IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Why panel tests of purchasing power parity should allow for heterogeneous mean reversion

  • Koedijk, Kees G.
  • Tims, Ben
  • van Dijk, Mathijs A.

Recent studies of purchasing power parity (PPP) use panel tests that fail to take into account heterogeneity in the speed of mean reversion across real exchange rates. In contrast to several other severe restrictions of panel models and tests of PPP, the assumption of homogeneous mean reversion is still widely used and its consequences are virtually unexplored. This paper analyzes the properties of homogeneous and heterogeneous panel unit root testing methodologies. Using Monte Carlo simulation, we uncover important adverse properties of the panel approach that relies on homogeneous estimation and testing. More specifically, power functions are low and assume irregular shapes. Furthermore, homogeneous estimates of the mean reversion parameters exhibit potentially large biases. These properties can lead to misleading inferences on the validity of PPP. Our findings highlight the importance of allowing for heterogeneous estimation when testing for a unit root in panels of real exchange rates.

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.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261-5606(10)00115-4
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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 Elsevier in its journal Journal of International Money and Finance.

Volume (Year): 30 (2011)
Issue (Month): 1 (February)
Pages: 246-267

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:jimfin:v:30:y:2011:i:1:p:246-267
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30443

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. Francisco Maeso-Fernandez & Chiara Osbat & Bernd Schnatz, 2001. "Determinants of the euro real effective exchange rate: a BEER/PEER approach," International Finance 0111003, EconWPA.
  2. Sarno, Lucio & Taylor, Mark P, 1997. "The Behaviour of Real Exchange Rates During the Post-Bretton Woods Period," CEPR Discussion Papers 1730, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  3. Serena Ng & Pierre Perron, 2001. "LAG Length Selection and the Construction of Unit Root Tests with Good Size and Power," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1519-1554, November.
  4. Wu, Jyh-Lin & Wu, Shaowen, 2001. "Is Purchasing Power Parity Overvalued?," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 33(3), pages 804-12, August.
  5. Breuer, Janice Boucher & McNown, Robert & Wallace, Myles S, 2001. "Misleading Inferences from Panel Unit-Root Tests with an Illustration from Purchasing Power Parity," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 482-93, August.
  6. Papell, David H., 2002. "The great appreciation, the great depreciation, and the purchasing power parity hypothesis," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 51-82, June.
  7. Cheung, Yin-Wong & Chinn, Menzie & Fujii, Eiji, 2001. "Market Structure and the Persistence of Sectoral Real Exchange Rates," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(2), pages 95-114, April.
  8. Alan M. Taylor & Mark P. Taylor, 2004. "The Purchasing Power Parity Debate," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(4), pages 135-158, Fall.
  9. Shiu-Sheng Chen & Charles Engel, 2005. "Does 'Aggregation Bias' Explain The Ppp Puzzle?," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(1), pages 49-72, 02.
  10. Kenneth Rogoff, 1996. "The Purchasing Power Parity Puzzle," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 647-668, June.
  11. Fleissig, Adrian R. & Strauss, Jack, 2000. "Panel unit root tests of purchasing power parity for price indices," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 489-506, August.
  12. Claude Lopez & David H. Papell, 2003. "Convergence to Purchasing Power Parity at the Commencement of the Euro," Macroeconomics 0310008, EconWPA.
  13. Jean Imbs & Haroon Mumtaz & Morten O. Ravn & Hélène Rey, 2005. "PPP Strikes Back: Aggregation And the Real Exchange Rate," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 120(1), pages 1-43.
  14. Maddala, G S & Wu, Shaowen, 1999. " A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data and a New Simple Test," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 61(0), pages 631-52, Special I.
  15. Jose M. Campa & Holger C. Wolf, 1997. "Is Real Exchange Rate Mean Reversion Caused By Arbitrage?," NBER Working Papers 6162, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  16. Choi, Chi-Young, 2004. "Searching for evidence of long-run PPP from a post-Bretton Woods panel: separating the wheat from the chaff," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(7-8), pages 1159-1186.
  17. Lutz Kilian & Tao Zha, 2002. "Quantifying the uncertainty about the half-life of deviations from PPP," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(2), pages 107-125.
  18. Papell, David H., 2006. "The Panel Purchasing Power Parity Puzzle," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 38(2), pages 447-467, March.
  19. Frankel, Jeffrey A. & Rose, Andrew K., 1995. "A Panel Project on Purchasing Power Parity: Mean Reversion Within and Between Countries," Center for International and Development Economics Research (CIDER) Working Papers 233411, University of California-Berkeley, Department of Economics.
  20. Lothian, James R., 1997. "Multi-country evidence on the behavior of purchasing power parity under the current float," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 19-35, February.
  21. 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.
  22. Koedijk, C.G. & Tims, B. & van Dijk, M.A., 2004. "Purchasing Power Parity and the Euro Area," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2004-025-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
  23. Robertson, D & Symons, J, 1992. "Some Strange Properties of Panel Data Estimators," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(2), pages 175-89, April-Jun.
  24. Campbell, J.Y. & Perron, P., 1991. "Pitfalls and Opportunities: What Macroeconomics should know about unit roots," Papers 360, Princeton, Department of Economics - Econometric Research Program.
  25. Kenneth A. Froot & Kenneth Rogoff, 1994. "Perspectives on PPP and Long-Run Real Exchange Rates," NBER Working Papers 4952, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  26. Breuer, Janice Boucher & McNown, Robert & Wallace, Myles, 2002. " Series-Specific Unit Root Tests with Panel Data," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 64(5), pages 527-46, December.
  27. Christian J. Murray & David H. Papell, 2000. "The Purchasing Power Parity Persistence Paradigm," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0017, Econometric Society.
  28. Im, Kyung So & Pesaran, M. Hashem & Shin, Yongcheol, 2003. "Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 53-74, July.
  29. Boyd, Derick & Smith, Ron, 1999. "Testing for Purchasing Power Parity: Econometric Issues and an Application to Developing Countries," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 67(3), pages 287-303, June.
  30. Levin, Andrew & Lin, Chien-Fu & James Chu, Chia-Shang, 2002. "Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 1-24, May.
  31. Cheung, Yin-Wong & Lai, Kon S., 2000. "On cross-country differences in the persistence of real exchange rates," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 375-397, April.
  32. Nelson, Forrest D & Savin, N E, 1990. "The Danger of Extrapolating Asymptotic Local Power," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(4), pages 977-81, July.
  33. Choi, Chi-Young & Mark, Nelson C. & Sul, Donggyu, 2006. "Unbiased Estimation of the Half-Life to PPP Convergence in Panel Data," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 38(4), pages 921-938, June.
  34. Pesaran, M.H. & Smith, R., 1992. "Estimating Long-Run Relationships From Dynamic Heterogeneous Panels," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 9215, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
  35. Abuaf, Niso & Jorion, Philippe, 1990. " Purchasing Power Parity in the Long Run," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 45(1), pages 157-74, March.
  36. Engel, Charles & Hendrickson, Michael K. & Rogers, John H., 1997. "Intranational, Intracontinental, and Intraplanetary PPP," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 480-501, December.
  37. Papell, David H., 1997. "Searching for stationarity: Purchasing power parity under the current float," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(3-4), pages 313-332, November.
  38. Jorion, Philippe & Sweeney, Richard J., 1996. "Mean reversion in real exchange rates: evidence and implications for forecasting," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 535-550, August.
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:eee:jimfin:v:30:y:2011:i:1:p:246-267. 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: (Shamier, Wendy)

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.