Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
=
1 3 1 2 1 , 1 1 , 0
4
0
4
3
0
3 ,
2
0
2 ,
1
1
1 0
ln ln ln ln
ln ln ln ln ln
t t t t partner t i
k t
n
k
k k t
n
k
k k t partner
n
k
k k t i
n
k
k it
Vol ER Y X
Vol d ER d Y d X d d X
, + + + + +
A + A + A + A + = A
=
1 3 1 2 1 , 1 1 , 0
4
0
4
3
0
3 ,
2
0
2 ,
1
1
1 0
ln ln ln ln
ln ln ln ln ln
These equations include a linear combination of the lagged level of all variables
(second line of each equation), commonly referred to as an error-correction term. These
specifications provide estimates of both short-run and long-run effects. The short-run
1. Two main approaches were adopted in the past: the two-step residuals based procedure for
testing the null of no-cointegration (Engle and Granger, 1987) and the system-based reduced
rank regression approach due to Johansen (1991, 1995). These methods assume that the
variables are integrated of order one (I(1)) or more. Pesaran et al. (2001) develop a new
approach for testing the existence of a relationship between variables (they can be stationary
I(0), integrated of order one I(1) or mutually cointegrated).
2. Cointegration means a stationary long term relationship: variables are cointegrated if there is a
linear combination between the variables which is stationary.
TO WHAT EXTENT DO EXCHANGE RATES AND THEIR VOLATILITY AFFECT TRADE 31
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
effects are inferred from the estimates of
k k
c c
4 1
,..., or
k k
d d
4 1
,..., and the long-run
effects by
0
o ,
3
o (or
0
,
3
respectively) normalised by
0
o (
0
).
The first step in estimating error-correction models is to carry out the F-test for joint
significance of the lagged level variables or for their cointegration. A problem arises in
this step that is related to the choice of lag length. Although Pesaran et al. (2001) suggest
imposing a fixed number of lags on each differenced variable; Bahmani-Oskooee and
Ardalani (2006) have demonstrated that the F-test result is sensitive to the lag length.
Following Bahmani-Oskooee and Wang (2007), we first estimate by the OLS method
different ARDL models for all lags with a maximum of 12 lags. We use both Akaikes
information criterion (AIC) and Schwartz Bayesian Criterion (SBC)
3
to select the
optimum lags on each variable.
With the optimal lags, the presence of cointegration is then tested through an OLS
estimation by restricting all estimated coefficients of lagged level variables equal to zero
(
0
o =
1
o =
2
o =
3
o =0 or
0
=
1
=
2
=
3
=0). The null hypothesis of non cointegration is
tested against the alternative by the mean of an F-test with an asymptotic non-standard
distribution. If the computed F-statistic lies above the upper level of the band, the null is
rejected, indicating cointegration. If the computed F-statistic lies below the lower level
ban, the null cannot be rejected, supporting the absence of cointegration. If the statistics
fall within the band, inference would be inconclusive. This is called a bounds testing
procedure since the two sets of critical values provide critical value bounds for all
possibilities of the regressors into purely I(0), I(1) or mutually cointegrated.
In a second step, after confirmation of the existence of a long run relationship
between the variables in the model, the long run and short run models can be derived.
Estimates of
0
o -
3
o (
0
-
3
respectively) are then used to form an error-correction term
ECM
t-1
.
4
We replace the linear combination of lagged level variables (second line of each
equation) by ECM
t-1
. The error correction model is re-estimated by using the same lag
structure as before. When all variables are adjusting toward their long-run equilibrium,
the gap between the dependent and the independent variables measured by the coefficient
associated to ECM
t-1
must decrease. In other words, a negative and significant coefficient
obtained for ECM
t-1
not only will be an indication of adjustment toward equilibrium but
also an alternative way of supporting cointegration among variables (Bahmani and
Ardalani (2006)). The larger the error correction coefficient (in absolute value) the faster
is the economys return to its equilibrium, once shocked.
