## wpiea2019256-print-pdf - 5.5 percent of GDP in 2017 for tourism-dependent countries, while for commodity-exporter

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [wpiea2019256-print-pdf - 5.5 percent of GDP in 2017 for tourism-dependent countries, while for commodity-exporter](https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/wp/2019/wpiea2019256-print-pdf.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/files/publications/wp/2019/wpiea2019256-print-pdf.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/files/publications/wp/2019/wpiea2019256-print-pdf.pdf.json)

---

### External balances and trade structure (2017)
- Tourism-dependent countries: current account balance of -5.5 percent of GDP in 2017.
- Commodity-exporter countries: current account balance of -0.1 percent of GDP in 2017.
- Total imports represented around 52 percent of GDP.
- Unweighted average component balances (percent of GDP, 2017) — Table 1 summary:
  - Caribbean average:
    - Current Account Balance -5.5
    - Goods Balance -18.6
    - Services Balance 11.7
    - Exports Goods 16.9
    - Exports Services 28.3
    - Imports Goods 35.5
    - Imports Services 16.6
  - Tourism-Dependent average:
    - Current Account Balance -7.5
    - Goods Balance -25.2
    - Services Balance 19.0
    - Exports Goods 9.0
    - Exports Services 36.7
    - Imports Goods 34.2
    - Imports Services 17.7
  - Commodity Exporter average:
    - Current Account Balance -0.1
    - Goods Balance -0.3
    - Services Balance -8.1
    - Exports Goods 38.7
    - Exports Services 5.4
    - Imports Goods 39.0
    - Imports Services 13.5
- Correlation of GDP growth (1990-2016):
  - At least 9 out of 15 Caribbean countries show a strong and positive correlation with Canada, the United States and/or the United Kingdom.
  - Most dependent: The Bahamas, Barbados, Antigua and Barbuda.
  - Weakest associations: Haiti, Guyana, Dominica.

### Methodology: GVAR model tailored for the Caribbean
- Implementation approach:
  - Tailored the Smith and Galesi (2014) GVAR Matlab toolbox to Caribbean characteristics and data availability.
  - Two-stage GVAR implementation:
    - Step i) estimate separate VAR-X models for each country.
    - Step ii) link country models through trade-weight matrices to form a global system.
- VAR-X specification details:
  - Domestic and foreign variables with lag orders p and q.
  - Foreign variables defined as weighted averages: x*_it = sum_j w_ij x_jt with sum_j w_ij = 1.
  - Stacked global system transformed into a standard VAR.
- Data and sample:
  - Annual data, 1980–2017.
  - Sample: 44 countries, of which 15 belong to the Caribbean region.
  - Country-specific variables:
    - real GDP (ln Real_GDP_it = ln Real_GDP_it),
    - real exchange rate (re p_it = ln E_it - ln CPI_it),
    - interest rates (R_it = r_it/100),
    - inflation (π_it = p_it - p_it-1).
  - Global variables:
    - oil price (ln poil_WTI_it),
    - price of raw materials (ln pmat_RawMaterialsPriceIndex_it).
  - Bilateral exports and imports: exp_i,j,t and imp_i,j,t disaggregated by origin and destination.
- Weak exogeneity testing:
  - Formal tests following Johansen (1992) and Harbo et al. (1998).
  - Result: only 5 out of 212 exogeneity tests rejected weak exogeneity.

### Model specification and estimation notes
- Benchmark specification included lags of all system variables, adjusted for stability and statistical significance.
- Not every country model includes the same variables or lags; practical exclusions applied to variables that adversely affected stability (e.g., nominal variables in countries with large inflation episodes).
- Maximum lag across countries: max_i p_i = p.
- Final global VAR expressed in standard VAR form with estimated coefficient matrices derived from stacked country models and the trade-weight matrix.

