Exchange Rate Regimes and competitiveness The case of Greece

Dimitris Routos

Trade and Economic Integration in Eastern and South-Eastern Europe

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 2

CONTENTS
Abstract Introduction Exchange rate regime and competitiveness The case of Greece Conclusions References 3 4 5 7 15 16

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 3

ABSTRACT
The optimal choice of an exchange rate regime is often connected with inflation expectations, output growth, and economic integration. The impact of the exchange rate regime on the competitiveness of a country, although controversial, is considered to be a major factor in this respect. The case of Greece is portrayed as an example regarding the consequences of either a floating exchange rate regime or a fixed one, on the competitiveness of the country towards its trading partners and the rest of the world. The adoption of the Euro as Greeces national currency, affected its ability to intervene through monetary measures in order to fix the balance of trade disequilibria, and deteriorated its export performance during the last decade.

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 4

INTRODUCTION
Exchange rate regimes can be categorized in three major groups: a) fixed or pegged exchange rate regimes, where a currency's value is fixed against the value of another single currency or to a basket of other currencies, or to another measure of value, such as gold, b) flexible or floating exchange rate regimes, where the value of a currency against other currencies is determined by the market forces of supply and demand, and c) managed floating exchange rate regimes, that are hybrids of fixed and floating exchange rate regimes. The choice of an exchange rate regime is directly associated with country-specific characteristics. Three competing approaches in the relevant literature explain the choice of an exchange rate regime and underline those characteristics: The optimal currency area (OCA), the financial view, and the political view. According to the OCA theory, the choice of the exchange rate regime is related with the countrys size, trade links, openness, and the kind of shocks that the country is vulnerable to. The financial view is concentrated on the consequences of international financial integration, while the political view interprets the choice of an exchange rate regime as a buffer in the absence of nominal and institutional credibility.1 The concept of competitiveness as applied to economies has no clear or agreed definition among scholars. Still less is there any consensus regarding the factors that contribute to national competitiveness. Nevertheless improving a nations competitiveness is frequently presented as a central goal of economic policy and in this respect the following definition by OECD (OECD, Technology and the Economy: the Key Relationships, 1992) can describe the outlines of the term: "Competitiveness may be defined as the degree to which, under open market conditions, a country can produce goods and services that meet the test of foreign competition while simultaneously maintaining and expanding domestic real income". What would be the characteristics of a competitive economy are described in the EU report European Competitiveness Report (2000) as follows: An economy is competitive if its population can enjoy high and rising standards of living and high employment on a sustainable basis. More precisely, the level of economic activity should not cause an unsustainable external balance of the economy nor should it compromise the welfare of future generations. The impact of the exchange rate regime on competitiveness and economic development of a country was extensively debated during the last fifty years. One general understanding is that the nominal depreciation of the currency of a country with a floating exchange rate supports its competitiveness in the short-term by making its exports cheaper. However there are other factors that can neutralize the short-term effects of a nominal depreciation such as, rise in the prices of imported goods, inflation pressures, wages and inflation expectations. These factors are playing a decisive role in small open economies, with limited
1

Levy-Yeyati Eduardo, Sturzenegger Federico, and Reggio Iliana (2009), On the Endogeneity of Exchange Rate Regimes, European Economic Review V. 54 No. 5 (2010) pp. 659677.

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 5

opportunities for implementing autonomous monetary policies. Therefore in the medium term the nominal depreciation of the currency does not lead to a sustainable improvement of competitiveness.2 In this respect McKinnon (1963) argued that a floating exchange rate regime is desirable if a nations exports are limited to one or few goods, while a pegged regime is chosen if tradable goods represent a large proportion in a nations GDP.

