Abstract:
Recently, Imbs et. al. (2002) have claimed that much of the purchasing power parity puzzle can be explained by aggregation bias'. This paper re-examines aggregation bias. First, it clarifies the meaning of aggregation bias and its applicability to the PPP puzzle. Second, the size of the bias' is shown to be much smaller than the simulations in Imbs et. al. (2002) suggest, if we rule out explosive roots in the simulations. Third, we show that the presence of non-persistent measurement error especially in the Imbs et. al. (2002) data can make price series appear less persistent than they really are. Finally, it is now standard to recognize that small-sample bias plagues estimates of speeds of convergence of PPP. After correcting small sample bias by methods proposed by Kilian (1998) and by So and Shin (1999), the half-life estimates indicate that heterogeneity and aggregation bias do not help to solve the PPP puzzle.
Downloads: (external link) http://www.nber.org/papers/w10304.pdf (application/pdf)
Access to the full text is generally limited to series subscribers, however if the top level domain of the client browser is in a developing country or transition economy free access is provided. More information about subscriptions and free access is available at http://www.nber.org/wwphelp.html.
More papers in NBER Working Papers from National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc Address: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A. Contact information at EDIRC. Series data maintained by ().
This site is part of RePEc
and all the data displayed here is part of the RePEc data set.
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to
contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .