Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cointegration tests of purchasing power parity

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Review of World Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Im et al. (Unpublished working paper, 2008) develop cointegration tests using stationary instrumental variables. Their tests avoid the need to simulate critical values for the cointegration estimations, especially problematic in the presence of a nuisance parameter. Likewise, bootstrapping errors is unnecessary. Using an updated version of the Taylor (Rev Econ Stat 84(1):139–150, 2002) data set, the Im et al. (Unpublished working paper, 2008) approach is applied to two well-known, single equation cointegration methods to test for purchasing power parity. The estimations with instruments provide evidence of purchasing power parity (PPP) for more than half of the countries studied; but the empirical results, hence conclusions regarding PPP sometimes differ with the choice of instrument.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A list of countries and periods of coverage are provided in Table 5 of the “Appendix”. Data for Argentina are only available to 2006. The Taylor data also include information for three additional countries (Chile, Greece, and New Zealand) for shorter periods of coverage and not reported in Taylor (2002). Data for these three countries are included in this study.

  2. They eliminate Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico from their study. Their data are updated to 1998.

  3. See Taylor (2001) on this issue.

  4. Taylor (2001) shows that temporal aggregation of exchange rate and price data may also bias the results against rejecting a unit root null in the real exchange rate.

  5. See Im et al. (2008) for proofs and more detail.

  6. Except for the US price level, which must be integrated since the dollar is the numeraire currency.

  7. Since the PPP relationship does not include a deterministic time trend; t is omitted from the empirical models.

  8. Results from applying the three standard cointegration tests to the updated Taylor data were originally reported in Wallace et al. (2008). The standard test results reported in this paper are for restricted sample periods thus differ somewhat from those in Wallace et al. (2008).

  9. The coefficient from the regression having the minimum sum of squared residuals is italicized in bold font in all tables showing coefficient estimates, i.e. Tables 2 and 4.

References

  • Bahmani-Oskooee, M., Kutan, A., & Zhou, S. (2007). A century of purchasing power parity: Further evidence. Economics Bulletin, 6(31), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bahmani-Oskooee, M., Kutan, A., & Zhou, S. (2009). A century of PPP: Supportive results from non-linear unit root tests. Global Business and Economics Review, 11(1), 19–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, A., Dolado, J. J., & Mestre, R. (1998). Error-correction mechanism for cointegration in a single-equation framework. Journal of Time Series Analysis, 19(3), 268–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breusch, T. S. (1978). Testing for autocorrelation in dynamic linear models. Australian Economic Papers, 17(31), 334–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, G., Rothenberg, T., & Stock, J. H. (1996). Efficient tests for an autoregressive unit root. Econometrica, 64(4), 813–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enders, W., Im, K. S., Lee, J., & Strazicich, M. (2010). IV threshold cointegration tests and the Taylor rule. Economic Modelling, 27(6), 1463–1472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, N.R., MacKinnon, J.G. (2002) Distributions of error corrections tests for cointegration. Econometrics Journal 5(2), 285–318. Computer program available at http://www.econ.queensu.ca/faculty/mackinnon/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, L. G. (1978). Testing for higher order serial correlation in regression equations when the regressors include lagged dependent variables. Econometrica, 46(6), 1293–1302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gubitz, A. (1988). Collapse of the purchasing power parity in the light of co-integrated variables? Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 124(4), 667–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, R. I. D., & Judge, G. (1998). Small sample testing for cointegration using the bootstrap approach. Economics Letters, 58(1), 31–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Im, K. S., Lee, J., Enders, W. (2008). Cointegration tests using instrumental variables with an example of the U.K. demand for money. Unpublished working paper.