EXCHANGE RATE REGIME and COMPETITIVENESS

Earlier studies on the difference between floating and pegged exchange rate regimes are based on the external shocks, and the OCA theory. More recent approaches focus on the trade-off between flexibility and credibility, or the economic performance and currency crisis. In the classical literature the choice is portrayed as either completely fixed exchange rate, or fully flexible. The general approach of the classical literature is that the prices of the commodities are relatively sticky regarding exchange rates, thus shocks to the economy lead to fluctuations in the economic activity. Major contributors to the classical exchange rate literature are among others Friedman (1953), Fleming (1962), Mundell (1961, 1963), McKinnon (1963), and Kenen (1969). Friedman argued that in the presence of sticky prices, floating exchange rates would insulate the economy from foreign shocks, by allowing relative prices to adjust faster. Mundell (1963), explored the role of capital mobility in the choice of exchange rate regimes. Under this approach, the choice between fixed and floating depends on the sources of shocks in an economy, whether they are real or nominal, and the degree of capital mobility. In an open economy with high degree of capital mobility a floating exchange rate provides insulation against real shocks, such as a change in the demand for exports or in the terms of trade, because under a floating rate system the exchange rate can adjust quickly and restores equilibrium, rather than requiring price level changes. On the other hand, a fixed exchange rate is desirable in the case of nominal shocks such as a shift in money demand, because money supply automatically adjust to changes in money demand without interest rate changes or price level changes (Mundell, 1963; Fleming, 1962). The assumption in Mundell Fleming framework is that capital mobility implies international arbitrage across countries in the form of uncovered interest parity. And the conclusion is that it is impossible to achieve simultaneously the three domestic goals: exchange rate stabilization, capital market integration and independent monetary policy, known as the impossible trinity. Also Mundell (1961) stressed the fundamentals of the optimal currency theory (OCA), defining the characteristics of areas in which it is optimal to adopt a single currency. The OCA approach weights out the trade and welfare gains from a stable exchange rate against the benefits of exchange rate flexibility as a shock absorber in the presence of nominal rigidities. According to OCA theory, the advantages of fixed exchange rates increase with the degree of economic integration among countries.
2

See: Rose A. (1999); Klein M. & Shambaugh J.(2006); Adam C.& Cobham D. (2007).

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 6

McKinnon (1963) focused on the criterion of the openness of an economy. He argued that economic size and openness of an economy are the fundamentals for OCA theory, and that small and open economies tend to adopt fixed exchange rate regimes than large and relatively close economies. Also Kenen (1969) argued that product diversification in trade, should be considered as a major determinant of whether a country should adopt a fixed exchange rate regime, or not. He also argues that countries with very concentrated production structures are more likely to adopt flexible exchange rates than countries with diversified production. Inflation and growth play an important role on a governments choice of exchange rate regimes. Recent literature has attempted to explain the impact of exchange rate regimes on economic performance. Ghosh et al. (1997) examine the effects of the exchange rate regime on inflation and economic growth. Their results suggest that both the level and variability on inflation is lower under fixed exchange rates than floating ones. Levy-Yeyati and Sturzenegger (2001) demonstrate that developing countries with pegged regimes are associated with lower inflation than developing countries under floating rates, but pegged regimes are associated with slower growth. Rogoff et al. (2003) study the link between exchange rate regimes and economic performance and according to their results, for countries at a relatively early stage of financial development and integration, fixed regimes appear to offer anti-inflation credibility gain without compromising growth objectives. On the contrary, flexible exchange rate regimes seem to offer higher growth without any cost to credibility for developed countries that are not in a currency union. Obstfeld and Taylor (2002) link the evolution of exchange rate regimes to the various phases of financial globalization, based on this impossible trinity argument. They argue that, while capital mobility prevailed at a time when monetary policy was subordinated to exchange rate stability (as in the gold standard), as soon as countries attempted to use monetary policy to revive their economies during WWI, they had to impose controls to curtail capital movements. Another approach in modern literature has studied the use of the exchange rate as a nominal anchor to reduce inflation. In particular, Giavazzi and Pagano (1988) argue that governments with a preference for low inflation but facing low institutional credibility, in order to convince the public of their commitment to nominal stability, may chose a peg as a policy crutch to tame inflationary expectations. They also argue that countries with a poor institutional track record may be more eager to rely on fixed exchange rate arrangements as a second best solution to a commitment problem. As the argument goes, weak governments that are more vulnerable to expansionary pressures (i.e., pressures from interest groups with the power to extract fiscal transfers), may choose to use a peg as a buffer against these pressures. The variety of definitions regarding competitiveness not only among scholars but also between national and international organizations dealing with its measurement, demonstrates the ambiguity of the term. Prominent academics decline even its use as an indicator of nations international performance and called it a dangerous obsession; it has

