Exploring the relationship between exchange rate misalignment uncertainty and economic growth in South Africa

Figures & data

Table 1. Economic variables were used

Variables	Description	Source
$gdp$	Economic growth	SARB (2023b)
$k$	Average capital-labour ratio	SARB (2023a)
$l$	Average output-labour ratio	SARB (2023b)
$opntrd$	Trade openness	Calculated
$g$	Government expenditure	SARB (2023a)
$mv$	Income velocity of circulation of money	SARB (2023b)
$exr$	Rand to US Dollar exchange rate	SARB (2023a)
$exr\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$	Exchange rate uncertainty ARCH approach	Estimated
$exr\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$	Exchange rate uncertainty GARCH approach	Estimated
$e\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$	Exchange rate equilibrium using the fundamental approach	Estimated
$miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$	Misalignment of exchange rate equilibrium using the fundamental approach	Estimated
$e\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$	Exchange rate equilibrium using the HP filter	Estimated
$miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$	Misalignment of equilibrium using the HP filter	Estimated
$miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$	Exchange rate uncertainty using the ARCH approach and fundamental approach	Estimated
$Accessisdenied$	Exchange rate uncertainty using the GARCH approach and fundamental approach	Estimated
$miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$	Exchange rate uncertainty using the ARCH approach and HP filter	Estimated
$miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$	Exchange rate uncertainty using the GARCH approach and HP filter	Estimated

Table 2. Descriptive statistics

Variable	Obs	Mean	Std. Dev.	Min	Max	Skewness	Kurtosis	Shapiro‒Wilk
$gdp$	250	2.88	2.388	−17.1	16.5	0.000	0.0000	0.0001
$k$	212	396186.57	37641.466	331804	453484	0.284	0.0000	0.0001
$l$	212	177792.3	17738.784	149586	204700	0.782	0.0000	0.0001
$opntrd$	250	−0.387	8.077	−43	63	0.000	0.0000	0.0001
$g$	248	13.635	9.536	−7.3	53.7	0.000	0.0001	0.0001
$mv$	175	8.981	2.833	4.88	14.08	0.012	0.0000	0.0001
$exr$	251	4.826	4.684	0.671	17.951	0.000	0.7511	0.0001

Table 3. Matrix of correlations

Variables	$\mathit{g}dp$	$\mathit{k}$	$\mathit{l}$	$\mathit{o}pntrd$	$\mathit{g}$	$\mathit{m}v$	$\mathit{e}xr$
$gdp$	1.000
$k$	0.110	1.000
$l$	−0.192	0.395	1.000
$opntrd$	−0.045	0.043	0.053	1.000
$g$	0.246	0.208	−0.201	−0.018	1.000
$mv$	0.359	0.509	−0.440	−0.009	0.565	1.000
$exr$	−0.315	−0.135	0.594	0.082	−0.528	−0.866	1.000

Figure 1. Economic variables and estimation. Note $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$ misalignment of exchange rate equilibrium using the fundamental approach, $e\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$ exchange rate equilibrium using the fundamental approach, $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$ misalignment of exchange rate equilibrium using the fundamental approach, $e\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$ exchange rate equilibrium using the HP filter and $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$ misalignment of equilibrium using the HP filter.

Table 4. Conventional unit root and structural break

Test		Dickey-Fuller test for unit root		Phillips-Perron test for unit root		Structural break
Variable		Test Stat	5% Critical Value	Test Stat	5% Critical Value	Break	P value
$gdp$	Z(t)	−12.59	−2.880	−12.59	−2.880	2008q3	0.00
$k$	Z(t)	−16.129	−2.880	−16.129	−2.880	978q2	0.00
$d.l$	Z(t)	−14.514	−2.883	−14.514	−2.883	2005q1	0.00
$opntrd$	Z(t)	−14.526	−2.883	−14.526	−2.883	1969q4	0.00
$g$	Z(t)	−16.394	−2.88	−16.394	−2.88	1993q1	0.00
$mv$	Z(t)	−11.408	−2.88	−11.408	−2.88	1992q2	0.00
$d.exr$	Z(t)	−12.599	−2.88	−12.599	−2.88	1992q2	0.00

Note: that $d$ It is the difference in the first-order condition. Unit-root and Stationarity tests are constant but without deterministic trends.

