IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

A Century of Purchasing Power Parity: Further Evidence

  • Mohsen Bahmani-Oskooee

    ()

    (University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee)

  • Su Zhou

    ()

    (University of Texas at San Antonio)

  • Ali Kutan

    ()

    (Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville)

Since the publication of Taylor's (2002) results supporting Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) theory using a century of data, several authors have tried to verify PPP using the same data set. While one study has rejected Taylor''s strong conclusion, others have supported it. In this paper we use yet a different unit root testing procedure to determine whether Taylor''s results are sensitive to switching the null hypothesis of stationarity with the alternative of non-stationarity. More precisely, we rely upon Kwiatkowski, et al. (1992) test and apply it to the real bilateral and real effective exchange rates of 20 countries in Taylor''s sample. The results provide support for PPP in 18 of the 20 countries that are much closer to Taylor''s findings than any other study.

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: http://www.accessecon.com/pubs/EB/2007/Volume6/EB-07F30005A.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by AccessEcon in its journal Economics Bulletin.

Volume (Year): 6 (2007)
Issue (Month): 31 ()
Pages: 1-9

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:ebl:ecbull:eb-07f30005
Contact details of provider:

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.:

as in new window
  1. Kwiatkowski, D. & Phillips, P.C.B. & Schmidt, P., 1990. "Testing the Null Hypothesis of Stationarity Against the Alternative of Unit Root : How Sure are we that Economic Time Series have a Unit Root?," Papers 8905, Michigan State - Econometrics and Economic Theory.
  2. Frederick H. Wallace & Gary L. Shelley, 2005. "An Alternative Test of Purchasing Power Parity," International Finance 0502009, EconWPA.
  3. Fisher, Mark E & Seater, John J, 1993. "Long-Run Neutrality and Superneutrality in an ARIMA Framework," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(3), pages 402-15, June.
  4. Elliott, Graham & Rothenberg, Thomas J & Stock, James H, 1996. "Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(4), pages 813-36, July.
  5. Bahmani-Oskooee, Mohsen & Das, Satya P, 1985. "Transaction Costs and the Interest Parity Theorem," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(4), pages 793-99, August.
  6. Coe, Patrick J. & Serletis, Apostolos, 2002. "Bounds tests of the theory of purchasing power parity," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 179-199, January.
  7. Alan M. Taylor, 2000. "A Century of Purchasing-Power Parity," NBER Working Papers 8012, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  8. Serena Ng & Pierre Perron, 1997. "Lag Length Selection and the Construction of Unit Root Tests with Good Size and Power," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 369, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 01 Sep 2000.
  9. Papell, David H & Theodoridis, Hristos, 2001. "The Choice of Numeraire Currency in Panel Tests of Purchasing Power Parity," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 33(3), pages 790-803, August.
  10. Lopez, Claude & Murray, Christian J & Papell, David H, 2005. "State of the Art Unit Root Tests and Purchasing Power Parity," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 37(2), pages 361-69, April.
  11. Hall, Alastair R, 1994. "Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series with Pretest Data-Based Model Selection," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 12(4), pages 461-70, October.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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:ebl:ecbull:eb-07f30005. 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: (John P. Conley)

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.