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 7

been also characterized as vague and ill-measured concept, while some argue that it is productivity that matters for a nations international advantage, and not competitiveness.3 Nevertheless as the rhetoric for competitiveness has become predominant among opinion leaders throughout the world, arguments in favor of competitiveness as an indicator of national competitive success are pervasive in the academic literature. Labor costs, interest rates, exchange rates and economies of scale are considered to be the most influential determinants of competitiveness. In terms of preconditions for the achievement of a nations competitive advantage, four attributes are playing a decisive role: a) Factor conditions, that is the nations position in factors of production, such as skilled labor or infrastructure, necessary to compete in a given industry, b) Demand conditions, that is the nature of home-market demand for products or services, c) Related and supporting industries, that is the presence or absence in the nation of supply industries that are internationally competitive, and d) Firm strategy, structure and rivalry, that is the conditions in the nation governing how companies are created, organized, and managed, as well as the nature of domestic rivalry.4 The ideal indicator for measuring competitiveness has been a controversial issue among scholars for more than a decade. Real Effective Exchange Rates (REER), and Unit Labor Costs (ULC), are used more frequently for this purpose. Nevertheless other indicators such as relative export prices are also used for competitiveness measurement.5

THE CASE of GREECE

The options for choosing an exchange rate regime after WW II, were mainly determined for Greece by international developments, particularly the choices of Western European countries and the subsequent priorities of the political and economic leadership of the country. Immediately after the war, the allied countries with the initiative of USA and the UK established a new international monetary order, focusing on the dollar, with which other currencies were pegged. This system, known as the monetary system of Bretton Woods, managed to ensure international monetary stability for almost two decades. Greece participated in this system in 1953. After the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in 1971, Greece chose in line with other Western European countries a floating exchange rate regime, up to 1997. Since 1998 Greece participated in ERM I and ERM II, while since January 1st 2002 adopted the Euro as its national currency. The period of the Bretton Woods system was for Greece a period of stability regarding exchange rate fluctuations and the Drachma remained pegged with the US Dollar with its initial rate 1 USD=30 drachmas (it must be noted that drachma devaluated 50% against the US dollar, just before the participation of Greece in the Bretton Woods system). This
3 4

See: Krugman P. (1994); Thompson R. (2003). Porter Michael (1990), The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Harvard Business Review, MarchApril 1990, pp.73-91. 5 Ca Zorzi Michele, Schnatz Bernd (2007), Explaining and Forecasting Euro Area Exports- Which Competitiveness Indicator Performs Best?, ECB Working Paper Series, No 833, November 2007.

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 8

remarkable stability was mainly derived from the fact that after the civil war of 1944-1949, there were no pressures from any credible political opposition towards the alteration of the economic and political goals of the elites. The adoption of the floating exchange rate regime in Greece was simultaneous with the first oil crisis. Upon the announcement of the end of the gold standard (end of the Bretton Woods system, August 1971), drachma remained in a fixed parity with the US dollar (1 USD=30 drachmas), despite the fact that other Western European countries created a new monetary mechanism known as the snake in the tunnel, which allowed major European currencies to fluctuate 2,25% relatively the US dollar. Due to the fact that the US dollar devaluated against the European currencies, Greece managed to improve its current account balance as Greek tradable goods became cheaper compared with those of its European trade partners. On the other hand, Greek economy suffered from high rates of imported inflation, as imported goods became more expensive, and of course due to the oil crisis effects. Therefore the fixed parity of drachma with the US dollar lasted up to October 1973, when it started to fluctuate freely against all currencies after a 10% revaluation. Since then and up to 1998, drachma entered in a period of continuous sliding against major currencies, in an attempt to neutralize the negative consequences from huge differences in the level of inflation in comparison with the European trade partners of Greece.6 In table 1 the de jure drachma devaluations are depicted.

1953 1983 1985 1998 1999 2000

DRACHMA DEVALUATIONS (and a revaluation)

50% against USD (1USD = 30.000 GRD from 1USD = 15.000 GRD). 15,5% against major currencies. 15% against major currencies. 12,3% against ECU. Drachmas participation in ERM. 1 ECU = 357 GRD. Drachma participates in ERM II. 1 = 353,11 GRD. 3,5% revaluation against the Euro. 1 = 340,75 GRD.
Table 1

Devaluations of the Greek drachma were used extensively during the 80s and 90s, as a tool for fixing the disequilibria in the balance of trade. In the period April 1981 December 2000, drachma devaluated (either de jure or de facto) against the US dollar and the German mark, 714% and 709% respectively (figure 1).

