Araştırma Makalesi


DOI :10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001   IUP :10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001    Tam Metin (PDF)

Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi Hipotezi Geçerliliğinin Fourier Birim Kök Testleri ile İncelenmesi: Türkiye Örneği



Satın alma gücü paritesi, literatürde en sık tartışılan ekonomik teorilerden biridir. Diğer taraftan, satın alma gücü paritesinin geçerliliği, uluslararası karşılaştırmada kullanılan ortak bir döviz kuru olması açısından önemlidir. Bu çalışmada Türkiye için satın alma gücü paritesinin geçerliliği 1992:01-2018:12 dönemi aylık verileri kullanılarak Fourier birim kök testleri yardımıyla incelenmiştir. Çalışmada karşılaştırma yapılabilmesi amacıyla literatüre son zamanlarda kazandırılan iki farklı birim kök testi kullanılmıştır. Çalışmanın sonuçları Türkiye için satın alma gücü paritesi hipotezinin geçerli olduğunu göstermektedir. Buna göre Türkiye’nin incelenen dönemde reel döviz kurları durağandır ve reel döviz kurlarına gelen şoklar geçicidir. Çalışmadan elde edilen genel sonuca göre Türkiye için SAGP’nin para politikası kararlarında etkin rol oynaması beklenmektedir.

DOI :10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001   IUP :10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001    Tam Metin (PDF)

Investigation of the Validity of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis with Fourier Unit Root Tests: The Case of Turkey



Purchasing power parity is one of the most frequently discussed economic theories in the literature. Furthermore, the validity of purchasing power parity is important in terms of being a common exchange rate used in international comparison. In this study, the validity of purchasing power parity was examined using Fourier unit root tests for Turkey for the period 1992:01-2018:12. In order to make a comparison, two different recently developed unit root tests were used in the study. The results show that the purchasing power parity hypothesis is valid for Turkey. Accordingly, the real exchange rate is stationary and the shocks on the real exchange rate is temporary in this period. According to overall results, it is expected that PPP play an active role in monetary policy decisions.


GENİŞLETİLMİŞ ÖZET


Purchasing power parity (PPP), which is one of the subjects of interest in international finance and economy, is defined as a rate of change that equalizes the purchasing power of different currencies by eliminating price level differences between countries (TURKSTAT, 2008). In other words, the theory of purchasing power parity states that the nominal exchange rate between the two currencies is determined by the purchasing power of each country’s currency. This means that the exchange rate between the two countries must be equal to a fixed level of goods and services basket price of the two currencies. While economists generally doubt the validity of PPP in the short term, they agree that it is necessary to investigate whether PPP is valid in the long term because price differences between countries are not sustainable in the long term (Acaravcı and Öztürk, 2010). Chortareas and Kapetanios (2009) evaluated the importance of purchasing power parity in terms of both traditional and new approaches to open economy macroeconomics for policy purposes. According to the traditional approach, the validity of PPP is valuable information for policy-makers who want to evaluate the effects of devaluation since the effects of devaluation under PPP on competitiveness will be eliminated in the long term. In open economies with new approaches, PPP is a necessary condition for equalizing market integrity and marginal utility. Empirical studies use cointegration tests, variance ratio tests, and quantitative regressions for nominal exchange rates and prices, and unit root tests for real exchange rates, to assess the validity of PPP. (Chortareas and Kapetanios, 2009; 391). The estimation of PPP exchange rates is very important for practical purposes. These objectives are; (i) determining the degree of deviation from the nominal exchange rate, ie determining whether the exchange rate is low or not. (ii) making appropriate policy decisions; (iii) adjusting currency parities; (iv) an international comparison of national income levels; and (v) a comparison between domestic price and foreign price (Sarno and Taylor, 2002). Whether PPP is valid or not should be examined. Where PPP is not valid, PPP cannot be used as a criterion for international income level comparison and estimation of real exchange rates, and where applicable, it can be used as a criterion for the level of development comparisons and the reliability of all economic decisions (Güriş et al. 2016). . In this study, the validity of purchasing power parity was examined using Fourier unit root tests for Turkey for the period 1992:01-2018:12. In order to make a comparison, two different recently developed unit root tests were used in the study. The study is expected to contribute to the current literature in terms of the method used. The studies for Turkey is as follows; Gurbuz and Hasgur (1997), Telatar and Kazdagli (1998), Erlat (2003), Yazgan (2003), Alba and Park (2005), Aslan and Kanbur (2007), Ozdemir (2008), Kalyoncu (2009), Lightning and Lightning (2012), Sener et al. (2015), Güriş et al. (2016), Rock and Steel (2018). In cases where series do not have a linear structure, nonlinear unit root tests give more powerful results than linear unit root tests. In the literature, there are unit root tests examining stationarity structures of nonlinear series. In this study, Güris (2018) and Ranjbar et al. (2018) non-linear Fourier unit root tests were used. Firstly, the linearity of the calculated real exchange rate series was examined and it was found that it does not have a linear structure. In the second part of the empirical analysis, the stationarity of the series was examined with the help of Fourier unit root tests. The obtained results indicate that Turkey has a stationary structure in the real exchange rate series. Accordingly, it is seen that the PPP hypothesis is valid for Turkey. In other words, the analyzed period, the real exchange rate being stationary and Turkey coming to the real exchange rate shocks are temporary. The validity of PPP means that the prices of goods expressed in the same currency are the same anywhere in the world. Therefore, PPP is expected to play an active role in the monetary policy decision for Turkey.


