270 likes | 383 Views
ACADEMY OF ECONOMIC STUDIES DOCTORAL SCHOOL OF FINANCE AND BANKING. Dissertation Paper. The Equilibrium Real Exchange Rate (An Empirical Analysis on the USD/ROL exchange rate)
E N D
ACADEMY OF ECONOMIC STUDIES DOCTORAL SCHOOL OF FINANCE AND BANKING • Dissertation Paper The Equilibrium Real Exchange Rate (An Empirical Analysis on the USD/ROL exchange rate) Student: Cristina Maria Iacob Supervisor: Professor Moisă Altăr
CONTENTS • Literature review • The concept of Equilibrium Real Exchange Rate (ERER) and its importance • The model • The data • Estimating the ERER and the degree of misalignment • Concluding remarks
LITERATURE REVIEW • The FEER approach • Williamson (1985, 1994): the ERER is calibrated at a • level consistent with both internal and external balance. • The BEER approach • P.Clark and R.MacDonald (1997,1998,2001) • J.Baffes, I.A.Elbadawi, S.A.O’Connell (1997) • T.Feyzioglu (1997) • L.Halpern and C.Wyplosz (1996,1998,2001) • B.Egert (2001), B.Y. Kim and I.Korhonen (2002) • a two-step procedure: a simple behavioral ERER relationship is estimated and then this is used to determine the misalignment.
THE CONCEPT OF ERER • The PPP Theory: the exchange rate should be driven only by the level and movement of the prices in the two countries; • -the wrong rule to follow by transition economies (lack of historical data; non-conventional factors ). • The Equilibrium Real Exchange Rate is the level of the real exchange rate when internal (equilibrium in the non-tradable market) and external (sustainability of long-term capital flows) balances are achieved.
THE IMPORTANCE OF ERER • External competitiveness: • overvalued currency: high export prices, loss of competitiveness; • in transition economies (reduced output and high unemployment) export-led growth argues in favor of slightly undervalued exchange rates. • Joining the EU and adopting the Euro: • ERM2: an undervalued currency is susceptible to experience inflationary pressure in the process of real appreciation (fail to meet the Maastricht convergence criterion on inflation).
THE ROMANIAN ECONOMY • The NBR’s objective: to assure currency stability in order to maintain price stability. • Managed float exchange rate regime. • 1997: foreign exchange market liberalization; the last stage of price liberalization high jump in inflation and nominal depreciation. • 1999: peak of the due payment of external debt balance of payment crisis (the country didn’t enter payment incapacity). • High liberalization of the capital account.
THE REAL EXCHANGE RATE USD/ROL (1995-2002) • The beginning of transition: real depreciation. • This is followed by real appreciation driven not by increases in productivity, but by a “natural recovery” process. • 1997: nominal depreciation and higher inflation real appreciation. • 1999: nominal and real depreciation. • 2001: real appreciation followed by nominal appreciation
THE MODEL (S.Edwards (1989) and Montiel (1996)) • A small, open economy based on two sectors. • Maximizing utility households: . • The dynamic budgetary constraint: • The public sector: • Internal balance: • External balance:
Real indeces (CPI deflated), fixed base January 1995=100; • Monthly data • Source: NBR Annual Reports THE DATA • Internal balance: CREDIT (non-governmental), DEP (difference between foreign currency and ROL deposits); • External balance: NFA (net foreign assets to GDP),OPEN (exports plus imports to GDP); • GDP proxied by the index of industrial output
THE GOAL To estimate the equilibrium real exchange rate as: - + +/- + • Cointegration technique (Johansen, Engle-Granger)
DECOMPOSING REAL AND NOMINAL EXCHANGE RATE MOVEMENTS • VAR analysis (Blanchard and Quah decomposition) on the log of the real and nominal exchange rate (I(1)). • The restriction:nominal shocks have no long-run effect on the RER Variance Decomposition • The importance of nominal shocks (due to NBR’s interventions)
ESTIMATING THE ERER • Unit root tests Variable ADF PP RER C I(1) C I(1) NFA TC I(1) TC I(1) OPEN C I(1) C I(1) CREDIT C I(1) C I(1) DEP C I(1) C I(1) • 1% significance level; • the unit root tests are biased towards accepting the null of a unit root in the presence of structural breaks .