Finally, we run diagnostic tests. We test for stability of short-run and long-run
coefficient estimates by applying the CUSUM and CUSUMQ tests proposed by Brown
et al. (1975) to the residuals of the error-correction models. We present the conclusion in
3. The AIC and SBC are the two most popular model selection criteria. The strategy consists on
choosing the number of lags for which the criteria are the smallest. These model selection
criteria measure the fit of a given model by its maximized value of the log-likelihood
function.
4. ECM(-1) represents the lagged linear combination of the variables: it represents the gap towards
the equilibrium in period t-1. Its estimated associated coefficient corresponds to the reaction
degree of the dependent variable regards to the previous gap towards the equilibrium.
32 TO WHAT EXTENT DO EXCHANGE RATES AND THEIR VOLATILITY AFFECT TRADE
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
tables G.1 and G.2 in Annex G
5
. We also produce a Ramsey Reset specification test, and
a LM-test of non autocorrelation of residuals.
Cusum (cumulative sum) and Cusumq (cusum of squares test) are based on recursive
residuals. Cusum is defined as
+ =
=
r
k j
j
ols
r
v W
1
1
o
r=k+1, k+2, n
Where v
t
is the recursive residual based on the first j observations.
The test employs a graphic technique and involves plotting W and a pair of straight
lines for values of r = k+1, k+2, n. The straight lines are drawn assuming a 5%
significance level.
In the same idea, Cusumq is based on the quantities:
+ =
+ =
=
n
k j
j
r
k j
j
r
WW
1
2
1
2
v
v
r = k+1, k+2, n
5. Graphs are available upon request from the authors.
TO WHAT EXTENT DO EXCHANGE RATES AND THEIR VOLATILITY AFFECT TRADE 33
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
Annex C.
Alternative measures of volatility
The volatility of real bilateral exchange rate (ER) is reported in this paper by variable
vol. As mentioned in the text, three measures of volatility were tested in empirical
analysis. One is a GARCH-based measure. The two others are based on moving standard
deviation of ER. For each month this measure is the standard deviation of previous 12
observations ending at current month in the first case. For the alternative case, it is the
standard deviation of previous 60 observations (5 years). Only empirical results based on
the 5-year moving standard deviation are reported in the document.
In a simple GARCH model it is assumed that ER itself follows a first order auto-
regressive process:
ER
t
= a
0
+ a
1
ER
t-1
+
t
, (1)
where
t
is white noise with E () = 0 and V () = h
2
.
The conditional mean of ER
t
is a
0
+ a
1
ER
t-1
. In order to forecast the variance of ER,
the conditional variance of
t
which is a time varying variable needs to be estimated.
GARCH allows thus the variance of a variable like ER to change over time. The
theoretical specification of a GARCH(p,q) model which is being used is as follows:
2 2
1 1
2 2
1 1 0
2
... ...
p t t q t q t t
h h h
+ + + + + + = c | c | | (2)
Where p is the number of GARCH (lagged variance) and q the number of ARCH (lagged
residual squared terms)
The GARCH model represented by Equation (2) includes a ARCH term (s) which
states that the variance of the current error term is a function of the variance of error term
in the previous periods and a GARCH term (s) which summarizes last periods forecast
variance. The GARCH (p,q) model is used to generate predicted value of h
t
2
as a measure
of volatility of exchange rate.
Before estimating the GARCH model, we carry out an ARCH test. We use the
Lagrange multiplier procedure proposed by Engle (1982). The first step is to regress the
OLS squared residuals
2
t
c from the regression (1) on a constant and its own lagged
values:
2
t
c =
0
+
1
2
1
t
c
+
2
2
2
t
c
+ +
q
2
q t
c + e
t
(3)
The ARCH(q) effect is carried out by testing the statistical significance coefficients
0
=
=
q
= 0.
34 TO WHAT EXTENT DO EXCHANGE RATES AND THEIR VOLATILITY AFFECT TRADE
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
Under the null hypothesis, the conditional homoskedasticity is tested. The LM
statistic is asymptotically distributed as a chi-squared _
2
.