PDF Görünüm

Referanslar

  • Acaravci, A., & Ozturk, I. (2010). Testing purchasing power parity in transition countries: evidence from structural breaks. Amfiteatru Economic Journal, 12(27), 190–198. Alba, J. D., & Park, D. (2005). An empirical investigation of purchasing power parity (PPP) for Turkey. Journal of Policy Modeling, 27(8), 989–1000. google scholar
  • Arize, A. C., Malindretos, J., & Nam, K. (2010). Cointegration, dynamic structure, and the validity of purchasing power parity in African countries. International Review of Economics & Finance, 19(4), 755-768. google scholar
  • Aslan, N.ve Kanbur, N. (2007). Türkiye’de 1980 Sonrası satın alma gücü paritesi yaklaşımı. Marmara Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 23(2), 9–43. google scholar
  • Aydın, M. (2017). Exaination of the validity of purchasing power parity (PPP) with fractured fourier unit root tests: The case of fragile fıve countries. Journal of Applied Research in Finance and Economics, 3(4), 18–28. google scholar
  • Bahmani‐Oskooee, M., & Hegerty, S. W. (2009). Purchasing power parıty in less‐developed and transition economies: A revıew paper. Journal of Economic Surveys, 23(4), 617–658. google scholar
  • Boršic, D., & Beko, J. (2006). Testing the Theory of purchasing power parity for Slovenia and Hungary. Eastern European Economies, 44(4), 82–96. google scholar
  • Carvalho, M., & Júlio, P. (2012). Digging out the PPP hypothesis: An integrated empirical coverage. Empirical Economics, 42(3), 713–744. google scholar
  • Chang, T., Liu, W. C., Tzeng, H. W., & Yu, C. P. (2010). Purchasing power parity for G-7 countries: Panel SURADF tests. Applied Economics Letters, 17(12), 1223–1228. Chortareas, G., & Kapetanios, G. (2009). Getting PPP Right: Identifying mean- reverting real exchange rates in Panels. Journal of Banking & Finance, 33, 390–404. google scholar
  • Christev, A., & Noorbakhsh, A. (2000). Long-run purchasing power parity, prices and exchange rates in transition: The case of six Central and East European countries. Global Finance Journal, 11(1-2), 87–108. google scholar
  • Christidou, M., & Panagiotidis, T. (2010). Purchasing power parity and the European single currency: Some new evidence. Economic Modelling, 27(5), 1116–1123. google scholar
  • Collin C., Pippenger, J., and Steigerwald, D. (1996). Testing for absolute purchasing power parity. Journal of International Money and Finance, 15(5), 783–796. google scholar
  • Cuestas, J. C., & Regis, P. J. (2013). Purchasing power parity in OECD countries: Nonlinear unit root tests revisited. Economic Modelling, 32, 343-346. google scholar
  • Doğanlar, M., Bal, H., & Özmen, M. (2009). Testing long-run validity of purchasing power parity for selected emerging market economies. Applied Economics Letters, 16(14), 1443–1448. google scholar
  • Emirmahmutoglu, F., & Omay, T. (2014). Reexamining the PPP hypothesis: A nonlinear asymmetric heterogeneous panel unit root test. Economic Modelling, 40, 184–190. google scholar
  • Erlat, H. (2003). The Nature of persistence in Turkish real exchange rates. Emerging Markets Finance& Trade, 39(2), 70–97. google scholar
  • Gürbüz, H. ve Hasgür, İ. (1997). Satın alma gücü paritesi örneğinin mevsimsel verilere (1970:01- 1994:04) analizi üzerine bir uygulama: eşbütünleşme. SDÜ İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(2), 171–196. google scholar
  • Güriş, B., Tıraşoğlu, B. Y., & Tıraşoğlu, M. (2016). Türkiye’de satın alma gücü paritesi geçerli mi? Doğrusal olmayan Birim Kök Testleri. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 5(4), 30–42. google scholar
  • Güriş, B. (2018). A new nonlinear unit root test with Fourier function. Communications in StatisticsSimulation and Computation, 1–7. google scholar
  • Gyamfi, E. N., & Mohammed, A. A. (2017). Validity of purchasing power parity in BRICS under a DFA Approach. Acta Universitatis Danubius: Oeconomica, 13(1), 17–28. google scholar
  • Harvey, D.I., Leybourne, S.J., & Xiao, B. (2008). A Powerful Test for Linearity When the Order of Integration is Unknown. Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, 12(3). google scholar
  • He, H., & Chang, T. (2013). Purchasing power parity in transition countries: Sequential panel selection method. Economic Modelling, 35, 604–609. google scholar
