SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Bankacılar / 2019 / Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 111

Purchasing Power Parity in the Last Century of Turkey

Türkiye’nin Son Yüzyılında Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi

Ufuk CAN
Zeynep CAN
Pages
71–90
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)

Therefore, it is concluded that it is not appropriate for Turkey to use PPP in determining the long-term equilibrium value of the exchange rate and in making Income comparisons with other countries.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purchasing power parity (PPP) is a crucial economic indicator observed carefully by decisionmakers, as it shows the purchasing power of different currencies by taking into consideration the price level differences and allowing comparing the standards of living between countries.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, using a battery of stationarity tests including unit root tests, variance ratio tests and fractional integration models, hypothesis of purchasing power parity for the Dollar/Lira exchange rate is tested with a data set which spans approximately a hundred years in length, covering the period 1923-2018.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Therefore, it is concluded that it is not appropriate for Turkey to use PPP in determining the long-term equilibrium value of the exchange rate and in making Income comparisons with other countries.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Purchasing power parity (PPP) is a crucial economic indicator observed carefully by decisionmakers, as it shows the purchasing power of different currencies by taking into consideration the price level differences and allowing comparing the standards of living between countries. In this study, using a battery of stationarity tests including unit root tests, variance ratio tests and fractional integration models, hypothesis of purchasing power parity for the Dollar/Lira exchange rate is tested with a data set which spans approximately a hundred years in length, covering the period 1923-2018. The econometric results reveal conflicting results regarding the stationarity of the real exchange rate. As a result of the elimination based on the strength of the tests, Turkey's last century cannot be called as a century of PPP century. Therefore, it is concluded that it is not appropriate for Turkey to use PPP in determining the long-term equilibrium value of the exchange rate and in making Income comparisons with other countries.

Özet

Satın alma gücü paritesi (SGP) ülkeler arasındaki fiyat düzeyi farklılıklarını gözeterek farklı para birimlerinin satın alma güçlerini göstermesi ve ülkeler arasındaki yaşam standartlarını karşılaştırmaya olanak sağlaması nedeniyle karar vericiler tarafından dikkatle gözlemlenen önemli bir ekonomik göstergedir. Bu çalışmada birim kök testleri, varyans oranı testleri ile kesirli bütünleşme modellerinden oluşan bir dizi durağanlık testi kullanılarak, 1923-2018 dönemini kapsayan yaklaşık 100 yıllık uzunluğa sahip veri seti ile Dolar/Lira döviz kuru için satın alma gücü paritesi hipotezi test edilmektedir. Ekonometrik bulgular reel döviz kurunun durağanlığı ile ilgili çelişkili sonuçlara işaret etmektedir. Testlerin gücüne göre yapılan eleme sonucunda, Türkiye’nin son yüzyılının SGP yüzyılı olarak adlandırılamayacağı belirlenmektedir. Bu nedenle, günümüzde Türkiye için gerek döviz kurunun uzun dönemli denge değerinin tespit edilmesinde gerekse diğer ülkelerle gelir kıyaslaması yapılmasında SGP’nin kullanılmasının uygun olmayacağı sonucuna ulaşılmaktadır. Bu çalışmada belirtilen görüşler yazarına ait olup, T.C. Merkez Bankası’nın görüşlerini yansıtmamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

CAN, U., CAN, Z. (2019). Purchasing Power Parity in the Last Century of Turkey. Bankacılar, Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 111, 71–90. https://ajindex.com/articles/142908

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Abuaf, N. ve Jorion, P. (1990). Purchasing Power Parity in the Long Run. Journal of Finance, 45(1),157–174.
  2. Adler, M. ve Lehmann, B. (1983). Deviations from Purchasing Power Parity in the Long-Run. Journal of Finance, 38(5), 1471–1487.
  3. Alquist, R. ve Chinn, M.D. (2002). Productivity and the Euro-Dollar Exchange Rate Puzzle. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper, No: 8824. Amara, J. ve Murphy, C. (2011). Testing for Stationarity Using Covariates: An Application to Purchasing Power Parity. Applied Economics Letters, 18(13), 1295-1301.
  4. Ardeni, P.G. (1989). Does the Law of One Price Really Hold for Commodity Prices? American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 71(3): 661–669.
  5. Ardeni, P.G. ve Lubian, D. (1991). Is There Trend Reversion in Purchasing Power Parity?. European Economic Review, 35(5): 1035–1055. Arltová, M. ve Fedorová, D. (2016). Selection of Unit Root Test on the Basis of Length of the Time Series and Value of AR (1) Parameter. Statistika, 96(3), 3. Bahmani-Oskooee, M. ve Nasir, A.B.M. (2001). Panel Data and Productivity Bias Hypothesis. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 49(2), 395–402.
  6. Bahmani-Oskooee, M., Kutan, A. ve Zhou, S. (2007). A Century of Purchasing Power Parity: Further Evidence. Economics Bulletin, 6(31), 1–9.
  7. Bahmani-Oskooee, M., Kutan, A. ve Zhou, S. (2009). A Century of PPP: Supportive Results from Nonlinear Unit Root Tests. Global Business and Economic Review, 11(1), 19–27.
  8. Balassa, B. (1964). The Purchasing Power Parity Doctrine: A Reappraisal. Journal of Political Economy, 72(6): 584–596.
  9. Banerjee, A. ve Urga, G. (2005).
  10. Modelling Structural Breaks, Long Memory and Stock Market Volatility: An Overview. Journal of Econometrics, 129(1), 1–34.
  11. Bartolini, L. (1995). Purchasing Power Parity Measures of Competitiveness. Finance and Development, 32(3), 46–49.
  12. Baum, C.F., Barkoulas, J.T. ve Çağlayan, M. (1999). Long Memory or Structural Breaks: Can Either Explain Nonstationary Real Exchange Rates under the Current Float?. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 9(4), 359–376.
  13. Baum, C.F., Barkoulas, J.T. ve Çağlayan, M. (2001). Nonlinear Adjustment to Purchasing Power Parity in the Post-Bretton Woods Era. Journal of International Money and Finance, 20(3), 379– 399. Bhagwati, J.N. (1984). Why Are Services Cheaper in Poor Countries?. Economic Journal, 94(374), 279–286.
  14. Bleaney, M. (1992). Does Long-Run Purchasing Power Parity Hold within the European Monetary System?. Journal