### Case study A — Oil price spillovers to ECCU countries
- ECCU characteristics:
  - net oil importers, tourism-dependent, low diversification.
- Observed effects of oil price fall since mid-2014:
  - Imports of oil in the region were reduced by about 4 percentage points of GDP, improving current account balances.
  - Energy prices contained between 2014-2016; electricity prices pass fuel costs to consumers using lagged averages (example pass-through practices: St. Vincent uses a 3-month average, Grenada uses a 13-month average).
  - Canadian tourist arrivals to the ECCU region dropped by 11 percent (y-o-y) in 2015.
- Tourism-source economy responses:
  - Canada: GDP growth slowed from 2.5 percent in 2014 to 1.2 percent in 2015; policy response included accommodative fiscal and monetary policies and exchange rate depreciation.
  - Trinidad and Tobago:
    - energy sector ~25 percent of economy;
    - recession in energy sector of about 10 percent in 2016;
    - overall GDP growth -6.1 percent in 2016 and -2.6 percent in 2017.
  - U.S. and U.K.: ambiguous net effects due to offsetting sectoral impacts.
- GVAR simulation — impulse-response to a negative oil price shock equivalent to 20 percent:
  - Positive GDP response expected in all ECCU countries except Dominica (results sensitive to recent natural disasters: Tropical storm Erika (2015) and hurricane Maria (2017); Dominica’s economy collapsed during 2014–2017).
  - Trinidad and Tobago: model predicts an oil shock would hit the economy by about 2 percent of GDP in the medium term (magnitude coincides with observed decline in 2016-2017).
  - Initial negative impact on tourism-source economies which diminishes over time.

### Case study B — Expansionary policy stance in the U.S.
- Size and links:
  - U.S. share of global economy: 24.3 percent of global GDP in 2017 and around 12 percent of global trade.
  - Caribbean aggregated GDP: fluctuated between 0.12 and 0.29 percent of world GDP since 1980; around 0.2 percent in 2017.
  - U.S. tourists accounted for 47 percent of total tourists to the region in 2016; share stable since 2006 with notable importance for Belize, Dominican Republic, and The Bahamas.
- Trade linkages for goods-exporters (1980–2017 averages / 2017 shares):
  - Exports to the U.S.: Haiti 79 percent, Trinidad and Tobago 51 percent of total exports (average cited for 1980–2017).
  - Imports from the U.S. for goods-exporters were about 20-30 percent of total imports in 2017.
- Exchange rate and interest rate transmission:
  - Many Caribbean countries have pegged or rigid exchange rate regimes to the U.S. dollar.
  - ECCU interest rates may not respond significantly to external interest rate variations; GVAR statistical results support this finding.
- GVAR simulation — impulse-response to a 1 percentage point increase in U.S. GDP:
  - All tourism-dependent Caribbean countries increase their level of GDP; a few increase more than proportionally to the change in U.S. GDP.
  - Goods-exporters: mixed responses
    - Marginally null or negative impact for some goods-exporters, including Trinidad and Tobago and Haiti.
    - Positive impact expected for Suriname and Guyana.
  - Explanation for negative/marginal responses: larger responses of some countries to real exchange rate fluctuations accompanying the initial U.S. GDP shock that partially revert initial trade effects.

### Conclusions and policy implications
- Methodological conclusion:
  - The GVAR methodology effectively isolates global and country-specific shocks and gauges cross-country impacts using trade-weighted linkages and second-round effects.
  - The GVAR can be expanded to include more countries or idiosyncratic variables for particular countries as a potential extension for future research.
- Key empirical findings:
  - An oil price drop benefits most ECCU economies (net oil importers) via lower import bills and contained energy prices.
  - Expansionary U.S. policy strongly benefits tourism-dependent Caribbean economies; effects on goods exporters are mixed.
- Policy recommendations and structural implications:
  - Caribbean countries may benefit from preventive measures to reduce vulnerability to external shocks, including:
    - increasing competitiveness,
    - diversifying their economies,
    - reducing dependence on critical commodities and services, namely, oil-based energy and tourism.
  - Such policies could reduce exposure to external imbalances and promote economic growth.

