Kazakhstan trade with its partners and the role of tenge: an asymmetric analysis

Abstract

Previous research has shown that lack of any short-run and long-run relationship between the trade balance and the exchange rate could be due to ignoring non-linear adjustment of the exchange rate. In this paper, we introduce non-linearity of the exchange rate adjustment and consider the asymmetric response of Kazakhstan’s trade balance with each of its 13 trading partners. While we find short-run asymmetric response in almost all 13 models, short-run asymmetric effects translate into the long run only in the trade with Austria, China, France, and the U.S. Only in the trade with France a tenge depreciation had favorable long-run effects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

  1. 1.

    IMF (2017b) also argues that the impact of real exchange rate depreciation on competitiveness and exports is likely to manifest with a lag.

  2. 2.

    For theoretical derivation of the model, see Rose and Yellen (1989) or Bahmani-Oskooee (2018).

  3. 3.

    Note that if increase in economic activity is due to an increase in the production of import substitute goods, an estimate of b (c) could also be negative (positive). For details see Bahmani-Oskooee (1986).

  4. 4.

    Note that once normalization takes place, we have \(\hat{b} = \frac{{\hat{\lambda }_{2} }}{{ - \hat{\lambda }_{1} }},^{{}} \hat{c} = \frac{{\hat{\lambda }_{3} }}{{ - \hat{\lambda }_{1} }},^{{}} \hat{d} = \frac{{\hat{\lambda }_{4} }}{{ - \hat{\lambda }_{1} }}.\)

  5. 5.

    Indeed, we made sure that there is no I(2) variable.

  6. 6.

    Note that partial sum of positive (negative) changes is the same as cumulative sum where negative (positive) values are replaced with zeroes.

  7. 7.

    For more on some other application of these methods see Gogas and Pragidis (2015), Durmaz (2015), Baghestani and Kherfi (2015), Al-Shayeb and Hatemi (2016), Lima et al. (2016), Nusair (2016), Caputo et al. (2016), Aftab et al. (2017), Arize et al. (2017), and Gregoriou (2017).

  8. 8.

    Note that the size of estimate attached to ECMt-1 measures the speed of adjustment. Therefore, the estimates of − 1.28 in the linear model and − 1.43 in the non-linear model of Russia that are greater than one imply that 60–70% of adjustment takes place in half of a quarter since data are quarterly. For more on Russia’s foreign trade, see Rasoulinezhad (2018).

  9. 9.

    The significant negative long run estimate attached to the real exchange rate could be due to import demands being inelastic.

  10. 10.

    As tenge appreciates against the dollar, Kazakhstan export earnings increase, and her trade balance with U.S. improves. This could only be the case if U.S. import demand is inelastic.

References

  1. Aftab, M., Shah Syed, K., & Katper, N. A. (2017). Exchange-rate volatility and Malaysian-Thai bilateral industry trade flows. Journal of Economic Studies,44, 99–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Al-Shayeb, A., & Hatemi-J, A. (2016). Trade openness and economic development in the UAE: an asymmetric approach. Journal of Economic Studies,43, 587–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Arize, A. C., Malindretos, J., & Igwe, E. U. (2017). Do exchange rate changes improve the trade balance: an asymmetric non-linear cointegration approach. International Review of Economics and Finance,49, 313–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baghestani, H., & Kherfi, S. (2015). An error-correction modeling of US consumer spending: are there asymmetries? Journal of Economic Studies,42, 1078–1094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bahmani-Oskooee, M. (1985). Devaluation and the J-Curve: some evidence from LDCs. The Review of Economics and Statistics,67, 500–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bahmani-Oskooee, M. (1986). Determinants of international trade flows: case of developing countries. Journal of Development Economics,20, 107–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bahmani-Oskooee, M. (1996). Source of stagflation in an oil exporting country: evidence from Iran. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics,18, 609–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bahmani-Oskooee, M. (2018), The J-curve and the effects of exchange rate changes on the trade balance. In F. L. Rivera-Batiz (Ed.), International money and finance, Volume 3 Encyclopedia of international economics and global trade. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. (chapter 16, forthcoming).

  9. Bahmani-Oskooee, M., & Fariditavana, H. (2015). Non-linear ARDL approach, asymmetric effects and the J-Curve. Journal of Economic Studies,43(3), 519–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bahmani-Oskooee, M., & Fariditavana, H. (2016). Non-linear ARDL approach and the J-Curve phenomenon. Open Economies Review,27, 51–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bahmani-Oskooee, M., & Hegerty, S. W. (2010). The J- and S-Curves: a survey of the recent literature. Journal of Economic Studies,37, 580–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bahmani-Oskooee, M., & Ratha, A. (2004). The J-Curve: a literature review. Applied Economics,36, 1377–1398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Banerjee, A., Dolado, J., & Mestre, R. (1998). Error-correction mechanism tests in a single equation framework. Journal of Time Series Analysis,19, 267–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Burke, J., & Okulova, X. (2009). The effects of devaluation of the tenge upon the Kazakhstan economy. EILF Journal of Law & Economics, 1, 1–35.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bussiere, M. (2013). Exchange rate pass-through to trade prices: the role of non-linearities and asymmetries. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics,75, 731–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Caputo, A., Pellegrini, M. M., Dabic, M., & Dana, L. P. (2016). Internationalization of firms from Central and Eastern Europe: a systematic literature review. European Business Review, 28(6), 630–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Durmaz, Nazif. (2015). Industry level J-Curve in Turkey. Journal of Economic Studies,42, 689–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Engle, R. F., & Granger, C. W. J. (1987). Cointegration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica,55(2), 251–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Frankel, J. (2013). Exchange rate and monetary policy for Kazakhstan in light of resource exports. Cambridge: Center for International Development, Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gogas, P., & Pragidis, I. (2015). Are there asymmetries in fiscal policy shocks? Journal of Economic Studies,42, 303–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gregoriou, A. (2017). Modelling non-linear behavior of block price deviations when trades are executed outside the bid-ask quotes. Journal of Economic Studies,44, 206–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hasanov, A. S., & Baharumshah, A. Z. (2009). Exchange rate risk and trade flows: the case of transition countries. EERC Working Paper Series no. 11/09.