Figure 2. Economic variables cluster the first and second waves of volatility. Note that the economic variables, $exr$ Rand to US Dollar exchange rate, $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$ misalignment of exchange rate equilibrium using the fundamental approach, $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$ misalignment of equilibrium using the HP filter, $v\mathrm{\_}1$ and $v\mathrm{\_}2$ in each economic variable reflect the cluster volatility.

Figure 3. Variance for the exchange rate proxies volatility. Note economic variables $exr\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$ exchange rate uncertainty ARCH approach, $exr\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$ exchange rate uncertainty GARCH approach, $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$ exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the ARCH approach and fundamental approach, $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$ exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the GARCH approach and fundamental approach, $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$ exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the ARCH approach and HP filter and $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$ exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the GARCH approach and HP filter.

Table 5. ARCH effect test

$\mathit{e}xr$
White’s test							Breusch‒Pagan
Heteroskedasticity	58.18	2	0.0000	chi2(2)	=	58.18	chi2(2)	=		268.12
Skewness	2.14	1	0.1433	Prob > chi2	=	0.0000	Prob > chi2	=		0.0000
Kurtosis	6.75	1	0.0094
Total	67.07	4	0.0001
$\mathit{m}iss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$
White’s test							Breusch‒Pagan
Heteroskedasticity	22.53	2	0.0000	chi2(2)	=	22.53	chi2(2)	=		39.42
Skewness	0.32	1	0.5718	Prob > chi2	=	0.0000	Prob > chi2	=		0.0000
Kurtosis	7.07	1	0.0079
Total	29.29	4	0.0000
$\mathit{m}iss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$
White’s test							Breusch‒Pagan
Heteroskedasticity	3.96	2	0.1383	chi2(2)	=	3.96	chi2(2)	=		32.68
Skewness	4.68	1	0.0305	Prob > chi2	=	0.0383	Prob > chi2	=		0.0000
Kurtosis	4.33	1	0.0374
Total	12.97	4	0.0114

Ho: homoskedasticity or constant variance. The $exr$ Rand to US Dollar exchange rate, $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$ misalignment of exchange rate equilibrium using the fundamental approach and $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$ misalignment of equilibrium using the HP filter.

Table 6. Lag-order selection criteria

Lag	AIC	HQIC	SBIC
0	25.8959	25.9815	26.1839
1	22.8071	23.4064	24.8228
2	21.2436	22.3568	24.9872
3	17.3053*	18.9322*	22.7766*

Table 7. Johansen tests for cointegration

Maximum rank	Params	LL	Eigenvalue	Trace statistic	Critical value 5%
0	42	−304.73924	.	149.0001	94.15
1	53	−275.80617	0.86404	91.1340	68.52
2	62	−256.01131	0.74466	51.5443	47.21
3	69	−240.33515	0.66078	20.1920*	29.68