*Source: IMF staff estimates and authors’ calculations as presented in the supplied content.*

### 5.5 percent of GDP in 2017 for tourism-dependent countries, while for commodity-exporter

### wpiea2019256-print-pdf - 5.5 percent of GDP in 2017 for tourism-dependent countries, while for commodity-exporter

### External balances and trade structure (2017)
- Tourism-dependent countries: current account balance of -5.5 percent of GDP in 2017.
- Commodity-exporter countries: current account balance of -0.1 percent of GDP in 2017.
- Total imports represented around 52 percent of GDP (no significant differences between tourism-dependent and commodity-exporter groups).
- Table 1 reported component balances (as percent of GDP, 2017) with unweighted averages:
  - Caribbean average: Current Account Balance -5.5; Goods Balance -18.6; Services Balance 11.7; Exports Goods 16.9; Exports Services 28.3; Imports Goods 35.5; Imports Services 16.6.
  - Tourism-Dependent average: Current Account Balance -7.5; Goods Balance -25.2; Services Balance 19.0; Exports Goods 9.0; Exports Services 36.7; Imports Goods 34.2; Imports Services 17.7.
  - Commodity Exporter average: Current Account Balance -0.1; Goods Balance -0.3; Services Balance -8.1; Exports Goods 38.7; Exports Services 5.4; Imports Goods 39.0; Imports Services 13.5.
- At least 9 out of 15 Caribbean countries show a strong and positive correlation of their GDP growth with that of Canada, the United States and/or the United Kingdom (1990-2016). Most dependent: The Bahamas, Barbados, Antigua and Barbuda. Weakest associations: Haiti, Guyana, Dominica.

### Methodology: GVAR model tailored for the Caribbean
- Approach: Tailored the Smith and Galesi (2014) GVAR Matlab toolbox to Caribbean characteristics and data availability.
- Two-stage GVAR implementation:
  - Step i) estimate separate VAR-X models for each country.
  - Step ii) link country models through trade-weight matrices to form a global system.
- Individual VAR-X specification summary:
  - Domestic and foreign variables with lag orders p and q.
  - Foreign variables defined as weighted averages of trading partners: x*_it = sum_j w_ij x_jt with sum_j w_ij = 1.
  - Stacked global system transformed into a standard VAR.
- Data and frequency:
  - Annual data, 1980–2017.
  - Sample: 44 countries, of which 15 belong to the Caribbean region.
  - Country-specific variables: real GDP (ln Real_GDP_it = ln Real_GDP_it), real exchange rate (re p_it = ln E_it - ln CPI_it), interest rates (R_it = r_it/100), inflation (π_it = p_it - p_it-1).
  - Global variables: oil price (ln poil_WTI_it), price of raw materials (ln pmat_RawMaterialsPriceIndex_it).
  - Bilateral exports and imports: exp_i,j,t and imp_i,j,t disaggregated by origin and destination.
- Weak exogeneity testing:
  - Formal tests following Johansen (1992) and Harbo et al. (1998).
  - Result: only 5 out of 212 exogeneity tests rejected weak exogeneity.

### Model specification and estimation notes
- Benchmark specification included lags of all system variables, adjusted for stability and statistical significance; not every country model includes the same variables or lags.
- Practical exclusions: variables that adversely affected country-specific or global stability (e.g., nominal variables in countries with large inflation episodes).
- Maximum lag across countries: max_i p_i = p.
- Final global VAR expressed in standard VAR form with estimated coefficient matrices derived from stacked country models and trade-weight matrix.

### Case study A — Oil price spillovers to ECCU countries
- ECCU characteristics: net oil importers, tourism-dependent, low diversification.
- Observed effects of oil price fall since mid-2014:
  - Imports of oil in the region were reduced by about 4 percentage points of GDP, improving current account balances.
  - Energy prices contained between 2014-2016; electricity prices pass fuel costs to consumers using lagged averages (fuel price pass-through practices vary across ECCU countries, e.g., St. Vincent uses a 3-month average, Grenada uses a 13-month average).
  - Canadian tourist arrivals to the ECCU region dropped by 11 percent (y-o-y) in 2015.
- Tourism-source economy responses:
  - Canada: GDP growth slowed from 2.5 percent in 2014 to 1.2 percent in 2015; policy response included accommodative fiscal and monetary policies and exchange rate depreciation.
  - Trinidad and Tobago: energy sector ~25 percent of economy; recession in energy sector of about 10 percent in 2016; overall GDP growth -6.1 percent in 2016 and -2.6 percent in 2017.
  - U.S. and U.K.: ambiguous net effects due to offsetting sectoral impacts.
- GVAR simulation: impulse-response to a negative oil price shock equivalent to 20 percent in its price:
  - Positive GDP response expected in all ECCU countries except Dominica (results sensitive to recent natural disasters: Tropical storm Erika (2015) and hurricane Maria (2017); Dominica’s economy collapsed during 2014–2017).
  - Trinidad and Tobago: model predicts an oil shock would hit the economy by about 2 percent of GDP in the medium term (magnitude coincides with observed decline in 2016-2017).
  - Initial negative impact on tourism-source economies which diminishes over time.

