Modelling Real Private Consumption Expenditure in South Africa to Test the Absolute Income Hypothesis
Abstract
This paper explores, the hotly debated topic among economists and policymakers, whether fiscal and monetary policies impact on households by examining the relevance of the absolute income hypothesis in explaining private consumption expenditure and its relationship with household disposable income in South Africa. Worldwide, private consumption expenditure remains a big puzzle for leading consumption function theories. Friedman’s permanent income hypothesis posits that private consumption expenditure is not affected by how much consumers earn on a daily basis, but by what they expect to earn during their lifetime. Friedman’s permanent income hypothesis is at odds with Keynes’s absolute income hypothesis, that private consumption expenditure is affected by fiscal stimulus policies, which are effective for increasing economic activity and employment. Subscribing to the former underrates the potential power of fiscal stimulus policies and other monetary or trade policies that boost short-term income. The overarching objective of this paper is to ascertain whether patterns of private consumption expenditure in South Africa are determined by Friedman or Keynes’s theory. The paper specified econometric equations with quarterly seasonally adjusted data from the South African Reserve Bank for the sample period 1984 to 2015 and estimated them with cointegration techniques consisting of the Engle-Granger two-step approach. The importance of the paper and its scientific novelty are that it is more realistic since it specified models that take into account the reaction time of the dependent variable when the independent variable changes by imposing lags on the variables. The empirical results indicate that in South Africa, when household disposable income changes over time, private consumption expenditure depends more on a household’s previous disposable income than its current disposable income. The main empirical finding is that the absolute income hypothesis is not appropriate in explaining private consumption expenditure in this country. Even when the interest rate was included in a modified absolute income hypothesis, the overall estimates were not robust. Hence, estimates of the short- and long-run regression models were not consistent with the absolute income hypothesis. This is in line with arguments put forward in some extant studies using this model, that the fiscal stimulus policies might not generate the desired increased economic activity and employment. If households use money from the fiscal stimulus policies to bail themselves out of existing debts rather than consume additional goods and services which, would be the catalyzer to increase Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
Downloads
References
Hall, R. (1978). Stochastic implications of the life-cycle permanent income hypothesis. Journal of Political Economy, 86(6), 971-987 Heim, J. J. (2007). Was Keynes right? Does current year disposable income drive consumption spending? Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Working Papers, 0710. Heim, J. J. (2008). Consumption function. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Working Papers, 0805. Hillier, B. (1991). The macroeconomic debate: Models of the closed and open economy, Oxford, New-Jersey: Basil Blackwell. Inder, B. (1993). Estimating long-run relationships in economics. Journal of Econometrics, 57, (1-3), 53-68. Kankaanranta, P. (2006). Consumption over the life cycle: A selected literature review. Aboa Centre for Economics, Discussion, 7. Keynes, J. M. (1936). The general theory of employment, interest, and money. New York: Harcourt Brace. Khan, K. & Nishat, M. (2011). Permanent-income hypothesis, myopia and liquidity constraints: A case study of Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences (PJSS), 31(2), 299-307. Khan, K., Yousaf, H., Abbas, M. G., Memon Che, M. H. & Nishat, M. (2012). Permanent-income hypothesis, myopia and liquidity constraints: A case study of Pakistan. Asian Economic and Financial Review, 2(1), 155-162. Koekemoer, R. (1999). Private consumption expenditure in South Africa: The role of price expectation and learning. PhD Thesis, Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences, University of Pretoria. Kuznets, S. (1946). National income: A summary of findings. National Bureau of Economics Research - NBER, New York. Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P. C. B., Schmidt, P. & Shin, Y. (1992). Testing the null hypothesis of stationary against the alternative of a unit root. Journal of Econometrics, 54 (13), 159-178. Lafrance, A. & LaRochelle-Côté, S. (2011). Consumption patterns among ageing Canadians: a synthetic cohort approach. Economic Analysis Research Paper Series, Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 11F0027M, No. 067, Ottawa. Lumley, T., Diehr, P., Emerson, S. & Chen, L. (2002). The importance of the normality assumption in large public health data sets. Annual Reviews in Public Health, 23, 151-169. Mishkin, F. S. (2011). Monetary policy strategy: Lessons from the crisis. National Bureau of Economics Research - NBER Working Paper Series, 16755. Modigliani, F. (1986). Life cycle, individual thrift, and the wealth of nations. American Economic Review, American Economic Association, 76(3), 297-313. Modigliani, F. & Brumberg, R.E. (1954). Utility analysis and aggregate consumption function: An interpretation of cross-section data. In Post Keynesian Economics, K.K Kurinara (ed) New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. Oke, D. M. & Bokana, K. G. (2017). Understanding the theory of consumption in the context of a developing economy. Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, 9(5), 219-229. Palley, T. I. (2008). The Relative income theory of consumption: A synthesis of Keynes, Duesen berry, and Friedman model. Political Economy Research Institute, UMASS, Working Paper Number 170. Parker, J. A., Souleles, N. C., Johnson, D. S. & McClelland, R. (2011). Consumer spending and the economic stimulus payment of 2008. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Papers 16684. Patterson, K. D. (1986). The stability of some annual consumption functions. Oxford Economic Papers, 38, 130. Phillips, P. C. B. (1987). Time series regression with a unit root. Econometrica, 55, 277-302. Phillips, P. C. B. & Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression, Biometrika. Phillips, P. C. B. & Hansen, B. E. (1990). Statistical inference in instrumental variables regression with I (1) processes. Review of Economic Studies, 57, 99-125. Phillips, P. C. B. & Ouliaris, S. (1990). Asymptotic properties of residual-based tests for cointegration. Econometrica, 58, 73-93. Pretorius, C. J. & Knox, S. (1995). Private consumption expenditure in the macro-econometric model of the Reserve Bank, working paper. Saikkonen, P. (1991). Asymptotically efficient estimation of cointegration regressions. Econometric Theory, 7, 1-21. Schuh, S. (2017). Measuring consumer expenditures with payment diaries. Working Papers, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, No. 17-2.
Singh, B. (2004). Modelling real private consumption expenditure – an empirical study on Fiji. Economics Department Reserve Bank of Fiji, Working Paper 2004/2005, 1-32. Utkulu, U. (2012). How to estimate long-run relationships in economics: an overview of recent development. Vasilev, A. (2015). Modelling real private consumption expenditure in Bulgaria after the currency board implementation (1997-2005). Zagreb International Review of Economics & Business, 18(1), 81-89. West, K. D. (1988). Asymptotic normality, when regresses have a unit root. Econometrica, 56, 1397-418. Wooldridge, J. M. (2016). Introductory Econometrics: a modern approach (6th ed), Mason, OH: South-Western College Publishing, Cengage Learning. Yazdan, G. F. & Merabirad, S. (2013). The testing of Hall‘s permanent-income hypothesis: A case study of Iran. Asian Economic and Financial Review, 3(3), 311-318. Zarinah, Y. & Pereira, J. (2012). Consumption invariant to the economic downturn? Evidence on the propensity to consume. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 3(6).
Copyright (c) 2018 Bokana K.G., Kabongo W.N.S.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Author (s) should affirm that the material has not been published previously. It has not been submitted and it is not under consideration by any other journal. At the same time author (s) need to execute a publication permission agreement to assume the responsibility of the submitted content and any omissions and errors therein. After submission of a revised paper in the light of suggestions of the reviewers, editorial team edits and formats manuscripts to bring uniformity and standardization in published material.
This work will be licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) and under condition of the license, users are free to read, copy, remix, transform, redistribute, download, print, search or link to the full texts of articles and even build upon their work as long as they credit the author for the original work. Moreover, as per journal policy author (s) hold and retain copyrights without any restrictions.