In a second step, once conditional heteroskedasticity in the residuals is established,
the GARCH model is estimated. The order of GARCH is determined by significance of
s and s in (2). Our results suggest that a GARCH (1,1) specification is sufficient
1
for
the following pair-countries: The Euro AreaUnited States and United States -China. A
GARCH (2,2) is better for Euro Area-China.
2
Next, the moving standard deviation measure of volatility is as follows:
2 / 1
1
2
2 1
) ( ). / 1 (
(
=
=
+ +
m
i
i t i t t
ER ER m Vol
ER: exchange rate; m: 12 or 60 observations according to the measure.
1. Other studies found a GARCH (1,1) specification like (Doyle, 2001).
2. Detailed results are available upon request from the authors.
TO WHAT EXTENT DO EXCHANGE RATES AND THEIR VOLATILITY AFFECT TRADE 35
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
Annex D.
Results of F-Test for Co-Integration Among Variables
We gather from Tables D.1. and D.2 below that calculated F-statistics are higher than
the upper-bound critical values in the majority of cases, supporting cointegration among
the variables in both models. This justifies keeping the lagged-level variables in the
models. Note that the lagged-level variables will be retained even in the models that
yielded insignificant F statistics. This is due to the significant and negative estimated
associated coefficient of the ECM variable (Annex F).
Table D.1. Results with GARCH volatility
Import-value model Export-value model
Optimum lags F-statistic Optimum lags F-statistic
Euro Area / United States
Agriculture Sector
Non-agriculture sector
12,0,2,0
4,0,2,0
7.28
(2.94)
12,5,0,1
12,6,9,1
17.42
3.83
Euro Area /China
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture sector
3,0,0,0
8,0,1,0
3.75
3.78
3,0,0,0
12,8,12,1
5.59
8.97
United States /China
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture Sector
1,3,7,1
12,12,3,0
15.33
4.61
6,8,0,0
1,0,0,0
20.68
15.92
Table D.2. Results with five-year standard deviation volatility measure
Import-value model Export-value model
Optimum lags F-statistic Optimum lags F-statistic
Euro Area / United States
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture sector
12,11,8,12
12,12,10,11
8.10
5.65
12,3,0,0
12,1,8,1
11.96
18.72
Euro Area /China
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture sector
3,0,0,0
8,0,1,0
4.65
7.58
3,0,0,0
12,11,12,12
5.65
7.43
United States /China
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture sector
7,3,7,2
12,2,0,6
10.27
13.54
6,8,0,3
1,1,0,0
22.45
19.59
Note: A trend is added in all specifications with the exception of agriculture imports of EA from the United States.
Critical values at 5% and 10 % if the model includes a constant and a trend are [4.066; 5.119] and [3.484; 4.458]
Critical values at 5% and 10 % if the model includes a constant only are [3.219; 4.378] and [2.711; 3.800].
Results that are reported in italic mean that we cannot conclude. Those in brackets correspond to a rejection of the test.
36 COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AND TRADE PERFORMANCE: POLICY IMPLICATIONS
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
Annex E.
Estimated Short-Run Effects
Table E.1. Estimated short-run effects of import function (vol= GARCH
Pair country
and variables
Lag order
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Euro Area United States
Agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
1.18***
(4.31)
-0.76
(1.63)
0.07***
(2.80)
1.36***
(2.96)
Non-agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
0.11
(0.73)
-0.08
(0.28)
-0.00
(0.14)
0.92***
(3.15)
Euro Area China
Agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
0.64***
(2.87)
0.28*
(1.80)
-0.00
(0.57)
Non-agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
0.63***
(2.78)
0.82***
(3.21)
-0.03**
(2.14)
United States - China
Agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
1.40
(0.98)
3.68*
(1.73)
0.07**
(2.16)
0.39
(0.26)
-0.16
(0.06)
3.88**
(2.63)
-0.71
(0.27)
-0.97
(0.38)
-0.28
(0.11)
5.72**
(2.33)
6.31**
(2.56)
Non-agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
-0.25
(0.24)
-2.76*
(1.67)
0.02
(1.05)
-0.10
(0.09)
-0.60
(0.34)
1.89
(1.61)
2.90*
(1.79)
2.14*
(1.89)
1.27
(1.07)
2.64**
(2.23)
2.06*
(1.74)
2.57**
(2.16)
1.40
(1.16)
1.32
(1.08)
3.45**
(2.58)
3.52**
(2.59)
Note: t-ratios in absolute value are reported in brackets.