### Case study B — Expansionary policy stance in the U.S.
- U.S. share of global economy: 24.3 percent of global GDP in 2017 and around 12 percent of global trade.
- Caribbean aggregated GDP: fluctuated between 0.12 and 0.29 percent of world GDP since 1980; around 0.2 percent in 2017.
- Tourism linkages:
  - U.S. tourists accounted for 47 percent of total tourists to the region in 2016; share stable since 2006 with notable importance for Belize, Dominican Republic, and The Bahamas.
- Trade linkages for goods-exporters:
  - Between 1980 and 2017, average export shares to the U.S.: Haiti 79 percent, Trinidad and Tobago 51 percent of total exports.
  - Imports from the U.S. for goods-exporters were about 20-30 percent of total imports in 2017.
- Exchange rate and interest rate transmission:
  - Many Caribbean countries have pegged or rigid exchange rate regimes to the U.S. dollar.
  - ECCU interest rates may not respond significantly to external interest rate variations; statistical results from the GVAR support this finding.
- GVAR simulation: impulse-response to a 1 percentage point increase in U.S. GDP:
  - All tourism-dependent Caribbean countries increase their level of GDP; a few increase more than proportionally to the change in U.S. GDP.
  - Goods-exporters: mixed responses
    - Marginally null or negative impact for some goods-exporters, including Trinidad and Tobago and Haiti.
    - Positive impact expected for Suriname and Guyana.
  - Explanation for negative/marginal responses: larger responses of some countries to real exchange rate fluctuations accompanying the initial U.S. GDP shock that partially revert initial trade effects.

### Conclusions and policy implications
- The GVAR methodology effectively isolates global and country-specific shocks and gauges their cross-country impacts using trade-weighted linkages and second-round effects.
- Key findings:
  - An oil price drop benefits most ECCU economies (net oil importers) via lower import bills and contained energy prices.
  - Expansionary U.S. policy strongly benefits tourism-dependent Caribbean economies; effects on goods exporters are mixed.
- Policy recommendations and structural implications:
  - Caribbean countries may benefit from preventive measures to reduce vulnerability to external shocks, including:
    - increasing competitiveness,
    - diversifying their economies,
    - reducing dependence on critical commodities and services, namely, oil-based energy and tourism.
  - Such policies could reduce exposure to external imbalances and promote economic growth.
- Methodological note: the GVAR model can be expanded to include more countries or idiosyncratic variables for particular countries as a potential extension for future research.

*Source: IMF staff estimates and authors’ calculations as presented in the supplied content.*