Table 8. Vector error correction in the short and long run

Short run			Long run
Estimation	1	2	Estimation	3	4
Variables	$\mathit{g}dp$	$\mathit{g}dp$	Variables	$\mathit{g}dp$	$\mathit{g}dp$
$D\mathrm{\_}gdp$
$L.\mathrm{\_}ce1$	−0.00617	−0.00530
	(0.62)	(−1.52)
$LD.gdp$	−0.441***	−0.455***
	(−6.60)	(−6.94)
$LD.k$	0.000277***	0.000268***	$k$	0.0002	−0.0001
	(4.44)	(4.32)		(0.19)	(−0.05)
$LD.l$	−0.000282**	−0.000270**	$l$	0.0002	−0.0006
	(−2.78)	(−2.67)		(1.24)	(−1.34)
$LD.opntrd$	−0.0414	−0.0572*	$opntrd$	4.1961***	−12.378***
	(−1.57)	(−2.15)		(12.28)	(−12.61)
$LD.g$	0.0197	0.0266	$g$	−1.334***	3.6958***
	(0.70)	(0.96)		(−3.30)	(3.19)
$LD.mv$	−3.416***	−3.374***	$mv$	−.8030	−0.6972
	(−4.34)	(−4.32)		(−0.31)	(−0.09)
$LD.exr$	0.697	0.872	$exr$	−3.8461***	9.0230
	(1.47)	(1.88)		(−3.24)	(2.61)
$LD.exr\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$	−0.0185*		$exr\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$	0.6053***
	(−1.96)			(4.31)
$LD.exr\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$		−0.138*	$exr\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$		−4.9786**
		(−2.34)			(−2.11)
$\mathrm{\_}cons$	−0.211	−0.232	$\mathrm{\_}cons$	4.1962	14.6767
	(−0.91)	(−1.07)		(−0.91)	(−1.07)
$N$	172	172	$N$	172	172

Note: t statistics in parentheses, values that are in () Z values and * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

Table 9. Vector error correction short run

Short run
Estimation	1	2	3	4
Variables	$\mathit{g}dp$	$\mathit{g}dp$	$\mathit{g}dp$	$\mathit{g}dp$
$D\mathrm{\_}gdp$
$L.\mathrm{\_}ce1$	−0.0321	−0.0328	−0.00501	−0.00501
	(−0.40)	(−0.41)	(−1.05)	(−1.05)
$LD.gdp$	−0.405***	−0.405***	−0.428***	−0.428***
	(−4.53)	(−4.53)	(−6.64)	(−6.64)
$LD.k$	0.000293***	0.000293***	0.000287***	0.000287***
	(5.04)	(5.04)	(4.66)	(4.66)
$LD.l$	−0.000266**	−0.000266**	−0.000315**	−0.000315**
	(−2.79)	(−2.79)	(−3.11)	(−3.11)
$LD.opntrd$	−0.00134	−0.000660	−0.0339	−0.0339
	(−0.02)	(−0.01)	(−1.67)	(−1.67)
$LD.g$	−0.0230	−0.0230	0.00754	0.00754
	(−0.87)	(−0.87)	(0.28)	(0.28)
$LD.mv$	−2.875***	−2.876***	−3.359***	−3.359***
	(−3.81)	(−3.81)	(−4.24)	(−4.24)
$LD.exr$	−0.197	−0.208	−0.944	−0.944
	(−0.12)	(−0.13)	(−0.62)	(−0.62)
$LD.miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$	0.00349	0.000785
	(0.01)	(0.00)
$LD.miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$	−1.252
	(−1.86)
$LD.miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$		−1.264
		(−1.83)
$LD.miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$			1.655	1.655
			(0.99)	(0.99)
$LD.miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$			−0.0225
			(−1.23)
$LD.miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$				−0.0225
				(−1.23)
$\mathrm{\_}cons$	−0.0791	−0.0778	0.0288	0.0288
	(−0.34)	(−0.33)	(0.11)	(0.11)
$N$	172	172	172	172

Note: t statistics in parentheses, values that are in () Z values and * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

