IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Purchasing Power Parity: Further Evidence and Implications

Listed author(s):
  • Hassanain K.

    (Department of Economics, UAE University)

This study tests the validity of the purchasing power parity (PPP) theory using a panel of ten Arab countries. It also measures the speed of convergence for the panel and for the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), including Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates which follow a hard dollar peg. The test is conducted using nine base currencies. The main findings are first on the validity of PPP. (1) The null of unit root is rejected using each of the nine currencies as a numeraire—the result appears to be invariant to the choice of the base currency. (2) The result appears to be stronger when the estimation is based on heterogeneous rather than homogeneous serial correlations among panel units. Secondly, on persistence. (3) The estimated average half-life of a shock to the real exchange rate in the full panel is 2.19 years. (4) The study reveals that for the GCC economies deviation from PPP will be more persistent due to the hard peg, the dollar volatility and the weak goods market arbitrage. Clearly, the GCC countries will need to move to a more stable peg to be able to achieve the benefits they hope by engaging in a monetary union by 2010.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.

File URL:
Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by De Gruyter in its journal Review of Middle East Economics and Finance.

Volume (Year): 2 (2004)
Issue (Month): 1 (April)
Pages: 61-75

in new window

Handle: RePEc:bpj:rmeecf:v:2:y:2004:i:1:n:4
Contact details of provider: Web page:

Order Information: Web:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:rmeecf:v:2:y:2004:i:1:n:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Golla)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.