IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecj/ac2002/13.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Testing for PPP: Should We Use Panel Methods?

Author

Listed:
  • Banerjee, Anindya

    (EUI)

  • Massimiliano Marcellino

    (Bocconi University)

  • Chiara Osbat

    (EUI)

Abstract

A common finding in the empirical literature on the validity of purchasing power parity (PPP) is that it holds when tested for in panel data, but not in univariate (i.e. country specific) analysis. The usual explanation for this mis-match is that panel tests for unit roots and cointegration are more powerful than their univariate counterparts. In this paper we suggest an alternative ex-planation for the mismatch. More generally, we warn against the use of panel methods for testing for unit roots in macroeconomic time series. Existing panel methods assume that cross-unit cointegrating or long-run relationships, that tie the units of the panel together, are not present. However, using empirical examples on PPP for a panel of OECD countries, we show that this assumption is very likely to be violated. Simulations of the properties of panel unit root tests in the presence of long-run cross-unit relationships are then presented to demonstrate the serious cost of assuming away such relationships. The empirical size of the tests is substantially higher than the nominal level, so that the null hypothesis of a unit root is rejected very often, even if correct.

Suggested Citation

  • Banerjee, Anindya & Massimiliano Marcellino & Chiara Osbat, 2002. "Testing for PPP: Should We Use Panel Methods?," Royal Economic Society Annual Conference 2002 13, Royal Economic Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecj:ac2002:13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.org/res2002/Banerjee.pdf
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. O'Connell, Paul G. J., 1998. "The overvaluation of purchasing power parity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Engel, Charles, 2000. "Long-run PPP may not hold after all," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 243-273, August.
    3. Oh, Keun-Yeob, 1996. "Purchasing power parity and unit root tests using panel data," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 405-418, June.
    4. Perron, Pierre, 1989. "The Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1361-1401, November.
    5. Larsson, Rolf & Lyhagen, Johan, 1999. "Likelihood-Based Inference in Multivariate Panel Cointegration Models," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 331, Stockholm School of Economics.
    6. 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.
    7. Frankel, Jeffrey A. & Rose, Andrew K., 1995. "Empirical research on nominal exchange rates," Handbook of International Economics,in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 33, pages 1689-1729 Elsevier.
    8. Anindya Banerjee & Massimiliano Marcellino & Chiara Osbat, 2004. "Some cautions on the use of panel methods for integrated series of macroeconomic data," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 7(2), pages 322-340, December.
    9. 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.
    10. Pesaran, M. Hashem & Smith, Ron, 1995. "Estimating long-run relationships from dynamic heterogeneous panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 79-113, July.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Gonzalo, Jesus & Granger, Clive W J, 1995. "Estimation of Common Long-Memory Components in Cointegrated Systems," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 13(1), pages 27-35, January.
    14. Banerjee, Anindya, 1999. " Panel Data Unit Roots and Cointegration: An Overview," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 61(0), pages 607-629, Special I.
    15. Pedroni, Peter, 1999. " Critical Values for Cointegration Tests in Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple Regressors," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 61(0), pages 653-670, Special I.
    16. Johansen, Soren, 1995. "Likelihood-Based Inference in Cointegrated Vector Autoregressive Models," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198774501.
    17. 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.
    18. Mark, Nelson C, 1995. "Exchange Rates and Fundamentals: Evidence on Long-Horizon Predictability," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 201-218, March.
    19. 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.
    20. Tamim Bayoumi & Ronald MacDonald, 1999. "Deviations of Exchange Rates from Purchasing Power Parity: A Story Featuring Two Monetary Unions," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 46(1), pages 1-5.
    21. Badi H. Baltagi & Chihwa Kao, 2000. "Nonstationary Panels, Cointegration in Panels and Dynamic Panels: A Survey," Center for Policy Research Working Papers 16, Center for Policy Research, Maxwell School, Syracuse University.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General
    • C13 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Estimation: General
    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes
    • C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ecj:ac2002:13. 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: (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.