. (2006), : ..., unpublished.

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 9

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, own calculations

Figure 1

The main policy objective of the devaluation, apart from taming imported inflation, is to improve the balance of payments performances through external competitiveness allowing the nominal exchange rate to depreciate. The price ratio of tradable to non-tradable is a method, which generally measures the internal competitiveness). Domestic price level has substantial influence on RER. Increasing of domestic price level at a higher rate relative to foreign price levels directly affects the RER in terms of appreciation of domestic currency in real terms eroding the external competitiveness. Nominal devaluation in turn leads to increase in the domestic price level (Hinkle and Montiel, 1999). As stated earlier, the main objective of the devaluation or depreciation is to gain external competitiveness and balance of payments improvement in an economy. Under this scenario the policy makers should face certain dilemma in terms of increasing price level and eroding competitiveness under a single policy variable if the pass-through of exchange rate is substantial (figure 2).

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 10

Figure 2

The competitiveness of the Greek economy remained weak after WW II, regardless the adoption of a floating or a fixed exchange rate regime. An indication of this argument is shown in table 2. Greek exports as a percentage of GDP, never exceeded 25% on average for various periods with different exchange rate arrangements.

EXPORTS as % of GDP
1953 1971 Bretton Woods. 10,48% (1960-1971 ) 1972 1987 Free Floating. 19,12% 1988 1997 Hard drachma policy. 18,36% 1998 2001 Participation in ERM and ERM II. 23,27% 2002 2012 Participation in the Euro zone. 23,06%
Source: EU AMECO Database, Own Calculations Table 2

Measuring competitiveness of the Greek economy is an inherently difficult issue. Estimates can differ, depending on whether competitiveness is measured on the basis of relative prices or relative unit labor costs, on whether one uses nominal or real unit labor costs, on which countries one compares Greece with and, finally, on the relative weight of each country in the index. In addition to that measurement of competitiveness must be focused on the export sector, i.e. tradable goods and services, not the whole economy, since a large part of goods and services produced in the Greek economy are non-tradable due to the fact that the Greek public sector is quite large. REERs for Greece either UCL based or CPI based, as well nominal ULCs are presented in table 3. The differences occurred are due to different methodologies and different base years.

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 11

REERs and nominal ULCs

BROAD REER (ULC REER (CPI EU REER (CPI based) based) based) NOMINAL 2005=100* 2000=100** 2000=100*** ULC **** 101,3 N/A N/A 66,5 100,9 N/A N/A 70,4 100,6 N/A N/A 76,9 100,3 N/A N/A 80,7 99,5 N/A N/A 83,4 98,0 100 100 85,0 92,2 101,1 99,9 84,7 98,9 103,7 101,5 93,3 97,3 109,4 102,8 94,7 98,6 111,5 103,7 96,8 100 111,4 105,1 100 97,4 112,2 106,3 98,9 97,4 114 107,2 101,4 97,6 116,8 108,1 106,6 99,3 118,7 109,2 113,2 99,2 118,1 112,6 113,1 96,3 118,5 113 111,0 88,2 114,6 112,1 104,1

* AMECO: REER, based on ULC (total economy)- Performance relative to the rest of 36 industrial countries: double **BOG: REER Broad CPI based index, includes the 28 main trading partners of Greece ***BOG: REER EU CPI based index includes the rest 16 Euro area countries ****AMECO: Nominal unit labour costs: total economy (Ratio of compensation per employee to real GDP per person employed).
Source: Eurostat Ameco database, Bank of Greece Table 3

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

The following analysis will be based on the CPI based REERs produced by Bank of Greece because CPI based REERs are demonstrating in relative accuracy the competitive advantages or disadvantages of the Greek economy. In order to quantify the competitiveness of the Greek economy, the structure of the economy (proportion in GDP of the primary, secondary, and tertiary sectors) must be taken into account. According to EU statistics the relative numbers are 7%, 23,9% and 69%.7 Moreover, it must be taken into account that exporters of goods often face different competitors than exporters of services such as the tourist industry. For example, Germany is one of the biggest export markets of Greek goods and Greek exporters of industrial goods face fierce competition from German producers. However, Germany is not a competitor for Greeces tourist industry because it offers winter tourism, whereas Greece offers summer vacations. As a result, in measuring competitiveness of Greek exports of industrial goods, Germany should have a large weight,
7

http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/statistics/rural-development/2012/indicators_en.pdf

