Advertisement

Empirica

pp 1–21 | Cite as

Are future enlargement candidate countries converging with the EU?

  • Christos KolliasEmail author
  • Petros Messis
Original Paper
  • 7 Downloads

Abstract

The paper addresses the issue of convergence with the EU for nine countries: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Moldova, Serbia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Montenegro and Ukraine. All that are at different stages of EU candidacy that could eventually lead to full membership. Some are officially recognized as candidate countries while others are at the stage of an association agreement. The presence of convergence is examined in terms of two macroeconomic indices: GDP per capita and GDP per person employed. Panel unit root tests as well as univariate unit root tests are estimated for the period 1997–2016. In broad terms, the empirical findings reported herein indicate a lack of convergence with the EU irrespective of the metric used. However, they indicate a process of in-group convergence mostly in terms of GDP per person employed.

Keywords

Convergence Panel unit root tests EU candidate countries 

JEL Classification

C23 O47 O52 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to two anonymous referees for spotting flaws and inconsistencies in earlier versions and for their insightful detailed comments and constructive suggestions that helped improve the paper. They also wish to sincerely thank Junsoo Lee and Constantinos Katrakilidis for their assistance with the panel LM unit root test code.

References

  1. Altinay G (2005) Structural breaks in long-term Turkish macroeconomic data, 1923–2003. Appl Econom Int Dev 5:117–130Google Scholar
  2. Amsler C, Lee J (1995) An LM test for a unit root in the presence of a structural change. Econom Theory 11:359–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Apergis N, Panopoulou E, Tsoumas C (2010) Old wine in a new bottle: growth convergence dynamics in the EU. Atl Econ J 38:169–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ayala A, Cunado J, Gil-Alana L (2013) Real convergence: empirical evidence for Latin America. Appl Econ 45(22):3220–3229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baltagi B (2005) Econometric analysis of panel data, 3rd edn. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  6. Belke A, Schneider J (2013) Portfolio choice of financial investors and European business cycle convergence: a panel analysis for EU countries. Empirica 40:175–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Belke A, Haskamp U, Schnabl G (2018) Beyond Balassa and Samuelson: real convergence, capital flows, and competitiveness in Greece. Empirica 45:409–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ben-David D, Papell D (1997) Slowdowns and meltdowns: post war growth evidence from 74 countries. Rev Econ Stat 28:561–571Google Scholar
  9. Beyaert A, Camacho M (2008) Panel unit root tests and real convergence: an application to the EU enlargement process. Rev Dev Econ 12:668–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bongardt A, Torres F (2013) Forging sustainable growth: the issue of convergence of preferences and institutions in EMU. Intereconomics 2:72–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Borsi M, Metiu N (2015) The evolution of economic convergence in the European Union. Empir Econ 48(2):657–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Breitung J (2000) The local power of some unit root tests for panel data. Adv Econom 15:161–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ceylan R, Abiyev V (2016) An examination of convergence hypothesis for EU-15 countries. Int Rev Econ Finance 45:96–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chapsa X, Katrakilidis C (2014) Assessing economic convergence in the EU: is there a perspective for the ‘cohesion countries’? Appl Econ 46(33):4025–4040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chapsa X, Katrakilidis C, Tabakis N (2015) Investigating the convergence hypothesis in the EU: more evidence accounting for structural breaks. In: Karasavvoglou A et al (eds) EU crisis and the role of the periphery. Springer, Switzerland, pp 21–39Google Scholar
  16. Choi I (2001) Unit root tests for panel data. J Int Money Finance 20:249–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dauderstadt M (2014) Convergence in crisis: European integration in jeopardy, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/id/ipa/11001.pdf. Accessed 25 Apr 2017
  18. Dawson JW, Strazicich MC (2010) Time-series tests of income convergence with two structural breaks: evidence from 29 countries. Appl Econ Lett 17:909–912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dickey D, Fuller W (1979) Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. J Am Stat Assoc 74:427–431Google Scholar
  20. Dickey D, Fuller W (1981) Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica 49:1057–1072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dobrinsky R (2003) Convergence in per capita income levels, productivity dynamics and real exchange rates in the EU acceding countries. Empirica 30:305–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Emvalomatis G (2017) Is productivity diverging in the EU? Evidence from 11 member states. Empir Econ 53:1171–1192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Evans P (1998) Using panel data to evaluate growth theories. Int Econ Rev 39:295–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Firgo M, Huber P (2014) Convergence as a heterogeneous process: what can be learnt about convergence in EMU from regional experiences? Empirica 41:129–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Galvão A, Reis Gomes FA (2007) Convergence or divergence in Latin America? A time series analysis. Appl Econ 39(11):1353–1360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hadri K (2000) Testing for stationarity in heterogeneous panel data. Econom J 3:148–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hlouskova J, Wagner M (2006) The performance of panel unit root and stationarity tests: results from a large scale simulation study. Econom Rev 25:85–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Huang H, Lin P, Yeh C (2011) Price level convergence across cities? Evidence from panel unit root tests. Appl Econ Lett 18:87–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Icoz G (2011) Turkey’s path to EU membership: an historical institutionalist perspective. J Contemp Eur Stud 19(4):511–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Im K, Pesaran M, Shin Y (2003) Testing for unit roots in heterogenous panels. J Econom 115:53–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Im K, Lee J, Tieslau M (2005) Panel LM unit-root tests with level shifts. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 67:393–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lau C, Marco K, Demir E, Bilgin M (2016) A nonlinear model of military expenditure convergence: evidence from Estar nonlinear unit root test. Def Peace Econ 27(3):392–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lee J, Strazicich M (2003) Minimum Lagrange multiplier unit root test with two structural breaks. Rev Econ Stat 85:1082–1089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Levin A, Lin C, Chu C (2002) Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties. J Econom 108:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lumsdaine R, Papell D (1997) Multiple trend breaks and the unit-root hypothesis. Rev Econ Stat 79:212–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lyncker K, Thoennessen R (2017) Regional club convergence in the EU: evidence from a panel data analysis. Empir Econ 52:525–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Maddala G, Wu S (1999) A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 61:631–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Martin C, Sanz I (2003) Real convergence and European integration: the experience of the less developed EU members. Empirica 30:205–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Perron P (1989) The great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica 57:1361–1401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Phinnemore D, Içener E (2016) Holding the door half (?) open: the EU and Turkey 10 years on. J Contemp Eur Stud 24(4):446–462.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14782804.2016.1178104 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sondermann D (2014) Productivity in the euro area: any evidence of convergence? Empir Econ 47:999–1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Strazicich M, Lee J, Day E (2004) Are incomes converging among OECD countries? Time series evidence with two structural breaks. J Macroecon 26:131–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tsanana E, Katrakilidis C (2014) Do Balkan economies catch up with EU? New evidence from panel unit root analysis. Empirica 41:641–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tsoukalis L (2014) The unhappy state of the union. Europe needs a new grand bargain. Policy network. www.policy-network.net. Accessed 25 April 2017
  45. Vojinovic B, Oplotnik Z, Prochniak M (2010) EU enlargement and real economic convergence. Post-Communist Econ 22(3):303–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zivot E, Andrews D (1992) Further evidence on the great crash, the oil-price shock and the unit root hypothesis. J Bus Econ Stat 10:251–270Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory of Economic Policy and Strategic Planning, Department of EconomicsUniversity of ThessalyVólosGreece
  2. 2.Department of Accounting and FinanceUniversity of MacedoniaThessaloníkiGreece

Personalised recommendations