Author: Mohit Verma

  • Forecasting Unemployment Rate during the Pandemic

    Forecasting Unemployment Rate during the Pandemic

    Forecasting
    Forecasting, in simpler terms, is a process of predicting future values of a variable based on past data and other variables that are related to the variable being forecasted. For example, values of future demand for tickets for a particular airline company depend on past sales and the price of its tickets.
    Time-series data is used for forecasting purposes. According to Wikipedia ‘A time series is a series of data points indexed in time order. Most commonly, a time series is a sequence taken at successive equally spaced points in time. Thus, it is a sequence of discrete-time data.’ An example of time series data for monthly airline passengers is given below:

    Figure 1


    More technically, it is modelled through a stochastic process, Y(t). In a time series data, we are interested in estimating values for Y(t+h) using the information available at time t.  
    Unemployment rate
    Unemployment is the proportion of people in the labour force who are willing and able to work but are unable to find work. It is an indicator of the health of the economy because it provides a timely measure of the state of labour market and hence, overall economic activities. In wake of the impact of Covid-19 on economic activities throughout the world, unemployment rate analysis and forecasts have become paramount in assessing economic conditions.
    In India, unemployment rates have been on the higher end in recent times. According to data released by Statistics Ministry, unemployment rate for FY18 was 6.1%, the highest in 45 years. It is no co-incidence that GDP rates have also been declining successively for the past few years. The shock that Covid-19 has given to the economy has only worsened our situation. The unemployment rate rose to 27.1% as a whopping 121.5 million were forced out of work.
     

    Figure 2


    Source: CMIE
    Methodology
    The data used to forecast unemployment rates was sourced from CMIE website, which surveys over 43,000 households to generate monthly estimates since January 2016. The data has 56 monthly observations ranging from January 2016 to August 2020, data before 2016 was not available.
    Four popular econometric forecasting models (ARIMA, Naïve, Exponential Smoothing, Holt’s winter method) were used and the best performing model was chosen to forecast unemployment till December 2020.
    The forecasting models were programmed in R. The relevant codes are available upon request with the author. The Dicky-Fuller test and the Chow test for structural breaks were conducted using STATA, results of which are presented further in the article.
    Before beginning the analysis, I believe that the limitations of the analysis should be mentioned:

    • The sample size of 56 observations is not sufficient for a thorough analysis, ideally the sample size should have been 2-3 times larger than the available data. Smaller sample sizes lead to skewed forecasting results which are prone to errors.
    • The unemployment data from CMIE is an estimate and is a secondary source. In India, primary data is only collected once in 3-4 years, thus the forecasting results are only as good as the source of the data.
    • This is a univariate analysis, an Okun’s law based analysis of Unemployment rate as a function of GDP (output) and past trends would have been more suitable. However, since GDP data is only available quarterly and there are only 56 monthly observations available, it would have rendered the analysis insignificant with only 19 quarterly observations.
    • Forecasting being based on past trends, is prone to errors. The negative shock provided by Covid-19 to the economies worldwide has made it all the more difficult to forecast. A Bloomberg study analysed over 3,200 forecasts by IMF since 1999 and found that over 93% of the forecasts underestimated or overestimated the results with a mean error of 2 percentage points.

     
    Checking the stationarity of data
    In order to model build a model, we need to make sure that the series is stationary. For intuitively checking the stationarity, I plotted the data over time as indicated in Figure 2 above. I also plotted the correlograms (autocorrelations versus time lags) as shown in Figure 8 and 9 in appendix. The plot of data over time indicate varying mean, variance and covariance. The ACF and PACF plot show that autocorrelations function are persistent indefinitely.
    We perform the Augmented Dickey Fuller test at 2 lags. Result of the ADF test is shown in Table 1 below. The test statistic is insignificant at 5 per cent and the p-value is 0.1709, which is more than the accepted benchmark of 0.05. We fail to reject the null hypothesis of non-stationarity. We conclude that our series is non-stationary.

