Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may

This paper analyses the macroeconomic effects of inflation targeting (it) in five LatinAmerican countries during the period 2000-2007. We perform three types of econometric tests, which coincide in showing that it regimes have contributed to decreasing the level and variability of both the rate of inflation and the short-term interest rate, compared with a group of non-it Latin American countries. Moreover, our empirical analysis clearly reveals that it has led to lower variability in gdp growth, but the net effects on the level of economic growth remain unclear. The main technical innovation of this paper is the estimation of a treatment effects model to solve the endogeneity problem of adopting it, which is inherently present in most of the econometric tests applied so far in this field.

This paper studies the Balassa-Samuelson effects in two areas with strong differences in economic development, sixteen OECD countries and sixteen Latin American economies. The USA is taken as a benchmark. Applying recent panel cointegration and bootstrapping techniques that solve for cross-sectional dependence and small panel size problems, we find some evidence for not rejecting the whole hypothesis in the LA area. In the context of OECD group, the second stage of the BS hypothesis, which relates relative sector prices with the real exchange rate, does not hold, probably because national markets remain to some extent segmented, as reflected in departures from PPP in the tradable sectors.

Purpose This study aims to identify structural breaks in the current account and the periods between these breaks, which the authors name stability spells, and study their characteristics and determinants. Design/methodology/approach Using data from the IMF and the World Bank, this study applies the Lee and Strazicich test to endogenously identify breaks and the Heckman selection model to simultaneously study the determinants of structural breaks and current-account changes after breaks. Findings This study identifies 212 significant structural breaks and 341 stability spells. These spells become shorter and more volatile the further they are from equilibrium, and half of them last 10 years or less. The results show that economic growth and foreign-exchange piling are particularly useful to prevent breaks, while lower per capita income increases exposure to break risks. Originality/value This study introduces the concept of current-account stability spells to refer to the periods between structural breaks. These spells are then studied to determine their main characteristics. The authors also apply a global perspective in their analysis, using a wide sample of 181 economies between 1980 and 2018 and considering positive and negative breaks in both level and trend.

No abstract