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 12

while in measuring competitiveness of Greek services, Germany should have a low (in fact zero) one. The opposite holds for Spain, or Portugal, which have a low weight in Greeces manufacturing exports but are at the same time some of Greeces major competitors in tourist services. Greece is one of the major European tourist destinations and the tourist sector is Greeces biggest export industry. In contrast to the goods exporters, competitiveness of exporters of services such as tourism may depend more on prices of services in Greece relative to competitor countries than on relative ULCs. A tourist in Greece does not care so much about how much personnel is paid in a Greek hotel, but he definitely cares about how much one week of his stay in Greece will cost him relative to one week in a similar tourist resort in Spain or Portugal. Therefore CPI based REERs are considered better indicators for measuring the competitiveness of the Greek economy. Since the adoption of Euro as Greeces national currency, the ability of autonomous monetary policy has been abolished. Consequently, the Greek authorities had not in their possession any more, a useful tool in order to intervene in monetary terms for fixing disequilibria in the balance of trade. The deterioration in the REER Index is shown in figure 3, relatively to 28 main trading partners and the rest Euro area countries, for the period 20002012. Since 2001 we observe an acute deterioration, especially towards the 28 main trading partners, which continues up to 2009. From 2010 a gradual reversal is being observed.

CPI based REER INDEX (2000=100)

120 118 116 114 112 110 108 106 104 102 100 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Broad index (28 main trading partners) EU17 Index (the rest 16 EA countries)

Source: Bank of Greece, Bulletin of conjunctural indicators 148, Jan-Feb 2013

Figure 3

The sharp deterioration in the competitiveness of the Greek economy is also clearly depicted in figures 4, 5 & 6. In figure 4 it can be noticed that while from 1996 till 2000, there is a positive trend in Greek exports as a percentage of GDP relative to three core Eurozone countries (Germany, Austria and the Netherlands), since 2000 there is a negative downturn which is being reversed in 2003, when a stagnation period follows up to 2008.

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 13

EXPORTS as % of GDP
85,00%

75,00%

65,00%

55,00%

45,00%

35,00%

25,00%

15,00% 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Germany Greece Netherlands Austria

Source: EU AMECO Statistical Database

Figure 4

In a comparison of the Greek exports as a percentage of GDP with three Eurozone periphery countries (Spain, Italy and Portugal) in figure 5, the convergence noticed from 1993 till 2000, is reversed in 2000, a more sharp decline is depicted through 2003, and a relative deterioration from 2004 up to 2008.

EXPORTS as % of GDP
40,00%

35,00%

30,00%

25,00%

20,00%

15,00% 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Greece 1999 2000 2001 Spain 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Italy

Portugal

Source: EU AMECO Statistical Database

Figure 5

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 14

Finally in figure 6 the comparison of the Greek exports as a percentage of GDP relative to the 27 European countries and the 17 Eurozone countries shows the convergence period from 1996 up to 2000, the negative trend from 2000 till 2003, and the stagnation period from 2004 until 2008.

EXPORTS as % of GDP
50,00%

45,00%

40,00%

35,00%

30,00%

25,00%

20,00%

15,00% 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

European Union (27 countries)

Euro area (17 countries)

Greece

Source: EU AMECO Statistical Database

Figure 6

Since 2009, the Greek exports as a percentage of GDP, follow an upside trend similar to the one experienced by the rest Eurozone and EU27 countries. This is a result of the improvement in the CPI REERs as shown in figure 3.

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 15

CONCLUSIONS
The choice of an exchange rate regime affects the international competitiveness of a country. Greece was suffering from chronic disequilibria in its balance of payments. Devaluation of the drachma was a cure to its well lasting imbalances up to 2000. Greeces entrance into the EMU was based rather on political than economic criteria. It was clearly evident that Greece in 2001 was lacking behind the rest of the EMU countries in terms of economic development and convergence. Although considerable improvement had been recorded in various economic indicators in the years preceding the entrance to EMU, alarming signals of structural problems in the Greek economy were present. Upon the adoption of the Euro as its national currency, and the subsequent abolition of an independent monetary policy, its competitiveness towards its trading partners both in the EU, and internationally worsened. Although EMU joining decision was cheerfully celebrated in Greece, it concealed the need for an incremental adjustment of the Greek economy in the years following the accession, due to the fact that it was not adequately reformed, before adopting the Euro as its national currency. Greek political and economic elites proved to be incapable in imposing the needed reforms that would enable Greece to experience sustainable growth along with fiscal discipline and social prosperity. The inability of the Greek elites to impose these necessary reforms for the Greek economy and society is the main cause for todays problems.