### References

### References

### Bibliographic entries (as listed)
- Anderton R. and Alessandro Galesi and Marco Lombardi and Filippo di Mauro, 2010. "Key Elements of Global Inflation," RBA Annual Conference Volume,in: Renée Fry and Callum Jones and Christopher Kent (ed.), Inflation in an Era of Relative Price Shocks Reserve Bank of Australia
- Baumeister C. and Lutz Kilian, 2016. "Lower Oil Prices and the U.S. Economy: Is This Time Different?," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 47(2 (Fall)), pages 287-357.
- Bernanke B.and Mark Gertler and Mark Watson, 1997. "Systematic Monetary Policy and the Effects of Oil Price Shocks," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 28(1), pages 91-157.
- Chudik A. and Michael Fidora, 2012. "How the global perspective can help us identify structural shocks," Staff Papers, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Dec.
- Chudik A. and M. Hashem Pesaran, 2013. "Econometric Analysis of High Dimensional VARs Featuring a Dominant Unit," Econometric Reviews, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 32(5-6), pages 592-649, August.
- Chudik A. and M. Hashem Pesaran, 2016. "Theory and Practice Of Gvar Modelling," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 165-197, 02.
- Di Mauro F. and L. Vanessa Smith and Stephane Dees and M. Hashem Pesaran, 2007. "Exploring the international linkages of the euro area: a global VAR analysis," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(1), pages 1-38.
- Edwards Sebastian, 1997."Openness, Productivity and Growth: What Do We Really Know?," NBER Working Papers 5978, National Bureau of Economic Research.
- Ferderer, Peter, 1996. "Oil price volatility and the macroeconomy," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 1-26.
- Gourinchas P. and Hélène Rey, 2007. "From World Banker to World Venture Capitalist: U.S. External Adjustment and the Exorbitant Privilege," NBER Chapters, in: G7 Current Account Imbalances: Sustainability and Adjustment, pages 11-66, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Hamilton, James D., 1996. "This is what happened to the oil price-macroeconomy relationship," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 215-220, October.
- Han, Fei and Ng, Thiam, (2011), ASEAN-5 Macroeconomic Forecasting Using a GVAR Model, No 76, Working Papers on Regional Economic Integration, Asian Development Bank.
- Harbo, I., S. Johansen, B. Nielsen, and A. Rahbek. 1998. ‘Asymptotic Inference on Cointegrating Rank in Partial Systems’, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 16, pp. 388-399.
- IMF, 2016. ‘IMF Country Report 16/226’, July.
- IMF, 2018. ‘IMF Country Report 18/179’, June.
- Johansen, S. 1992. ‘Cointegration in Partial Systems and the Efficiency of Single-Equation Analysis’, Journal of Econometrics, 52, pp. 231-254.
- Meissner, Christopher M., 2014. "Growth from Globalization? A View from the Very Long Run," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 8, pages 1033-1069 Elsevier.
- Myrvoda A. and Julien Reynaud, 2018. "Monetary Policy Transmission in the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union," IMF Working Papers 18/70, International Monetary Fund.
- Pesaran, M. Hashem and Schuermann, Til and Smith, L. Vanessa, 2009. "Forecasting economic and financial variables with global VARs," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 642-675, October.
- PwC, 2015. “The Impact of Lower Oil Prices on the UK Economy”, on UK Economic Outlook, March 2015.
- Raciborski R. and Anastasia Theofilakou and Lukas Vogel, 2015. "Revisiting the macroeconomic effects of oil price changes," Quarterly Report on the Euro Area (QREA), Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission, vol. 14(2), pages 19-27, July.
- Walther T. and Lanouar Charfeddine and Tony Klein, 2018. "Oil Price Changes and U.S. Real GDP Growth: Is this Time Different?” Working Papers on Finance 1816, University of St. Gallen, School of Finance.

### Annex — List of countries included in the model
- 1 Antigua and Barbuda
- 2 Austria
- 3 Bahamas
- 4 Barbados
- 5 Belgium
- 6 Belize
- 7 Bulgaria
- 8 Cameroon
- 9 Canada
- 10 China
- 11 Cyprus
- 12 Denmark
- 13 Dominica
- 14 Dominican Republic
- 15 Finland
- 16 France
- 17 Germany
- 18 Greece
- 19 Grenada
- 20 Guyana
- 21 Haiti
- 22 Hungary
- 23 India
- 24 Ireland
- 25 Italy
- 26 Jamaica
- 27 Japan
- 28 Luxembourg
- 29 Malta
- 30 Mexico
- 31 Netherlands
- 32 Poland
- 33 Portugal
- 34 Romania
- 35 Singapore
- 36 Spain
- 37 St. Kitts and Nevis
- 38 St. Lucia
- 39 St. Vincent and the Grenadines
- 40 Suriname
- 41 Sweden
- 42 Trinidad and Tobago
- 43 United Kingdom
- 44 United States