    Dicky-Fuller test on raw data

    Table 1

    —– Interpolated Dickey-Fuller —–
    Test statistic 1% critical value 5% critical value 10%critical value
    Z(t) -2.303 -3.576 -2.928 -2.599

     
     
     
     
     

    MacKinnon approximate p-value for Z(t) = 0.1709

    Converting the non-stationary series into stationary

    In order to transform the non-stationary series into stationary, we use differencing method (computing difference between consecutive observations).
    We plot the data over time, ACF and PACF again as shown in Figure 5 below and figure 10 and 11 in appendix, respectively. From the figures, we can intuitively say that the transformed series is stationary. Further, we used Augmented Dickey-Fuller tests to ascertain the stationary of our series. Table 2 shows the result of the ADF test. The test statistic is significant at 1,5 and 10 per cent levels and the p-value is less than 0.05. We reject the null hypothesis of non-stationarity of our series. The tests confirm that the series is stationary.
     

    Dicky-Fuller test on first difference data

    Table 2

    —– Interpolated Dickey-Fuller —–
    Test statistic 1% critical value 5% critical value 10%critical value
    Z(t) -5.035 -3.576 -2.928 -2.599

    MacKinnon approximate p-value for Z(t) = 0.0000
     
     

    Figure 3


     
    Naïve model
    Naïve models are the simplest of forecasting models and provide a benchmark against which other more sophisticated models can be compared. Thus, a Naïve model serves as an ideal model to start any comparative analysis with. In a naive model, the forecasted values are simply the values of the last observation. It is given by
    y^t+h|t=yt.
    Forecast results from Naïve method are presented below in figure 4 and table1.
     

    Figure 4

     

     

    Table 1

     
     
    Point forecast Lo 80 High 80 Low 95 High 95
    Sept 8.35 4.861900 11.83810 3.0154109 13.68459
    Oct 8.35 3.417081 13.28292 0.8057517 15.89425
    Nov 8.35 2.308433 14.39157 -0.8897794 17.58978
    Dec 8.35 1.373799 15.32620 -2.3191783 19.01918

     
    Box-Jenkins Approach
     

    1. Identification of ARIMA (p, d, q) model

     
    The data was split into training and testing dataset in 80:20 ratio. The training data was used for estimating the model, while the model was tested on the remaining 20 percent data. This is done in order to forecast the future values of the time series data.
    p, d and q in (p, d, q) stand for number of lags, difference and moving average respectively.
    The model best fitting the data was (0,1,3) as its Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) was the lowest amongst all the possible combinations of the order of the ARIMA model.
    The residuals from Arima model were found to be normally distributed, with a mean of 0.09 and zero correlation. This causes a bias in the estimates. To solve the problem of bias, we will add 0.09 to all forecasts. The ACF and line graph of residuals is attached in the appendix.
    After identification and estimation, several diagnostic tests were conducted to check if there were any uncaptured information in the model. Results of the diagnostics tests have been omitted from the article in interest of length.
     

    1. Forecasting

     
    The model that has been constructed was used to forecast unemployment rates for the next four months. The results are presented below in figure 5 and table 2.
     

    Figure 5

     

     
    Table 2

     
     
    Point forecast Lo 80 High 80 Low 95 High 95
    Sept 9.04 5.978858 11.93987 4.401073 13.51765
    Oct 9.77 5.183039 14.1951 2.797671 16.58054
    Nov 10.3 5.364191 15.06267 2.797157 17.62971
    Dec 10.3 5.280182 15.14668   2.668678   17.75819

     
    Exponential Smoothing method
    It is one of the most popular classic forecasting models. It gives more weight to recent values and works best for short term forecasts when there is no trend or seasonality in dataset. The model is given by:
    Ŷ(t+h|t) = ⍺y(t) + ⍺(1-⍺)y(t-1) + ⍺(1-⍺)²y(t-2) + …
    with 0<<1
    As observed in the model, recent time periods have more weightage in the model and the weightage keeps decreasing exponentially as we go further back in time.
    The ⍺  is the smoothing factor here whose value was chosen to be 0.9 since it had the lowest RMSE among all other values.
    The forecast results are presented below:
     

    Figure 6


    Table 3

     
     
    Point forecast Lo 80 High 80 Low 95 High 95
    Sept 8.30 4.739288 11.87260 2.8512134 13.76068
    Oct 8.30 3.507498 13.10439 0.9673541 15.64454
    Nov 8.30 2.532806 14.07908 -0.5233096 17.13520
    Dec 8.30 1.700403 14.91149 -1.7963595   18.40825

