Pairwise tests of purchasing power parity

Given nominal exchange rates and price data on N + 1 countries indexed by i = 0,1,2,…, N, the standard procedure for testing purchasing power parity (PPP) is to apply unit root or stationarity tests to N real exchange rates all measured relative to a base country, 0, often taken to be the U.S. Such a procedure is sensitive to the choice of base country, ignores the information in all the other cross-rates and is subject to a high degree of cross-section dependence which has adverse effects on estimation and inference. In this article, we conduct a variety of unit root tests on all possible N(N + 1)/2 real rates between pairs of the N + 1 countries and estimate the proportion of the pairs that are stationary. This proportion can be consistently estimated even in the presence of cross-section dependence. We estimate this proportion using quarterly data on the real exchange rate for 50 countries over the period 1957-2001. The main substantive conclusion is that to reject the null of no adjustment to PPP requires sufficiently large disequilibria to move the real rate out of the band of inaction set by trade costs. In such cases, one can reject the null of no adjustment to PPP up to 90% of the time as compared to around 40% in the whole sample using a linear alternative and almost 60% using a nonlinear alternative

Policy volatility and growth

The paper aims to examine how fiscal and monetary volatility might affect the balanced economic growth rate using a standard monetary growth model characterized by nominal wage rigidity and productive public spending. The model shows that any type of shock — monetary or fiscal — can generate either a negative or positive relationship between short-run volatility and long-run growth, critically de- pending on the size of government and the elasticity of output with respect to labor/ capital. In particular, given the labor income share, it shows that excessive government spending may cause the impact of fiscal volatility on long-run growth to turn from positive to negative. In addition, a rise in the volatility of the monetary shock is capable of generating either an increase or decrease in the mean of growth. With the range of the labor share values in reality, the model produces results consistent with the fact that the relationship between volatility and growth is generally found empirically to be more negative in developing than in developed countries. The model can be seen as a further explanation for the ambiguous empirical evidence in the existing literature.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Job Creation and Trade in Manufactures: Industry-Level Analysis Across Countries

This paper examines industry-level responses of manufacturing employment in the context of globalization using a large sample of developed, developing, and transition economies. We find that developing countries need atypically high rates of value-added growth (about 10 %) to increase manufacturing employment appreciably (about 4 %). The employment benefits of export orientation are also modest even in “comparative advantage” industries of developing countries. However, diversifying the export basket contributes significantly to employment growth, particularly in the medium- and high-technology industries. Import competition does not undermine employment growth in low-technology industries of developing countries while it displaces jobs in the same industries in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and transition economies. For developing countries, import-induced job losses are higher in the more capital-intensive medium-technology industries. Jobs in high-technology industries are less sensitive to imports with positive relationships observed in the OECD. Investment also complements job creation in low-technology industries of developing countries that have yet to industrialize

Dutch disease-cum-financialization booms and external balance cycles in developing countries

We formally investigate the medium-to-long-run dynamics emerging out of a Dutch disease-cum-financialization phenomenon. We take inspiration from the most recent Colombian development pattern. The “pure” Dutch disease first causes deindustrialization by permanently appreciating the economy’s exchange rate in the long run. Financialization, i.e. booming capital inflows taking place in a climate of natural resource-led financial over-optimism, causes medium-run exchange rate volatility and macroeconomic instability. This jeopardizes manufacturing development even further by raising macroeconomic uncertainty. We advise the adoption of capital controls and a developmentalist monetary policy to tackle these two distinct but often intertwined phenomena

The macroeconomics of a financial Dutch disease

We describe the medium-run macroeconomic effects and long-run development consequences of a financial Dutch disease that may take place in a small developing country with abundant natural resources. The first move is in financial markets. An initial surge in foreign direct investment targeting natural resources sets in motion a perverse cycle between exchange rate appreciation and mounting short- and medium-term capital flows. Such a spiral easily leads to exchange rate volatility, capital reversals, and sharp macroeconomic instability. In the long run, macroeconomic instability and overdependence on natural resource exports dampen the development of nontraditional tradable goods sectors and curtail labor productivity dynamics. We advise the introduction of constraints to short- and medium-term capital flows to tame exchange rate/capital flows boom-and-bust cycles. We support the implementation of a developmentalist monetary policy targeting competitive nominal and real exchange rates in order to encourage product and export diversification