Consistent underestimation bias, the asymmetrical loss function, and homogeneous sources of bias in state revenue forecasts
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20201429 |
|---|---|
| Authors | William R Voorhees (Arizona State University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2006 |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 61-76 |
| Publication date | 2006-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Public Budgeting Accounting & Financial Management (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1096-3367 • E-ISSN: 1945-1814 |
| Publisher | Emerald (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1108/jpbafm-18-01-2006-b003 |
| OpenAlex | W2775719608 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 17 |
One component of revenue forecast error has been attributed to the phenomena of consistent underestimation bias due asymmetrical loss. Because underestimation of revenue forecast results in less loss to forecasters than overestimations, there appears to be a bias for forecasters to underestimate revenue forecasts. This paper confirms this hypothesis. Additionally, with the greater usage of national forecasting organizations that provide economic forecasts on which revenue forecasts are based, a secondary source of forecaster bias may be present in many state level forecasts. This hypothesis is supported by the increase in number of states using such organizations and a decrease in the standard deviation of the annual mean percentage state forecast error
Consensus forecast · Econometrics · Economics · Forecast error · Homogeneous · Revenue · Standard deviation · Statistics · Economics of Agriculture and Food Markets · Forecasting Techniques and Applications · Mathematics · Monetary Policy and Economic Impact · Finance
An Open Systems Model of Local Government Forecasting
Is california broke or is its budgeting system broken? empirical examination of the budget affordability, the institutional arrangements, and the growth of deficits in California
Budget Slack, Institutions, and Transparency
Revenue volatility and forecast errors
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,27 |
| Citation span | 2011 - 2020 (10) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 4 |