Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T23:30:18.375Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Les sources des fluctuations des taux de change en Europe et leurs implications pour l'union monétaire

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 August 2016

Alain DeSerres  and
René Lalonde
Alain DeSerres
Affiliation:
Banque du Canada
René Lalonde
Affiliation:
Banque du Canada
Get access

Résumé

La présente étude traite de la question de I'union monétaire européenne é partir d'une approche empirique. L'objectif principal de l'étude est d'évaluer le degré d'asymétrie des chocs affectant un ensemble de huit pays européens stisceptibles de former le noyau d'une éventuelle union monétaire. Étant donné que la mesure qui importe le plus est le degré d'asymétrie des chocs réels, notre approche consiste à utiliser les fluctuations observées des taux de change réels comme un indicateur du degré d'asymétrie des chocs et d'en extraire les composantes réelles (qui sont permanentes) et nominales (qui sont transitoires) par le biais de l'information contenue dans le mouvement du taux de change nominal. La méthode de décomposition utilisée est celle recommendee par Blanchard et Quah [1989] et adapteé au cas des taux de change reels. De facon générate, les résultats démontrent que meme à court terme, les chocs réels constituent la principale source des fluctuations des taux de change réels. Les résultats suggérent également que l'Allemagne, les Pays-Bas et la Belgique pourraient former le noyau d'une union monétaire, alors que le Royaume-Uni et l'Espagne auraient à as-sumer des coûts d'ajustement importants. Quant aux autres pays inclus dans l'étude (la France, l'ltalie et la Suisse), ils représentent des cas intermédiaires.

Summary

Summary

The objective of this paper is to provide an empirical evaluation of the degree of shock asymmetry between eight European countries potentially forming the core of a monetary union. Given that the relevant measure is the degree of real shock asymmetry, our approach is to use the observed movement in real exchange rates as an indicator of the degree of shock asymmetry and to decompose it into real (permanent) and nominal (temporary) components, using information from the nominal exchange rate in a bivariate system. The decomposition method used is similar to that proposed by Blanchard and Quah [1989] and has been adapted to the case of exchange rates. In general, the results indicate that even in the short run, real shocks represent the dominant source of fluctuations in real exchange rates. The results also suggest that Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium together could form the core of a monetary union. At the other end, Spain and the United Kingdom could potentially face serious adjustment costs. The other countries included in the study (France, Italy and Switzerland) represent intermediate cases.

Keywords

C32F33F41C32F33
Type
Research Article
Information
Recherches Économiques de Louvain/ Louvain Economic Review , Volume 61 , Issue 1 , 1995 , pp. 3 - 42
Copyright
Copyright © Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de recherches économiques et sociales 1995 

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

(*)

Nous remercions Alain Guay, Robert Lafrance, John Murray, Pierre St-Amant et Simon van Norden pour leurs commentaires et suggestions. Cette étude a également bénéficié des commentaires que Robert Kollman, de l'Université de Montréal, nous a fait dans le cadre du Congrès de la Société canadienne de science économique. Nos remerciements vont aussi à Kevin Cassidy pour sa contribution à la mise sur pied de la banque de données. Nous assumons l'entiére responsabilité des erreurs que ce texte pourrait contenir.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHIE

