The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis
Yıl: 2018 Cilt: 9 Sayı: 4 Sayfa Aralığı: 735 - 747 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.20409/berj.2018.135 İndeks Tarihi: 16-01-2020
The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis
Öz: The exchange rates are one of the most important macroeconomic variablesinfluencing the economic activities of any country such as foreign trade, money andcapital markets. From this aspect, examining the changes in exchange rates, which areconsidered as one of the indicators of economic stability, is of significant importance.The aim of this study is to test the purchasing power parity (PPP) hypothesis for E-7countries between 1994 and 2017. Within the scope of this analysis, firstly thedependence between the cross-sections was examined. Then, the validity of PPPhypothesis was tested using SURADF (Seemingly Unrelated Augmented Dickey Fuller)panel unit root test developed by Breuer et al. (2001) and Carrion-i-Silvestre et al. (2005)panel unit root test (PANKPSS), which takes the structural breaks into consideration.According to the results of SURADF test, it was determined that the PPP is holds only inRussia and Turkey, but not in the other countries. According to the results of PANKPSSunit root test considering the structural breaks, however, it was found that PPP is holdsin all the countries.
Anahtar Kelime: Konular:
Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
- Ağayev, S. (2013). Satın alma gücü paritesi hipotezinin Kazakistan için geçerliliği. International Conference on Eurasian Economies, 372.
- Alba, J. D., & Park, D. (2005). An empirical investigation of purchasing power parity (PPP) for Turkey. Journal of Policy Modeling, 27(8), 989-1000.
- Aliyeva, B., & Hüseynov, A. (2017). Satın alma gücü paritesinin Azerbaycan Cumhuriyeti için geçerliliğin analizi. Yönetim, Ekonomi, Edebiyat, İslami ve Politik Bilimler Dergisi, 2(1), 73-86.
- Alves, D. C. O., Cati, R. C., & Fava, V. L. (2001). Purchasing power parity in Brazil: A test for fractional cointegration. Applied Economics, 33(9), 1175-1185.
- Aslan, N., & Kanbur, N. (2007). Türkiye’de 1980 sonrası satın alma gücü paritesi yaklaşımı. Marmara Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 23 (2), 9-43.
- Bahmani-Oskooee, M. (1995). Real effective exchange rates and the purchasing power parity: Experiences of 19 industrial countries. Economic Notes, 24, 239-250.
- Bahmani-Oskooee, M. (1998). Do exchange rates follow a random walk process in Middle Eastern countries? Economics Letters, 58(3), 339-344.
- Baum C. F., Barkoluas, J. T., & Çağlayan M. (1999). Long memory or structural breaks: Can either explain nonstationary real exchange rates under the current float? Journal of International Financial Markets Intuitions and Money, 9(4), 359-376.
- Bjørnland, H. C., & Hungnes, H. (2002). Fundamental determinants of the long run real exchange rate: The case of Norway. Memorandum. Department of Economics University of Oslo, Working Paper, 23, 1.36.
- Bozoklu, Ş., & Yılancı, V. (2010). Reel döviz kurlarının durağanlığı: E7 ülkeleri için ampirik bir inceleme. Maliye Dergisi, 158, 587-606.
- Breuer, B., Mcnown, R., & Wallace, M. (2002). Series specific unit root test with panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 64(5), 527-546.
- Breuer, J. B., McNown, R., & Wallace, M. (2001). Misleading inferences from panel unit root tests with an illustration from purchasing power parity. Review of International Economics, 9, 482–93.
- Carrion-i-Silvestre, J. L. (2005). Health care expenditure and GDP: Are they broken stationary? Journal of Health Economics, 24(5), 939-854.
- Carrion-i-Silvestre, J. L., Barrio-Castro, T. D., & Lopez-Bazo, E. (2005). Breaking the panels: An application to the GDP per capita. Econometrics Journal, 8(2), 159-175.
- Cevıs, I., Ceylan, R. (2015). Kırılgan beşlide satın alma gücü paritesi (SAGP) hipotezinin test edilmesi. Journal of Yaşar University, 10(37), 6381-6393.
- Coakley, J., & Fuertes, A. M. (1997). New panel unit root tests of PPP. Economics Letter, 57(1), 17-22.
- Darvas, Z. (2012). Real effective exchange rates for 178 countries: A new database. Bruegel Working Paper. 6. Dornbusch, R. (1985). Purchasing power parity. National Bureau of Economic Research, 1591, 1-34.
- Engle, R. F., & Granger, C. W. J. (1987). Co-integration and error correction: Representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica, 55(2), 251-276.
- Erlat, H. (2003). The nature of persistence in Turkish real exchange rates. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 39(2), 70-97.
- Gil-Alana, L. A., & Jiang L. (2013). The purchasing power parity hypothesis in the US-China relationship: Ffractional integration, time variation and data frequency. International Journal of Finance and Economics, 18(1), 82-92.
- Granger, C. W .J., & Newbold, P. (1974). Spurious regressions in econometrics. Journal of Econometrics, 2, 111–120.
- Güloğlu, B., İspir, S., & Okat, D. (2011). Testing the validity of quasi PPP hypothesis: Evidence from a recent panel unit root test with structural breaks. Applied Economics Letters, 18(18), 1817-182.
- Hawksworth, J. (2006). The world in 2050: How big will the major emerging market economies get and how can the OECD compete? PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP(PWC), 1-46.
- Hoarau, J. F. (2007). Long run purchasing power parity in Eastern and Southern African countries: Evidence from panel data stationary test with multiple structural breaks. Retrieved June 10, 2018, from http://cemoi.univreunion.fr/fileadmin/Fichiers/CEMOI/Publications/ Documents_de_travail/Archives/2007/2007-20_- _Pppafricaceresur2.pdf
- Kargbo, J. M. (2009). Financial globalization and purchasing power parity in the G7 countries, Applied Economics Letters, 16 (1), 69-74.
