In this paper, the evidence collected in the large literature on testing for Granger-causality from money to output is revisited. Using a broad data base of 14 EU-countries plus Canada, the US and Japan, and quarterly data from the mid 60s to the mid 90s, a number of hypotheses from this literature is evaluated. It is found that very few general conclusions can be sustained. For instance, in most countries it is not the case that the use of data in levels creates a bias in favour of finding Granger-causality effects of money on output compared to using differences. Neither does the significance of money lags decline when increasing the number of variables included in the model. What appears to be robust, though, is that allowing for asymmetries clearly increases the likelihood of finding significant causality effects. Based on the Granger-causality test results, a number of country groups are obtained using cluster analysis, which are characterised by a similarly behaviour with respect to the money-output relation.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by EconWPA in its series Macroeconomics with number
9809009.
Find related papers by JEL classification: E40 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Money and Interest Rates - - - General E50 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit - - - General
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
Hendry, David F, 1980.
"Econometrics-Alchemy or Science?,"
Economica,
London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 47(188), pages 387-406, November.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)
J. Weymark & H. König & J. Backhaus & B. Hayo & A. Gabriele, 2001.
"Book reviews,"
Journal of Economics,
Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 348-368, October.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions:
S. Littlechild & S. Klasen & J. Oechssler & K. Futagami & B. Hayo & K. Hamada, 1999.
"Book reviews,"
Journal of Economics,
Springer, vol. 70(3), pages 328-346, October.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
W. Krelle & H. Siebert & P. Schönfeld & R. Gradus & D. Wildasin & J. Weymark & G. Tullock & C. Keuschnigg & A. Endres & R. Schwarze & U. Kamecke & A. Wellink, 1990.
"Book reviews,"
Journal of Economics,
Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 295-326, October.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)