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 16

REFERENCES
Adam Christopher, Cobham David (2007), Exchange Rate Regimes and Trade, The Manchester School Vol. 75, Iss. Supplement s1, pp. 44-63. Altomonte Carlo, Aquilante Tommaso and Ottaviano Gianmarco (2012), The triggers of competitiveness: the EFIGE cross-country report, Bruegel Blueprint Series , Vol. XVII, Bruegel, Brussels. Bank of Greece (2013), Bulletin of conjunctural indicators 148, Jan-Feb 2013. Beker Emilija (2006), Exchange Rate Regime Choice, Panoeconomicus, Vol. 3, pp. 313-334. Buldorini Luca, Makrydakis Stelios And Thimann Christian (2002), The Effective Exchange Rates Of The Euro, ECB Occasional Paper Series No. 2, ECB, Frankfurt, February 2002. Cambridge Econometrics, Ecorys-Nei (2003), A Study on the Factors of Regional Competitiveness - A draft final report for The European Commission DirectorateGeneral Regional Policy. Ca Zorzi Michele, Schnatz Bernd (2007), Explaining and Forecasting Euro Area Exports. Which Competitiveness Indicator Performs Best?, ECB Working Paper Series, No 833, November 2007. Commission of The European Communities (2000), European competitiveness report 2000, Commission Staff Working Paper SEC(2000) 1823, Brussels. Darvas Zsolt (2012), Productivity, Labour Cost and Export Adjustment: Detailed Results for 24 EU Countries, Brugel Working Paper No. 2012/11, July 2012. De Broeck Mark, Guscina Anastasia, and Mehrez Gil (2012), Assessing Competitiveness Using Industry Unit Labor Costs: an Application to Slovakia, IMF Working Paper No. WP/12/107, IMF, April 2012. De Grauwe Paul (2012), In search of symmetry in the Eurozone, CEPS Policy Brief No. 268, May 2012. Detragiache Enrica and Hamann Alfonso (1997), Exchange Rate-Based Stabilization in Western Europe: Greece, Ireland, Italy and Portugal, IMF Working Paper No. WP/97/75, IMF, June 1997. ECORYS Nederland BV and Cambridge Econometrics (2011), Study on the cost competitiveness of European industry in the globalisation era - empirical evidence on the basis of relative unit labour costs (ULC) at sectoral level, EU DG ENTERPRISE, Cambridge, 28 September 2011.

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 17

Eichengreen, B. (1994), International Monetary Arrangements for the 21st Century, The Brookings Institution, Washington D.C., USA. Eichengreen B. (1999), Kicking the Habit: Moving from Pegged Rates to Greater Exchange Rate Flexibility, The Economic Journal Vol. 109, Iss. 454, pages 114, March 1999. Felipe Jesus and Kumar Utsav (2011), Unit Labor Costs in the Eurozone: The Competitiveness Debate Again, Asian Development Bank Working Paper No. 651, February 2011, Manila, Philippines. Fleming M. J. (1962), Domestic Financial Policies under Fixed and under Floating Exchange Rates, IMF staff paper 9, pp. 369-379. Frankel Jeffrey (1996), Recent Exchange-Rate Experience and Proposals for Reform, The American Economic Review, Vol. 86, No. 2, pp. 153-158. Friedman M. (1953), Choice, Chance and the Personal Distribution of Income, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 61, No. 4, pp. 277-290. Garelli Stphane (2012), The Fundamentals and History of Competitiveness, IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook 2012, pp. 488-503. Giavazzi F. and Pagano M. (1998), The Advantage of Tying Ones Hands: EMS Discipline and Central Bank Credibility, European Economic Review No. 32, pp. 1055-1075. Ghosh A. R., Gulde A. M., Ostry J.D., and Wolf H. (1997), Does the Nominal Exchange Rate Regime Matter?, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 5874. Hinkle Lawrence, Montiel Peter (1999), Exchange Rate Misalignment: Concepts and Measurement for Developing Countries, Oxford University Press, USA. Hughes Hallett Andrew and Oliva Juan Carlos Martinez (2013), The Importance of Trade and Capital Imbalances in the European Debt Crisis, Peterson Institute for International Economics Working Paper No. 13-01, January 2013. Husain Aasim, Mody Ashoka, Rogoff Kenneth (2004), Exchange Rate Regime Durability and Performance in Developing Versus Advanced Economies, Journal of Monetary Economics, 52 (2005) Iss. 1, pp. 35-64. Kenen Peter (2000), Currency Areas, Policy Domains, and the Institutionalization of Fixed Exchange Rates, Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics and Political Science, UK. Klein Michael, Shambaugh Jay (2006), Fixed exchange rates and trade, Journal of International Economics, Volume 70, Issue 2, December 2006, Pages 359383. Krugman Paul (1994), Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession, Foreign Affairs, March/April 1994.

