RDP 2022-04: The Unit-effect Normalisation in Set-identified Structural Vector Autoregressions Appendix B: Proofs of Propositions
October 2022
- Download the Paper 2,225KB
Proof of Proposition 4.1. Assume so there exists such that for all Given that the impulse response horizon h is fixed and finite, for all .[26] There thus exists such that for all It follows that for all , so is bounded.
Proof of Proposition 4.2. Assume that the sign restrictions are ordered such that the first row of corresponds to the sign restriction Let collect the coefficient vectors of the sign and zero restrictions.
First, consider the case where and let represent an orthonormal basis for the null space of . By the rank-nullity theorem, has dimension Thus, it is always possible to construct satisfying by taking any column of . Such a vector clearly satisfies the identifying restrictions with , so .
Now, consider the case where Let represent the coefficients of the zero restrictions augmented with a ‘binding’ version of the sign restriction on , and let represent the coefficients of the remaining sign restrictions (i.e. the last s – 1 rows of ). Since Proposition 4.1 in Read (2022) states that the system of zero and sign restrictions, and , can be transformed into a set of sign restrictions in . Let represent the transformed sign restrictions, where and is obtained from using the transformation described in Read. Corollary 4.1 of Read states that the set will be non-empty if and only if the set is non-empty, in which case I proceed by showing that the set is always non-empty.
If then has dimension so it is always possible to construct satisfying by taking any column of , and the set is non-empty. If there cannot exist such that (since has full rank), so by Gordan's Theorem (e.g. Mangasarian 1994; Border 2020) there must exist such that , so the set is non-empty.
Footnote
Allowing for arbitrarily large impulse response horizons h would require restricting the support of the reduced-form parameter space such that the infinite-order vector moving average representation of the VAR exists; this will be the case if the eigenvalues of the companion matrix lie inside the unit circle (e.g. Hamilton 1994; Kilian and Lütkepohl 2017). By avoiding this assumption I allow for mildly explosive processes. [26]