### Figures (labels and measured items)
- Figure A1. Total Trade (percent)
  - Depicts "Trade Share Caribbean" and "Trade Share World - RHS" series over years 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015 for individual Caribbean countries (examples in the source: Antigua and Barbuda; Bahamas; Barbados; Belize; Dominica; Dominican Republic; Grenada; Guyana; Haiti; Jamaica; St. Kitts and Nevis; St. Lucia; St. Vincent and the Grenadines; Suriname; Trinidad and Tobago). Axis tick values shown in the source include numeric points such as .003 .004 .005 .006; .015 .02 .025 .03 .035; .008 .01 .012 .014 .016 .018; .004 .005 .006 .007; .001 .0015 .002; .08 .09 .1 .11 .12 .13; .0015 .002 .0025 .003 .0035; .006 .007 .008 .009 .01; .008 .01 .012 .014 .016; .025 .03 .035 .04 .045 .05; .0015 .002 .0025; .003 .0035 .004 .0045 .005 .0055; .001 .0015 .002 .0025; .006 .008 .01 .012; .04 .05 .06 .07 .08; and world-share scales such as 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2; 7 8 9 10 11; 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5; 1.8 2 2.2 2.4; .4 .45 .5 .55 .6; 25 30 35 40; .6 .7 .8 .9 1; 2 2.5 3 3.5 4; 3 4 5 6; 11 12 13 14 15 16; .6 .65 .7 .75 .8; 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7; .55 .6 .65 .7 .75; 2 3 4 5; and 15 20 25 30.
- Figure A2. Real Effective Exchange Rate
  - Shows "REER" index (examples show index ticks 80 90 100 110 120 130 and dates 2008m1 2010m1 2012m1 2014m1 2016m1) and "Correlation" scale running from -1 to 1; series include "REER USA", "Correlation w/ USA", "Correlation w/ UK", "Correlation w/ CAN" for listed countries (Antigua and Barbuda; Bahamas; Barbados; Belize; Dominica; Dominican Republic; Grenada; Guyana; Haiti; Jamaica; St. Kitts and Nevis; St. Lucia; St. Vincent and the Grenadines; Suriname; Trinidad and Tobago).
- Figure A3. GDP Size of the 44 countries included in the GVAR Model

### Tables and statistical outputs (labels and content summaries)
- Table A1. Weak Exogeneity Test
  - Columns include "Country", "F test", "Fcrit_0.05", and variables labeled "gdps", "Dpseps", "rspoil" per the table header formatting in the source.
  - Sample entries (as shown): ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA F( 1,23) 4.28 1.24 2.420.010.260.92; AUSTRIA F( 1,22) 4.30 0.64 0.39 0.04; BAHAMAS F( 1,23) 4.28 2.47 0.71 0.474.401.11; ...; USA F( 1,23) 4.28 2.62 1.11 1.570.01.
- Table A2. Coefficients of the VECX Model
  - Presents per-country VECX coefficients for domestic equations. For each country the table lists R2, Intercept, lagged and contemporaneous coefficients for variables with exact labels used in the source (examples include dgdp, dDp, dr, ep, etc.), and numerous numeric coefficient entries that appear in the source (e.g., for ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA: dgdp 0.47 0.23 0.00 -0.21 -0.17 -0.03 0.02 -0.01 -0.10 0.00 1.66 -0.16 -0.19 2.90 -0.05; AUSTRIA dgdp 0.75 -0.71 -0.28 -0.35 0.16 0.08 0.31 -0.17 0.55 0.80 -0.01 0.24; etc.). The table spans many countries and includes continued pages with extensive coefficient matrices.
- Table A2 (continued) — Unit root tests for domestic variables
  - Presents ADF and WS test decisions ("Not reject H0" or "Reject H0") at the 5% significance level for domestic variables and their differences (e.g., gdp (with trend), gdp (no trend), Dgdp, DDgdp, DDDgdp, ep (with trend), dep, r (with trend), Dr, DDr, etc.) across all listed countries. The table notes: "1\ H0: Unit root; at the 5% Significance Level" and "Source: Author's calculations."
- Table A3. Unit root tests for foreign variables
  - Similar panel of ADF and WS decisions for foreign variables (gdps, Dgdps, DDgdps, Dps, DDeps, rs, Drs, etc.) across countries, with the same note: "1\ H0: Unit root; at the 5% Significance Level" and "Source: Author's calculations."
- Additional notes in tables:
  - Multiple instances of exact test-statment strings such as "Not reject H0" and "Reject H0" are used consistently across unit-root tables.
  - Tables include precise test-statistic headings and are annotated as "Source: Author's calculations."

*Source: wpiea2019256-print-pdf - References*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/wp/2019/wpiea2019256-print-pdf.pdf_