TESTING THE PRODUCTIVITY BIAS HYPOTHESIS FOR BRAZIL

Year 2019, Volume: 10 Issue: 1, 69 - 72, 30.12.2019

Gulfer Vural

Abstract

Purpose- Productivity Bias Hypothesis (Balassa-Samuelson hypothesis) implies that currency appreciates in a relatively more productive country. The focus of this study is to test productivity bias hypothesis for Brazil by employing time series data over the period 1980-2018. Methodology- Time series data is analyzed by Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) method of cointegration. Findings-Stationarity of the variables are supported by Augmented Dickey Fuller (ADF) and Phillips Perron (PP) tests. F bounds test and error correction model suggest that variables are cointegrated. Conclusion- Empirical analysis does not support the evidence in favor of productivity bias hypothesis for Brazil over the selected period.

Keywords

Productivity bias hypothesis, Brazil

References

• Asea, P. K., Mendoza, E. G. (1994). Balassa-Samuelson model: An overview. Review of International Economics, vol. 2, no. 3,p. 191–200.
• Apergis, N. (2013), The domestic Balassa–Samuelson effect of inflation for the Greek economy. Applied Economics, vol. 45,no. 23, p. 3288-3294.
• Bahmani-Oskooee, M.O., Nasir, A. B. M. (2001). Panel data and productivity bias hypothesis. Economic Development and Cultural Change,vol. 49, p. 393–402.
• Bahmani-Oskooee, M., Nasir, A.B.M. (2005), Productivity bias hypothesis andthe purchasing power parity: A review article. Journal of Economic Surveys, vol.19, no.4, p. 671-696.
• Balassa, B. (1964). The Purchasing-Power-Parity Doctrine: AReappraisal. Journal of Political Economy,vol. 72, no. 6, 584-596.
• Bahmani-Oskooee, M. , Nasir, A.B.M. (2004), ARDL approach to test the productivity bias hypothesis. Review of Development Economics, vol. 8, no. 3, p. 483-488.
• Bergstrand, J. H. (1991). Structural determinants of real exchange rates and national price levels: Some empirical evidence. American Economic Review, vol. 81, p. 325–334.
• Bergstrand, J.H.(1992).Realexchange rates,national pricelevels, and the peach dividend. American Economic Review, vol. 82, p. 56–61.
• Brown, R.L., Durbin, J., Evans, J.M. (1975), Techniques for testing the constancy of regression relations over time. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, vol. 37, no. 1, p. 149-163.
• Canzoneri, M. B., Cumby, R. E. , Diba, B. (1999). Relative labour productivity and the real exchange rate in the long run: evidence for a panel of OECD countries.Journal of International Economics vol. 47, p. 245–266.
• Cardi, O., Restour, R. (2015), Imperfect mobility of labor across sectors: a reappraisal of the Balassa–Samuelson effect. Journal of International Economics, vol. 97, no. 2, p. 249-265.
• Chowdhury, K. (2012), The real exchange rate and the Balassa–Samuelson hypothesis in SAARC countries: an appraisal. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 52-73.
• Clague, C. K. (1986), Determinants of national price level: Some empirical results.The Review of Economics and Statistics vol.68, no. 2, p. 320–323.
• De Gregorio, J., Giovannini, A., Wolf, H. C. (1994). International evidence on tradables and nontradables inflation. European Economic Review, vol. 38, p. 1225–1244.
• Dickey, D. A., Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 74, no. 366a, p. 427–431.
• Egert, B. (2002), Does the productivity-bias hypothesis hold in the transition countries: evidence from five CEE economies in the 1990s. Eastern European Economies, vol. 40, no. 2, p. 5-37.
• Halıcıoglu, F., Ketenci N. (2018). Testing the Productivity Bias Hypothesis in Middle East Countries. Journal of Economic Studies, vol. 45, no.5, p.922-931.
• Hsieh, D.A. (1982), The determination of the real exchange rate: the productivityapproach.Journal of International Economics, vol.12, p.355-362.
• Irandoust, M. (2017), Symmetry, proportionality and productivity bias hypothesis: evidence from panel-VAR models. Economic Change and Restructuring, vol. 50, no. 1, p. 79-93.
• Kravis, I. B., Lipsey, R. E. (1983). Toward and explanation of National price levels. Princeton Studies in International Finance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, International Finance Section.
• Officer, L. H. (1976). The productivity bias in purchasing power parity: An econometric investigation. International Monetary Fund Staff Papers vol.23, p. 545–579.
• Pesaran, H.M., Shin, Y. , Smith, J.R. (2001), Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, vol. 16, no. 3, p. 289-326.
• Phillips, P. C., Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, vol. 75, no. 2, p.335–346. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/75.2.335
• Samuelson, P. (1964). Theoretical Notes on Trade Problems. Review of Economics and Statistics,vol.46, p. 145−154.
• Strauss, J. (1999). Productivity differentials, the relative price of non – tradables and real exchange rates. Journal of International Money and Finance, vol. 18, p. 383–409.
• Rogoff, K. (1992),Traded goods consumption smoothing and the random walk behavior of the real exchange rates. Bank of Japan Monetary and Economic Studies, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 1-29.