Exogenous shocks and time-varying price persistence in the EU27

Caporale, Guglielmo Maria; Gil-Alaña, Luis A.; Imeri, Amir Article Exogenous shocks and time-varying price persistence in the EU27 Journal of Applied Economics Provided in Cooperation with: University of CEMA, Buenos Aires Suggested Citation: Caporale, Guglielmo Maria; Gil-Alaña, Luis A.; Imeri, Amir (2024) : Exogenous shocks and time-varying price persistence in the EU27, Journal of Applied Economics, ISSN 1667-6726, Taylor & Francis, Abingdon, Vol. 27, Iss. 1, pp. 1-16, https://doi.org/10.1080/15140326.2024.2329857 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/314265 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 be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Journal of Applied Economics ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/recs20 Exogenous shocks and time-varying price persistence in the EU27 Guglielmo Maria Caporale, Luis A. Gil-Alana & Amir Imeri To cite this article: Guglielmo Maria Caporale, Luis A. Gil-Alana & Amir Imeri (2024) Exogenous shocks and time-varying price persistence in the EU27, Journal of Applied Economics, 27:1, 2329857, DOI: 10.1080/15140326.2024.2329857 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15140326.2024.2329857 © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Published online: 21 Mar 2024. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 486 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=recs20 REVIEW ARTICLE Exogenous shocks and time-varying price persistence in the EU27 Guglielmo Maria Caporale a , Luis A. Gil-Alana b,c and Amir Imeri d a Economics, Brunel University London, London, UK; b Faculty of Economics, Edificio Amigos, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain; c Economics, Universidad Francisco de Vitoria, Madrid, Spain; d Economics, University for Business and Technology, Pristina, Kosovo ABSTRACT This paper analyses monthly price persistence in the EU27 countries over the period 2010–2022 using a fractional integration framework, where the measure of persistence is the fractional differencing parameter d. In addition to full sample estimates, subsample and recursive ones are obtained to examine time variation. On the whole, the results provide clear evidence that both the exogenous shocks considered (namely, the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war) have generally increased price persistence in the EU27 (despite their heterogeneity), although the recursive estimates suggest that their impact might have peaked and might now be decreasing. Therefore, any policies adopted to counteract those shocks should be gradually phased out. The exceptions are the Southern European countries, where price persistence appears to have decreased, though in Italy the recursive analysis indicates that it is now rising sharply. ARTICLE HISTORY Received 28 March 2023 Accepted 5 March 2024 KEYWORDS Price persistence; fractional integration; COVID-19 pandemic; Russia-Ukraine war 1. Introduction The world economy has recently been hit by two exogenous shocks with global consequences, namely the COVID-19 pandemic and the energy crisis resulting from the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Both of them have had repercussions not only on the real economy, but also on prices, which have risen sharply in countries throughout the globe. An interesting issue is whether or not the effects of those shocks on prices will be long-lived in order to be able to adopt appropriate policy responses. This is the focus of the present study, which provides evidence on the degree of price persistence in each of the 27 European Union member states (EU27) over a sample period including both the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war. More specifically, the aim of the analysis is to establish whether there has been any time variation in the degree of persistence as a result of those two shocks. For this purpose, a fractional integration model for monthly log-prices is estimated first over a sample ending in December 2019 CONTACT Luis A. Gil-Alana [email protected] Faculty of Economics, Edificio Amigos, University of Navarra, Pamplona E-31009, Spain JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMICS 2024, VOL. 27, NO. 1, 2329857 https://doi.org/10.1080/15140326.2024.2329857 © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent. (the period before the COVID-19 pandemic), then for one ending in January 2022 (the period before Russia-Ukraine war) and lastly for the full sample ending in December 2022; in addition, recursive analysis is carried out to shed further light on the possible presence of time variation. The adopted framework is more general than the standard one based on the dichotomy between I(0) stationarity and the I(1) non-stationarity. Specifically, it allows for fractional as well as integer degrees of differentiation. Moreover, it produces a direct measure of persistence in the form of the estimated fractional differencing parameter d. Finally, it is informative on whether the effects of shocks are transitory or permanent and the nature of the dynamic adjustment process. This is essential information for policy makers to decide on appropriate actions. Note that our analysis is univariate and therefore cannot shed light on the specific channels through which shocks can affect prices. However, it is still useful to policy makers since knowledge of whether or not the effects of shocks will persist can help them decide on the appropriateness of policy intervention. In the existing literature various papers have analysed inflation persistence using different methods. For instance, Franta et al. (2010) estimated ARFIMA models and found that among the new members of the European Union some (Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Malta, Romania, and Slovakia) exhibit persistence levels similar to those of the euro area countries, whilst others (Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Slovenia) are characterised by much higher persistence. Caporale and Gil-Alana (2011) considered Gegenbauer processes for some European countries and found mean reversion in all cases, which implies that the effects of exogenous shocks on inflation are transitory and therefore there is no need for active policies to respond to them. Gil-Alana et al. (2016) analysed the inflation rate in the G7 countries allowing for nonlinearities; in particular, they applied fractional integration methods based on Chebyshev polynomials in time. They found evidence of unit roots in the UK, Canada, France, Japan and the USA, of mean reversion in Germany, and of explosive patterns in Italy. J. Cuestas et al. (2016) examined the inflation differentials between seven Central and Eastern European Countries (CEECs) and the Eurozone. They found evidence of nonlinearities in most cases, but of persistence only in a few ones. Note that a lot of the available empirical evidence can be rationalized in terms of the contracting model developed by Fuhrer and Moore (1995), in which agents are concerned with relative real wages. Further evidence on inflation persistence was provided by Robalo Marques (2004) for both the US and the Euro Area; he pointed out that the results are sensitive to the function used to proxy the inflation mean, and found higher persistence in the 60s and 70s. Cogley et al. (2010) focused on the US inflation gap, measured as the difference between inflation and trend inflation, and reported that persistence increased during the 1980s and decreased after the Volcker disinflation, whilst Pivetti and Reis (2007) found that it was relatively stable. Mayoral (2007) modelled the inflation rates of 21 OECD countries using fractional integration methods and found generally high and relatively stable persistence. Caporale et al. (2020) applied long-memory techniques to long runs of data for the UK and the US by applying long-memory methods and also concluded that inflation persistence in these two countries was generally stable over the time period 1660–2016. However, Caporale and Gil-Alana (2020) found an increase in the degree of persistence in the 16th century and more recently after WWI and in the last quarter of the 20th century in the case of the UK when considering a longer sample from 1216 to 2010. 