  • Kanas, A. (2006). Purchasing power parity and Markov regime switching. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 38(6), 1669–1687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapetanios, G., Shin, Y., & Snell, A. (2003). Testing for a unit root in the nonlinear STAR framework. Journal of Econometrics, 112(2), 359–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., & Moh, Y. (2010). A century of purchasing power parity confirmed: The role of nonlinearity. Journal of International Money and Finance, 29(7), 1398–1405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P. C. B., Schmidt, P., & Shin, Y. (1992). Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit-root. Journal of Econometrics, 54(1–3), 159–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopez, C., Murray, C. J., & Papell, D. H. (2005). State of the art unit root tests and purchasing power parity. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 37(2), 361–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michael, P., Nobay, A. R., & Peel, D. A. (1997). Transactions costs and nonlinear adjustment in real exchange rates: An empirical investigation. Journal of Political Economy, 105(4), 862–879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell, P. G. J., & Wei, S. J. (2002). The bigger they are the harder they fall: Retail price differences across US cities. Journal of International Economics, 56, 21–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obstfeld, M., & Taylor, A. M. (2004). Global capital markets: Integration, crisis, and growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Papell, D. H., & Prodan, R. (2006). Additional evidence of long-run purchasing power parity with restricted structural change. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 38(5), 1329–1349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parikh, A., & Wakerly, E. (2000). Real exchange rates and unit roots. Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 136(3), 478–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, J.Y., Shintani, M., (2005). Testing for a unit root against transitional autoregressive models. (Working Paper 05-W10). United States: Vanderbilt University.

  • Pesavento, E. (2004). Analytical evaluation of the power of tests for the absence of cointegration. Journal of Econometrics, 122(2), 349–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pesavento, E. (2007). Residuals based tests for the null of no cointegration: An analytical comparison. Journal of Time Series Analysis, 28(1), 111–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, K. (1996). The purchasing power parity puzzle. Journal of Economic Literature, 34(2), 647–668.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarno, L. (2000). Systematic sampling and real exchange rates. Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 136(1), 24–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarno, L., Taylor, M.P. (2002). Purchasing power parity and the real exchange rate. IMF Staff Papers 49(1).

  • Sarno, L., & Valente, G. (2006). Deviations from purchasing power parity under different exchange rate regimes: Do they revert and, if so, how? Journal of Banking & Finance, 30(11), 3147–3169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sercu, P., Uppal, R., & Van Hulle, C. (1995). The exchange rate in the presence of transactions costs: Implications for tests of purchasing power parity. The Journal of Finance, 50(4), 1309–1319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, A. T. (2001). Potential pitfalls for the purchasing-power-parity puzzle? Sampling and specification biases in mean-reversion tests of the law of one price. Econometrica, 69(2), 473–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, A. T. (2002). A century of purchasing-power parity. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84(1), 139–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, F. H. (2008). Nonlinear unit root tests of PPP using long-horizon data. Economics Bulletin, 6(33), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, F. H., & Shelley, G. L. (2006). An alternative test of purchasing power parity. Economics Letters, 92(2), 177–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, F. H., Lozano-Cortés, R., & Cabrera-Castellanos, L. F. (2008). Pruebas de cointegración de paridad de poder de compra. EconoQuantum, 4(2), 7–25.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I thank Alan Taylor for providing his data. Walt Enders kindly shared computer code, recent versions of his working papers cited herein, and helpful comments on an earlier version of the paper. Gary Shelley and an anonymous referee made a number of useful suggestions that greatly improved the paper. I have also benefited from the comments of seminar participants at the Banco de México, the Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, and the Centro de Investigaciones Socioeconómicos of the Universidad Autónoma de Coahuila. Errors are mine, of course. Financial support from Mexico′s National Council for Science and Technology (CONACYT) is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Social Sciences, University of Minnesota, Morris, 600 East 4th Street, Morris, MN, 56267, USA

    Frederick H. Wallace

Authors
  1. Frederick H. Wallace
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frederick H. Wallace.

About this article

Cite this article

Wallace, F.H. Cointegration tests of purchasing power parity. Rev World Econ 149, 779–802 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-013-0165-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-013-0165-2

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation