1989
DOI: 10.2307/1928067
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Japanese Trade Elasticities and the J-Curve

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
49
0

Year Published

1996
1996
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 77 publications
(50 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
1
49
0
Order By: Relevance
“…the trade balance worsened in the first quarter to gradually improve in the following quarters, and to achieve balance only in the eleventh quarter. Research studies Noland (1989) and Petrović and Gligorić (2010) have confirmed our results.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 89%
“…the trade balance worsened in the first quarter to gradually improve in the following quarters, and to achieve balance only in the eleventh quarter. Research studies Noland (1989) and Petrović and Gligorić (2010) have confirmed our results.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 89%
“…In estimations, initially, the trade balance worsened in 5 quarters, then improved and reached a new equilibrium in the next 13 quarters. An earlier study by Marcus Noland (1989) on the economy in Japan, with quarterly data during the period from 1970 to1985, also supported these findings. Specifically, the results showed that the estimated price elasticity in the long-term met the Marshall -Lerner condition and implied the exchange rate devaluation improved the trade balance in the long term.…”
Section: The Relationships Of Trade Balance and Exchange Rate In Devementioning
confidence: 56%
“…Various papers investigated whether there is a so-called "J-curve", with devaluations leading to a short-run deterioration of the TB but a long-run improvement (see Bahmani-Oskooee, 1985;Rahman, Mustafa, and Burckel, 1997;Himarios, 1989;Rose and Yellen, 1989;Briguglio, 1989;Noland, 1989;Rose, 1990;Berument, 2005), with mixed results. Most studies use bilateral aggregate data (see, e.g., Boyd et al, 2001;Lal, and Lowinger, 2002;Onafuwora, 2003;McDaniel, and Agama, 2003;Fullerton and Sprinkle, 2005;Bahmani-Oskooee et al, 2006;Narayan, 2006;Bahmani-Oskooee, and Hegerty, 2011;Dash, 2013;Costamagna, 2014), again providing mixed evidence.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%