     
    Holt Winters’ method
    The simple exponential function cannot be used effectively for data with trends. Holt-Winters’ exponential smoothing method is a better suited model for data with trends. This model contains a forecast equation and two smoothing equations. The linear model is given by:
    yt+h = lt + hbt
    l= αyt + (1-α)lt-1
    bt = β(lt-lt-1)+ (1-β)bt-1
    where, lt is the level (smoothed value).
    h is the number of steps ahead.
    bt is the weighted average of the trend.
    Just like the simple exponential smoothing method, lt shows that it is a weighted average of yt
    The α  is the smoothing factor here whose value was chosen to be 0.99 and  the β  value 0.0025 since they had the lowest RMSE among all other values.
    The forecast results are presented below:
     

    Figure 7


     
    Table 4

     
     
    Point forecast Lo 80 High 80 Low 95 High 95
    Sept 8.34 4.749288 11.9326 2.84121 13.84
    Oct 8.33 3.24 13.4243 0.54541 16.11977
    Nov 8.32 2.0800 14.5678 -1.2253 17.87316
    Dec 8.31 1.0963 15.53419 -2.725103   19.35565

     
    Evaluation
    To compare the models the two parameters chosen are:

    • Root mean square error (RMSE)
    • Mean absolute error (MAE)

    MAE is a measure of mean error in a set of observations/predictions. RMSE is the square root of the mean of squared differences between prediction and actual observation. RMSE is more useful when large errors are not desirable and MAE is useful otherwise.
    RMSE and MAE statistics for all the models are presented below:

    Naive ARIMA Exp Smoothing Holt Winters’
    RMSE 2.72 2.24 2.73 2.7
    MAE 1.05 1.034 1.06 1.05

     
    From the table it is clear that ARIMA/Box Jenkins method has both the lowest RMSE and MAE among the models under consideration while Exponential smoothing method has the highest MAE and RMSE among all.
    Therefore, the unemployment rate forecasts as per the Box Jenkins method for the next four months are:
     

    Sept 9.04
    Oct 9.77
    Nov 10.3
    Dec 10.3

     
    The way ahead?

    • The unemployment rate is expected to rise in the coming months. This is a bad sign for an economy that is already suffering.
    • With GDP forecasts getting lower and lower for the current financial year, the govt needs to act quick to mitigate the potential damage.
    • It is impossible to correctly ascertain the total impact of covid-19 on the economy and the range of the impact, but it is safe to say that we will be seeing the effects for a long time to come in some form or other.
    • We might see more and more people slip into poverty, depression, increased domestic violence and with potentially long term impact on human development parameters like child mal-nutrition, enrolment rates etc among other things.

    Some possible solutions

    1. Expansionary monetary policy: It is a common tool of dealing with high unemployment rate in the short term. Under expansionary monetary policy, the central bank reduces the rate of interest on which it lends money to the banks, subsequently the banks lower their rates which leads to a higher amount of loans being taken by business owners. This extra capital helps businesses to hire more workers and expand production, which in turn reduces unemployment rate.
    2. Expansionary fiscal policy: Under expansionary fiscal policy the government increases its spending, particularly in the infra-structure sector. It spends more money to build dams, roads, bridges, highways etc. This increased spending leads to an increase in employment as these projects require labour.
    3. Expand the scope of NREGS to urban areas permanently and a higher minimum wage for all : NREGS has proved to be really effective in alleviating poverty, improving quality of life and decreasing unemployment rate in rural areas. Given the unprecedented circumstances, the govt can consider expanding its scope to urban areas, so that it could provide employment to the millions of unemployed workers there. This increase in expenditure could also help the govt revive consumer demand, which is essential if we want to help the GDP get back on track.
    4. A stimulus package aimed at putting money into the hands of the poor :

    The govt should also consider providing at least a one-time transfer of funds to people just like the US govt did. Such a transfer of putting money directly into the hands of the poor is the most effective way of reviving consumer demand in the economy and many economists around the world have been calling for such a plan to be implemented. There is no better way of increasing consumer expenditure other than putting money into the hands of cash-starved people.
     
