SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Balkan Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 16

An Analysis on the Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in ASEAN Countries

ASEAN Ülkelerinde Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi Hipotezinin Geçerliliğine İlişkin Bir Analiz

Durmuş Çağrı YILDIRIM
Seda YILDIRIM
Selen ÇOLTU
Pages
179–186
Publication Date
2019-07-31
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)

According to the results of the Panel LM test which takes into account the structural breaks, it was found that the hypothesis of purchasing power parity is valid for ASEAN countries.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is to test the validity of the purchasing power parity hypothesis with the help of panel unit root tests taking into account the cross-sectional dependence as well as structural breaks for ASEAN (Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines, Singapore, Brunei, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia).
📊
Key Findings & Data:For this purpose, monthly data for the period 1995: 01-2017: 05 was used.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the results of the Panel LM test which takes into account the structural breaks, it was found that the hypothesis of purchasing power parity is valid for ASEAN countries.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi · Reel Döviz Kuru · Birinci Nesil Panel Birim Kök Testi

Abstract

The aim of this study is to test the validity of the purchasing power parity hypothesis with the help of panel unit root tests taking into account the cross-sectional dependence as well as structural breaks for ASEAN (Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines, Singapore, Brunei, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia). For this purpose, monthly data for the period 1995: 01-2017: 05 was used. According to the results of the Panel LM test which takes into account the structural breaks, it was found that the hypothesis of purchasing power parity is valid for ASEAN countries.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, satın alma gücü paritesi hipotezinin geçerliliğini ASEAN (Endonezya, Malezya, Tayland, Filipinler, Singapur, Brunei, Vietnam, Laos, Kamboçya) ülkeleri için yatay kesit bağımlılığı yanı sıra yapısal kırılmaları göz önüne alan panel birim kök testleri yardımı ile test etmektir. Bu amaçla 1995:01-2017:05 arası döneme ait aylık verilerden yararlanılmıştır. Yapısal kırılmaları göz önüne alan Panel LM test sonuçlarına göre ASEAN ülkeleri için satın alma gücü paritesi hipotezinin geçerli olduğuna ilişkin bulgulara ulaşılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

YILDIRIM, D. Ç., YILDIRIM, S., ÇOLTU, S. (2019). An Analysis on the Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in ASEAN Countries. Balkan Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 16, 179–186. https://ajindex.com/articles/739701

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Al-Gasaymeh, A., & Kasem, J. (2015). Strong and Weak Form of Purchasing Power Parity: The Case of Jordan and its Major Trading Partners. Journal of International Business and Economics, 3(1), 93-108.
  2. Alper, E A. (2015). Testing The Validity of Purchasing Power Parity For BRICS Countries Using Non-Linear Unit Root Test. Journal of Academic Researches and Studies, 7(12), 90-99.
  3. Baharumshah, A. Z., Tze-Haw, C., & Fountas, S. (2008). Re-examining purchasing power parity for East-Asian currencies: 1976–2002. Applied Financial Economics, 18(1), 75-85.
  4. Bozoklu, Ş., & Yılancı, V. (2010). Reel döviz kurlarının durağanlığı: E7 ülkeleri için ampirik bir inceleme. Maliye Dergisi, 158, 587-606.
  5. Çağlayan, E., & Şak, N. (2009). OECD Ülkelerinde Satınalma Gücü Paritesi: Panel Eşbütünleme Yaklaşımı. Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 26(1), 483-500.
  6. Chang, T., Lee, C. H., & Liu, W. C. (2012). Nonlinear adjustment to purchasing power parity for ASEAN countries. Japan and the World Economy, 24(4), 325-331.
  7. Choi, I. (2001). Unit root tests for panel data. Journal of international money and Finance, 20(2), 249-272.
  8. Choji, N. M., & Manga, E. (2017). Purchasing Power Parity Theory using Panel Data Approach. International Journal of Recent Research in Mathematics Computer Science and Information Technology, 4(1), 63-66.
  9. Drine, I., & Rault, C. (2008). Purchasing Power Parity for Developing and Developed Countries. What Can We Learn From Non‐Stationary Panel Data Models?. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22(4), 752-773.
  10. Elmi, Z. M., & Ranjbar, O. (2010). Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis in OIC Countries: Evidence from Panel Unit Root Tests with Heterogeneous Structural Breaks. Iranian Economic Review, 15(27), 1-12.
  11. Erlat, H. (2003). The nature of persistence in Turkish real exchange rates. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 39(2), 70-97.
  12. Güloğlu, B., Ispira, S., & Okat, D. (2011). Testing the validity of quasi PPP hypothesis: evidence from a recent panel unit root test with structural breaks. Applied Economics Letters, 18(18), 1817-1822.
  13. Im, K. S., Lee, J., & Tieslau, M. (2005). Panel LM unit‐root tests with level shifts. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 67(3), 393-419.
  14. Im, K., Pesaran, M. H., & Shin, Y. (1997). Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels. University of Cambridge. Jayaraman, T. K., & Choong, C. K. (2013). Purchasing power parity theory and its validity in Pacific Island countries. Fiji National University, College of Business, Ho