IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/manchs/v69y2001is1p42-56.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Heterogeneous Panel Unit Root Tests and Purchasing Power Parity

Author

Listed:
  • Kul B. Luintel

Abstract

Doubts have been raised recently on the findings of panel studies of purchasing power parity (PPP) on the grounds that they ignore serial correlation and cross‐sectional dependence, and consequently suffer from severe size biases and loss of power. We implement an alternative panel unit root test that controls for serial correlation and cross‐sectional dependence as well as the heterogeneity of dynamics and error variances across groups, and find strong support for PPP. Our findings are consistent with other recent studies on the subject.

Suggested Citation

  • Kul B. Luintel, 2001. "Heterogeneous Panel Unit Root Tests and Purchasing Power Parity," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 69(s1), pages 42-56.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:manchs:v:69:y:2001:i:s1:p:42-56
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-9957.69.s1.3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9957.69.s1.3
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-9957.69.s1.3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Canarella, Giorgio & Miller, Stephen M. & Nourayi, Mahmoud M., 2013. "Firm profitability: Mean-reverting or random-walk behavior?," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 76-97.
    2. Mishra, Vinod & Smyth, Russell, 2010. "Female labor force participation and total fertility rates in the OECD: New evidence from panel cointegration and Granger causality testing," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 48-64, January.
    3. Bulent Guloglu & Mehmet Ivrendi, 2010. "Output fluctuations: transitory or permanent? the case of Latin America," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 381-386.
    4. Mark Holmes & Jesús Otero & Theodore Panagiotidis, 2012. "PPP in OECD Countries: An Analysis of Real Exchange Rate Stationarity, Cross-Sectional Dependency and Structural Breaks," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 767-783, November.
    5. Kumar Narayan, Paresh & Smyth, Russell, 2007. "Are shocks to energy consumption permanent or temporary? Evidence from 182 countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 333-341, January.
    6. Julián Ramajo Hernández(1) & Montserrat Ferré Carracedo(2), "undated". "Testing For Long-Run Purchasing Power Parity In The Post Bretton Woods Era: Evidence From Old And New Tests," Working Papers 24-05 Classification-JEL , Instituto de Estudios Fiscales.
    7. Paresh Kumar Narayan & Russell Smyth, 2007. "The Military Expenditure-External Debt Nexus: New Evidence From A Panel Of Middle Eastern Countries," Monash Economics Working Papers 17-07, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    8. Narayan, Paresh Kumar & Smyth, Russell, 2008. "Energy consumption and real GDP in G7 countries: New evidence from panel cointegration with structural breaks," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 2331-2341, September.
    9. Li, Zeyun & Kuo, Yen-Ku & Mahmud, Abdul Rahman & Nassani, Abdelmohsen A. & Haffar, Mohamed & Muda, Iskandar, 2022. "Integration of renewable energy, environmental policy stringency, and climate technologies in realizing environmental sustainability: Evidence from OECD countries," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 1376-1384.
    10. Narayan, Paresh Kumar & Narayan, Seema & Smyth, Russell, 2008. "Are oil shocks permanent or temporary? Panel data evidence from crude oil and NGL production in 60 countries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 919-936, May.
    11. Jesús Clemente & Carmen Marcuello & Antonio Montañés, 2008. "Pharmaceutical expenditure, total health‐care expenditure and GDP," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(10), pages 1187-1206, October.
    12. repec:wsr:wpaper:y:2009:i:029 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    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:bla:manchs:v:69:y:2001:i:s1:p:42-56. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/semanuk.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.