IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eur/ejmsjr/252.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Panel Data Analysis of Exchange Rate for Fragile Five

Author

Listed:
  • Assoc. Prof. Dina Çakmur Yildirtan

    (Capital Market Dept, School of Banking and Insurance, Marmara University, Turkey)

  • Esengül SalihoÄŸlu

Abstract

After the Bretteon Woods System, as a result of the preffering especially the flexible exchange rate systems of developed countries the exchange rate risk has emerged. The transfer for the flexible exchange systems in the majority of developing countries started with the financial liberalization in the 1990’s. In this period, the progress of information technology and globalization have rendered exchange rate policies and exchange rates a priority for countries and exchange rates have become effective on macroeconomic indicators. In this study was examined exchange rate behaviour of Morgan Stanley’s “Fragile Five Countries†which are Brazil, India, Indonesia, South Africa and Turkey. For this purpose with the Panel Cointegration Tests was investigated if there is long termed relationship between the exchange rate and international reserves, money supply and The Bloomberg U.S. Financial Conditions Index(BFCIUS). As well as, Granger Causality test is applied using Panel Data Causality Techniques are used to uncover the direction of relation between variables. Thus Panel Vector Autoregression (PVAR) Model was estimated among the variables. The present study is distinguished from previous studies by investigation of long term relationship between also The BFCIUS, exchange rate. Data base is containing from the exchange rate index, international reserve index, Money supply index and BFCIUS variables presented by Bloomberg and monthly data includes 1015 observations done in the period of March 2000 - January 2017.