TO WHAT EXTENT DO EXCHANGE RATES AND THEIR VOLATILITY AFFECT TRADE 37
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
Table E.2. Estimated short-run effects of export function (vol= GARCH
Pair
country
and
variables
Lag order
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Euro Area United States
Agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
-0.42
(0.46
0.87***
(8.29)
0.03
(1.49)
2.56***
(2.88)
3.72***
(4.07)
1.98**
(2.13)
3.35***
(3.53)
Non-agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
-0.47
(0.49)
-0.03
(0.12)
0.04*
(1.84)
0.66
(0.66)
0.75***
(2.73)
-0.43
(0.42)
0.27
(0.99)
-0.39
(0.38)
0.39
(1.44)
2.70**
(2.42)
-0.27
(1.02)
3.64***
(3.43)
0.03
(0.10)
-0.18
(0.64)
-0.57**
(2.02)
1.30***
(4.65)
Euro Area - China
Agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
0.56
(1.15)
-0.03
(0.10)
0.02
(0.48)
Non-agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
0.66***
(2.97)
-0.52*
(1.68)
-0.00
(0.41)
-3.52***
(4.27)
0.13
(0.34)
-2.93***
(3.98)
-1.03***
(2.80)
-2.54***
(3.87)
-0.68*
(1.83)
-2.23***
(3.88)
-1.32***
(3.63)
-1.94***
(4.03)
-0.33
(0.89)
-1.60***
(4.36)
-0.69*
(1.91)
-0.78***
(3.31)
-0.54
(1.40)
0.85**
(2.26)
-0.17
(0.42)
-0.24
(0.62)
0.76**
(2.00)
United States - China
Agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
1.66*
(5.25)
4.61***
(2.94)
-0.08
(1.23)
-10.39***
(5.25)
-10.58***
(5.93)
-9.44***
(5.44)
-8.90***
(5.36)
-7.49***
(4.77)
-5.70***
(4.30)
-2.20**
(2.35)
Non-agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
1.18***
(3.79)
-1.31**
(2.32)
0.05**
(1.91)
Note: t-ratios in absolute value are reported in brackets.
38 COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AND TRADE PERFORMANCE: POLICY IMPLICATIONS
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
Table E.3. Estimated short-run effects of import function (vol= five-year MSD
Pair
country
and
variables
Lag order
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Euro Area United States
Agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
1.76
(1.63)
0.13
(0.27)
3.55***
(2.68)
-3.34**
(2.61)
0.05
(0.09)
-0.71
(0.34)
-1.06
(0.86)
0.12
(0.22)
0.35
(0.16)
-3.17**
(2.65)
-0.68
(1.33)
3.73*
(1.79)
-0.12
(0.10)
-0.41
(0.77)
-1.54
(0.74)
-1.96*
(1.68)
-0.74
(1.44)
0.11
(0.05)
-1.86
(1.13)
-1.08**
(2.11)
4.71**
(2.29)
-5.95***
(-3.26)
0.61
(1.14)
-7.08***
(3.33)
-3.74*
(1.91)
3.07
(1.34)
-4.43**
(2.40)
-2.38
(1.00)
-2.75*
(1.80)
3.30
(1.42)
-3.31*
(1.99)
Non-agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
0.81
(1.25)
-0.14
(0.47)
0.17
(0.23)
-2.17**
(2.19)
0.43
(1.18)
0.21
(0.17)
-1.27
(1.25)
0.25
(0.76)
0.26
(0.21)
-0.35
(0.34)
-0.12
(0.35)
-0.59
(0.47)
-1.18
(1.08)
-0.11
(0.33)
0.55
(0.43)
-1.05
(1.02)
0.35
(1.07)
1.41
(1.07)
-0.33
(0.30)
0.09
(0.27)
