Purchasing power parity theory: A cross-sectional dependence panel data analysis of sixteen developed countries

Niri Martha Choji; Siok Kun Sek

doi:10.32890/jcia2023.2.1.5

Authors

Niri Martha Choji Plateau State University Bokkos
Siok Kun Sek Universiti Sains Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32890/jcia2023.2.1.5

Keywords:

augmented mean group, common correlated effect mean group, pesaran, purchasing power parity, westerlund

Abstract

This paper examined the purchasing power parity (PPP) theory for a group of sixteen developed countries using powerful statistical panel data methods that account for cross-sectional dependence. The paper utilized the Pesaran panel unit root test, the cointegration test of Westerlund, the Augmented Mean Group (AMG) estimator, the Common Correlated Effect Mean Group (CCEMG) estimator, and the panel data Granger non-causality test of Dumitricus and Hurlin to analyze the causal relationships among the variables involved in the study. The tests showed that the PPP theory occurs in this group of countries. Furthermore, outcomes of the long-run estimation revealed both depreciation and appreciation of the nominal exchange rates. Apart from providing important policy implications on the results obtained, this paper made another significant contribution by extending the linear AMG and CCEMG estimators into nonlinear estimators and further used them in examining the long-run PPP theory.

References

Al-Zyoud, H. (2015). An empirical test of purchasing power parity theory for Canadian Dollar-US dollar exchange rates. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 7(3), 233–240. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v7n3p233

Bahmani-Oskooee, M., Chang, T., & Lee, K.-C. (2015). Panel asymmetric nonlinear unit root test and PPP in Africa. Applied Economics Letters, 23(8), 554–558. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2015.1088132

Bahmani-Oskooee, M., Chang, T., & Lee, K.-C. (2014). Purchasing power parity in the BRICS and the MIST countries: Sequential panel selection method. Review of Economics & Finance, 4, 1–12.

Baltagi B. H. (2005). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. 3rd Edition. John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Carnovale, C. (2001). Purchasing power parity and frequency domain filtering [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Calgary.

Choji, N. M., & Sek, S. K. (2017). Testing for the validity of purchasing power parity theory both in the long-run and the short-run for ASEAN-5. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1905, 050015-1 – 050015-6. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5012234

Doganlar, M., Mike, F., & Kizikaya O. (2020). Testing the validity of purchasing power parity in alternative market: Evidence from the fourier quantile unit root test. Bursa Instanbul Review, 12, 1-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2020.12.004

Dumitrescu, E. I., & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450–1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014

Durusu-Ciftci, D., Ispir, M. S., & Yetkiner, H. (2016). Financial development and economic growth: Some theory and more evidence. Journal of Policy Modeling, 39(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2016.08.001

Eberhardt, M. (2010). Estimating panel time-series models with heterogeneous slopes. Stata Journal, 10(3), 288–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X1201200105

Eberhardt, M., & Teal, F. (2010). Productivity analysis in global manufacturing production. DEGIT Conference Papers c015_019, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade, 515, 1–32.

Emirmahmutoglu, F., & Omay, T. (2014). Reexamining the PPP hypothesis: A nonlinear asymmetric heterogeneous panel unit root test. Economic Modelling, 40, 184–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2014.03.028

Furuoka, F. (2015). Financial development and energy consumption: Evidence from a heterogeneous panel of Asian countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 430–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.120

Gengenbach, C., Palm, F. C., & Urbain, J.-P. (2008). Panel unit root tests in the presence of cross-sectional dependencies: Comparison and implications for modelling. Econometric Reviews, 29(2), 111–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/07474930903382125

Hegwood, N. D., & Papell, D. H. (2002). Purchasing power parity under the gold standard. Southern Economic Journal, 69(1), 72–91. https://doi.org/10.2307/1061557

Jenkins, M. A. & Snaith, S. M. (2005). Tests of purchasing power parity via cointegration analysis of heterogeneous panels with consumer price indices. Journal of Macroeconomics, 27(2), 345–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmacro.2003.11.020

Jiang, C., Bahmani-Oskooee, M. & Chang, T. (2015). Revisiting purchasing power parity in OECD. Applied Economics, 47(40), 4323–4334. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2015.1026592

Mehmet, S., Ekrem, A.Y. & Gokcen, O. (2014). Cross sectional dependence and cointegration analysis among the GDP-foreign

direct investment and aggregate credits : Evidence from selected developing countries. Asian Economic and Financial Review Journal, 4(11), 1485–1501.

Papell, H. D., & Prodan, R. (2020). Long-run purchasing power parity redux. Journal of International Money and Finance, 109, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jimonfin.2020.102260

Pesaran, M. H. (2006). Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error structure. Econometrica, 74(4), 967–1012. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00692.x

Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22, 265–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951

Shin, Y., Yu, B. & Greenwood-Nimmo, M. (2014). Modelling asymmetric cointegration and dynamic multipliers in a nonlinear ARDL framework. In R., Sickles, & W. Horrace (Eds.), Festschrift in Honor of Peter Schmidt (pp. 281–314). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-8008-3_9

Taylor, A. M., & Taylor, M. P. (2004). The purchasing power parity debate. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18(4), 138-158. doi:10.1257/0895330042632744

Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69(6), 709–748. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2007.00477.x