Table 10. Vector error correction long run

Long run
Estimation	1	2	3	4
Variables	$\mathit{g}dp$	$\mathit{g}dp$	$\mathit{g}dp$	$\mathit{g}dp$
$k$	−7.8406	−7.8206	−0.0640	−.0064
	(−0.70)	(−0.69)	(−4.28)	(−4.28)
$l$	0.0162	0.0001	0.0110	0.1109
	(0.92)	(0.92)	(0.51)	(0.51)
$opntrd$	0.8337***	0.8334***	0.1235	0.1235
	(15.12)	(15.13)	(0.30)	(0.30)
$g$	−.21424***	−.2137***	0.3257	0.3257
	(−5.37)	(−5.37)	(0.67)	(0.67)
$mv$	−0.1311	−.1324	20.562***	20.562***
	(−0.51)	(−0.52)	(5.96)	(5.96)
$exr$	−18.889***	−18.869***	10.891***	10.891***
	(−12.37)	(−12.37)	(7.36)	(7.36)
$miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$	1.5965***	1.5779***
	(12.19)	(12.19)
$miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$	0.6032
	(0.75)
$miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$		0.5492
		(0.68)
$miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$			5.2076***	5.2076***
			(11.29)	(11.29)
$miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$			1.0141***
			(2.94)
$miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$				1.0141***
				(2.94)
$\mathrm{\_}cons$	3.7499	3.7711	−23.4797	−23.4797
	(−0.46)	(−0.46)	(−0.54)	(−0.54)
N	172	172	172	172

Note: t statistics in parentheses, values that are in () Z values and * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

Figure 4. Shocks of misalignment of exchange rate equilibrium using the fundamental approach and misalignment of equilibrium using the HP filter. Note that the economic variables are $gdp$ the economic growth, $k$ average capital-labor ratio, $l$ average output-labor ratio, $opntrd$trade openness, $exr$exchange rate, $g$ government expenditure, $mv$ income velocity of circulation of money M1, M2 and M3, $exr$ Rand to US Dollar exchange rate, $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$ misalignment of exchange rate equilibrium using the fundamental approach and $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$ misalignment of equilibrium using the HP filter.

Figure 5. Shocks of exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the ARCH approach and fundamental approach and exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the GARCH approach and fundamental approach. Note that the economic variables are $gdp$ the economic, $k$ average capital-labor ratio, $l$ average output-labor ratio, $g$ government expenditure, $mv$ income velocity of circulation of money M1, M2 and M3, $exr$ Rand to US Dollar exchange rate, $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$ exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the ARCH approach and fundamental approach and $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the GARCH approach and fundamental approach. This result are connect to that of Amor et al. (2023), Ramos-Herrera and Sosvilla-Rivero (2023) and Maku et al. (2023) among other that found is a negative impact of real overvaluation on growth performance, while an undervaluation has no significant impact. investigate the heterogeneous relationship between the per capita economic growth rate and the deviations from the equilibrium exchange rate.

Figure 6. Shocks of exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the ARCH approach and HP filter and exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the GARCH approach and HP filter. Note that the economic variables are $gdp$ the economic growth, $k$ average capital-labor ratio, $l$ average output-labor ratio, $exr$exchange rate, $g$ government expenditure, $mv$ income velocity of circulation of money M1, M2 and M3, $exr$ Rand to US Dollar exchange rate, $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$ exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the ARCH approach and HP filter and $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$ exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the GARCH approach and HP filter.

Figure A1. Structural break of the economic variables. The economic variables are $gdp$ the economic growth, $k$ average capital-labor ratio, $l$ average output-labor ratio, $opntrd$ trade openness, $g$ government expenditure, $mv$ income velocity of circulation of money M1, M2 and M3 and $exr$ Rand to US Dollar exchange rate.

Table A1. Skewness and Kurtosis tests for normality

Variable	Obs	Pr(Skewness)	Pr(Kurtosis)	adj_chi2(2)	Prob>chi2
$gdp$	250	0.003	0.0300	31.230	0.000
$k$	250	0.001	0.0010	32.240	0.000
$l$	250	0.001	0.0010	32.240	0.000
$opntrd$	250	0.001	0.0010	32.240	0.000
$g$	250	0.006	0.0006	30.450	0.000
$mv$	250	0.006	0.0060	30.450	0.000
$exr$	250	0.000	0.0000	33.800	0.000

Note: The economic variables are $gdp$ the economic growth, $k$ average capital-labor ratio, $l$ average output-labor ratio, $opntrd$ trade openness, $g$ government expenditure, $mv$ income velocity of circulation of money M1, M2 and M3 and $exr$ Rand to US Dollar exchange rate.

Table A2. The $exr\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$ and $exr\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$ exchange rate uncertainty ARCH and GARCH approaches

Volatility	$\mathit{e}xr\mathrm{\_}arch$	$\mathit{e}xr\mathrm{\_}garch$
Estimation	1	2
Variable	$\mathit{e}xr$	$\mathit{e}xr$
$\mathit{e}xr$
$L.exr$	0.976***	0.987***
	(9517.74)	(689.01)
$\mathrm{\_}cons$	0.0171***	0.00947***
	(178.67)	(8.07)
$\mathit{A}RCH$
$L.arch$	20.01***	3.501***
	(18.33)	(8.75)
$L.garch$		0.167***
		(8.95)
$\mathrm{\_}cons$	−0.00000153**	0.000000284
	(−2.65)	(1.95)
$N$	250	250

Note: t statistics in parentheses, values that are in () Z values and * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

Table A3. The $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$ and $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$ exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the ARCH and GARCH approach

Volatility	$\mathit{m}iss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap\mathrm{\_}arch$	$\mathit{m}iss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap\mathrm{\_}garch$
Estimation	1	2
Variable	$\mathit{m}iss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$	$\mathit{m}iss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$
$\mathit{m}iss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$
$L.miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}fdap$	0.994***	0.995***
	(97.08)	(94.67)
$\mathrm{\_}cons$	0.102	0.0985
	(1.08)	(1.03)
$\mathit{A}RCH$
$L.arch$	0.345*	0.339*
	(2.46)	(2.28)
$L.garch$		0.0321
		(0.13)
$\mathrm{\_}cons$	0.268***	0.258***
	(11.59)	(3.63)
$N$	170	170

Note: t statistics in parentheses, values that are in () Z values and * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

Table A4. The $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}arch$ and $miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}v\mathrm{\_}ht\mathrm{\_}garch$ exchange rate misalignment uncertainty using the ARCH as well as the ARCH approach and HP filter

Volatility	$\mathit{m}iss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}arch$	$\mathit{m}iss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t\mathrm{\_}garch$
Estimation	1	2
Variable	$\mathit{m}iss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$	$\mathit{m}iss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$
$\mathit{m}iss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$
$L2.miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$	0.472***
	(113.33)
$L3.miss\mathrm{\_}exr\mathrm{\_}hpf\mathrm{\_}t$		−0.295***
		(−143.92)
$\mathrm{\_}cons$	0.00793***	0.0219***
	(5.77)	(15.60)
$\mathit{A}RCH$
$L.arch$	9.803***	9.803***
	(22.02)	(22.02)
$L.garch$		6.557***
		(23.48)
$\mathrm{\_}cons$	0.00183***	0.00253***
	(7.45)	(4.84)
$N$	249	248

Note: t statistics in parentheses, values that are in () Z values and * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

SARB. (2023b). Online statistical query (historical macroeconomic timeseries information). Retrieved 20-03-, 2023, from https://www.resbank.co.za/Research/Statistics/Pages/OnlineDownloadFacility.aspx.

 Google Scholar

SARB. (2023a). HISTORY of BANKNOTES and COIN. Retrieved 14-06-, 2023, from https://www.resbank.co.za/en/home/what-we-do/banknotes-and-coin/history-of-banknotes-and-coin#:~:text=On%2014%20February%201961%2C%20the,does%20not%20demonetise%20its%20currency.

 Google Scholar

Amor, T. H. (2023). Real exchange rate misalignments and economic growth in Tunisia: New evidence from a threshold analysis of asymmetric adjustments. The Quarterly Review of Economics & Finance, 88, 215–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2023.01.007

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ramos-Herrera, M. D. C., & Sosvilla-Rivero, S. (2023). Economic growth and deviations from the equilibrium exchange rate. International Review of Economics & Finance, 86, 764–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2023.03.028

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Maku, O. A. (2023). Exchange rates and macroeconomic fundamentals in a small-commodity-export-dependent economy. Innovations, 72(2), 361–369.

 Google Scholar