Box-Cox Type Models: A Proposal for an Estimation Strategy

Authors

  • Dieter Wunder Departamento de Economía, Universidad de Chile image/svg+xml
  • Héctor Gutiérrez Departamento de Economía, Universidad de Chile image/svg+xml

Keywords:

Box-Cox models, hedonic prices, maximum likelihood, nonlinear least squares, estimation strategy, urban economics

Abstract

This paper proposes a strategy for evaluating and estimating Box-Cox models which are widely used for example in estimation of hedonic price equations in urban economics. The proposition has in mind some difficulties arising in practical implementation of Spitzer's [1982] conclusion about the equivalence between results obtained with the maximun likelihood technique, by one hand, and the ones obtained with the iterative and non linear least squared technique, by the other. The strategy is shown estimating a sites and services's hedonic price equation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Amemiya, T. (1984). Non-linear regression models. In Z. Griliches & M. Intriligator (Eds.), Handbook of econometrics (Vol. 1, cap. 6, pp. 333–389). North-Holland. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1573-4412(83)01010-7

Amemiya, T., & Powell, J. (1981). A comparison of the Box-Cox maximum likelihood estimator and the non-linear two-stage least squares estimator. Journal of Econometrics, 17(3), 351–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(81)90007-5

BID. (1987). Hedonic rent (or property value) functions and project benefit measurement: Some methodological and empirical issues (Reporte OEO/WP-03/87).

BID. (1988). Empirical issues in the estimation of hedonic rent or property value equations and their use in prediction (Reporte OEO/WP-02/88).

Box, G. E. P., & Cox, D. R. (1964). An analysis of transformations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B, 26(2), 211–252.

Cassel, E., & Mendelsohn, R. (1985). The choice of functional forms for hedonic price equations: Comment. Journal of Urban Economics, 18(2), 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/0094-1190(85)90012-9

Duan, N. (1983). Smearing estimate: A nonparametric retransformation method. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 78(383), 605–610. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1983.10478017

Goldfeld, S. M., & Quandt, R. E. (1972). Nonlinear methods in econometrics. North-Holland.

Haessel, W. (1978). Measuring goodness of fit in linear and nonlinear models. Southern Economic Journal, 44(3), 648–652.

Maddala, G. S. (1977). Econometrics. McGraw-Hill.

Miller, D. M. (1984). Reducing transformation bias in curve fitting. The American Statistician, 38(2), 124–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.1984.10483180

Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. (1987). Diagnóstico de alternativas de sistemas habitacionales.

Quandt, R. E. (1984). Computational problems and methods. In Handbook of econometrics (Vol. 1, cap. 12, pp. 699–764). North-Holland. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1573-4412(83)01016-8

Rao, P., & Miller, R. (1971). Applied econometrics. Wadsworth.

Rosen, S. (1974). Hedonic prices and implicit markets: Product differentiation in pure competition. Journal of Political Economy, 82(1), 34–55. https://doi.org/10.1086/260169

Spitzer, J. J. (1982). A primer on Box-Cox estimation. Review of Economics and Statistics, 64(2), 307–313. https://doi.org/10.2307/1924310

Wunder, D., & Gutiérrez, H. (1992). Precios de mercado de soluciones de vivienda progresiva en el Gran Santiago (Documento Serie Investigación). Departamento de Economía, Universidad de Chile.

Published

1992-10-31

How to Cite

Wunder, D., & Gutiérrez, H. (1992). Box-Cox Type Models: A Proposal for an Estimation Strategy. Economic Analysis Review, 7(2), 79–102. Retrieved from https://www.rae-ear.org/index.php/rae/article/view/230

Issue

Section

Articles

Article usage

ViewsTimes this article's page was opened since the journal started recording statistics. One person can visit more than once.
90
DownloadsTimes the full text of this article (usually the PDF) was opened or downloaded.
234

All time, as recorded by the journal.

Last 2 years: 39 views, 112 downloads.

2.60 downloads per view (journal average 1.65).Downloads of the full text for every abstract view of this article, compared with the whole journal.

Explore the journal's metrics