Econometrical analysis of the purchasing power parity in Peru

Main Article Content

Luis Francisco Laurente Blanco
Froylan Machaca Hancco


Cointegration equations, Long term, VAR, Price index


Peru is a small economy open to the world, highly dependent on transactions with its trading partners that expose it to external shocks such as the financial
crisis of 2008 or the shock of interest rates in 2006 that directly affect the behavior of the rate exchange. Therefore, the objective of this research was to contrast the validity of purchasing power parity between Peru and the United States in the period 2000-2019 from the functional forms of the parity equation in its absolute and relative forms. For the contrast analysis of cointegration relationships, the Johansen methodology was used; for the
calculation of long-term parameters, the modification of autoregressive vector models. The results reveal that the purchasing power parity hypothesis for the Peruvian sol and for the US dollar is not fulfilled in any of its functional forms. This is due to the parameters estimated for absolute and relative parity being different from unity, thus rejecting the hypothesis of market efficiency in the long term for both Peru and the United States.


Download data is not yet available.
Abstract 326 | PDF (Español) Downloads 191


BCRP. (2019). Sistemas de Consultas Estadísticas, varios años. Recuperado el 6 de marzo del 2018, de

BLS. (2019). Consumer Price Index (CPI) Databases: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Recuperado el 10 de septiembre del 2018, de

Chocholata, M. (2001). Purchasing Power Parity and Cointegration: Evidence from Latvia and Slovakia. Ekonomický Časopis, (1), 51-60.

Clemente, J., Montañés, A., y Reyes, M. (1998). Testing for a unit root in variables with a double change in the mean. Economics Letters, 59 (2), 175-182.

Dickey, D. A., y Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series With a Unit Root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74 (366), 427-431.

Edison, H. (1987). Purchasing Power Parity in the Long Run: A Test of the Dollar/Pound Exchange Rate (1890-1978). Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 19 (3), 376-387.

Engle, R. F., y Granger, C. W. J. (1987). Co-Integration and Error Correction: Representation, Estimation, and Testing. Econometrica, 55 (2), 251.

Frenkel, J. A. (1976). A Monetary Approach to the Exchange Rate: Doctrinal Aspects and Empirical Evidence. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 78 (2), 200.

Frenkel, J. A. (1978). Purchasing power parity. Doctrinal perspective and evidence from the 1920s. Journal of International Economics, 8 (2), 169-191.

Frenkel, J. A. (1981). Flexible Exchange Rates, Prices, and the Role of “News”: Lessons from the 1970s. Journal of Political Economy, 89 (4), 665.

Gómez, M., y Rodríguez, J. (2012). Análisis de la Paridad del Poder de Compra: Evidencia Empírica entre México y Estados Unidos. Estudios Económicos, 27 (1), 169-207.

Granger, C. W. J. (1980). Testing for causality. A personal viewpoint. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 2 (C), 329-352.

Granger, C. W. J. (1988). Some recent development in a concept of causality. Journal of Econometrics, 39(1-2), 199-211.

Guevara, G. (1999). Política Monetaria del Banco Central: una perspectiva histórica. Revista Estudios Económicos, (5), 1-33.

Jaramillo, M., y Serván, S. (2012). Modeling exchange rate dynamics in Peru: A cointegration approach using the UIP and PPP. MPR 70772. University Library of Munich, Germany.

Johansen, S. (1988). Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 12 (2-3), 231-254.

Johansen, S., y Juselius, K. (1990). Maximum Likelihood Estimation and Inference on Cointegration - With Applications To the Demand for Money. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 2.

Kim, Y. (2008). Purchasing Power Parity in the Long Run: A Cointegration Approach. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 22 (4), 491-503.

Kugler, P., y Lenz, C. (2014). Multivariate Cointegration Analysis and the Long-Run Validity of PPP. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 75 (1), 180-184.

Macías, A. (2003). Tipo de cambio y paridad del poder de compra en México. Comercio Exterior, 53 (9), 820-831.

Mackinnon, J., Haug, A., y Michelis, L. (1999). Numerical distribution functions of likelihood ratio tests for cointegration. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 14 (5), 563-577.<563::AID-JAE530>3.0.CO;2-R

Muñoz, J. (2011). Paridad del Poder de Compra: Evidencia Empírica de Largo Plazo. Theoria, 20 (1), 33-41.

Pacheco, J. (2017). Estimando la Política Cambiaria según la Paridad de Poder de Compra: el caso peruano, colombiano y chileno 1960-2015. Lima: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.

Pérez, M., y Vega, J. (1993). Paridad del Poder de Compra: Un análisis empírico. España: Banco de España.

Phillips, P. C., y Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, 75 (2), 335-346.

Ricardo, D. (1821). On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shams, N., y Murad, W. (2010). Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) in the Long-Run: A Cointegration Approach. The Jahangirnagar Economic Review, 21 (4), 491-503.

Sideris, D. (2004). Testing for Long-Run PPP in a System context: Evidence for the US, Germany and Japan. Grecia: Bank of Greece.

Wald, A., y Wolfowitz, J. (1940). On a Test Whether Two Samples are from the Same Population. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 11 (2), 147-162.

Wheatley, J. (1807). An Essay on The Theory of Money and Principles of Commerce (vol. 1). Londres: W. Bulmer and Co.

Zivot, E., y Andrews, D. W. K. (1992). Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 10 (3), 251–270.