Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
|dc.description.abstract||In this paper, the evidence collected in the large literature on testing for Granger-causality frommoney to output is revisited. Using a broad data base of 14 EU-countries plus Canada, the USand Japan, and quarterly data from the mid 60s to the mid 90s, a number of hypotheses fromthis literature is evaluated. It is found that very few general conclusions can be sustained. Forinstance, in most countries it is not the case that the use of data in levels creates a bias infavour of finding Granger-causality effects of money on output compared to using differences.Neither does the significance of money lags decline when increasing the number of variablesincluded in the model. What appears to be robust, though, is that allowing for asymmetriesclearly increases the likelihood of finding significant causality effects. Based on the Grangercausalitytest results, a number of country groups are obtained using cluster analysis, which arecharacterised by a similar behaviour with respect to the money-output relation.||-|
|dc.relation.ispartofseries|||aZEI working paper |xB 08-1998||en_US|
|dc.title||Money-output Granger causality revisited: An empirical analysis of EU countries||en_US|
Files in This Item:
Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.