- Krugman, P. R., & Obstfeld, M. (2003). International economics: Theory and policy (Sixth Edition) New York: AddisonWesley Publishing Company.
- Kugler, P., & Lenz, C. (1993). Multivariate cointegration analysis and the long-run validity of PPP. Review of Economics and Statistics, 75, 180-184.
- Li, H., Lin, Z., & Hsiao, C. (2015). Testing purchasing power parity hypothesis: A semiparametric varying coefficient approach. Empirical Economics, 48(1), 427-438.
- MacDonald, R. (2007). Exchange rate economics: Theories and evidence. New York: Routledge,
- Mercan, M. (2014). Feldstein-Horioka hipotezinin AB-15 ve Türkiye ekonomisi için sınanması: Yatay kesit bağımlılığı altında yapısal kırılmalı dinamik panel veri analizi. Ege Akademik Bakış, 14(2), 231-245.
- Narayan, P. K. (2005). New evidence on purchasing power parity from 17 OECD countries. Applied Economics, 37, 1063- 1071.
- Özcan, B. (2012). Satın alma gücü paritesi G7 ülkeleri için geçerli mi? Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(2), 137-161.
- Pesaran, M.H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. Cambridge Working Papers in Economics, 435, 1-39.
- Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A., & Yamagata, T. (2008). A bias-adjusted lm test of error cross-section independence. Econometrics Journal, 11, 105-127.
- Pilbeam, K. (2006). International finance. England: Palgrave Macmillan Education Ltd.
- Ridzuan, R., & Ahmed, E. M. (2011) Testing the evidence of purchasing power parity for Asean-5 countries using panel estimation. International Journal of Economics and Business Modeling, 2(1), 42-56.
- Rogoff, K. (1996). The purchasing power parity puzzle. Journal of Economic Literature, 34(2), 647-668.
- Sarno, L. (2000). Real exchange rate behaviour in high inflation countries: Empirical evidence from Turkey, 1980-1997. Applied Economics Letters, 7(5), 285-291.
- Tatoğlu, F. Y. (2013). Panel veri ekonometrisi: Stata uygulamalı (2. Baskı). İstanbul: Beta Yayınları.
- Taylor, M. P. (2006). Real exchange rates and purchasing power parity: Mean-reversion in economic thought. Applied Financial Economics, 16, 1-17.
- Telatar, E., & Kazdağlı, H. (1998). Re-examine the long run purchasing power parity hypothesis for a high inflation country: The case of Turkey 1980-93. Applied Economics Letters, 5(1), 51-53.
- Tiwari, A. K., & Shahbaz, M. (2014). Revisiting purchasing power parity for India using threshold cointegration and nonlinear unit root test. Economic Change and Restructuring, 47(2), 117-133.
- Yalçınkaya, Ö. (2016). G-20 ülkelerinde satın alma gücü paritesi teorisinin geçerliliği: Panel birim kök testinden kanıtlar (1994:Q1-2015:Q4). Bitlis Eren Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5, 145-162.
- Yılancı, V., & Eriş, Z. A. (2013). Purchasing power parity in African countries: Further evidence from fourier unit root tests based on linear and nonlinear models. South African Journal of Economics, 81(1), 20-34.
- Yıldırım, O. (2003). Döviz kurları çerçevesinde satın alma gücü paritesinin zaman serisi analizi ve Türkiye ekonomisi uygulaması. Bankacılar Dergisi, 44, 3-14.
- Zumaquero, A. M., & Urrea, R. P. (1998). Purchasing power parity: Correction models and structural breaks. Open Economic Review, 13(1), 5-26.
| APA | ALTINER A, BOZKURT E (2018). The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis. , 735 - 747. 10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
| Chicago | ALTINER ALI,BOZKURT Eda The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis. (2018): 735 - 747. 10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
| MLA | ALTINER ALI,BOZKURT Eda The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis. , 2018, ss.735 - 747. 10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
| AMA | ALTINER A,BOZKURT E The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis. . 2018; 735 - 747. 10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
| Vancouver | ALTINER A,BOZKURT E The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis. . 2018; 735 - 747. 10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
| IEEE | ALTINER A,BOZKURT E "The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis." , ss.735 - 747, 2018. 10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
| ISNAD | ALTINER, ALI - BOZKURT, Eda. "The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis". (2018), 735-747. https://doi.org/10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
| APA | ALTINER A, BOZKURT E (2018). The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis. Business and Economics Research Journal, 9(4), 735 - 747. 10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
| Chicago | ALTINER ALI,BOZKURT Eda The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis. Business and Economics Research Journal 9, no.4 (2018): 735 - 747. 10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
| MLA | ALTINER ALI,BOZKURT Eda The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis. Business and Economics Research Journal, vol.9, no.4, 2018, ss.735 - 747. 10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
| AMA | ALTINER A,BOZKURT E The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis. Business and Economics Research Journal. 2018; 9(4): 735 - 747. 10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
| Vancouver | ALTINER A,BOZKURT E The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis. Business and Economics Research Journal. 2018; 9(4): 735 - 747. 10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
| IEEE | ALTINER A,BOZKURT E "The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis." Business and Economics Research Journal, 9, ss.735 - 747, 2018. 10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
| ISNAD | ALTINER, ALI - BOZKURT, Eda. "The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in E-7 Countries: Panel Data Analysis". Business and Economics Research Journal 9/4 (2018), 735-747. https://doi.org/10.20409/berj.2018.135 |