  • He, H., Chou, M. C., & Chang, T. (2014). Purchasing power parity for 15 Latin American countries: Panel SURKSS test with a Fourier function. Economic Modelling, 36, 37–43. google scholar
  • Huang, C. H., & Yang, C. Y. (2015). European exchange rate regimes and purchasing power parity: An empirical study on eleven eurozone countries. International Review of Economics & Finance, 35, 100–109. google scholar
  • Kalyoncu, H. (2009). New evidence of the validity of purchasing power parity from Turkey. Applied Economics Letters, 16(1), 63–67. Kaya, H. ve Çelik, İ. (2018) Türkiye’de satın alma gücü paritesi hipotezinin geçerliliği: Uzun hafıza testlerinden kanıtlar. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(2), 351–365. Koedijk, K. G., Tims, B., & Van Dijk, M. A. (2004). Purchasing power parity and the Euro area. Journal of International Money and Finance, 23(7-8), 1081–1107. Kruse, R. (2011). A new unit root test against ESTAR based on a class of modified statistics. Statistical Papers, 52(1), 71–85. DOI: 10.1007/s00362-009-0204-1 google scholar
  • Lopez, C., & Papell, D. H. (2007). Convergence to purchasing power parity at the commencement of the euro. Review of International Economics, 15(1), 1–16. google scholar
  • Majumder, A., Ray, R., & Sinha, K. (2011). Estimating Intra Country ve Cross Country Purchasing Power Parities from Household Expenditure Data Using Single Equation ve Complete Demve Systems Approach: India ve Vietnam. Monash University Department of Economics. Discussion Paper No. 34/11. google scholar
  • Ozdemir, Z. A. (2008). The purchasing power parity hypothesis in Turkey: Evidence from nonlinear STAR error correction models. Applied Economics Letters, 15(4), 307–311. google scholar
  • Payne, J., Lee, J., & Hofler, R. (2005). Purchasing power parity: Evidence from a transition economy. Journal of Policy Modeling, 27(6), 665-672. google scholar
  • Peng, H., Liu, Z., & Chang, T. (2017). Revisiting purchasing power parity in BRICS countries using more powerful quantile unit-root tests with stationary covariates. Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 46(20). DOI: 10051-10057.7–1591. google scholar
  • Ranjbar, O., Chang, T., Elmi, Z. M., & Lee, C. C. (2018). A new unit root test against asymmetric ESTAR nonlinearity with Smooth Breaks. Iranian Economic Review, 22(1), 51–62. google scholar
  • Sarno, L., & Taylor, M. P. (2002). Purchasing Power Parity and the Real Exchange Rate, IMF Staff Papers, 49(1), 65–105. google scholar
  • Sollis, R. (2009). A Simple Unit Root Test against Asymmetric STAR Nonlinearity with an Application to Real Exchange Rates in Nordic Countries. Economic Modelling, 26, 118–125. google scholar
  • Su, J., Cheung, A.W., & Roca, E. (2014). Does purchasing power parity hold? New evidence from wild-bootstrapped nonlinear unit root tests in thepresence of heteroskedasticity. Econ. Model. 36, 161–171. google scholar
  • Şener, S., Yılancı, V. ve Canpolat, E. (2015). Satın alma gücü paritesi ve varyaslarının Türkiye için sınanması. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 11(25), 53–63. google scholar
  • Telatar, E., & Kazdagli, H. (1998). Re-examine the long-run purchasing power parity hypothesis for a high inflation country: the case of Turkey 1980–93. Applied Economics Letters, 5(1), 51-53. google scholar
  • Tiwari, A. K., & Shahbaz, M. (2014) Revisiting purchasing power parity for ındia using threshold cointegration and nonlinear unit root test. Econ Change Restruct, 47, 117–133. google scholar
  • TUİK (2008). Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi, Sorularla Resmi İstatistikler Dizisi-4. Ankara google scholar
  • Wu, Y. H., & Lin, E. S. (2011). Does purchasing power parity hold following the launch of the euro? Evidence from the panel unit root test. Applied Economics Letters, 18(2), 167–172. google scholar
  • Yazgan, M. E. (2003). The purchasing power parity hypothesis for a high inflation country: A reexamination of the case of Turkey. Applied Economics Letters, 10(3), 143–147. google scholar
  • Yıldırım, S. ve Yıldırım, Z. (2012). Reel efektif döviz kuru üzerine kırılmalı Birim Kök Testleri ile Türkiye’nin satın alma gücü paritesi hipotezinin geçerliliğinin sınanması. Marmara Üniversitesi İ.İ.B. Dergisi, 33(2), 221–238. google scholar

