4. The Relationship between Inflation and Steady-State Inflation Uncertainty in
a Bivariate VAR Framework
Next, we estimate a bivariate VAR for inflation and steady-state inflation uncertainty
to test for causality and for the presence of structural breaks related to EMU. As a first
step, the order of integration of the variables needs to be established. Standard ADF
tests reject the null hypothesis of a unit root in levels in both cases. We then carry out
the unit root tests proposed by Saikkonen and Lütkepohl (2002) and Lanne et al.
(2002). These are based on first estimating the deterministic term by a generalized
least squares (GLS) procedure under the unit root null hypothesis and subtracting it
from the original series. Then an ADF-type test is performed on the adjusted series
which also includes terms to correct for estimation errors in the parameters of the
deterministic part. As in the case of the ADF statistic, the asymptotic null distribution
is non-standard. Critical values are tabulated in Lanne et al. (2002). The test results
when allowing for exogenous breaks indicate that steady-state uncertainty might not
be stationary, but those including endogenously determined breaks again support
stationarity of both series (see Table 2).
Tabl |
e 2. Unit root tests on inflation and steady-state inflation uncertainty | ||||
INFLATION |
SS_UNC | ||||
Test |
Lag |
Test statistic |
Det. Comp. |
Test statistic |
Det. Comp. |
ADF |
3 |
-6.80 ** |
C, T, SD |
-4.45 ** |
C, T, SD |
REC |
-3.50 *(5) |
C, T, SD |
-4.45 ** (3) |
C, T, SD | |
EXO_SB |
3 |
-5.14** |
C, T, SD |
-2.74 |
C, T, SD |
REC |
-3.03 * (5) |
C, T, SD |
-1.58 (5) |
C, T, SD | |
END_SB |
3 |
-8.14 ** |
C, T, SD 2008 M5 |
-3.58 ** |
C, T, SD 2001 M3 |
REC |
-1.52 (11) |
C, T, SD 2008 M7 |
-3.58 ** (3) |
C, T, SD 2001 M3 |
Table 3. Johansen Trace Test for: [infl, infl ss var]
Test 1: includ |
ed lags (levels): 3, trend and |
intercept, seasonal dummies included | |||
Coint rank |
Test stat. |
p val |
90% |
95% |
99% |
r0 = 0 |
91.11 |
0 .0000 |
23.32 |
25.73 |
30.67 |
r0 = 1 |
19.71 |
0.0020 |
10.68 |
12.45 |
16.22 |
Test 2: includ |
ed lags (levels): 1, trend and |
intercept, seasonal dummies included | |||
r0 = 0 |
137.26 |
0.0000 |
23.32 |
25.73 |
30.67 |
r1 = 1 |
21.37 |
0.0009 |
10.68 |
12.45 |
16.22 |
Test 3: includ |
ed lags (levels): 8, trend and |
intercept, seasonal dummies included | |||
r0 = 0 |
67.20 |
0.0000 |
23.32 |
25.73 |
30.67 |
r1 = 1 |
16.20 |
0.0101 |
10.68 |
12.45 |
16.22 |
13
More intriguing information
1. The Dictator and the Parties A Study on Policy Co-operation in Mineral Economies2. The ultimate determinants of central bank independence
3. The urban sprawl dynamics: does a neural network understand the spatial logic better than a cellular automata?
4. The name is absent
5. Fiscal Policy Rules in Practice
6. The name is absent
7. A simple enquiry on heterogeneous lending rates and lending behaviour
8. The name is absent
9. Needing to be ‘in the know’: strategies of subordination used by 10-11 year old school boys
10. A Rational Analysis of Alternating Search and Reflection Strategies in Problem Solving