Showing posts with label Forecasting Forum. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 10, 2016
Government fiscal forecasts invoke considerable skepticism: Frankel (2012), for instance, calls them “wishful thinking” and advocates the use of private forecasts as a reality check. This recommendation leads to an obvious question: how good are the private sector’s fiscal forecasts? We assess the quality of forecasts of the government budget balance made by the private sector for nine advanced economies between 1993 and 2013, with a special focus on the Great Recession period. Our main findings can be summarized as follows. First, we show that private sector budget balance forecasts typically display bias towards ‘optimism’ but the extent of the bias differs across countries. Second, we find that budget balance forecasts exhibit ‘information rigidity’; that is, revisions to forecasts tend to be smooth. This tendency proves costly around turning points in the economy, which we illustrate here using the forecast errors made during the Great Recession. To conclude, while it is a good idea to complement government fiscal forecasts with those from the private sector, there are steps that the private sector could also take to improve the quality of its own forecasts.
For details, see my paper published in the 21st Federal Forecasters Conference Proceedings.
Government fiscal forecasts invoke considerable skepticism: Frankel (2012), for instance, calls them “wishful thinking” and advocates the use of private forecasts as a reality check. This recommendation leads to an obvious question: how good are the private sector’s fiscal forecasts? We assess the quality of forecasts of the government budget balance made by the private sector for nine advanced economies between 1993 and 2013, with a special focus on the Great Recession period. Our main findings can be summarized as follows.
Posted by 5:27 PM
atLabels: Forecasting Forum
Monday, February 1, 2016
The Stekler Award is named after the famous forecasting expert and academic Herman Stekler who believes that recessions should be forecast “early and often.” In practice, recessions are almost never forecast in advance. The Economist recently re-discovered this long-standing finding and highlighted the poor record of the IMF in forecasting recessions. The record of other public institutions or the private sector is just as poor. For instance, see the charts below on forecasts made by the IMF, OECD and the private sector (labeled ‘CF’ in the charts) over the course of 2009—each point shows the forecast for a particular country. The forecasts are virtually identical. And the forecasts for recessions (negative growth) were not made in advance by any of the sources.
The race is on for the 2017 award. Suggestions are welcome and can be sent to ploungani@gmail.com. The Stekler Award recognizes forecasts that depart significantly from the consensus view. Predictions need not be restricted to forecasts of recessions but they must be specific (so “oil prices will rebound someday” doesn’t cut it) and well reasoned (so no “we have been on the path to doom which is bound to come one day”-type of forecasts).
We mined a recent article in Politico to see if we could get some front runners for the 2017 award. There were a range of predictions, some quite clever (Dean Baker predicted that during 2016, unlike 2015, oil prices would not fall another $60 a barrel), some specific (Ann Harrison predicts that “India will replace China as the leading destination for foreign investment” in 2016), most quite gloomy. On the U.S. economy in 2016, most experts surveyed stuck to the center, though Robert Reich said: “I expect the U.S. economy to sputter in 2016”; if he’d been a little more specific he ‘coulda been a contender’.
The 2016 Stekler Award for Courage in Forecasting goes to Michael (“Mish”) Shedlock. At the start of 2015, the blogger popularly known as “Mish” had predicted recessions in Canada and the United States during 2015. While these events did not come to pass, enough anxiety was generated about the health of these economies over the course of the year that Mish deserves some credit for anticipating a degree of weakness that was not being widely talked about at the start of last year. Read the full article…
Posted by 6:21 PM
atLabels: Forecasting Forum
Wednesday, January 27, 2016
But as Drum noted in the Economist article, “Despite forecasters’ best efforts, growth is devilishly hard to predict”.
Last year, in September, my presentation at the Federal Forecasters Conference summarized my work on the inability or unwillingness of forecasters to predict recessions. I suggested that to get forecasters to predict recessions (even inaccurately) we should have a Stekler Award for Courage in Forecasting. The award would be in honor of noted forecaster Herman Stekler who says that forecasters should predict recessions early and often and that he himself has predicted 9 of the last 5 recessions.
For my recent work on forecast accuracy see the following:
Kevin Drum–a political blogger for Mother Jones–asks: “But I wonder who did better at predicting recessions? Goldman Sachs? The CIA? A hedge fund rocket scientist in Connecticut? Whoever it is, it sounds like the IMF might want to look them up.”
But as Drum noted in the Economist article, “Despite forecasters’ best efforts, growth is devilishly hard to predict”.
Last year, in September, my presentation at the Federal Forecasters Conference summarized my work on the inability or unwillingness of forecasters to predict recessions.
Posted by 9:35 PM
atLabels: Forecasting Forum
Saturday, November 21, 2015
Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction. By Philip Tetlock and Dan Gardner. Crown; 352 pages; $28.
Here are four forecasts that have been made in the technology field. First: “There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home”, this was a forecast made in 1977 by Ken Olson—the president of Digital Equipment Corporation. Second: “There’s no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance”, that was the forecast made in 2007 by Steve Ballmer—CEO of Microsoft. Third: “In five years I don’t think there’ll be a reason to have a tablet anymore”, forecast made in 2013 by Thorsten Heins—CEO of BlackBerry. Fourth: “Yes, the iPad Pro is a replacement for a notebook or a desktop for many, many people. They will start using it and conclude they no longer need to use anything else, other than their phones”, this forecast was made few weeks ago by Tim Cook—CEO of Apple. In the first three cases, it is safe to say that we know the outcome. In the last case, we will have to wait and see.
