4. Choosing between Exchange Rate Regimes
Countries that operate under fixed exchange rates with one another are constrained to have the same
interest rates. Therefore, fixed exchange rates eliminate discretionary monetary policy and nominal
depreciation as methods of adjustment during recession. In normal times, adjustment happens slowly—
through price adjustment and changes in the real exchange rate over the medium run. In emergency
situations, adjustment happens through devaluation, often forced on policymakers through currency crisis.
Thus, the adjustment mechanism of fixed exchange rates does not appear terribly attractive.
On the other hand, as Robert Mundell pointed out in the 1960s, the loss of discretionary monetary policy
is less important to the extent that countries operating under fixed exchange rates face one of two
conditions: similar economic shocks or high factor mobility with one another. If countries face similar
shocks, they would tend to choose the same monetary policies even in the absence of fixed exchange
rates. If countries have high factor mobility, movements of workers can substitute for real depreciation as
a method of economic adjustment. In other words, workers will move from areas that require real
depreciation to avoid high unemployment. A group of countries that satisfy at least one of Mundell’s
conditions is said to constitute an optimal currency area. As the name implies, it makes sense
economically for such a group of countries to adopt a single currency. As the text argues, many
economists believe that the countries of the Euro zone do not constitute an optimal currency area, since
they satisfy neither of Mundell’s conditions.
In some cases, the loss of policymaking flexibility under fixed exchange rates may also provide benefits.
If countries have a reputation for undisciplined monetary policy, international investors may fear that a
flexible exchange rate system will allow too much latitude for inflationary policy. To the extent that such
countries can commit to a fixed rate system, they eliminate the potential for discretionary monetary
policy. Since a fixed exchange rate can always be abandoned, however, it is not always a simple matter to
demonstrate commitment to a fixed rate system. One method is to enter into a common currency with a
set of other countries, as much of Europe has done. Another is to supplement fixed exchange rates with
legislative or technical measures that limit or prohibit discretionary monetary policymaking. The latter
arrangements—called currency boards—generated much interest in the 1990s. Argentina adopted a
currency board in 1991, but abandoned it in crisis in 2001. Some economists argue that Argentina’s
currency board was not tight enough, since an exchange rate crisis was not prevented. These economists
argue that a country that wants a fixed exchange rate should simply adopt the U.S. dollar as its currency.
Other economists argue that fixed exchange rates are a bad idea, and that currency boards should be used
for only short periods of time, if at all. A box in the text describes Argentina’s crisis.
Finally, the policy flexibility seemingly offered by flexible exchange rates may be illusory. In practice,
flexible exchange rates vary greatly. Large and unpredictable movements in the nominal exchange rate
make life more complicated for firms and consumers and have real effects in the short run since prices
(and hence the real exchange rate) adjust slowly. As described above, movements in the exchange rate
are driven by expectations, which are not well understood, and the relationship between monetary policy
and the nominal exchange rate is a bit more complicated than it seemed in Chapter 19. Moreover, to the
extent that changes in the nominal exchange rate have real effects, monetary policymakers may be
required to use policy to respond to unpredictable (and sometimes difficult to understand) movements in
the nominal exchange rate. Thus, flexible exchange rates do not allow policymakers complete
independence: to some extent, policymakers are at the mercy of the foreign exchange market.
The choice of exchange rate regime requires weighing the costs of highly variable nominal exchange rates
against the potentially poor adjustment properties of fixed exchange rates. The choice will depend on the
©2017 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall
20-97