One Money, One Market-A Revised Benchmark /

The introduction of the euro generated substantial interest in measuring the impact of currency unions (CUs) on trade flows. Rose's (2000) initial estimates suggested a tripling of trade and created a literature in search of "more reasonable" CU effects. A recent meta-analysis of this...

Descrición completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor Principal: Henn, Christian
Outros autores: Eicher, Theo
Formato: Revista
Idioma:English
Publicado: Washington, D.C. : International Monetary Fund, 2009.
Series:IMF Working Papers; Working Paper ; No. 2009/186
Acceso en liña:Full text available on IMF
LEADER 02162cas a2200253 a 4500
001 AALejournalIMF006021
008 230101c9999 xx r poo 0 0eng d
020 |c 5.00 USD 
020 |z 9781451873337 
022 |a 1018-5941 
040 |a BD-DhAAL  |c BD-DhAAL 
100 1 |a Henn, Christian. 
245 1 0 |a One Money, One Market-A Revised Benchmark /  |c Christian Henn, Theo Eicher. 
264 1 |a Washington, D.C. :  |b International Monetary Fund,  |c 2009. 
300 |a 1 online resource (23 pages) 
490 1 |a IMF Working Papers 
500 |a <strong>Off-Campus Access:</strong> No User ID or Password Required 
500 |a <strong>On-Campus Access:</strong> No User ID or Password Required 
506 |a Electronic access restricted to authorized BRAC University faculty, staff and students 
520 3 |a The introduction of the euro generated substantial interest in measuring the impact of currency unions (CUs) on trade flows. Rose's (2000) initial estimates suggested a tripling of trade and created a literature in search of "more reasonable" CU effects. A recent meta-analysis of this literature shows that subsequent papers quantify CU trade impacts at 30-90 percent. However, most recent studies use shorter time series and fewer countries than Rose in his original work. We revisit Rose's original benchmark, extend the dataset, and address Baldwin's (2006) critiques regarding the proper specification of gravity models in large panels by simultaneously accounting for multilateral resistance and unobserved bilateral heterogeneity. This produces a robust average CU trade effect of 45 percent. Yet, the trade impacts of individual CUs vary substantially and are generally lower than those of preferential trade agreements (PTAs). Our revised benchmark can be used as a yardstick for future studies to delineate how estimates differ due to new data or differences in econometric specifications. 
538 |a Mode of access: Internet 
700 1 |a Eicher, Theo. 
830 0 |a IMF Working Papers; Working Paper ;  |v No. 2009/186 
856 4 0 |z Full text available on IMF  |u http://elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/001/2009/186/001.2009.issue-186-en.xml  |z IMF e-Library