Alternative exchange-rate regimes: The options for Latin America

North American Journal of Economics and Finance

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 195-211

  Hochreiter, Eduard ^a,b   Siklos, Pierre L ^a  

^a WILFRID LAURIER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b Oesterreichische Nationalbank   (Canada)

Author keywords

Convergence; Exchange rate regime; Monetary union

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036888889     PISSN: 10629408     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1062-9408(02)00099-2     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Alesina, A., & Grilli, V. (1992). The European Central Bank: Reshaping monetary politics in Europe. In M. Canzoneri, V. Grilli & P. R. Masson (Eds.), Establishing a Central Bank: Issues in Europe and lessons from the U.S. (pp. 49-77). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Arndt, S. W. (2002). The pros and cons of North American monetary integration. Mimeo.
3. Ballabriga, F., Sebastian, M., & Valles, J. (1999). Interdependence of EC economies: A VAR approach. Mimeo.
4. Bayoumi, T., & Eichengreen, B. (1994). One money or many? Analyzing the prospects for monetary unification in various parts of the world. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Studies in International Finance, No. 76.
5. Bayoumi, I., & Prasad, E. (1996). Currency unions, economic fluctuations and adjustment: Some new empirical evidence. Working Paper No. 96/81. Washington, DC: IMF.
6. Berg, A., & Borensztein, E. (2000). The pros and cons of full dollarization.Working Paper No. 00/50.Washington, DC: IMF.
7. Blundell-Wignall, A., & Gregory, R. G. (1990). Exchange rate policy in advanced commodity-exporting countries: Australia and New Zealand. In V. Argy (Ed.), Choosing an exchange rate regime: The challenge for smaller industrial countries (pp. 224-271). Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
8. Buiter, W. (1999). The EMU and the NAMU: What is the case for North American monetary union? Journal of Canadian Public Policy, 25, 3.
9. Calvo, G. A., & Reinhart, C. M. (2002). Fear of floating. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(2), 379-408.
10. Corsetti, G., & Pesenti, P. (2002). Self-validating optimum currency areas. Working Paper No. 8783. Cambridge, MA: NBER.
11. Courchene, T. (1999). Alternative North American currency arrangements:Aresearch agenda. Journal of Canadian Public Policy, 25, 3.
12. Courchene, T., & Harris, R. (1999). From fixing to monetary union: Options for North American currency integration. CD Howe Institute Commentary, 127.
13. Courchene, T. J., & Harris, R. G. (2000). North American monetary union: Analytical principles and operational guidelines. North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 1(August), 3-18.
14. Crow, J. (1999). Canadian exchange rate policy. Canadian Public Policy, 25, 3.
15. DeSerres, A., & Lalonde, R. (1994). Symetrie des chocs touchant les régions canadiennes et choix d'un réime de change. Working Paper No. 94-99. Bank of Canada.
16. Dupasquier, C., Lalonde, R., & St-Amant, P. (1997). Optimum currency areas asapplied to Canada and the United States. In Exchange rates and monetary policy (pp. 131-170). Proceedings of a conference held by the Bank of Canada, October 1996.
17. Eichengreen, B. (2001). What problems can dollarization solve? Journal of Policy Modeling, 23(April), 267-277.
18. Eichengreen, B. (2002). When to dollarize. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 34(February), 1-24.
19. Eichengreen, B., & Von Hagen, J. (1996). Fiscal policy and monetary union: Is there a tradeoff between federalism and budgetary restrictions? Working Paper No. 5517. Cambridge, MA: NBER.
20. Frankel, J. A. (1999). No single currency regime is right for all countries or at all times. Working Paper No. 7338. Cambridge, MA: NBER.
21. Frankel, J. A., & Rose, A. K. (1998, July). The endogeneity of the optimum currency area criteria. The Economic Journal, 108, 1009-1025.
22. Gramlich, E. M., & Wood, P. R. (2001). Fiscal federalism and European integration: Implications for fiscal and monetary authorities. In M. Braimbridge & P. Whyman (Eds.), Fiscal federalism and European integration. London: Routledge. Forthcoming.
23. Grubel, H. (1999). The case for the Amero. The Fraser Institute, Critical Issues Bulletin.
24. Harris, R. (1999). The NAMU debate. Canadian Public Policy, 25, 3.
25. Hochreiter, E., Korinek, A., & Siklos, P. L. (2002). The potential consequences of alternative exchange rate regimes: A study of three candidate regions. International Journal of Economics and Finance. Forthcoming.
26. Hoover, K. D., & Jordá, O. (2001, July/August). Measuring systematic monetary policy Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Review, 83, 113-138.
27. Kletzer, K., & Von Hagen, J. (2002). Monetary union and fiscal federalism. ZEI. Mimeo.
28. Krugman, P. (1993). Lessons from Massachusetts for EMU. In F. Torres & F. Giavazzi (Eds.), Adjustment and growth in the European monetary union (pp. 241-261). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Kuttner, K., & Posen, A. (2001). Beyond bipolar: A three-dimensional assessment of monetary frameworks. International Journal of Finance and Economics, 6(4), 369-387.
30. Lafrance, R., & St-Amant, P. (1999). Optimal currency areas: A review of the recent literature. Working Paper No. 99-16. Bank of Canada.
31. Laidler, D. (1999). Canada's exchange rate options. Canadian Public Policy, 25(September), 324-332.
32. Lalonde, R., & St-Amant, P. (1995). Optimum currency areas: The case of Mexico and the United States. Centre for Latin American Studies. Monetary Affairs (July-December), 93-128.
33. Lane, P. R. (2001, August). The new open economy macroeconomics: A survey. Journal of International Economics, 54, 2335-2366.
34. Melitz, J., & Weber, A. (1996). The costs/benefits of a common monetary policy in France and Germany and possible lessons for monetary unions. Working Paper No. 1374. CEPR.
35. Murray, J. (2000, August). Why Canada needs a flexible exchange rate. North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 11, 41-60.
36. Mussa, M. (1979, Autumn). Empirical regularities in the behavior of exchange rates and theories of foreign exchange rate markets. Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series in Public Policy, 11, 9-57.
37. Mussa, M. (2002, July). Argentina and the fund: From triumph to tragedy. Policy Analyses in International Economics, Vol. 67. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.
38. Obstfeld, M., & Rogoff, K. (1995). The mirage of fixed exchange rates. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 73-96.
39. Rose, A. K., & Engel, C. (2000). Currency unions and international integration. Working Paper No. 7872. Cambridge, MA: NBER.
40. Tornell, A., & Velasco, A. (1995). Fixed versus flexible exchange rates: Which provides more fiscal discipline? Working Paper No. 5108. Cambridge, MA: NBER.
41. Von Hagen, J., & Zhou, J. (2002). The choice of exchange rate regimes: An empirical analysis for transition economies. Working Paper No. B 03 2002. ZEI.
42. Willett, T. (2001). Fear of floating needn't imply fixed rates: Feasible options for intermediate exchange rate regimes. Working Paper. Claremont Graduate University.
43. Williamson, J. (Ed.). (2002, November). An economic policy agenda for Latin America. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics. Forthcoming.