2G. M. CAPORALE ET AL. Caporale et al. (2022) again used long-range dependence methods and found high persistence in the G7 over the period January 1973 - March 2020. Finally, Caporale et al. (2023) evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and of the Russia-Ukraine war on the degree of persistence of inflation in both the EU27 and the euro zone using a fractional integration framework. They found a significant increase in inflation persistence, but also that the full-sample results imply only temporary effects of the two shocks being considered. In contrast to the studies discussed above, the present one focuses on log-prices rather than the inflation rate, and thus provides evidence on the degree of persistence of a possibly nonstationary series such as prices rather than taking first differences to make it stationary. It also makes an important contribution to the existing literature by examining in greater depth the case of Europe. More precisely, as in Caporale et al. (2023), it uses long-memory and fractional integration methods to analyse the impact of both the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine. However, in contrast to that study, it focuses on the evolution of price themselves rather than the corresponding inflation rate. Moreover, it examines their stochastic behaviour in each of the 27 EU member states. In particular, it investigates time variation in price persistence in each of them, thus producing a novel set of empirical results not previously available in the literature. The remainder of the paper is structured as follows: Section 2 outlines the methodology; Section 2 describes the data and discusses the empirical findings; Section 3 offers some concluding remarks. 2. Methodology Different measures of persistence have been used in the literature. A simple one is given by the autoregressive coefficient in an AR(1) model (or the sum of the coefficients in an AR(p) one), with higher values corresponding to higher degrees of persistence. However, a serious limitation of this approach is that it imposes an exponential rate of decay on the autocorrelation values; moreover, it assumes stationarity I(0) of the series of interest. By contrast, in the present study we adopt a more general framework allowing for fractional orders of integration and a (much lower) hyperbolic rate of decay in the estimated differencing parameter d, which measures the degree of persistence. This type of model encompasses the standard AR(p) ones, which are a special case of the I(d) specification with d-differenced series. More precisely, we estimate the following model: yt¼β0þβ1tþxt;ð1LÞdxt¼ut;t¼1;2;...;(1) where y t is the observed time series, in our case the (logged) Harmonized Index of Consumer Prices (HICP); β 0 and β 1 are respectively the intercept and the coefficient on a linear time trend; L is the lag operator, i.e., L k x t = x t-k , and x t is assumed to be I(d), where d is the degree of differentiation. As for the error term u t , we assume (weak) autocorrelation 1 ; however, instead of imposing a specific ARMA model, we use a non1 Autocorrelation can be defined as weak or strong. Weak autocorrelation is usually associated to models with values of the autocorrelation function decaying at an exponential rate such as the AutoRegressive Moving Average (ARMA) models; strong autocorrelation is instead characterised by a much lower rate of decay, for instance a hyperbolic one as in the case of fractionally integrated models (with d > 0). JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMICS 3 parametric method due to Bloomfield (1973) that approximates ARMA structures with very few parameters and is very suitable in the context of fractional integration, as shown by Gil-Alana (2004). Note that the fractional differencing polynomial in L above can be expanded for any real d as 1Lð Þd¼X 1 j¼0 d j � �1ð ÞjLj¼1dL þd d 1ð Þ 2L2. . . and thus, x t can be expressed as xt¼d xt1dðd1Þ 2xt2þ. . . þut: In this context, if the differencing parameter d is a non-integer value, x t will be a function of all its past history, and the higher the value of d is, the higher is the degree of dependence between the observations. That is the reason why this parameter is used as a measure of persistence in the data. Moreover, if d > 0, the series exhibits long