Atıflar

Biçimlendirilmiş bir atıfı kopyalayıp yapıştırın veya seçtiğiniz biçimde dışa aktarmak için seçeneklerden birini kullanın


DIŞA AKTAR



APA

(2019). Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi Hipotezi Geçerliliğinin Fourier Birim Kök Testleri ile İncelenmesi: Türkiye Örneği. Ekoist: Journal of Econometrics and Statistics, 0(30), 35-48. https://doi.org/10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001


AMA

. Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi Hipotezi Geçerliliğinin Fourier Birim Kök Testleri ile İncelenmesi: Türkiye Örneği. Ekoist: Journal of Econometrics and Statistics. 2019;0(30):35-48. https://doi.org/10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001


ABNT

Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi Hipotezi Geçerliliğinin Fourier Birim Kök Testleri ile İncelenmesi: Türkiye Örneği. Ekoist: Journal of Econometrics and Statistics, [Publisher Location], v. 0, n. 30, p. 35-48, 2019.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

. 2019. “Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi Hipotezi Geçerliliğinin Fourier Birim Kök Testleri ile İncelenmesi: Türkiye Örneği.” Ekoist: Journal of Econometrics and Statistics 0, no. 30: 35-48. https://doi.org/10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001


Chicago: Humanities Style

. Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi Hipotezi Geçerliliğinin Fourier Birim Kök Testleri ile İncelenmesi: Türkiye Örneği.” Ekoist: Journal of Econometrics and Statistics 0, no. 30 (May. 2021): 35-48. https://doi.org/10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001


Harvard: Australian Style

2019, 'Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi Hipotezi Geçerliliğinin Fourier Birim Kök Testleri ile İncelenmesi: Türkiye Örneği', Ekoist: Journal of Econometrics and Statistics, vol. 0, no. 30, pp. 35-48, viewed 15 May. 2021, https://doi.org/10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001


Harvard: Author-Date Style

(2019) ‘Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi Hipotezi Geçerliliğinin Fourier Birim Kök Testleri ile İncelenmesi: Türkiye Örneği’, Ekoist: Journal of Econometrics and Statistics, 0(30), pp. 35-48. https://doi.org/10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001 (15 May. 2021).


MLA

. Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi Hipotezi Geçerliliğinin Fourier Birim Kök Testleri ile İncelenmesi: Türkiye Örneği.” Ekoist: Journal of Econometrics and Statistics, vol. 0, no. 30, 2019, pp. 35-48. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001


Vancouver

. Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi Hipotezi Geçerliliğinin Fourier Birim Kök Testleri ile İncelenmesi: Türkiye Örneği. Ekoist: Journal of Econometrics and Statistics [Internet]. 15 May. 2021 [cited 15 May. 2021];0(30):35-48. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001 doi: 10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001


ISNAD

. Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi Hipotezi Geçerliliğinin Fourier Birim Kök Testleri ile İncelenmesi: Türkiye Örneği”. Ekoist: Journal of Econometrics and Statistics 0/30 (May. 2021): 35-48. https://doi.org/10.26650/ekoist.2018.30.0001



ZAMAN ÇİZELGESİ


Gönderim24.06.2019
Kabul04.07.2019

LİSANS


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


PAYLAŞ




İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları, uluslararası yayıncılık standartları ve etiğine uygun olarak, yüksek kalitede bilimsel dergi ve kitapların yayınlanmasıyla giderek artan bilimsel bilginin yayılmasına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları açık erişimli, ticari olmayan, bilimsel yayıncılığı takip etmektedir.