30.06.2013 Views

TESTING INTERNATIONAL PRICE TRANSMISSION UNDER ...

TESTING INTERNATIONAL PRICE TRANSMISSION UNDER ...

TESTING INTERNATIONAL PRICE TRANSMISSION UNDER ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Empirical Analysis: Cointegration Models Accounting for Policy Regime Changes<br />

α<br />

LM test<br />

ARCH(13)<br />

84<br />

Table 5.5 Model 1b estimates for swfr and hrw, 1993:07-2003:12<br />

∆swfr ∆hrw Cointegration vector<br />

-0.078**<br />

(0.034)<br />

0.452<br />

(p-value 0.963)<br />

16.849<br />

(p-value 0.206)<br />

0.063<br />

(0.060)<br />

0.221<br />

(p-value 0.999)<br />

17.552<br />

(p-value 0.175)<br />

swfr = 0.<br />

664+<br />

0.<br />

842*<br />

* * hrw<br />

t<br />

( 1.<br />

505)<br />

( 0.<br />

305)<br />

cost = 0 χ 2 = 0.136 (p-value 0.712)<br />

β hwr = 1 χ 2 = 0. 180 (p-value 0.672)<br />

β hwr = 0 χ 2 = 8.549 (p-value 0.003)<br />

Standard errors are reported in parenthesis<br />

LM test: Lagrange Multiplier test with the null hypothesis of no-autocorrelation<br />

*significant at 10%; **significant at 5%; *** significant at 1% for the null hypothesis of zero coefficients (#, ##<br />

and ### respectively if for βhrw the null hypothesis of equal to one is rejected)<br />

In Model 1b, the hypothesis of perfect price transmission in the cointegration<br />

vector is not rejected. Adjustments coefficients have the right sign. The US price<br />

performs as weakly exogenous.<br />

wref and swfr are cointegrated, as well 73 ; the corresponding VECM is<br />

estimated (Model 1b, table 5.6).<br />

α<br />

LM test<br />

ARCH(13)<br />

Table 5.6 Model 1b estimates for swfr and wref, 1993:07-2003:12<br />

∆swfr ∆wref Cointegration vector<br />

-0.073**<br />

(0.032)<br />

0.346<br />

(p-value 0.991)<br />

13.086<br />

(p-value 0.441)<br />

0.063<br />

(0.052)<br />

0.155<br />

(p-value 0.999)<br />

10.644<br />

(p-value 0.641)<br />

swfr = 0.<br />

072+<br />

0.<br />

990*<br />

* * wref<br />

t<br />

( 1.<br />

624)<br />

( 0.<br />

328)<br />

cost = 0 χ 2 = 0.001 (p-value 0.970)<br />

β wref = 1 χ 2 = 0.0006 (p-value 0.981)<br />

β wref = 0 χ 2 = 9.201 (p-value 0.002)<br />

Standard errors are reported in parenthesis<br />

LM test: Lagrange Multiplier test with the null hypothesis of no-autocorrelation<br />

*significant at 10%; **significant at 5%; *** significant at 1% for the null hypothesis of zero coefficients (#, ##<br />

and ### respectively if for βwref the null hypothesis of equal to one is rejected)<br />

The long run relationship is swfrt = 0.072+ 0.990wreft. Adjustment<br />

coefficients, that are very close to the one presented in table 5.5, have the<br />

expected sign. The wref one is not significant, which could suggest that it is<br />

73 The two series are not cointegrated when 2 lags are included (which is the optimum number of lags in all<br />

cases). When, in analogy with the models estimated in the overall sample and in the first subsample, 13 lags<br />

are included, evidence of cointegration emerges if the null hypothesis is rejected at 10% significance. See<br />

annex C. The insertion of the 3 summer dummies allowed to get better information criteria.<br />

t<br />

t

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!