-0.14
(0.11)
-1.15
(1.01)
0.12
(0.36)
-2.49**
(2.00)
2.79**
(2.45)
0.75**
(2.52)
1.34
(0.99)
0.69
(0.65)
0.82***
(2.82)
0.92
(0.65)
0.98
(1.00)
0.71**
(2.28)
0.26
(0.19)
2.45***
(2.91)
1.18
(1.15)
Euro Area - China
Agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
0.82***
(3.61)
0.36***
(2.72)
0.05**
(1.99)
Non-agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
1.36***
(4.67)
0.90***
(3.75)
0.09***
(3.83)
United States-China
Agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
1.06
(0.78)
4.64**
(2.24)
1.74
(1.49)
0.22
(0.16)
-0.37
(0.16)
-2.37*
(1.97)
3.84***
(2.72)
1.47
(0.63)
2.17
(093)
2.08
(0.90)
4.44*
(1.96)
6.61***
(2.78)
Non-agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
-0.32
(0.32)
-1.21***
(5.42)
0.94
(1.13)
-2.57**
(2.41)
-1.31
(1.00)
0.18
(0.13)
-0.51
(0.39)
1.35
(1.03)
-1.93**
(2.35)
Note: t-ratios in absolute value are reported in brackets.
TO WHAT EXTENT DO EXCHANGE RATES AND THEIR VOLATILITY AFFECT TRADE 39
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
Table E.4. Estimated short-run effects of export function (vol = five-year MSD
+ Lag order
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Euro Area United States
Agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
1.17
(1.26)
0.59***
(5.82)
0.09***
(3.49)
2.29**
(2.37)
3.16***
(3.18)
Non-agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
0.12
(0.14)
0.05
(0.21)
0.72***
(2.37)
-0.36
(1.23)
-0.05*
(1.84)
-0.40
(1.47)
-0.91***
(3.38)
-0.66**
(2.42)
-0.91***
(3.53)
-1.27**
(4.29)
Euro Area - China
Agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
0.54
(1.11)
0.11
(0.50)
0.01
(0.22)
Non-agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
0.14
(0.51)
-0.26
(0.77)
0.07
(0.54)
-4.46***
(3.56)
-0.57
(1.34)
0.54
(0.78)
-4.11***
(3.58)
-0.71*
(1.76)
-1.00
(1.29)
-3.76***
(3.59)
-1.10**
(2.51)
-0.50
(0.62)
-3.34***
(3.58)
-1.98***
(4.65)
0.79
(1.04)
-2.
85***
(3.46)
-0.39
(0.81)
-1.00
(1.22)
-2.39***
(3.44)
-1.64***
(3.73)
0.83
(0.82)
-1.72***
(2.92)
-0.81*
(1.93)
-0.82
(0.67)
-0.98**
(2.06)
0.38
(0.90)
-0.63
(0.47)
-0.76**
(2.14)
-0.51
(1.24)
2.28
(1.47)
-0.30
(1.30)
-0.75*
(1.82)
-1.74
(1.08)
0.51
(1.26)
3.10**
(2.47)
United States - China
Agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
1.54*
(1.68)
3.51***
(2.96)
-2.33
(0.49)
-10.79***
(5.49)
12.60*
(1.69)
-10.67***
(6.05)
-12.15**
(4.66)
-9.94***
(5.81)
-9.41***
(5.73)
-8.03***
(5.20)
-5.98***
(4.63)
-2.04**
(2.25)
Non-agriculture sector
LnY
lnER
lnVol
1.23***
(4.13)
0.67**
(2.03)
-0.12***
(3.58)
Note: t-ratios in absolute value are reported in brackets.
40 COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AND TRADE PERFORMANCE: POLICY IMPLICATIONS
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
ANNEX F.
