Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T12:28:07.780Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Estimated Stabilization Costs of the EMU

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2020

Ray C. Fair*
Affiliation:
Cowles Foundation, Yale University, New Haven, CT06520-8281
*
Voice: 203-432-3715; Fax: 203-432-6167; e-mail: fair@econ.yale.edu; website: http://fairmodel.econ.yale.edu

Abstract

A multicountry econometric model and stochastic simulation are used to estimate the stabilization costs of the European Monetary Union (EMU). A measure of the variability of output and other variables is computed for the current regime and for the EMU regime. The results show that Germany is hurt the most in terms of increased output variability in moving from the current regime to the EMU regime.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 National Institute of Economic and Social Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

A previous version of this paper was presented at an ESRC conference on Macroeconomic Modelling and Economic Policy, London, 8-9 January 1998. All the data used in this paper can be downloaded from the website. I am indebted to William Nordhaus for many useful suggestions.

References

Fair, Ray C. (1994), Testing Macroeconometric Models, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fair, Ray C. (1997a), ‘Testing the NAIRU model for the United States’, April.Google Scholar
Fair, Ray C. (1997b), ‘Testing the NAIRU model for 27 Countries’, April.Google Scholar
Fair, Ray C. (1997c), ‘A fiscal-policy rule for stabilization’, June.Google Scholar
Hallett, Andrew Hughes, Patrick Minford, and Anupam Rastogi (1993), ‘The European Monetary System: achievements and survival’, in Bryant, Ralph C., Peter Hooper, and Mann, Catherine L., eds., Evaluating Policy Regimes: New Research in Empirical Macroeconomics, Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, pp. 617668.Google Scholar
Hamada, Koichi (1974), “Alternative exchange rate systems and the interdependence of monetary policies,” in Aliber, Robert Z., ed., National Monetary Policies and the International Financial System, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 1333.Google Scholar
Kenen, Peter B. (1969), ‘The theory of optimum currency areas’, in Mundell, Robert A., and Swoboda, Alexander A., eds., Monetary Problems of the International Economy, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 4160.Google Scholar
Masson, Paul R., and Stephen Symansky (1992), ‘Evaluating the EMS and EMU using stochastic simulations: some issues’, in Barrell, Ray, and John Whitley, eds., Macroeconomic Policy Coordination in Europe: The ERM and Monetary Union, London: SAGE Publications, pp. 1234.Google Scholar
Masson, Paul R., and Turtelboom, Bart G. (1997), ‘Characteristics of the Euro, the demand for reserves, and policy coordination under the EMU’, in Masson, Paul R., Krueger, Thomas H., and Turtelboom, Bart G., EMU and the International Monetary System, Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund, pp. 194224.Google Scholar
McKinnon, Ronald (1963), ‘Optimum currency areas’, American Economic Review, vol. 53, pp. 717725.Google Scholar
Mundell, Robert A. (1961), ‘A theory of optimum currency areas’, American Economic Review, vol. 50, pp. 657665.Google Scholar
Niehans, Jürg (1968), ‘Monetary and fiscal policies in open economies under fixed exchange rates: an optimizing approach’, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 76, pp. 893920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Hagen, Jürgen, and Manfred, J.Neumann, M. (1994), ‘Real exchange rates within and between currency areas: how far away is the EMU?’, Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 76, pp. 236244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyplosz, Charles (1997), ‘EMU: why and how it might happen’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 11, pp. 322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar