SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sosyoekonomi / 2026 / Cilt: 34 Sayı: 69

Hysteresis in EU Member States: A Comprehensive Analysis Using the Fourier Approach

AB Üyesi Ülkelerde Histerezis: Fourier Yaklaşımıyla Kapsamlı Bir Analiz

Yağmur Sağlam(SİNOP ÜNİVERSİTESİ, BOYABAT İKTİSADİ VE İDARİ BİLİMLER FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0001-6465-0297
Sultan Salur Küçük(SİNOP ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-9314-3526
Pages
289–300
Publication Date
2026-07-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The empirical results indicate strong evidence of inflation hysteresis across most EU countries and selective unemployment hysteresis in specific cases such as Germany, Hungary, and Ireland.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines the persistence of inflation and unemployment in European Union (EU) member states between 1991 and 2023, focusing on hysteresis effects and the applicability of the Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment (NAIRU) framework.
📊
Key Findings & Data:These asymmetries increase the likelihood of long-term macroeconomic imbalances, making the analysis of hysteresis particularly relevant.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The empirical results indicate strong evidence of inflation hysteresis across most EU countries and selective unemployment hysteresis in specific cases such as Germany, Hungary, and Ireland.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2023 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Sürekli Enflasyon · İşsizlik Histerezisi · NAIRU

Abstract

This study examines the persistence of inflation and unemployment in European Union (EU) member states between 1991 and 2023, focusing on hysteresis effects and the applicability of the Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment (NAIRU) framework. The EU represents a unique empirical setting due to the diversity of its national labour markets and fiscal structures within a shared economic space. These asymmetries increase the likelihood of long-term macroeconomic imbalances, making the analysis of hysteresis particularly relevant. The study addresses this issue using nonlinear econometric techniques, specifically the Fourier KPSS test and ECM-based bootstrap cointegration analysis, to detect smooth structural changes and long-run relationships between inflation and unemployment. The empirical results indicate strong evidence of inflation hysteresis across most EU countries and selective unemployment hysteresis in specific cases such as Germany, Hungary, and Ireland. Moreover, a significant long-term cointegration between inflation and unemployment is observed, challenging the conventional assumptions of the Phillips Curve. The study contributes methodologically by integrating advanced testing procedures and empirically by offering a comprehensive, comparative perspective across member states. These findings highlight the need for flexible, country-specific policy strategies to mitigate persistent inflation and labour market rigidities, thereby fostering long-term macroeconomic stability and convergence within the EU.

Özet

Bu çalışma, 1991-2023 yılları arasında Avrupa Birliği (AB) üye ülkelerinde enflasyon ve işsizliğin kalıcılığını ve histerezis etkilerini incelemektedir. Histerezis, ekonomik şokların uzun vadeli etkilerini vurgulayarak, özellikle para ve maliye politikalarının tasarımında geleneksel yaklaşımların ötesine geçilmesi gerektiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Bu bağlamda çalışmada, geleneksel birim kök testlerinin ötesine geçen ve yapısal değişimleri daha esnek bir şekilde yakalayan Fourier KPSS testi ile ECM Bootstrap eşbütünleşme analizi kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular, birçok AB ülkesinde enflasyonun kalıcı olduğunu ve Almanya, Macaristan, İrlanda gibi bazı ülkelerde işsizlikte de histerezis etkisinin belirgin olduğunu göstermektedir. Ayrıca, enflasyon ve işsizlik arasında uzun dönemli bir eşbütünleşme ilişkisinin bulunduğu tespit edilmiştir. Bu durum, geleneksel Phillips Eğrisi yaklaşımını sorgulamakta ve politika yapıcılar açısından ülke bazlı, esnek politika çerçevelerine olan ihtiyacı vurgulamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Sağlam, Y., Küçük, S. S. (2026). Hysteresis in EU Member States: A Comprehensive Analysis Using the Fourier Approach. Sosyoekonomi, Cilt: 34 Sayı: 69, 289–300. https://doi.org/10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2026.03.13

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (31)