    Appendix:
     

    Figure 8


     

    Figure 9

     

    Figure 10

     

    Figure 11

     

    Figure 12

     

    Figure 13

     
     

  • Good Economics For Hard Times

    Good Economics For Hard Times

    Title : Good Economics for Hard Times

    By Esther Duflo and Abhijit Bannerjee

    Published by Public Affairs, Hachette Book Group, New York

    Year :  November 2019

    Honesty is a quality seldom found among economists. More often than not, economists refuse to acknowledge the limitations of economic models that rely on, at times, completely unrealistic assumptions. That is, fortunately, not the case with this book. This book does not over-simplify economic issues and makes a compelling argument against making sweeping generalizations in a profession that relies on studying human behaviour.

    One of the best things about this book is its accessibility, it is as accessible to a layman as it is to a seasoned economist. This book, in a significant departure from their first book Poor Economics, focuses on the burning issues of wealthy countries instead. The writing is witty and succinct, full of interesting personal anecdotes.

    They start with the politically sensitive issue of immigration and show why conventional models of supply and demand don’t work for labour markets. Conventional theory, and critics of immigration, would have us believe that an influx of immigrants would drive down wages in the area and result in job losses for the natives. But Banerjee and Duflo show that the immigrants don’t just increase the labour force, they’re also consumers. Thus, they increase demand and by extension, employment and GDP in the area. They also point out that there is no strong evidence that even large influxes impact wages severely.

    However, when it comes to growth they’re not as clear as they are about the impact of immigration. They make a case as to why nobody really knows what drives growth in the long term and why prominent growth economists (Sollow, Romer etc) were all right as well as wrong at the same time. According to them, both the optimists and pessimists make sound arguments and it is impossible to predict if growth will continue or perish given the humongous number of variables involved and the sheer unpredictability of technology.

    Their support for free trade, unsurprisingly, is not unconditional. They don’t think it is the panacea that the neo-liberal discourse makes it out to be. Expansion of trade, they believe, is the driver of despair globally because of its random behaviour as they write, “Trade has created a more volatile world where jobs suddenly vanish only to turn up a thousand miles away.” They also present evidence showing that, at times, free trade has done more harm than good and argue that the state must provide proper support to the losers from trade if they want to mitigate the damage.

    Cutting tax rates for the rich has long been argued as a certain method to improve growth by many economists. Banerjee and Duflo, however, disagree. They write “In a policy world that has mostly abandoned reason … let’s be clear: Tax cuts for the wealthy do not produce economic growth.” They argue that even the (in)famous Reagan-Thatcher era tax cuts did little to revive growth. Instead, those tax cuts, accompanied by cuts in welfare spending contributed immensely to income inequality. Advocates of tax cuts often argue that raising taxes stifle innovation, but that is clearly false as Bill Gates himself argues here.

    Where a lot of economists fail and they excel, is bringing the social science aspect into economics. They don’t see people just as means to an end (growth) and emphasize on prioritising non-economic goals that don’t necessarily result into higher growth but instead improve overall happiness, dignity, self-respect and give people a sense of purpose. According to them, in this growing environment of despair, it is important to provide people with a sense of purpose.

    They argue, quite successfully, that we should change our policy response to poverty and stop letting only poverty define poor people. They recommend that poor people be seen just like normal people who have dreams and desires and policymakers need to stop believing that they know better about what poor people need than the people themselves.

    Lastly, they say that the message of policy interventions should not be ‘you are being rescued by the state’ and instead ‘this is the state’s support to ensure you have the basic rights you deserve.’ It is vital that they’re given the respect they deserve if we want them to lead dignified lives and not make them feel like they’re living on handouts from the state as even the needy hate being dependent on others. Restoring the dignity of the poor is an important step in eradicating poverty, they say.

    This book’s brilliance, in my opinion, is evident from the fact that economists across the ideological spectrum, from Sollow to Piketty, are all in awe of this work of art. To be honest, I have learnt more about economics and policymaking from this book than I did as an economics graduate.

    The arguments put forth in this book were, to an extent, eye-opening for me. I found them compelling and I believe you will too.

    Mohit Verma is a Research Intern in TPF. He is pursuing his Masters at the Madras School of Economics (MSE), Chennai.