Can ordinary people also make forecasts? Who keeps the score of all the forecasts that are made? Why keeping the score matters? What is needed in the forecasting field? Can we do better at forecasting? These are some of the questions that are discussed in a fascinating new book: Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction by Philip E. Tetlock and Dan Gardner. Tetlock is a professor at the University of Pennsylvania and Gardner is a journalist, author, and a lecturer.
The new book by Tetlock and Gardner describes the results from a massive forecasting tournament—the Good Judgment Project—sponsored by Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA). The idea behind the project was to see who could invent the best methods of making forecasts that intelligence analysts make every day. The participants were asked to make a forecast on different topics. Some of the topics included were: Will OPEC agree to cut its oil output at or before its November 2014 meeting? Will the president of Tunisia flee to a cushy exile in the next month? Will the gold price exceed $1,850 on September 30, 2011? Will the euro fall below $1.20 in the next twelve months? The project recruited a very high number of volunteers. These volunteers came from a very wide range of backgrounds: from retired computer programmer, social service worker, to a homemaker. Below are some of the interesting parts of the book.
Can ordinary people also make forecasts? Here is one example from the forecasting tournament: “With his gray beard, thinning hair, and glasses, Doug Lorch doesn’t look like a threat to anyone. He looks like a computer programmer, which he was, for IBM. He is retired now. (…) Doug likes to drive his little red convertible Miata around the sunny streets, enjoying the California breeze, but that can only occupy so many hours in the day. Doug has no special expertise in international affairs, but he has a healthy curiosity about what’s happening. He reads the New York Times. He can find Kazakhstan on a map. So he volunteered for the Good Judgment Project. Once a day, for an hour or so, his dinning room table became his forecasting center, where he opened his laptop, read the news, and tried to anticipate the fate of the world. (…) In year 1 alone, Doug Lorch made roughly one thousand separate forecasts. Doug’s accuracy was as impressive as his volume (…) putting him in fifth spot among the 2,800 competitors in the Good Judgment Project. (…) In year 2, Doug joined a superforecaster team and did even better, (…) making him the best forecaster of the 2,800 GJP volunteers. (…) This is a man with no applicable experience or education, and no access to classified information. The only payment he received was the $250 Amazon gift certificate that all volunteers got at the end of each season. Doug Lorch was (…) so good at it that there wasn’t a lot of room for an experienced intelligence analyst with a salary, a security clearance, and a desk in CIA headquarters to do better. Someone might ask why the United States spends billions of dollars every year on geopolitical forecasting when it could give Doug a gift certificate and let him do it.”
Who keeps the score of all the forecasts that are made? “More often forecasts are made and then … nothing. Accuracy is seldom determined after the fact and is almost never done with sufficient regularity and rigor that conclusions can be drawn. The reason? Mostly it’s a demand-side problem: The consumers of forecasting—governments, business, and the public—don’t demand evidence of accuracy. So there is no measurement. Which means no revision. And without revision, there can be no improvement.”
Why keeping the score matters? “With scores and leaderboards, forecasting tournaments may look like games but the stakes are real and substantial. In business, good forecasting can be the difference between prosperity and bankruptcy; in government, the difference between policies that give communities a boost and those that inflict unintended consequences and waste tax dollars; in national security, the difference between peace and war. If the US intelligence community had not told Congress it was certain that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, a disastrous invasion might have been averted.”
What is needed in the forecasting field? “For centuries, it hobbled progress in medicine. When physicians finally accepted that their experience and perceptions were not reliable means of determining whether a treatment works, they turned to scientific testing—and medicine finally started to make rapid advances. The same revolution needs to happen in forecasting.”
Can we do better at forecasting? “(…) it turns out that forecasting is not you have it or you don’t talent. It is a skill that can be cultivated.” Here are some tips for aspiring superforecasters: “Break seemingly intractable problems into tractable sub-problems (…) Strike the right balance between inside and outside views (…) Strike the right balance between under- and overreacting to evidence (…) Don’t treat commandments as commandments.”
My colleague Hites Ahir has a review and summary of Superforecasting
Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction. By Philip Tetlock and Dan Gardner. Crown; 352 pages; $28.
Here are four forecasts that have been made in the technology field. First: “There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home”, this was a forecast made in 1977 by Ken Olson—the president of Digital Equipment Corporation.
Posted by 7:43 PM
atLabels: Forecasting Forum
Friday, September 25, 2015
My presentation at the Federal Forecasters Conference summarized my work on the inability or unwillingness of forecasters to predict recessions. I also suggested that to get forecasters to predict recessions (even inaccurately) we should have a Stekler Award for Courage in Forecasting. The award would be in honor of noted forecaster Herman Stekler who says that forecasters should predict recessions early and often and that he himself has predicted 9 of the last 5 recessions. Read the full article…
Posted by 2:00 PM
atLabels: Forecasting Forum
Subscribe to: Posts