Adams, C. et Chadha, B. [1991], On Interpreting the Random Walk Behavior of Nominal and Real Exchange Rate, IMF working paper, WP/91/7, Janvier.Google Scholar
Amano, R. et Van Norden, S. [1993], Terms of trades and real exchange rates: The Canadian evidence, in John Murray, (éd.), The Exchange Rate and the Economy, Ottawa, Banque du Canada.Google Scholar
Amano, R. et NORDEN, S. [1992], Unit Root and the Burden of the Proof, Document de travail 92-7, Banque du Canada, Ottawa.Google Scholar
Baxter, M. [1992], Real Exchange Rates, Real Interest Differentials, and Government Policy: Theory and Evidence, University of Rochester working paper, Février, (à paraître dans le Journal of Monetary Economics). Google Scholar
Bayoumi, T. et Eichengreen, B.J. [1992], Shocking Aspects of Monetary Unification, NBER Working Paper n° 3949.Google Scholar
Beveridge, S. et Nelson, C.R. [1981], A New Approach to the Decomposition of Economic Time Series into Permanent and Transitory Components, with Particular Attention to the Measurement of the Business Cycle, Journal of Monetary Economics, 7(2), pp. 151–174.Google Scholar
Blanchard, O.J. et Quah, D. [1989], The Dynamic Effects of Aggregate Demand and Supply Disturbances, American Economic Review, 79(4), pp. 655–673.Google Scholar
Campbell, J.Y. et Clarida, R.H. [1987], The Dollar and Real Interest Rates, Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, volume 27, North-Holland, pp. 103–141.Google Scholar
Chamie, N., Deserres, A. et Lalonde, R. [1994], Optimum Currency Area and Shock Asymmetry: A Comparison of Europe and the United States, Bank of Canada working paper 94-1, Janvier.Google Scholar
Clarida, R. et Gali, J. [1993], Sources of Real Exchange Rate Fluctuations: How Important Are Nominal Shocks?, NBER working paper, Octobre.Google Scholar
Cooley, T.F. et Leroy, S.F. [1985], Atheoretical Macroeconometrics: A Critique, Journal of Monetary Economics, vol. 16, pp. 283–308.Google Scholar
De Grauwe, P. [1992], The Economics of Monetary Integration, Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
De Grauwe, P. et Heens, H. [1993], Real Exchange Rate Variability in Monetary Unions, Recherches Economiques de Louvain, 9(1-2), pp. 105–117.Google Scholar
Dickey, D.A. et Fuller, W.A. [1979], Distribution of the Estimator for Auto-regressive Time Series with a Unit Root, Journal of American Statistical Association, 74(4), pp. 427–431.Google Scholar
Dornbusch, R. [1976], Expectations and Exchange Rate Dynamics, Journal of Political Economy, 84(6), pp. 1161–1175.Google Scholar
Eichengreen, B.J. [1991], Is Europe an Optimal Currency Area?, NBER Working Paper n° 3579.Google Scholar
Engle, R.F. et Granger, C.W.J. [1987], Cointegration and error Correction: Representation, Estimation and Testing, Econometrica, vol.55, pp. 251–276.Google Scholar
Evans, M.D.D. et Lothian, J.R. [1991], The Response of Exchange Rates to Permanent and Transitory Shocks Under Floating Exchange Rates, Working Paper Series S-92-1, New York University Salomon Center.Google Scholar
Fenton, P. et Murray, J. [1993], Optimum Currency Areas: A Cautionary Tale, in John, Murray (éd.), The Exchange Rate and the Economy, Ottawa, Banque du Canada.Google Scholar
Huizinga, J. [1987], An Empirical Investigation of the Long-Run Behavior of Real Exchange Rates, Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, volume 27, North-Holland, pp. 149–215.Google Scholar
Johnson, D.R. [1993], Unit Roots, Cointegration and Purchasing Power Parity: Canada and the United States 1870-1991, in John, Murray (éd.), The Exchange Rate and the Economy, Ottawa, Banque du Canada.Google Scholar
Kenen, P. [1969], The Theory of Optimum Currency Areas: An Eclectic View, in Mundell, R. et Swoboda, A. (éds), Monetary Problems in the International Economy, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P.C.B. et Schmidt, P. [1991], Testing the Null Hypo-thesis of Stationnarity Against the Alternative of a Unit Root: How Sure Are We that Economic Time Series Have a Unit Root?, Discussion paper n° 979, Cowles Foundation of Research in Economics at Yale University, New Heaven, Connecticutt.Google Scholar
