Abstract
The present article examines 10-year bond yields convergence between each of the new EU countries and Germany, including a structural break that embodies the effects of the current sovereign debt crisis in the Eurozone. The analysis is based on a new definition of bond yields convergence that can be interpreted either as strong or weak monetary policy convergence, depending on whether the conditions of uncovered interest-rate parity and ex-ante purchasing power parity hold or are violated, respectively. The empirical results provide evidence of either strong or weak monetary policy convergence to Germany only for five new countries, namely Croatia, the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Romania and Slovakia. In contrast, for the rest of the new EU countries the empirical evidence suggests lack of monetary policy convergence to Germany. The latter result could be probably explained by the increased risk premia in these countries, as a result of the Eurozone sovereign debt crisis.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
In fact, Slovenia adopted the euro in January 2007, followed by Cyprus and Malta in January 2008, Slovakia in January 2009, Estonia in January 2011, Latvia in January 2014 and Lithuania in January 2015. All of the remaining new EU countries aspire to apply for Eurozone membership in the future.
Long-run convergence exists when the long-term forecasts of interest rates are equal and catching-up convergence is interpreted as the cointegration between the interest rates along a deterministic time trend.
Even though bond yields, in general, are driven by sovereign default risks, which are reflected in the sovereign credit ratings, 10-year bond yields can serve as indicators for the long-run perspectives of the respective economies. Thus, they can be used for examining monetary policy convergence between each new EU country and Germany.
If expected inflation differential converges to a small non-negative constant \(\pi_{0}\), the addition of a stationary ‘risk premium’ in Eq. (5) of the form \(u_{t} = \rho_{0} + \rho (L)u_{t - 1} + \nu_{t}\), where \(\rho (L)\) is a m-order polynomial in the lag operator \(L\) and \(\nu_{t}\) is a zero mean stochastic process, in order to reflect imperfect substitutability of bonds will still be consistent with the definition of weak convergence.
Perron (2006) provides a comprehensive review of this literature.
The current analysis can be extended by including both known and unknown break dates and implementing the cointegration methodology proposed by Carrion-i-Silvestre and Sansó (2006). But this is left for future research.
See also, Brunnermeier (2009).
The author is grateful to Carsten Trenkler for kindly providing him with the GAUSS codes.
One could attribute this evidence to the fact that Germany plays a major role in the economies of the Czech Republic, Lithuania and Slovakia. However, this argument does not necessarily imply that Germany is of less importance for the economies of the rest of the new EU countries, as, for example, for Poland.
Cyprus, Latvia, Malta and Slovenia joined the ERM II, Hungary pegged its currency to the euro, Poland implemented a free-floating exchange rate regime, while Bulgaria adopted a euro-based currency board.
References
Arghyrou MG, Gregoriou A, Kontonikas A (2009) Do real interest rates converge? Evidence from the European Union. J Int Financ Markets Inst Money 19:447–460. doi:10.1016/j.intfin.2008.05.004
Bernard AB, Durlauf S (1995) Convergence in international output. J Appl Econom 10:97–108. doi:10.1002/jae.3950100202
Bernard AB, Durlauf S (1996) Interpreting tests of the convergence hypothesis. J Econom 71:161–173. doi:10.1016/0304-4076(94)01699-2
Bhargava A (1986) On the theory of testing for unit roots in observed time series. Rev Econ Stud 53:369–384. doi:10.2307/2297634
Brunnermeier MK (2009) Deciphering the liquidity and credit crunch 2007-2008. J Econ Perspect 23:77–100. doi:10.1257/089533009797614162
Camarero M, Ez JO, Tamarit CR (2002) Tests for interest rate convergence and structural breaks in the EMS: further analysis. Appl Financ Econ 12:447–456. doi:10.1080/09603100010005294