ESTIMATED LONG-RUN EFFECTS
Results of this study show that estimated coefficient of the lagged error correction
model ECM is negative and highly significant in all cases. This confirms the long term
relationships between variables in levels. It is thus relevant to use such an error correction
model.
Table F.1. Estimated long-run effects Import model (vol=GARCH)
Constant lnY lnER LnVol ECMt-1
Euro Area United Sates
Agr Sector
Man Sector
9.69*
(1.90)
-0.18
(0.62)
2.29**
(2.07)
0.05
(0.73
0.10
(0.48)
-0.08*
(1.67)
0.13***
(4.41)
-0.00
(0.14)
-0.51***
(2.68)
-0.32***
(8.58)
Euro Area - China
Agr Sector
Man Sector
10.06***
(3.60)
15.27***
(8.91)
2.15***
(3.59)
1.47***
(3.91)
0.95**
(2.11)
0.42
(1.42)
-0.03
(0.56)
-0.08*
(1.99)
-0.30***
(3.62)
-0.42***
(3.02)
United States C hina
Agr Sector
Man Sector
9.84***
(3.91)
19.40***
(3.38)
1.35**
(2.37)
-0.10
(0.07)
-0.58
(0.75)
-1.30*
(1.83)
0.00
(0.19)
0.03
(0.90)
-0.61***
(7.48)
-0.54**
(2.15)
TO WHAT EXTENT DO EXCHANGE RATES AND THEIR VOLATILITY AFFECT TRADE 41
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
Table F.2. Estimated long-run effects Export model (vol=GARCH)
Constant lnY lnER LnVol ECMt-1
Euro Area United States
Agr Sector
Man Sector
13.55***
(4.99)
8.86**
(2.65)
1.36**
(2.29)
3.19***
(4.33)
2.18***
(3.89)
0.94***
(3.12)
-0.07**
(2.60)
-0.03
(1.31)
-0.40***
(3.73)
-0.35**
(2.49)
Euro Area - China
Agr Sector
Man Sector
11.99***
(2.78)
-3.19
(0.57)
1.04
(1.09)
5.63***
(4.35)
-0.06
(0.10)
1.50***
(4.64)
0.03
(0.49)
-0.06***
(2.96)
-0.53***
(4.38)
-0.90***
(4.19)
United States - China
Agr Sector
Man Sector
-29.37***
(4.08)
6.08**
(2.22)
11.57***
(6.50)
2.00***
(3.32)
3.81****
(2.92)
-2.21**
(2.58)
-0.06
(1.21)
0.09**
(2.26)
-1.21***
(9.24)
-0.59***
(7.20)
Note: t-ratio in absolute value are reported in brackets.
Table F.3. Estimated long-run effects import model (vol = 5-year MSD)
Constant lnY lnER LnVol ECMt-1
Euro Area United States
Agr Sector
Man Sector
7.50***
(5.12)
9.81***
(5.44)
2.61***
(8.40)
2.77***
(7.27)
1.03***
(18.60)
0.48***
(3.88)
-0.22***
(5.01)
-0.19***
(2.91)
-1.96***
(4.91)
-0.85**
(2.42)
Euro Area-China
Agr Sector
Man Sector
9.16***
(3.93)
14.15***
(16.02)
2.56***
(4.45)
1.80***
(8.43)
1.13***
(3.76)
0.31***
(2.75)
0.15*
(1.90)
0.13***
(4.85)
-0.32***
(3.95)
-0.75***
(4.50)
United States - China
Agr Sector
Man Sector
11.21***
(3.77)
7.62***
(3.04)
1.34**
(2.13)
2.76***
(5.77)
-0.07
(0.22)
-1.10***
(3.33)
0.02
(0.32)
0.09*
(1.82)
-0.93***
(5.80)
-1.10***
(4.38)
42 COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AND TRADE PERFORMANCE: POLICY IMPLICATIONS
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
Table F.4. Estimated long-run effects export model (vol = five-year MSD)
Constant lnY lnER LnVol ECMt-1
Euro Area United States
Agr Sector
Man Sector
11.85***
(4.71)
14.68***
(15.29)
1.89***
(3.35)
1.87***
(8.73)
1.31***
(3.70)
0.90***
(11.84)
0.19***
(2.89)
0.06***
(3.93)
-0.45***
(3.85)
-1.47**
(7.05)
Euro Area -China
Agr Sector
Man Sector
12.61***
(2.99)
5.73
(1.52)
1.02
(1.05)
3.41***
(3.96)
0.20
(0.50)
0.79***
(5.29)
0.02
(0.22)
-0.05*
(1.71)
-0.53***
(4.34)
-1.56***
(5.19)
United States-China
Agr Sector
Man Sector
-31.57***
(4.68)
7.93***
(3.21)
11.78***
(7.04)
2.82***
(4.57)
2.78***
(3.04)
0.95**
(2.03)
0.08
(0.98)
-0.17***
(3.95)
-1.26***
(9.77)
-0.70***
(8.20)
Note: t-ratio in absolute value are reported in brackets.