memory due to the fact that the spectral density function tends to infinity as the frequency approaches zero, and mean reversion takes place as long as d is smaller than 1 since the impulse response coefficients decay hyperbolically to zero. Covariance stationarity holds if d < 0.5, and the series becomes more nonstationary as d increases above 0.5, the reason being that the variance of the partial sums increase in magnitude with d (Franta et al., 2010). This type of processes was originally introduced by Granger (1980, 1981), Granger and Joyeux (1980) and Hosking (1981) and its justification was based on the concept of aggregation by authors such as Robinson (1978) and others. They are now commonly used in the analysis of time series data. Moreover, the fact that d can be any real number allows to consider a wide range of specifications, including: 1) short memory processes (if d = 0); 2) long-memory covariance stationary processes (0 < d < 0.5); 3) nonstationary processes with a mean reverting pattern (0.5 ≤ d < 1); 4) unit roots or I(1) processes (d = 1), or even explosive patterns (d ≥ 1). It is also important to know that the estimation of the deterministic terms (β 0 and β 1 ) in Equation (1) are clearly affected by the assumptions made with respect to x t . In particular, if x t is assumed to be short memory or I(0), the results will be biased and inconsistent if it is in fact I(d) with non-zero d. Note that in our approach we jointly estimate all the parameters in the model, since the two equations in (1) can be jointly written as: ~ yt¼β0~ 1tþβ1~ ttþut;t¼1:2;. . . (2) where ~ yt¼ ð1LÞdyt;~ 1t¼ ð1LÞd1;~ tt¼ ð1LÞdt; where 1 is a vector, whose elements are equal to 1 and t a time trend, and since u t is I (0) by construction, we can use standard t-tests to determine the significance of the coefficients. For the estimation we use a simple version of a testing procedure developed in Robinson (1994) that is based on the Lagrange Multiplier (LM) principle. It tests the 4G. M. CAPORALE ET AL. null hypothesis H o : d = d 0 for any real value d 0 in (1), and the chosen estimate of d is the value of d 0 producing the lowest statistic. This value is the same as the one obtained through the Whittle function in the frequency domain which is the objective function in Robinson’s (1994) procedure. This method is very suitable for our purposes, since: (i) it allows us to estimate d, the degree of persistence, for any real value d 0 , including possibly nonstationary processes (d 0 ≥0.5) without needing to take first differences as instead required by standard procedures based on unit (or fractional) roots; (ii) it has an asymptotic normal distribution; (iii) it is the most efficient test in the Pitman sense (Pitman, 1948) against local departures, which is important since d 0 is a fractional value. A full description of this method can be found in Gil-Alana and Robinson (1997). 3. Empirical results For the analysis we use the log transformation of seasonally unadjusted monthly data for the Harmonized Index of Consumer Prices (HICP) in each of the 27 European Union (EU) member states; these series have been obtained from Eurostat (the statistical office of the European Union) and are available on the Bloomberg platform, with the sample period going from January 2010 to December 2022. Figure 1 displays the HICP series for each of the EU27. 2 An upward trend in the most recent years is immediately noticeable. It is noteworthy that a few series display some degree of seasonality, especially in the case of the Southern European countries. However, this does not seem to be an important issue, since when assuming a seasonal AR process for the error term, the corresponding coefficient is found to be very close to 0 in all cases, including Greece, Italy and Spain (these results are not reported to save space). Table 1 displays the estimates of the differencing parameter d in Equation (1) and their associated 95% confidence intervals for each series and under three different specifications, namely: (i) setting β 0 = β 1 = 0, i.e., assuming that there are no deterministic terms in the model (column 2); (ii) setting β 1 = 0, i.e., including only an intercept in the model (column 