Carrion-i-Silvestre JL, Sansó A (2006) Testing the null of cointegration with structural breaks. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 68:623–646. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0084.2006.00180.x
Frömmel M, Kruse R (2015) Interest rate convergence in the EMS prior to European Monetary Union. J Policy Model 37:990–1004. doi:10.1016/j.jpolmod.2015.08.002
Gabrisch H, Orlowski LT (2010) Interest rate convergence in euro-candidate countries: volatility dynamics of sovereign bond yields. Emerg Markets Financ Trade 46:69–85
Gonzalo J, Granger CWJ (1995) Estimation of common long-memory components in cointegrated systems. J Bus Econ Stat 13:27–35
Goodwin BK, Grennes TJ (1994) Real interest rate equalization and integration of financial markets. J Int Money Financ 13:107–124. doi:10.1016/0261-5606(94)90027-2
Hafer RW, Kutan AM (1994) A long run view of German dominance and the degree of policy convergence in the EMS. Econ Inq 32:684–695. doi:10.1111/j.1465-7295.1994.tb01358.x
Haug AA, MacKinnon JG, Michelis L (2000) European Monetary Union: a cointegration analysis. J Int Money Financ 19:419–432. doi:10.1016/S0261-5606(00)00013-9
Holtemöller O (2005) Uncovered interest rate parity and analysis of monetary convergence of potential EMU accession countries. Int Econ Econ Pol 2:33–63. doi:10.1007/s10368-005-0026-0
Johansen S (1988) Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. J Econ Dyn Control 12:231–254. doi:10.1016/0165-1889(88)90041-3
Johansen S (1995) Likelihood-based inference in cointegrated vector autoregressive models. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Karfakis CJ, Moschos DM (1990) Interest rate linkages within the European Monetary System: a time series analysis. J Money Credit Bank 22:388–394. doi:10.2307/1992567
Katsimbris GM, Miller SM (1993) Interest rate linkages within the European Monetary System: further analysis. J Money Credit Bank 25:771–779. doi:10.2307/2077804
Kirchgässner G, Wolters J (1995) Interest rate linkages in Europe before and after the introduction of the European Monetary System. Empir Econ 20:435–454. doi:10.1007/BF01180675
Koukouritakis M (2013) Expectations hypothesis in the context of debt crisis: evidence from five major EU countries. Res Econ 67:243–258. doi:10.1016/j.rie.2013.07.002
Kwiatkowski D, Phillips PCB, Schmidt P, Shin Y (1992) Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root. J Econom 54:159–178. doi:10.1016/0304-4076(92)90104-Y
Lütkepohl H, Saikkonen P (2000) Testing for the cointegrating rank of a VAR process with a time trend. J Econom 95:177–198. doi:10.1016/S0304-4076(99)00035-4
Mark N (1985) Some evidence on the international inequality of real interest rates. J Int Money Financ 4:189–208. doi:10.1016/0261-5606(85)90043-9
Perron P (2006) Dealing with structural breaks. In: Patterson K, Mills TC (eds) Palgrave handbook of econometrics, volume 1: econometric theory. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp 278–352
Pesaran M (2007) A pair-wise approach to testing for output and growth convergence. J Econom 138:312–355. doi:10.1016/j.jeconom.2006.05.024
Saikkonen P, Lütkepohl H (2000) Testing for the cointegrating rank of a VAR process with structural shifts. J Bus Econ Stat 18:451–464
Schmidt P, Phillips PCB (1992) LM tests for a unit root in the presence of deterministic trends. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 54:257–287. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0084.1992.tb00002.x
Trenkler C, Saikkonen P, Lütkepohl H (2008) Testing for the cointegrating rank of a VAR process with level shift and trend break. J Time Ser Anal 29:331–358. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9892.2007.00558.x
Acknowledgements
This study was funded by the Special Account for Research (ELKE – Project KA4449) of the University of Crete. I would like to thank two anonymous referees for their constructive comments that improved the quality of the paper. All the remaining errors are my own responsibility.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Koukouritakis, M. Eurozone debt crisis and bond yields convergence: evidence from the new EU countries. Econ Change Restruct 50, 239–258 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10644-017-9208-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10644-017-9208-3