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 18

Kenen P. B. (1969), The Theory of Optimum Currency Areas: An Eclectic View, in Mundell R. A. and Swoboda A.K. eds., Monetary Problems of the International Economy, The university of Chicago Press, USA. Lafrance Robert, Osakwe Patrick, and St-Amant Pierre (1998), Evaluating Alternative Measures of the Real Effective Exchange Rate, Bank of Canada Working Paper 98-20, November 1998. Lauro Bernadette and Schmitz Martin (2012), Euro Area Exchange Rate-Based Competitiveness Indicators: A Comparison of Methodologies and Empirical Results, ECB paper presented at the Sixth IFC Conference on Statistical Issues and Activities in a Changing Environment BIS, 28-29 August 2012. Leichter Jules,Cristina Mocci, and Pozzuoli Stefania (2010), Measuring External Competitiveness: An Overview, Italian Ministry of Economy and Finance Working Paper No. 2, April 2010. Levy-Yeyati Eduardo, Sturzenegger Federico (2001), Exchange Rate Regimes and Economic Performance, IMF Staff Paper No. 47, pp. 62-98. Levy-Yeyati Eduardo, Sturzenegger Federico, and Reggio Iliana (2009), On the Endogeneity of Exchange Rate Regimes, European Economic Review V. 54 No. 5 (2010) pp. 659677. McKinnon R. I. (1963), Optimum Currency Areas, American Economic Review, Vol. 53, No. 4, pp. 717-725. Mundell R. A. (1961), A Theory of Optimum Currency Areas, American Economic Review, Vol. 51, No. 4, pp. 657-665. Mundell R. A. (1963), Capital Mobility and Stabilization Policy under Fixed and Flexible Exchange Rates, Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, Vol. 29, pp. 421431. OECD (1992), Technology and the Economy: the Key Relationships, Paris. Obstfeld Maurice and Taylor Alan (2002), Globalization and Capital Markets, NBER Working Paper Series No. 8846, March 2002. Porter Michael (1990), The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Harvard Business Review, MarchApril 1990, pp. 73-91. Rogoff K. S., Husain A. M., Mody A., Brooks R., and Oomes N. (2003), Evolution and Performance of Exchange Rate Regimes, IMF Working Paper 03/243. Rose Andrew (1999), One Money, One Market: Estimating the Effect of Common Currencies on Trade, NBER Working Paper 7432, December 1999.

Exchange rate Regimes & Competitiveness - Routos 19

Stockman Alan (1999), Choosing an exchange-rate system, Journal of Banking and Finance 23 (1999), pp. 1483-1498. Thompson E R, 2003, "A grounded approach to identifying national competitive advantage: a preliminary exploration" Environment and Planning A 35(4) pp. 631 657. Torrisi C., Uslu G. (2010), Transitioning Economies: A Calculus of Competitiveness, Journal of Applied Business and Economics vol.11(3) pp. 39-54. Van Ark Bart, Stuivenwold Edwin and Ypma Gerard (2005), Unit Labour Costs, Productivity and International Competitiveness, Research Memorandum GD-80, Groningen Growth and Development Centre, August 2005. (2006), : ..., unpublished.