  23. Hosny, A. (2014a). Exchange rate and the trade balance. In Republic of Kazakhstan selected issues. IMF Country Report no. 14/243. Washington: International Monetary Fund.

  24. Hosny, A. (2014b). Toward inflation targeting. In Republic of Kazakhstan selected issues. IMF Country Report no. 14/243. Washington: International Monetary Fund.

  25. Hosny, A. (2015). Annex I. Tunisia: external sector assessment. IMF Country Report no. 15/285. Washington: International Monetary Fund.

  26. IMF (2017a). Exchange rate pass-through in Kazakshtan: empirical findings and implications for inflation targeting. In Republic of Kazakhstan selected issues. IMF Country Report no. 17/109. Washington: International Monetary Fund.

  27. IMF (2017b). Republic of Kazakhstan: 2017 article IV consultation-press release and staff report. IMF Country Report no. 17/108. Washington: International Monetary Fund.

  28. Lima, L., Foffano Vasconcelos, C., Simão, J., & de Mendonça, H. (2016). The quantitative easing effect on the stock market of the USA, the UK and Japan: an ARDL approach for the crisis period. Journal of Economic Studies,43, 1006–1021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Magee, S. P. (1973). Currency contracts, pass-through, and devaluation. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,1, 303–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Naceur, S. B., Hosny, A., & Hadjian, G. (2015) How to De-Dollarize financial systems in the Caucasus and Central Asia? IMF Working Paper no. 15/203. Washington: International Monetary Fund.

  31. Nusair, S. A. (2016). The J-Curve phenomenon in European transition economies: a non-linear ARDL approach. International Review of Applied Economics,31(1), 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics,16(3), 289–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Rasoulinezhad, E. (2018). A new evidence from the effects of Russia’s WTO accession on its Foreign trade. Eurasian Economic Review,8, 73–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Rose, A. K., & Yellen, J. L. (1989). Is there a J-curve? Journal of Monetary Economics,24, 53–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Shin, Y. B., Yu, C., & Greenwood-Nimmo, M. (2014). Modelling asymmetric cointegration and dynamic multipliers in a non-linear ARDL framework. In R. Sickels, W. Horrace (Eds.), Festschrift in honor of Peter Schmidt (pp. 281–314). New York: Springer.

  36. World Bank (2014). Kazakhstan: short-term vulnerabilities, positive prospects. In Kazakhstan Economic Update. Washington: The World Bank.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohsen Bahmani-Oskooee.

Additional information

Valuable comments of two anonymous reviewers as well as those of the editor and associate editor are greatly appreciated. Any error, however, is our responsibility. Views suggested in the paper are those of the authors only and not their affiliated organizations.

Appendix

Appendix

Data definition and sources

Quarterly data over the period 2000QI–2015QIV are used to carry out the empirical analysis. They come from the IMF e-Library—DATA: The sources are:

  1. a.

    Direction of Trade Statistics (DOT) of the IMF.

  2. b.

    International Financial statistics (IFS) of the IMF.

There are 13 partners of Kazakhstan are: Austria, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Romania, Russian Federation, Switzerland, Turkey, and United States.

Variables

TBi Kazakhstan trade balance with partner i is defined as Kazakhstan imports from partner i over her exports to partner i. The data come from source a.

YKZN  Measure of Kazakhstan’s income. It is proxied by index of real GDP. The data come from source b.

Yi Trading partner i’s income. This is also proxied by the index of real GDP in country i and the data come from source b.

REXi The real bilateral exchange rate of the Kazakhstani Tenge against the currency of partner i. It is defined as REXi = (PKZN. NEXi/Pi) where NEXi is the nominal exchange rate defined as number of units of partner i’s currency per Tenge, PKZN is the price level in Kazakhstan. (measured by CPI) and Pi is the price level in country i (also measured by CPI). Thus, a decline in REX reflects a real depreciation of the Kazakhstani tenge. All nominal exchange rates and price levels data come from source b.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bahmani-Oskooee, M., Harvey, H. & Hosny, A. Kazakhstan trade with its partners and the role of tenge: an asymmetric analysis. Eurasian Econ Rev 9, 493–513 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40822-018-0116-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Trade balance
  • Exchange rate
  • Asymmetry effects
  • Kazakhstan
  • 13 partners