TO WHAT EXTENT DO EXCHANGE RATES AND THEIR VOLATILITY AFFECT TRADE 43
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
Annex G.
Diagnostic Tests
Some of the diagnostic tests undertaken are reported below. According to the adjusted
R
2
, the explanatory power of our estimated models is satisfactory. Additionally, CUSUM
and CUSUMSQ tests mostly support stability of the short-run and the long-run
coefficient estimates. (Graphical presentations of these test results have been not reported
for reasons of space but they are available upon request.) Third, the LM test for serial
correlation is significant only in four cases out of the 24 models. Finally, Ramseys Reset
test clearly indicates that all 24 models are well specified.
Table G.1. Diagnostic tests with GARCH volatility measure
Import-value model
2
R
CUSUM CUSUMQ LM
a
RESET
b
Euro Area / United States
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture sector
0.77
0.65
Stable
Stable
Unstable
Stable
30.80
28.96
0.22
0.00
Euro Area /China
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture sector
0.44
0.53
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
19.07
21.58
0.14
0.47
United States /China
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture sector
0.42
0.64
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
19.30
20.73
0.09
0.73
Export-value model
2
R
CUSUM CUSUMQ LM RESET
Euro Area / United States
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture sector
0.76
0.75
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
21.76
20.86
0.62
0.76
Euro Area /China
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture sector
0.47
0.69
Stable
Stable
Unstable
Stable
20.68
34.02
0.68
2.37
United States /China
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture sector
0.48
0.36
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
15.13
21.67
1.53
1.32
44 COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AND TRADE PERFORMANCE: POLICY IMPLICATIONS
OECD TRADE POLICY WORKING PAPER NO. 119 OECD 2011
Table G.2. Diagnostic tests with five-year moving standard deviation volatility measure
Import-value model
2
R
CUSUM CUSUMQ LM
a
RESET
b
Euro Area / United States
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture sector
0.76
0.69
Stable
Stable
Stable
Unstable
22.88
25.57
0.00
0.81
Euro Area / China
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture sector
0.46
0.61
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
16.43
19.05
0.17
1.74
United States / China
Agriculture sector
Non- agriculture sector
0.53
0.65
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
8.54
21.63
0.52
1.15
Export-value model
2
R
CUSUM CUSUMQ LM RESET
Euro Area / United States
Agriculture sector
Non- agriculture sector
0.71
0.75
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
27.54
18.61
0.02
0.04
Euro Area / China
Agriculture sector
Non-agriculture sector
0.47
0.72
Stable
Stable
Unstable
Unstable
17.91
13.07
0.64
0.00
United States / China
Agriculture sector
Non- agriculture sector
0.51
0.41
Stable
Stable
Unstable
Stable
20.16
20.45
0.95
1.15
a. The Lagrange Multiplier Test (LM) of residual correlation is distributed as
2
_ with 12 degrees of freedom. At the
5% (1%) level of significance, its critical value is 21.03 (26.22)
b. Ramseys Reset test for functional misspecification is distributed as
2
_ with one degree of freedom. Its critical
at 5% significance level is 3.84.