Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMagud, Nicolas
dc.date.accessioned2005-03-22T23:17:54Z
dc.date.available2005-03-22T23:17:54Z
dc.date.issued2004-10-20
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1794/666
dc.description27 p.en
dc.description.abstractIn choosing an exchange rate regime for a small open economy, the common wisdom (Friedman (1953), Meade (1950)) calls for a °oating regime to outperform a peg because of the ability of the former to cope with relative price changes without major output effects. With balance sheet effects in mind, doubts have been raised about it, though. I test for this, using a near VAR approach. The 32 country sample for the period 1980-2001 was split according to the degree of openness of the economy. The results show that for relatively open economies the common wisdom holds; on the contrary, for relatively closed economies it does not. In fact, the evidence documents that to absorb real shock, fixed exchange rate regimes perform better for relatively closed economies, while flexible exchange rate regimes do a better job for relatively open economies.en
dc.format.extent330635 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of Oregon, Dept of Economicsen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesUniversity of Oregon Economics Department Working Papers;2004-15
dc.subjectExchange rate regimesen
dc.subjectOpennessen
dc.subjectNear VARen
dc.titleExchange Rate Regime Choice and Country Characteristics: an Empirical Investigation into the Role of Opennessen
dc.typeWorking Paperen


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record