SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sosyoekonomi / 2020 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 44

Testing the Convergence Hypothesis for OECD Countries: RALS Panel Fourier SURADF Unit Root Test

OECD Ülkelerinde Yakınsama Hipotezinin Geçerliliği: Kalıntılarla Genişletilmiş Panel Fourier SURADF Birim Kök Testi

Veli YILANCI
Esra CANPOLAT GÖKÇE
Pages
395–407
Publication Date
2020-04-19
DOI
—
🏛️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)

We test the validity of stochastic convergence among 18 OECD countries using this suggested new test and find a supportive evidence of convergence for only 7 countries.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The main aim of this study is to improve the SURADF panel unit root test of Breur et al. (2001) by considering structural breaks and the knowledge of non-normal distrubited residuals.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Chang et al. (2012) introduce a new panel unit root test by allowing smooth structural breaks in SURADF test process, in this study, we also take into account of the information of the residuals that are nonnormally distrubited.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:We test the validity of stochastic convergence among 18 OECD countries using this suggested new test and find a supportive evidence of convergence for only 7 countries.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2001 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Panel · Birim Kök · SUR-ADF

Abstract

The main aim of this study is to improve the SURADF panel unit root test of Breur et al. (2001) by considering structural breaks and the knowledge of non-normal distrubited residuals. Chang et al. (2012) introduce a new panel unit root test by allowing smooth structural breaks in SURADF test process, in this study, we also take into account of the information of the residuals that are nonnormally distrubited. We test the validity of stochastic convergence among 18 OECD countries using this suggested new test and find a supportive evidence of convergence for only 7 countries.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı Breuer vd. (2001) tarafından önerilen SURADF birim kök testini yapısal değişim ve kalıntıların normal dağılmama bilgisini dikkate alan yapıya genişleterek OECD ülkeleri için gelir yakınsamasının geçerliliğini test etmektir. Breuer vd. (2001) tarafından geliştirilen panel SURADF birim kök testi, Chang vd. (2012) tarafından yumuşak kırılmalara izin verecek şekilde genişletilmiştir; bu çalışmada ise bu denklem sistemine Im ve Schmidt (2008) tarafından önerilen kalıntıların normal dağılmama bilgisinin de dâhil edildiği yeni bir test önerilmiştir. Önerilen bu yeni birim kök testi kullanılarak, seçilen OECD ülkeleri için yakınsama hipotezinin geçerliliği sınanmış ve ele alınan 18 ülkenin sadece yedisinde stokastik yakınsamanın geçerli olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

YILANCI, V., GÖKÇE, E. C. (2020). Testing the Convergence Hypothesis for OECD Countries: RALS Panel Fourier SURADF Unit Root Test. Sosyoekonomi, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 44, 395–407. https://ajindex.com/articles/139242

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Barro, R.J. & X. Sala-i Martin (1992), “Convergence”, Journal of Political Economy, 100, 223-251.
  2. Barro, R.J. (1991), “Economiz Growth in a Cross-Section of Countries”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(2), 407-443.
  3. Baumol, W.J. (1986), “Productivity Growth, Convergence and Welfare: What the Long Run Data Show”, American Economic Review, 76, 1072-1085.
  4. Bernard, A.B. & S.N. Durlauf (1996), “Interpreting Tests of the Convergence Hypothesis”, Journal of Econometrics, 71, 161-173.
  5. Breuer, J.B. & R. McNown & M.S. Wallace (2001), “Misleading Inferences from Panel Unit‐Root Tests with an Illustration from Purchasing Power Parity”, Review of International Economics, 9(3), 482-493. Carrion‐i‐Silvestre, L.J. & D. Barrio‐Castro & E. López‐Bazo (2005), “Breaking the panels: an application to the GDP per capita”, The Econometrics Journal, 8(2), 159-175.
  6. Chang, T. & C-H. Lee & P. Chou & S-C. Wang (2012), “Purchasing Power Parity for Transition Countries”, Eastern European Economics, 50(4), 42-59.
  7. De Long, J.B. (1988), “Productivity growth, convergence, and welfare: comment”, The American Economic Review, 78(5), 1138-1154.
  8. Durlauf, S.N. & P.A. Johnson (1995), “Multiple regimes and cross-country growth: Theory and policy implications”, Journal of Political Economy, 98, 1008-1038.
  9. Enders, W. & J. Lee (2012), “The flexible Fourier form and Dickey-Fuller type unit root tests”, Economics Letters, 117(1), 196-199.
  10. Gadea Rivas, M.D. & I. Sanz Villarroya (2017), “Testing the convergence hypothesis for OECD countries: A reappraisal”, Economics: The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, 11(2017-4), 1-22.
  11. Greasley, D. & L. Oxley (1997), Time-series based tests of the convergence hypothesis: Some pozitive results”, Economics Letters, 56, 143-147.
  12. Im, K.S. & M.H. Pesaran & Y. Shin (2003), “Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels”, Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53-74.
  13. Im, K.S. & P. Schmidt (2008), “More efficient estimation under non-normality when higher moments do not depend on the regressors, using residual augmented least squares”, Journal of Econometrics, 144(1), 219-233.
  14. Im, K.S. (1996), Least square approach to non-normal disturbances, (No. 9603), Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge. Lee, C-C. & C-P. Chang (2009), “Stochastic convergence of per capita carbon dioxide emissions and multiple structural breaks in OECD countries”, Economic Modelling, 26, 1375-1381.
  15. Li, Q. & D. Papell (1999), “Convergence of international output time series evidence for 16 OEC