Suggested Citation

  • Assoc. Prof. Dina Çakmur Yildirtan & Esengül SalihoÄŸlu, 2017. "Panel Data Analysis of Exchange Rate for Fragile Five," European Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 2, May Augus.
    • Handle: RePEc:eur:ejmsjr:252
    DOI: 10.26417/ejms.v5i1.p264-278
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://revistia.com/index.php/ejms/article/view/5828
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://revistia.com/files/articles/ejms_v2_i5_17/Yildirtan.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26417/ejms.v5i1.p264-278?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hu, Kuo-Jen & Yu, Vincent F., 2016. "An integrated approach for the electronic contract manufacturer selection problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 68-81.
    2. Konidari, Popi & Mavrakis, Dimitrios, 2007. "A multi-criteria evaluation method for climate change mitigation policy instruments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6235-6257, December.
    3. Dinglin Liu & Xianglian Zhao, 2013. "Method and Application for Dynamic Comprehensive Evaluation with Subjective and Objective Information," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-5, December.
    4. Loetscher, Thomas & Keller, Jurg, 2002. "A decision support system for selecting sanitation systems in developing countries," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 267-290, December.
    5. Halim Kazan & Omer Ozdemir, 2014. "Financial Performance Assessment of Large Scale Conglomerates Via Topsis and Critic Methods," International Journal of Management and Sustainability, Conscientia Beam, vol. 3(4), pages 203-224.
    6. Halim Kazan & Ömer Özdemir, 2014. "Financial Performance Assessment of Large Scale Conglomerates Via Topsis and Critic Methods," International Journal of Management and Sustainability, Conscientia Beam, vol. 3(4), pages 203-224.
    7. Ananda, Jayanath & Herath, Gamini, 2005. "Evaluating public risk preferences in forest land-use choices using multi-attribute utility theory," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 408-419, November.
    8. Canbolat, Yavuz Burak & Chelst, Kenneth & Garg, Nitin, 2007. "Combining decision tree and MAUT for selecting a country for a global manufacturing facility," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 312-325, June.
    9. Josias Zietsman & Laurence R. Rilett & Seung-Jun Kim, 2006. "Transportation corridor decision-making with multi-attribute utility theory," International Journal of Management and Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(2/3), pages 254-266.
    10. Gomez-Limon, Jose A. & Arriaza, Manuel & Riesgo, Laura, 2003. "An MCDM analysis of agricultural risk aversion," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(3), pages 569-585, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ayşegül Tuş & Esra Aytaç Adalı, 2019. "The new combination with CRITIC and WASPAS methods for the time and attendance software selection problem," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 56(2), pages 528-538, June.
    2. Wei, Jing & Zhang, Jianjun & Wu, Xia & Song, Zeyu, 2022. "Governance in mining enterprises: An effective way to promote the intensification of resources—Taking coal resources as an example," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    3. Mehmet Islamoglu & Mehmet Apan & Ahmet Oztel, 2015. "An Evaluation of the Financial Performance of REITs in Borsa Istanbul: A Case Study Using the Entropy-Based TOPSIS Method," International Journal of Financial Research, International Journal of Financial Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 6(2), pages 124-138, April.
    4. Kumaran, Sunitha, 2022. "Financial performance index of IPO firms using VIKOR-CRITIC techniques," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(PA).
    5. Patrik Aláč & Martin Čulík, 2017. "Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model for the Material Flow of Resonant Wood Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-11, March.
    6. Onur Selcuk & Hatice Karakas & Beykan Cizel & Emre Ipekci Cetin, 2023. "How does tourism affect protected areas?: A multi-criteria decision making application in UNESCO natural heritage sites," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 117(2), pages 1923-1944, June.
    7. Leilei Jiao & Fumin Deng & Xuedong Liang, 2017. "Sustainable Urbanization Synergy Degree Measures—A Case Study in Henan Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, December.
    8. Ahmed Imran Hunjra & Hasnain Mehmood & Haroon Bakari, 2018. "Co-Movement between Macroeconomic Variables and Capital Flight," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 8(9), pages 1185-1195, September.
    9. Taufiq Hidayat, 2016. "The Impact of Financial Conglomeration on Risk and Return Performance in Indonesia Banking Industry," International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, vol. 6(2), pages 1135-1135.
    10. N. Aktaş & N. Demirel, 2021. "A hybrid framework for evaluating corporate sustainability using multi-criteria decision making," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 15591-15618, October.
    11. Azevedo, I. & Leal, V., 2021. "A new model for ex-post quantification of the effects of local actions for climate change mitigation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    12. Zhi-Fu Mi & Yi-Ming Wei & Chen-Qi He & Hua-Nan Li & Xiao-Chen Yuan & Hua Liao, 2017. "Regional efforts to mitigate climate change in China: a multi-criteria assessment approach," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 45-66, January.
    13. Francisco J. André & Laura Riesgo, 2006. "A Duality Procedure to Elicit Nonlinear Multiattribute Utility Functions," Working Papers 06.02, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    14. Frank, Alejandro Germán & Gerstlberger, Wolfgang & Paslauski, Carolline Amaral & Lerman, Laura Visintainer & Ayala, Néstor Fabián, 2018. "The contribution of innovation policy criteria to the development of local renewable energy systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 353-365.
    15. Perez-Mesa, Juan Carlos & Galdeano-Gomez, Emilio & Aznar-Sanchez, Jose A., 2011. "Management System for Harvest Scheduling: The Case of Horticultural Production in Southeast Spain," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 14(4), pages 1-20, November.
    16. Bielza, Concha & Gómez, Manuel & Shenoy, Prakash P., 2011. "A review of representation issues and modeling challenges with influence diagrams," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 227-241, June.
    17. Akpan, Uduak & Morimoto, Risako, 2022. "An application of Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) to the prioritization of rural roads to improve rural accessibility in Nigeria," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(PB).
    18. Michailidou, Alexandra V. & Vlachokostas, Christos & Moussiopoulos, Νicolas, 2016. "Interactions between climate change and the tourism sector: Multiple-criteria decision analysis to assess mitigation and adaptation options in tourism areas," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 1-12.
    19. Amin Mahmoudi & Saad Ahmed Javed, 2022. "Probabilistic Approach to Multi-Stage Supplier Evaluation: Confidence Level Measurement in Ordinal Priority Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 1051-1096, October.
    20. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Kuik, Onno & Paglialunga, Elena, 2016. "Mitigation of adverse effects on competitiveness and leakage of unilateral EU climate policy: An assessment of policy instruments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 246-259.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eur:ejmsjr:252. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Revistia Research and Publishing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://revistia.com/index.php/ejms .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.