Table 3 Estimation results of the... | Emerald Publishing

Table 3

Estimation results of the regression models using the pooled time-series and cross-sectional data with fixed effects for the states

	Model (1)	Model (2)	Model (3)
Dependent variable	ln (N)	ln (Y)	ln (Q)
Independent variables	t and 6 state dummies	t and 6 state dummies	t and 6 state dummies
Estimation results
Intercept	6.9020***	−1.7257***	5.1763***
T	0.0373***	0.0283***	0.0656***
Michigan	−1.2275***	−0.0832	−1.3107***
New Hampshire	−1.2699***	−0.0829	−1.3528***
New York	0.2295***	−0.1169**	0.1126
Pennsylvania	−1.0590***	−0.2648***	−1.3238***
Vermont	0.9082***	0.0961*	1.0042***
Wisconsin	−0.8699***	0.0067	−0.8633***
Number of observations	175	175	175
R-squared	0.9746	0.6094	0.9394
Adjusted R-squared	0.9735	0.6001	0.9369
F-statistic	914.23***	37.21***	370.06***
Estimated CAAGRs (%)^a	3.73%	2.83%	6.56%
Estimated DAAGRs (%)^b	3.80%	2.87%	6.78%

	Model (1)	Model (2)	Model (3)
Dependent variable	ln (N)	ln (Y)	ln (Q)
Independent variables	t and 6 state dummies	t and 6 state dummies	t and 6 state dummies
Estimation results
Intercept	6.9020***	−1.7257***	5.1763***
T	0.0373***	0.0283***	0.0656***
Michigan	−1.2275***	−0.0832	−1.3107***
New Hampshire	−1.2699***	−0.0829	−1.3528***
New York	0.2295***	−0.1169**	0.1126
Pennsylvania	−1.0590***	−0.2648***	−1.3238***
Vermont	0.9082***	0.0961*	1.0042***
Wisconsin	−0.8699***	0.0067	−0.8633***
Number of observations	175	175	175
R-squared	0.9746	0.6094	0.9394
Adjusted R-squared	0.9735	0.6001	0.9369
F-statistic	914.23***	37.21***	370.06***
Estimated CAAGRs (%)^a	3.73%	2.83%	6.56%
Estimated DAAGRs (%)^b	3.80%	2.87%	6.78%

Note(s):

a

Directly the estimated coefficient of the time variable in the corresponding regression model

b

Calculated from (e^k – 1)*100, where k is the CAAGR estimated from the regression model

b

Calculated from (e^k – 1)*100, where k is the CAAGR estimated from the regression model

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001