Integrated monetary and exchange rate frameworks: are there empirical differences?

Abstract

The aim of the paper is to empirically estimate whether the different monetary and exchange rate frameworks observed in the accession countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the Baltic States do yield different outcomes in terms of level and variance of a set of nominal and real variables. The author follows and extends the methodology developed by Kuttner and Posen (2001), who perform a combined analysis of the individual effects of exchange rate regimes, central bank independence and announced targets in nominal variables for a large set of developed and developing countries. They also estimate that a set-up combining a free float, an independent currency board and inflation targeting yields an outcome that mimics the price stabilisation advantages of a hard peg without its drawbacks in terms of extreme volatility. This sample of countries, not covered by the Kuttner and Posen study, supports their conclusions for both nominal and real variables, testing for both the individual and combined effects of the frameworks and indicating that a flexible exchange rate regime, coupled with CBI and DIT, would be Pareto-improving when compared to harder regimes.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 18 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.