Forecasting price index of finger millet (Eleusine coracana) in India under policy interventions

ACHAL LAMA; K N SINGH; RAVINDRA SINGH SHEKHAWAT; KRISHNA PADA SARKAR; BISHAL GURUNG

doi:10.56093/ijas.v90i5.104334

Authors

ACHAL LAMA ICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
K N SINGH ICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
RAVINDRA SINGH SHEKHAWAT ICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
KRISHNA PADA SARKAR ICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
BISHAL GURUNG ICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v90i5.104334

Keywords:

GARCH, Policy interventions, Structural break, Volatile

Abstract

Millets are the major substitute for cereals such as rice and wheat. For developing country like India, millets hold immense importance as the cost of production is low and has high nutritional values. Various policy interventions are made by government of India from time to time to popularise its consumption and production. Few major policy interventions were made in last decade and inclusion of coarse cereals under Food Security Bill is one among them. Keeping this in mind, the present study was carried out at ICAR- Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi during 2018 to know the impact of policy interventions on the price index of Ragi. Further, we have introduced these interventions in the model using structural break analysis. The volatile Ragi price index series were modelled and forecasted using popular class of Generalised Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedastic (GARCH) models and its asymmetric extensions. The results indicated improvement in modelling and forecasting performance of the models after incorporation of the policy interventions. Study has empirically highlighted the positive impact of policies introduced.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aggarwal R, Inclan C and Leal R. 1999. Volatility in emerging markets. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 34(1): 33–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2676245

Bollerslev T. 1986. Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity. Journal of Econometrics 31(3): 307–27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(86)90063-1

Ding C. Duan J. Zhang Y. Wu X and Yu G. 2018. Using an ARIMA-GARCH modelling approach to improve subway short-term ridership forecasting accounting for dynamic volatility. IEEE transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems 19(4): 1054–64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2017.2711046

Ewinga B T and Malik F. 2016. Volatility spillovers between oil prices and the stock market under structural breaks. Global Finance Journal 29(C): 12–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2015.04.008

Ewinga B T and Malik F. 2017. Modelling asymmetric volatility in oil prices under structural breaks. Energy Economics 63(C): 227–33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2017.03.001

Government of India. 2014. Status paper on coarse cereals (sorghum, pearl millet, finger millet, small millets, maize and barley). Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture.

Killick R, Fearnhead P and Eckley I A. 2012. Optimal detection of change-points with a linear computational cost. Journal of the American Statistical Association 107(500): 1590–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2012.737745

Lamoureux C G and Lastrapes W D. 1990. Persistence in variance, structural change and the GARCH model. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 8(2): 225–34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07350015.1990.10509794

Lama A. Jha G K. Paul R K and Gurung B. 2015. Modelling and forecasting of price volatility: An application of GARCH and EGARCH models. Agricultural Economics Research Review 28(1): 73–82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-0279.2015.00005.1

Li N. Ker A. Sam A G and Aradhyula S. 2017. Modeling regime-dependent agricultural commodity price volatilities. Agricultural Economics 48(6): 683–91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12366

Nelson D. 1991. Conditional heteroskedasticity in asset returns: A new approach. Econometrica 59(2): 347–70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2938260

Nelson D and Cao C. 1992. Inequality constraints in the univariate GARCH model. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 10(2): 229–35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07350015.1992.10509902

Zakoian J. 1994. Threshold heteroskedastic models. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 18(5): 931–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1889(94)90039-6