Purchasing power parity and country characteristics: Evidence from panel data tests

Abstract We examine long-run purchasing power parity (PPP) using panel data methods to test for unit roots in US dollar real exchange rates of 84 countries. We find stronger evidence of PPP in countries more open to trade, closer to the United States, with lower inflation and moderate nominal exchange rate volatility, and with similar economic growth rates as the United States. We also show that PPP holds for panels of European and Latin American countries, but not for African and Asian countries. Our findings demonstrate that country characteristics can help explain both adherence to and deviations from long-run PPP.

[1]  G. Cassel,et al.  Money and Foreign Exchange after 1914. , 1923 .

[2]  A. Rose,et al.  A Panel Project on Purchasing Power Parity: Mean Reversion within and between Countries , 1995 .

[3]  Kenneth Rogoff,et al.  The Purchasing Power Parity Puzzle , 1996 .

[4]  Mark J. Holmes.  New evidence on real exchange rate stationarity and purchasing power parity in less developed countries. , 2001 .

[5]  Higher Power Tests for Bilateral Failure of PPP after 1973 , 2005 .

[6]  David H. Papell.  Searching for stationarity: Purchasing power parity under the current float , 1997 .

[7]  David H. Papell,et al.  Testing for Purchasing Power Parity using stationary covariates , 2006 .

[8]  Philippe Jorion,et al.  Mean reversion in real exchange rates: evidence and implications for forecasting , 1996 .

[9]  Serena Ng,et al.  Unit Root Tests in ARMA Models with Data-Dependent Methods for the Selection of the Truncation Lag , 1995 .

[10]  Alastair R. Hall,et al.  Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series With Pretest Data-Based Model Selection , 1994 .

[11]  Thomas J. Rothenberg,et al.  Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root , 1996 .

[12]  David H. Papell.  The Panel Purchasing Power Parity Puzzle , 2006 .

[13]  R. Summers,et al.  The Penn World Table (Mark 5): An Expanded Set of International Comparisons, 1950-1987 , 1991 .

[14]  M. Pesaran,et al.  Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels , 2003 .

[15]  Matthew J. Higgins,et al.  Purchasing Power Parity: Three Stakes Through the Heart of the Unit Root Null , 1999 .

[16]  Bela Balassa,et al.  The Purchasing-Power Parity Doctrine: A Reappraisal , 1964, Journal of Political Economy.

[17]  K. Lai,et al.  On Cross-Country Differences in the Persistence of Real Exchange Rates , 1999, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[18]  Robert McNown,et al.  Misleading Inferences from Panel Unit‐Root Tests with an Illustration from Purchasing Power Parity , 2001 .

[19]  Jyh-Lin Wu,et al.  Is Purchasing Power Parity Overvalued , 2001 .

[20]  J. Stock,et al.  Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root , 1992 .

[21]  Kate Phylaktis,et al.  Does the real exchange rate follow a random walk? The Pacific Basin perspective , 1994 .

[22]  P. O'Connell.  The overvaluation of purchasing power parity , 1998 .

[23]  David H. Papell,et al.  The Choice of Numeraire Currency in Panel Tests of Purchasing Power Parity , 2001 .

[24]  Keun-Yeob Oh,et al.  Purchasing power parity and unit root tests using panel data , 1996 .

[25]  Andrew T. Levin,et al.  Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties , 2002 .

[26]  Robert Summers,et al.  International comparisons of real product and purchasing power , 1979 .

[27]  Paul A. Samuelson,et al.  Theoretical Notes on Trade Problems , 1964 .

[28]  Long-run PPP may not hold after all , 2000 .

[29]  Robert Summers,et al.  International Comparisons of Real Product and Purchasing Power , 1978 .