  1. Becker, R. et al. (2004), “A general test for time dependence in parameters”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 19(7), 899-906.
  2. Becker, R. et al. (2006), “A stationarity test in the presence of an unknown number of smooth breaks”, Journal of Time Series Analysis, 27(3), 381-409.
  3. Blanchard, O.J. & L.H. Summers (1986), “Hysteresis and the European Unemployment Problem”, in: S. Fischer (ed.), NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1986 Vol. 1 (15-90), MIT Press.
  4. Blanchard, O.J. & L.H. Summers (1987), “Hysteresis in unemployment”, European Economic Review, 31(1-2), 288-295.
  5. Breusch, T.S. & A.R. Pagan (1980), “The Lagrange Multiplier Test and its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics”, The Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239-253.
  6. Caporale, G.M. et al. (2022), “Unemployment persistence in Europe: Evidence from the 27 EU member states”, Heliyon, 8(2), e08898.
  7. Doganer, A. (2022), “Determining Unemployment Hysteresis in European Countries Using Linear and Nonlinear Unit Root Tests: The 1991-2020 Period”, Istanbul Journal of Economics, 72(2), 753-785.
  8. Enders, W. & J. Lee (2012), “A unit root test using a Fourier series to approximate smooth breaks”, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 74(4), 574-599.
  9. Friedman, M. (1968), “The role of monetary policy”, American Economic Review, 58(1), 1-17.
  10. Furlanetto, F. et al. (2021), “Estimating hysteresis effects”, CEPR Discussion Paper No. DP16558.
  11. Gottfries, N. & H. Horn (1987), “Wage formation and the persistence of unemployment”, The Economic Journal, 97, 877-884.
  12. Haltmaier, J. (2012), “Do recessions affect potential output?”, International Finance Discussion Papers, No. 1066.
  13. Jump, R.C. & E. Stockhammer (2018), “New evidence on unemployment hysteresis in the EU”, EUROF18 Euroframe, Conference Sessions, January 12.
  14. Karul, Ç. (2016), “Esnek Fourier fonksiyonlu yeni bir panel birim kök testi önerisi ve OECD örneği”, Master’s Thesis, Denizli: Pamukkale Üniversitesi.
  15. Lee, J. & W. Enders (2004), “Testing for a unit root with a nonlinear Fourier function”, in: Econometric Society 2004 Far Eastern Meetings 457, Econometric Society.
  16. Lindbeck, A. & D. Snower (2001), “Insiders versus outsiders”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(1), 165-188.
  17. Meloni, W.P. et al. (2022), “Inflation and the NAIRU: Assessing the role of long-term unemployment as a cause of hysteresis”, Economic Modelling, 113, 105900.
  18. Mladenović, Z. (2016), “Econometric testing of unemployment hysteresis in selected CEE countries: Lessons for the Serbian economy”, Ekonomika Preduzeća, 64(7-8), 403-413.
  19. Özdemir, O. (2020), “Hysteresis in unemployment: New evidence from 19 Euro area countries”, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Management Inquiries, 4(7), 101-124.
  20. Pesaran, H.M. & T. Yamagata (2008), “Testing slope homogeneity in large panels”, Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50-93.
  21. Pesaran, H.M. (2004), “General diagnostic tests for cross-section dependence in panels”, Cambridge Working Papers in Economics, No. 0435.
  22. Phelps, E.S. (1967), “Phillips curves, expectations of inflation and optimal unemployment over time”, Economica, 34(3), 254-281.
  23. Phillips, A.W. (1958), “The relation between unemployment and the rate of change of money wage rates in the United Kingdom: 1861-1957”, Economica, 25(2), 283-299.
  24. Reichlin, L. & J. Zettelmeyer (2024), “The European Central Bank must adapt to an environment of inflation volatility”, Bruegel Policy Brief,, 02.03.2025.
  25. Rowthorn, R. (1999), “Unemployment, wage bargaining, and capital-labour substitution”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 23(4), 413-425.
  26. Santomero, A.M. & J.J. Seater (1978), “The inflation-unemployment trade-off: A critique of the literature”, Journal of Economic Literature, 16(2), 499-544.
  27. Taylor, J. (1989), “The evolution of ideas in macroeconomics”, The Economic Record, 65(2), 185-189.
  28. Westerlund, J. (2007), “Panel cointegration tests of the Fisher effect”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23(2), 193-233.
  29. World Bank Group (N/A), DataBank, World Bank Development Indicators (WDI),, 02.03.2025.
  30. Reichlin, L. & J. Zettelmeyer (2024), “The European Central Bank must adapt to an environment of inflation volatility”, Bruegel Policy Brief,, 02.03.2025.
  31. World Bank Group (N/A), DataBank, World Bank Development Indicators (WDI),, 02.03.2025.