Review, 5, 161–175. http://dx.doi.org/10.17535/crorr.2014.0005

Published
2015-08-01
How to Cite
Simionescu M. (2015). Kalman Filter or VAR Models to Predict Unemployment Rate in Romania?. Naše gospodarstvo/Our Economy, 61(3), 3-21. Retrieved from https://journals.um.si/index.php/oe/article/view/2258