Lalonde, R. [1993], Zones monétaires optimales et symétrie des chocs: une analyse empirique, travail dirigé de Maîtrise, École des Hautes études commerciales de Montréal.Google Scholar
Lastrapes, W.D. [1992], Sources of Fluctuations in Real and Nominal Exchange Rates, The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 74, pp. 530–537.Google Scholar
Laxton, D. et Tetlow, R.J. [1992], Government Debt in an Open Economy, Rapport technique n° 58, Banque du Canada, Ottawa Google Scholar
Macklem, R.T. [1993], Terms-of-Trade Disturbances and Fiscal Policy in a Small Open Economy, The Economic Journal vol 103, pp. 916–936.Google Scholar
Masson, P., Symansky, S. et Meredith, G. [1990], Multimod Mark II: A Revised and Extended Model, IMF Occasional paper 71.Google Scholar
Masson, P.R. et Taylor, M.P. [1992], Common Currency Areas and Currency Unions: An Analysis of the Issues, Discussion Paper n° 617, Centre for Economic Policy Research.Google Scholar
Mcklbbln, W.J. et Sachs, J.D, [1991], Global Linkages: Macroeconomic Interdependence and Cooperation in the World Economy, Washington, D. C., Broo-kings Institution.Google Scholar
Mcklnnon, R.I. [1963], Optimum Currency Areas, American Economic Review, vol. 53, pp. 717–724.Google Scholar
Meese, R. et Rogoff, K. [1988], Was It Real? The Exchange Rate-Interest Differential Relation Over the Modern Floating-Rate Period, Journal of Finance, vol. 43, pp. 933–948.Google Scholar
Mendoza, G.E. [1991], Real Business Cycles in a Small Open Economy, The American Economic Review, 81(4), 7 pp. 97–818.Google Scholar
Meredith, G. [1989], Intermod 2.0: Model Specification and Simulation Proper-ties, Document de travail WP 89-7, Ministére des Finances, Ottawa.Google Scholar
Mundell, R. [1961], A Theory of Optimum Currency Areas, American Economic Review, vol. 51, pp. 657–665.Google Scholar
Obstfeld, M. [1985], Floating Exchange Rates: Experience and Prospects, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, n° 2, pp. 369–450.Google Scholar
Perron, P. [1990], Testing for Unit Root in Time Series with a Changing Mean, Journal of Business in Economics and Statistics, vol. 8, pp. 153–162.Google Scholar
Perron, P. et Vogelsang, T.J. [1992], Non-Stationarity and Level Shifts with an Application to Purchasing Power Parity, Journal of Business in Economics and Statistics, 10(3), pp. 301–320.Google Scholar
Phillips, P.C.B. et Perron, P. [1988], Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series Regressions, Biometrika, 75, pp. 335–346.Google Scholar
Poloz, S. [1990], Real Exchange Rate Adjustment Between Regions in a Common Currency Area, Bank of Canada, Mimeo, February.Google Scholar
Quah, D. [1992], The Relative Importance of Permanent and Transitory Components : Identification and Some Theoretical Bounds, Econometrica, 60(1), pp. 107–118.Google Scholar
Roger, S. [1991], Terms of Trade Movements in Major Indsutrial Countries: 1969-1989, Bank of Canada Working Paper 91-92.Google Scholar
Schmidt, P. et Phillips, P.C.B. [1992], Testing for a Unit Root in the Presence of Deterministic Trends, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, vol. 54, pp. 257–288.Google Scholar
Shapiro, M.D. et Watson, M. [1988], Sources of Business Cycle Fluctuations, NBER Working Paper n ° 2589.Google Scholar
Shin, Y. [1992] A Residual-Based Test of the Null of Cointegration Against the Alternative of No Cointegration, Manuscrit, Dept. of Economics, Michigan State University, East Lansing.Google Scholar
Sims, C.A. [1980], Macroeconomics and Reality, Econometrica, 48(1), pp. 1–48 Google Scholar
Zivot, E. et Andrews, D.W.K. [1992], Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock and the Unit Root Hypothesis, Journal of Business in Economics ans Statistics, 10(3), pp. 251–270.Google Scholar