Similarity of supply and demand shocks between the euro area and the CEECs

Economic Systems

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 313-334

  Fidrmuc, Jarko ^a,b   Korhonen, Iikka ^c  

^a OESTERREICHISCHE NATIONALBANK   (Austria)

^b Physics and Informatics   (Slovakia)

^c BANK OF FINLAND   (Finland)

Author keywords

EU enlargement; Optimum currency area; Structural VAR

Indexed keywords

EID: 0242362239     PISSN: 09393625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecosys.2003.05.002     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Backé, P., 1999. Exchange rate regimes in Central and Eastern Europe: a brief review of recent changes. Current Issues and Future Challenges, Focus on Transition, 2/2000. Oesterreichische Nationalbank, Vienna, pp. 47-67.
2. Bayoumi, T., Eichengreen, B., 1993. Shocking Aspects of European Monetary Integration, In: Torres, F., Giavazzi, F. (Eds.), Growth and Adjustment in the European Monetary Union. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 193-230.
3. Blanchard O. Quah D. The Dynamic effects of aggregate demand and supply disturbances American Economic Review 79 1989 655-673
4. Boone, L., Maurel, M., 1998. Economic convergence of the CEECs with the EU. Discussion Paper No. 2018. CEPR, London.
5. Boone, L., Maurel, M., 1999. An optimal currency area perspective of the EU enlargement to the CEECs. Discussion Paper No. 2119. CEPR, London.
6. Campos N.F. Coricelli F. Growth in transition: what we know, what we don't, and what we should Journal of Economic Literature 11 2002 793-836
7. De Grauwe P. The Euro at stake? The monetary union in an enlarged Europe CESifo Economic Studies 49 2003 103-121
8. Estrin, S., Urga, G., 1997. Convergence in output in transition economies: Central and Eastern Europe, 1970-1995. Discussion Paper No. 1616. CEPR, London.
9. Fidrmuc, J., 2003. The endogeneity of the optimum currency area criteria, intraindustry trade, and EMU enlargement. Contemporary Economic Policy, in press.
10. Fidrmuc J. Grozea-Helmenstein D. Wörgötter A. East-west intra-industry trade dynamics Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv 135 1999a 332-345
11. Fidrmuc J. Horvath J. Fidrmuc J. Stability of monetary unions: lessons from the breakup of Czechoslovakia Journal of Comparative Economics 27 1999b 753-781
12. Fidrmuc, J., Korhonen, I., 2001. Similarity of supply and demand shocks between the Euro area and the CEECs. Focus on Transition 2/2001, Oesterreichische Nationalbank, Vienna, pp. 26-42.
13. Frankel J.A. Rose A.K. The endogeneity of the optimum currency area criteria Economic Journal 108 1998 1009-1025
14. Frenkel, M., Nickel, C., 2002. How symetric are the shocks and the shock adjustment dynamics between the Euro area and Central and Eastern European countries? Working Paper No. 02/222. IMF, Washington, DC.
15. Frenkel, M., Nickel, C., Schmidt, G., 1999. Some shocking aspects of EMU enlargement, Research Note No. 99-4, Deutsche Bank, Frankfurt am Main.
16. Horvath, J., 2000. Supply and demand shocks in Europe: large-4 EU members, Visegrad-5 and Baltic-3 Countries, Mimeo.
17. Horvath, J., Jonas, J., 1998. Exchange rate regimes in the transition economies: case study of the Czech Republic 1990-1997, Working Paper No. B11. Center for European Integration Studies, ZEI, Bonn.
18. Järvinen, M., 2000. Central and Eastern Europe: prospects for EMU membership. Discussion Paper No. 64. Finnish Ministry of Finance, Helsinki.
19. Kaitila, V., 2001. Accession countries' comparative advantage in the internal market: a trade and factor analysis. Discussion Paper No. 3/2001. Bank of Finland, Institute for Economies in Transition, Helsinki.
20. Kočenda E. Macroeconomic convergence in transition economies Journal of Comparative Economics 29 2001 1-23
21. Kopits, G., 1999. Implications of EMU for exchange rate policy in Central and Eastern Europe. Working Paper No. 99/9. IMF, Washington, DC.
22. Korhonen I. Some empirical tests on the integration of economic activity between the Euro Area and the accession countries: a note Economics of Transition 11 2003 1-20
23. Kutan, A.M., Yigit, T.M., 2002. Nominal and Real Stochastic Convergence within the Transition Economies and to the European Union: Evidence from Panel Data. Mimeo Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville, IL.
24. Maurel, M., 2002. On the way of EMU enlargement towards CEECs: What is the appropriate exchange rate regime? Discussion Paper No. 3409. CEPR, London.
25. McKinnon, R.I., 2000. Mundell, the Euro and the world Dollar standard. Journal of Policy Modeling, 22, 311-324.
26. McKinnon R.I. Optimum currency areas and the European experience Economics of Transition 10 2002 343-364
27. Mundell R. A Theory of optimum currency area American Economic Review 51 1961 657-665
28. Nuti M.D. Costs and benefits of unilateral Euroization in Central Eastern Europe Economics of Transition 10 2002 419-444