Post-Bretton Woods evidence on PPP under different exchange rate regimes

Abstract

This article investigates the behaviour of exchange rates across different regimes for a post-Bretton Woods period. The exchange rate regime classification is based on the classification of Frankel et al. (2004) who condensed the 10 categories of exchange rate regimes reported by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) into three categories. Panel unit-root tests and panel cointegration are used to examine the Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) hypothesis. The latter test is used to check for both the weak and strong forms of PPP. The panel unit-root tests show no evidence of PPP and suggest there is no difference in the behaviour of exchange rates across different regimes. However, failure to detect PPP across any of the regimes could be due to structural breaks. This assumption is reinforced by the results of cointegration tests, which suggest that there exists at least a weak form of PPP for the different regimes. The evidence for strong PPP decreases as the exchange rate regime moves away from a flexible exchange rate regime.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Professor Peter Pedroni for providing some of the RATS codes used in this article. The author is also grateful to Vania Sena, Thomas Elger and an anonymous referee for comments on an earlier version of this article.