ESTIMATING THE ERER • VAR analysis • Variables in levels, 2 lags; • Impulse response functions: + - + + +
ESTIMATING THE ERER • Johansen cointegration test
ESTIMATING THE ERER Johansen cointegrating relation: RER=0.021297+0.538429*OPEN-0.068865*NFA+0.038304*DEP+ (0.07563)(0.01741) (0.04866) +0.298500*CREDIT (0.04610)
ESTIMATING THE ERER Engle-Granger cointegrating relation: RER=0.356169-0.053560*NFA+0.131087*OPEN+0.193242*DEP+ (0.048655) (0.005841) (0.031664) (0.015865) +0.320477*CREDIT (0.022323) The cointegrating relation (stationary residuals:ADF and PP)
ESTIMATING THE ERER The estimated ERER Fitted ERER on the Johansen equilibrium relationship Fitted ERER on the Engle-Granger equilibrium relationship • The estimated ERER will allow us to determine the misalignment of the exchange rate.
SHORT-RUN DYNAMICS • VEC representation: • D(RER) = - 0.32354355*( RER(-1) - 0.5384287381*OPEN(-1) + +0.06886480321*NFA(-1) - 0.03830424481*DEP(-1) - 0.2985004165*CREDIT(-1) - 0.02129682639 ) - 0.06856552318*D(RER(-1)) - 0.107401684*D(OPEN(-1)) - 0.004766388211*D(NFA(-1)) + 0.06294160197*D(DEP(-1)) + +0.09737686503*D(CREDIT(-1)) + 0.0008867915601 • The time required to dissipate x% of a shock in the RER: α = the absolute value of the speed of adjustment the time it takes for the RER to come to equilibrium after a 1% shock , is 0.025755 years or 9.272 days.
WEAK-EXOGENEITY TESTS • The NFA and the proxi for the demand of foreign currency (DEP) are weakly exogenous. • OPEN and CREDIT accomodate to RER disequilibrium.
STABILITY TESTS The CUSUM test on the VEC representation of the Johansen equilibrium relationship The CUSUm test on the Engle-Granger estimated equilibrium relationship • Only the Johansen estimated equilibrium relationship has stable coefficients over the whole sample. • The second relation is not stable.
EXCHANGE RATE ACTUAL MISALIGNMENT Model 1: On average, the national currency was undervalued Model 2: On average, the national currency was overvalued
EXCHANGE RATE TOTAL MISALIGNMENT Estimated ERER based on the long-run value of the fundamentals vs. the actual RER Total misalignment for Johansen equilibrium relation Total misalignment for Engle-Granger equilibrium relation • Total misalignment includes the departure from equilibrium of the fundamentals, too. • Model 1undervaluation of the national currency. • Model 2overvaluation of the national currency.
THE MODEL’S FORECAST ABILITY • The VEC representation of the first model the one step ahead forecast of the real exchange rate: • The model yields a reasonable approximation of the real exchange rate for the period 1995:01-2002:12 • It reveals an overvaluation of the national currency during the second half of 2002
CONCLUSIONS • Nominal factors (monetary policy) play an important role in exchange rate determination. • The undervaluation of the national currency improves the external competitiveness and favorizes export-led growth. • Further analysis should determine the EUR/ROL ERER. • The managed float regime is more suitable than a fixed regime. • The results are determined by the choice of fundamentals.