3); (iii) allowing for both an intercept and a linear time trend (column 4). The coefficients in bold are those from the selected specification on the basis of the statistical significance of the estimated coefficients as indicated by the corresponding t-values. The sample period for these results ends in December 2019, i.e., before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Table 2 reports the estimated model coefficients for each series. It can be seen that the time trend is significant in all cases except that of Slovakia, indicating lack of statistical significance; more specifically, it is positive and ranges from 0.028 in Greece to 0.210 in Estonia. 3 Further, the estimated values of d are positive in all cases, which implies the presence of long memory (d > 0) in all countries except Malta, where the I(0) hypothesis cannot be rejected given the wide confidence interval. Evidence of mean reversion (d 2 Note that we do not consider the aggregate series because, as already mentioned, Robinson (1978) and Granger (1980) both showed that fractional integration can result from the aggregation of heterogenous AR processes with timevarying coefficients. Similar arguments were later made by other authors such as Cioczek-George and Mandelbrot (1995), Taqqu et al. (1997), Chambers (1998), Parke (1999), Oppenheim and Viano (2004), Zaffaroni (2004), Beran et al. (2013), Vera-Valdés (2021) and others. 3 Note that the significance of the time trend coefficient does not support the trend-stationarity representation since, as explained above, the two equations in (1) can be jointly estimated as in equation (2). A trend-stationary model would be supported by the data if d = 0, a hypothesis that is decisively rejected by the results reported in the tables. JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMICS 5 Figure 1. Monthly time series plots of the HICP series in the EU27 countries (2015 = 100). 6G. M. CAPORALE ET AL. Table 1. Estimates of the differencing parameter. Sample ending in December 2019. Country No terms An intercept An intercept and a linear time trend AUSTRIA 0.93 (0.73, 1.21) 0.59 (0.53, 0.65) 0.38 (0.23, 0.57) BELGIUM 0.92 (0.73, 1.19) 0.68 (0.61, 0.88) 0.75 (0.59, 0.96) BULGARIA 0.94 (0.77, 1.22) 1.05 (0.91, 1.22) 1.05 (0.92, 1.21) CROATIA 0.92 (0.74, 1.19) 0.82 (0.61, 1.23) 0.87 (0.68, 1.20) CYPRUS 0.93 (0.76, 1.20) 0.75 (0.42, 1.26) 0.80 (0.57, 1.27) CZECH REP. 0.92 (0.74, 1.21) 0.93 (0.74, 1.24) 0.94 (0.77, 1.20) DENMARK 0.94 (0.74, 1.18) 0.62 (0.52, 0.95) 0.79 (0.65, 0.97) ESTONIIA 0.94 (0.76, 1.19) 1.04 (0.73, 1.41) 1.03 (0.84, 1.40) FINLAND 0.93 (0.75, 1.19) 1.01 (0.81, 1.25) 1.00 (0.89, 1.16) FRANCE 0.91 (0.74, 1.20) 0.81 (0.61, 1.14) 0.88 (0.72, 1.12) GERMANY 0.93 (0.72, 1.18) 0.79 (0.64, 1.42) 0.80 (0.57, 1.36) GREECE 0.95 (0.78, 1.23) 0.28 (0.11, 0.55) 0.43 (0.19, 0.70) HUNGARY 0.95 (0.76, 1.21) 1.02 (0.77, 1.31) 1.02 (0.85, 1.28) IRELAND 0.92 (0.72, 1.19) 0.58 (0.46, 0.86) 0.62 (0.45, 0.88) ITALY 0.93 (0.75, 1.21) 0.37 (0.28, 0.46) 0.21 (0.07, 0.38) LITHUANIA 0.93 (0.75, 1.20) 0.70 (0.59, 0.86) 0.72 (0.58, 0.88) LUXEMBOURG 0.92 (0.74, 1.20) 0.63 (0.53, 0.91) 0.79 (0.65, 0.95) LATVIA 0.94 (0.74, 1.19) 0.81 (0.63, 1.07) 0.83 (0.66, 1.09) MALTA 0.91 (0.72, 1.15) 0.68 (0.40, 1.47) 0.68 (−0.08, 1.52) NETHERLANDS 0.92 (0.74, 1.19) 0.61 (0.51, 0.82) 0.65 (0.49, 0.85) POLAND 0.93 (0.75, 1.20) 1.16 (0.99, 1.43) 1.13 (0.99, 1.36) PORTUGAL 0.91 (0.74, 1.18) 0.46 (0.37, 0.55) 0.35 (0.17, 0.58) ROMANIA 0.95 (0.77, 1.20) 1.11 (0.91, 1.36) 1.10 (0.95, 1.32) SLOVAKIA 0.94 (0.74, 1.18) 1.28 (1.10, 1.54) 1.27 (1.09, 1.55) SLOVENIA 0.94 (0.76, 1.24) 0.51 (0.43, 0.62) 0.50 (0.37, 0.69) SPAIN 0.94 (0.76, 1.22) 0.36 (0.27, 0.46) 0.24 (0.08, 0.44) SWEDEN 0.92 (0.73, 1.20) 0.89 (0.79, 1.04) 0.88 (0.76, 1.04) The values in parenthesis are the 95% confidence bands of the estimates of d. In bold, the selected specification for each series on the basis of the statistical significance of the deterministic terms. Table 2. Estimated coefficients in selected models. Sample ending in December 2019. Country D Intercept (t-value) Time trend (t-value) AUSTRIA 0.38 (0.23, 0.57)* 89.85 (136.43) 0.151 (15.81) BELGIUM 0.75 (0.59, 0.96)* 89.77 (123.12) 0.152 (6.33) BULGARIA 1.05 (0.92, 1.21) 94.81 (220.44) 0.101 (2.07) CROATIA 0.87 (0.68, 1.20) 91.59 (262.58) 0.097 (5.30) CYPRUS 0.80 (0.57, 1.27) 93.23 (116.31) 0.058 (1.81) CZECH REP. 0.94 (0.77, 1.20) 91.86 (277.10) 0.139 (5.99) DENMARK 0.79 (0.65, 0.97)* 92.79 (272.63) 0.080 (6.16) ESTONIA 1.03 (0.84, 1.40) 85.42 (197.49) 0.210 (4.66) FINLAND 1.00 (0.89, 1.16) 89.59 (299.99) 0.121 (4.43) FRANCE 0.88 (0.72, 1.12) 92.78 (245.10) 0.105 (5.08) GERMANY 0.80 (0.57, 1.36) 91.69 (194.51) 0.118 (6.30) GREECE 0.43 (0.19, 0.70)* 98.98 (141.25) 0.028 (2.61) HUNGARY 1.02 (0.85, 1.28) 87.57 (231.25) 0.196 (5.19) IRELAND 0.62 (0.45, 0.88)* 96.02 (285.13) 0.048 (6.56) ITALY 0.21 (0.07, 0.38)* 93.67 (186.50) 0.088 (12.81) LITHUANIA 0.72 (0.58, 0.88)* 91.54 (209.81) 0.152 (11.74) LUXEMBOURG 0.79 (0.65, 0.95)* 89.58 (139.49) 0.139 (5.65) LATVIA 0.83 (0.66, 1.09) 91.73 (209.53) 0.137 (7.04) MALTA 0.68 (−0.08, 1.52) 88.99 (83.56) 0.135 (4.87) NETHERLANDS 0.65 (0.49, 0.85)* 90.90 (161.44) 0.125 (9.35) POLAND 1.13 (0.99, 1.36) 91.32 (342.21) 0.134 (3.17) PORTUGAL 0.35 (0.17, 0.58)* 93.74 (179.17) 0.092 (12.30) ROMANIA 1.10 (0.95, 1.32) 85.21 (185.44) 0.210 (3.20) SLOVAKIA 1.28 (1.10, 1.54) 91.16 (306.88) —– SLOVENIA 0.50 (0.37, 0.69)* 93.15 (189.36) 0.101 (12.34) SPAIN 0.24 (0.08, 0.44)* 94.87 (202.44) 0.082 (12.79) SWEDEN 0.88 (0.76, 1.04) 95.47 (245.74) 0.102 (4.80) In parenthesis in the third and fourth columns the associated t-values. * denotes evidence of mean reversion at the 95% level. JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMICS 7 a multivariate framework to investigate these issues in the context of fractional cointegration, using frameworks such as the fractional CVAR (i.e., FCVAR) model proposed by Johansen and Nielsen (2010, 2012). Further possible extensions could consider non-linear structures in the deterministic part of the model, such Chebyshev polynomials in time (as in J. C. Cuestas & Gil-Alana, 2016), Fourier functions (Gil-Alana & Yaya, 2021) or neural networks (Yaya et al., 2021) within a fractional integration framework. Acknowledgments Comments from the Editor and two anonymous reviewers are gratefully acknowledged. Luis A. Gil-Alana also gratefully acknowledges financial support from the Grant PID2020-113691RBI00 funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033, and from an internal Project from the Universidad Francisco de Vitoria. Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s). Funding The work was supported by the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación [PID2020-113691RB-I00]. Notes on contributors Guglielmo Maria Caporale is Professor of Economics and Finance, Divisional Lead for Economics and Econometrics, and Director of the Centre for Empirical Finance at Brunel University London. He is also a CESifo Research Network Fellow and an RCEA (Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis) Senior Fellow. Prior to taking up his current position, he was a Research Officer at the National Institute of Economic and Social Research in London; a Research Fellow and then a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Economic Forecasting at London Business School; Professor of Economics at the University of East London; Professor of Economics and Finance and Director of the Centre for Monetary and Financial Economics at London South Bank University (LSBU). Prof. Luis A. Gil-Alana completed his Ph.D. at the London School of Economics in 1997. He has published more than 500 papers in theoretical and applied econometrics and works as a Professor at the University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain and as a Senior Researcher at the Navarra Centre for International Development and at the University Francisco de Vitoria in Madrid, Spain. Amir Imeri is Assistant Professor in Faculty of Management, Business and Economics in University for Business and Technology in Prishtina, Kosovo. He completed his PhD at Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, North Macedonia, in 2004, in the area of International Economics. He obtained his Master degree at IIUM, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in 2008, in the field of Finance. He has been research fellow at Department of Economics, University of Graz and mobility staff in Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra in 2014 and University of Debrecen in 2019, including full time faculty in the Bahrain from 2015 to 2018. Additionally, has participated in many international conferences and has published articles mainly in macroeconomics, time series, shocks, tourism and EU integration. 