use of this distinction. And when we are confronted with terms of trade gains or losses between individual industries, caused by changes in relative prices that have been created artificially by protectionism, it would be most unfortunate to give it up. It does involve a lot of nasty index ambiguities, but that is a difficulty we have to live with, if at all we want to break down real national income changes in terms of trade gains, changes in primary factor quantities, and changes in productivity of primary factors. se of this distinctio . And when we are confronted REFERENCES

Belsley, D. A., The Power of the r-Test: Furthering Comment, this REvIEw, LV (Feb. 1973), 132. Cramer, H., Mathematical Methods of Statistics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1946), 290. Geary, R. C., Relative Efficiency of Count of Sign Changes for Assessing Residual Autoregression in Least Squares Regression, Biometrika, 57 (1970), 123. Habibagahi, H., and J. L. Pratschke, A Comparison of the Power of the Von Neumann Ratio, DurbinWatson and Geary Tests, this REVIEW, LIV (May 1972), 179. White, J. S., and J. A. Tillman, A Zero Crossing Statistic for a Gaussian Markov Process (mimeograph).

, and , Reply, Review (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, Apr. 1969), 12-16. DeLeeuw, F., and J. Kalchbrenner, and Fiscal Actions: Test of Their Relative Importance in Economic Stabilization Comment, Review (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, Apr. 1969), 6-11. Goldfeld, S., and A. Blinder, Some Implications of Stabilization Policy, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (3:1972), 585-640. Gramlich, E., Usefulness of Monetary and Fiscal Policy as Discretionary Stabilization Tools, Jozurnal of Money, Credit and Banking, 3 (May 1971), 506-532. Guttentag, J., Strategy of Open-Market Operations, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80 (Feb. 1966), 1-30. Hendershott, P., The Neutralized Money Stock: An Unbiased Measure of Reserve Policy Actions (Homewood, Ill.: Richard D. Irwin), 1968. Lombra, R. E., and R. G. Torto, Endogenous Reserve Open Market Operations in a Macro-Econometric Model: First Report. Presented at the Winter Meeting of the Econometric Society, 1971. and Federal Reserve 'Defensive' Behavior and the Reverse Causation Argument, Southern Economic Journal, 40 (July 1973), 4755, and Staff Economic Studies, no. 75 (Board of Governors of the Reserve System), 1972. Silber, W., St. Louis Equation: 'Democratic' and 'Republican' Versions and Other Experiments, this REVIEW, 53 (Nov. 1971), 362-367. Waud, R., and Fiscal Effects on Economic Activity. Presented at the Winter Meeting of the Econometric Society, 1972. Wood, J., A Model of Reserve Behavior, in George Horwich (ed.), Monetary Process and Policy (Homewood, Ill.: Richard D. Irwin), 1967, 135-166.

POLICIES to promote price and income stability in agriculture have often been justified by the belief that stability would help farmers make better consumption and investment decisions. However, review of literature makes it abundantly clear that the consequences of instability are matters of debate among economists. For instance, Caine (1966, p. 16) believes that a main evil resulting from fluctuations in income is lowering of the level of capital expenditure. Others argue that farmers adapt to the exigencies of fluctuating income and that instability, per se, has little influence on consumption and investment (e.g., Campbell, 1964, p. 59).1 In this paper, consumption and investment functions are estimated for two groups of southern Minnesota farmers with contrasting degrees of income stability. Since various hypotheses exist about investment and consumption behavior, alternative models are outlined in the first section. Consequently, this paper provides empirical evidence for evaluating alternative models as well as assessing the effects of instability. The data and the estimation procedures are briefly described in the second section, and the empirical results are presented in the third.

JHE PURPOSE of this article is to bring to the attention of the readers of this journal a number of related and important estimators that are currently being discussed in the statistical literature which have implications for applied work since rules are employed which seek to improve the performance of conventional estimators. In spite of the rapid advances, over the last three decades, of economic theory, econometric procedures, and data relating to economic processes and institutions, the search for quantitative economic knowledge still remains to some extent an essay in persuasion. In the process of nonexperimental model building there are typically many admissible economic and statistical models which do not contradict our perceived knowledge of human behavior. Thus, in model specification there is usually uncertainty, for example, relative to the algebraic form, classification, number and timing of variables to be included in the behavioral and technical relations, and the corresponding stochastic assumptions. When econometric models are correctly specified, statistical theory provides procedures for obtaining point and interval estimates and evaluating the performance of various linear and usually unbiased (at least asymptotically) estimators. But, the applied worker must inevitably work with false models, where the true specification of the sampling model is unknown. Furthermore, the statistical model employed is usually determined by some preliminary testing of hypotheses using the data at hand. This search procedure, involving two-stage or repeated significance test procedures applied to the same set of data and yielding an estimate after the preliminary test(s) if significance, is often used in applied work in economics with little or no information on the sampling properties of the resulting estimator and with little or no consideration to the possible distortion of subsequent inferences. Within this context, we, seek to generalize and extend the results of Wallace and Ashar (1972) relative to preliminary test or two-stage estimating procedures and call attention to another important class of estimators and estimator comparisons. In particular, we review the possible statistical consequences of using preliminary test or sequential estimators in the search process and suggest old and new estimators, that are superior, under a squared error loss measure for gauging estimator performance, to the conventional estimators usually employed. We also note that conventional estimating procedures currently used in applied work may not be appropriate for the problem at hand and, perhaps more importantly for the researcher, we show that better alternative estimators exist. Perhaps it is appropriate at this point to note that, when making a choice between estimators, the traditional solution is to restrict consideration to the class of linear unbiased estimators and hope that among the estimators in the restricted class, one has uniformly smallest risk. Fortunately for many problems a best linear unbiased estimate exists. In this paper, in discussing the estimators that are alternatives to the conventional least squares estimator, we will leave the class of linear unbiased estimators. The notion of unbiasedness which has been accepted by or perhaps forced on applied workers, although intuitively plausible, is an arbitrary restriction or property and has no direct connection with the loss due to incorrect decisions. The economist who is interested in parameter estimates or predictions appropriate for choice purposes, may not care if he is right on the average, and thus the unbiasedness property may be unsatisfactory from a decision point of view. In any event our purpose, which is to some extent expository in nature, is to focus on point estimation under a squared error loss measure of goodness and bring the statistical consequences of making use of conventional and Received for publication October 2, 1972. Revision accepted for publication April 3, 1973. *Arnold Zellner read an early draft of this paper and made many helpful comments.