REFERENCES • Baffes,J., I.A. Elbadawi, and S.A.O’Connell, (1997) “Single-equation estimation of the equilibrium real exchange rate” ,World Bank Working Paper No. 08/20/97; • Chinn, M. (1997), “ Sectoral productivity, government spending and real exchange rates: empirical evidence for OECD countries”, NBER working paper 6017; • Chinn,M., and L.Johnston (1996), “Real exchange rate levels, productivity and demand shocks : evidence from a panel of 14 countries”, NBER working paper 5709; • Clarida,R. and J. Gali (1994), “ Sources of real exchange rate fluctuations: how important are nominal shocks?”, NBER working paper 4658; • Clark,P.B. and R.MacDonald (1998) “Exchange rates and economic fundamentals: A methodological comparison of BEER’s and FEER’s “, IMF working paper 9867; • DeBroeck,M. and T.Slok (2001), “Interpreting real exchange rate movements in transition countries”, BOFIT Discussion Paper 7. • DeGregorio,J., and H.C. Wolf (1994) “Terms of trade, productivity and the real exchange rate”, NBER working paper 4807 • Edwards,S. (1989) “Real and monetary determinants of real exchange rate behavior: theory and evidence from developing countries”, NBER working paper 2721; • Egert, B. (2001a) “Equilibrium real exchange rates in central Europe’s transition Economies: How far is heaven?”, University of Paris X- Nanterre; • (2001b) “ Estimating the impact of the Balassa-Samuelson effect on inflation during the transition: does it matter in the run-up to EMU?”, Paper presented at the “East European Transition and EU Enlargement: a Quantitative Approach” meeting in Gdansk; • Enders,W. (2000), “Applied Econometric Time Series”, in John Wiley & Sons.
Engle, R. and C.Granger (1987), “Cointegration and Error-Correction: Representation, Estimation and Testing”, Econometrica 55, 251-276; • Faust,J. and J.Rogers (1999), “ Monetary Policy’s Role in exchange rate behavior”, Board of Governors of the Federal System, International Finance Discussion Papers No 652; • Feyzioglu,T. (1997), “Estimating the equilibrium real exchange rate : an application to Finland”, IMF working paper WP/97/109; • Gardeazabal,J., M. Regulez, and J. Vasquez (1997), “ Testing the canonical model of exchange rates with unobservable fundamentals”, International Economic Review; • Grafe,C. and C. Wyplosz (1997) “The Real exchange rate in transition economies”, Paper • presented at the Third Dubrovnik Conference On Transition Economies in Dubrovnik, Croatia; • Greene, W.H. (2000), “Econometric Analysis”, Prentice Hall International, Inc. • Halpern,L. and C. Wyplosz (1997a) “Equilibrium Exchange rates in transition economies”, IMF staff working paper 44, 430-461; • (1998b),“Equilibrium exchange rates in transition economies: further results”, prepared as part of a CEPR project on "Equilibrium and Adjustment Dynamics of the Exchange Rates of the Associated Countries of Central and Eastern Europe"; • (2001c) “Economic Transformation and real exchange rates in the 2000’s : the Balassa-Samuelson Connection”, UNECE working paper; • Kim, B.Y and I. Korhonen (2002), “Equilibrium exchange rates in transition countries: Evidence from dynamic heterogeneous panel models”, BOFIT Discussion Paper 15; • Kocenda, E. (1998), “Detecting structural Breaks: exchange rates in transition economies”, W. Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan Business School,CEPR, London;
Kutan,A.M. and S. Dibooglu (1998), “Sources of real and nominal exchange rate fluctuations in transition economies”, The Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis, working paper 1998-022A; • Lastrapes,W.D. (1992), “Sources of fluctuations in real and nominal exchange rates”, The review of economics and statistics, Volume 74, Issue 3, 530-539. • MacDonald, R. (1997a) “What determines the real exchange rate? The long and short of it”, IMF working paper WP/97/21;(2001b),“Modelling the long-run real effective exchange rate of the New Zealand Dollar”, Reserve Bank of New Zealand, DP2002/02; • Rault,C. and I. Drime (2001), “Long run determinants of real exchange rates:new evidence based on panel data unit root and cointegration tests for MENA countries”, EUREQUA, Sorbonne University; • Rogers,J. (1998), “Monetary Shocks and real exchange rates”, Board of Governors of the Federal System, International Finance Discussion Papers number 612; • Wyplosz, C. (1999) , “Ten Years of transformation: macroeconomic lessons”, Paper presented at the World Bank Annual Bank Conference on Development Economics, Washington; • *** National Bank of Romania- Annual Reports 1995-2002 • *** National Bank of Romania- Monthly Bulletins 1995-2002