14 G. M. CAPORALE ET AL. ORCID Guglielmo Maria Caporale http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0144-4135 Luis A. Gil-Alana http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5760-3123 Amir Imeri http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3546-9362 References Beran, J., Feng, Y., Ghosh, S., & Kulik, R. (2013). Long-memory processes: Probabilistic theories and statistical methods. Springer. Bloomfield, P. (1973). An exponential model in the spectrum of a scalar time series. Biometrika, 60 (2), 217–226. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/60.2.217 Caporale, G. M., & Gil-Alana, L. A. (2011). Multi-factor gegenbauer processes and European inflation rate. Journal of Economic Integration, 26(2), 386–409. https://doi.org/10.11130/jei. 2011.26.2.386 Caporale, G. M., & Gil-Alana, L. A. (2020). Fractional integration and the persistence of UK inflation, 1210–2016. Economic Papers: A Journal of Applied Economics and Policy, 39(2), 162–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/1759-3441.12275 Caporale, G. M., Gil-Alana, L. A., & Poza, C. (2022). Inflation in the G7 countries: Persistence and structural breaks. Journal of Economics & Finance, 46(2022), 493–506. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s12197-022-09576-w Caporale, G. M., Gil-Alana, L. A., & Trani, T. (2020). On the persistence of UK inflation: A long-range dependence approach. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 27(1), 439–454. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.2161 Caporale, G. M., Infante, J., Gil-Alana, L. A., & Ayestaran, R. (2023). Inflation persistence in Europe: The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and of the Russia-Ukraine war. SSRN Electronic Journal, forthcoming. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4273445 Chambers, M. (1998). Long memory and aggregation in macroeconomic time series. International Economic Review, 39(4), 1053–1072. https://doi.org/10.2307/2527352 Cioczek-George, R., & Mandelbrot, B. B. (1995). A class of micropulses and antipe rsitent fractional brownian motion. Stochastic Processes and Their Applications, 60(1), 1–18. https:// doi.org/10.1016/0304-4149(95)00046-1 Cogley, T., Primiceri, G. E., & Sargent, T. J. (2010). Inflation-gap persistence in the US. American Economic Journal Macroeconomics, 2(1), 43–69. https://doi.org/10.1257/mac.2.1.43 Cuestas, J. C., & Gil-Alana, L. A. (2016). A non-linear approach with long range dependence based on Chebyshev polynomials. Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics and Econometrics, 20(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.1515/snde-2014-000 Cuestas, J., Gil-Alana, L. A., & Taylor, K. (2016). Inflation convergence in central and Eastern Europe vs. The Eurozone: Non-linearities and long memory. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 63(5), 519–538. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjpe.12114 Franta, M., Saxa, B., & Smidkova, K. (2010). The role of inflation persistence in the inflation process in the new EU member states. Czech Journal of Economics and Finance, 60(6), 480–500. Fuhrer, J., & Moore, G. (1995). Inflation persistence. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(1), 127–159. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118513 Gil-Alana, L. A. (2004). The use of the bloomfield model as an approximation to ARMA processes in the context of fractional integration. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 39(4–5), 429–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-7177(04)90515-8 Gil-Alana, L. A., & Robinson, P. M. (1997). Testing of unit root and other nonstationary hypotheses in macroeconomic time series. Journal of Econometrics, 80(2), 241–268. https:// doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(97)00038-9 Gil-Alana, L. A., & Yaya, O. (2021). Testing fractional unit roots with non-linear smooth break approximations using Fourier functions. Journal of Applied Statistics, 48(13–15), 2542–2559. https://doi.org/10.1080/02664763.2020.1757047 JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMICS 15 Gil-Alana, L. A., Yaya, O. S., & Solademi, E. A. (2016). Testing unit roots, structural breaks and linearity in the inflation rates of the G7 countries with fractional dependence techniques. Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry, 32(5), 711–724. https://doi.org/10.1002/ asmb.2189 Granger, C. W. J. (1980). Long memory relationships and the aggregation of dynamic models. Journal of Econometrics, 14(2), 227–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(80)90092-5 Granger, C. W. J. (1981). Some properties of time series data and their use in econometric model specification. Journal of Econometrics, 16(1), 121–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(81) 90079-8 Granger, C. W. J., & Joyeux, R. (1980). An introduction to long memory time series and fractional differencing. Journal of Time Series Analysis, 1(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9892. 1980.tb00297.x Hosking, J. R. M. (1981). Modeling persistence in hydrological time series using fractional differencing. Water Resources Research, 20(12), 1898–1908. https://doi.org/10.1029/ WR020i012p01898 Johansen, S., & Nielsen, M. Ø. (2010). Likelihood inference for a nonstationary fractional autoregressive model. Journal of Econometrics, 158(1), 51–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom. 2010.03.006 Johansen, S., & Nielsen, M. Ø. (2012). Likelihood inference for a fractionally cointegrated vector autoregressive model. Econometrica, 80(6), 2667–2732. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA9299 Mayoral, L. (2007). The persistence of inflation in OECD countries: A fractionally integrated approach (February 2005). https://ssrn.com/abstract=1002300or10.2139/ssrn.1002300 Oppenheim, G., & Viano, M. C. (2004). Aggregation of random parameters Ornstein-Uhlenbeck or AR processes. Some convergence results. Journal of Time Series Analysis, 25(3), 335–350. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9892.2004.01775.x Parke, W. R. (1999). What is fractional integration? The Review of Economics and Statistics, 81(4), 632–638. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465399558490 Pitman, E. J. G. (1948). Mimeographed lecture notes on non-parametric statistics. Columbia University. Pivetti, F., & Reis, R. (2007). The persistence of inflation in the United States. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 31(4), 1326–1358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jedc.2006.05.001 Robalo Marques, C. (2004). Inflation persistence: Facts or artefacts? European Central Bank, Working Paper Series No. 371. Robinson, P. M. (1978). Statistical inference for a random coefficient autoregressive model. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 5(3), 163–168. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4615707 Robinson, P. M. (1994). Efficient tests of nonstationary hypotheses. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 89(428), 1420–1437. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1994.10476881 Taqqu, M. S., Willinger, W., & Sherman, R. (1997). Proof of a fundamental result in self-similar traffic modeling. Computer Communication Review, 27(2), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 263876.263879 Vera-Valdés, J. E. (2021). Nonfractional long-range dependence: Long memory, antipersistence, and aggregation. Econometrics, 9(4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/econometrics9040039 Yaya, O., Ogbonna, A. E., Furuoka, F., & Gil‐Alana, L. A. (2021). A new unit root test for unemployment hysteresis based on the autoregressive neural network. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 83(4), 960–981. https://doi.org/10.1111/obes.12422 Zaffaroni, P. (2004). Contemporaneous aggregation of linear dynamic models in large economies. Journal of Econometrics, 120(1), 75–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00207-0 16 G. M. CAPORALE ET AL.