European Monetary Union
A case for floating

The European Commission's report, One Market, One Money, argued for a single European currency because it would eliminate transactions costs (which it estimated as 0.4% of Community GDP) and might also bring other benefits. In Discussion Paper No. 656, Research Fellows Patrick Minford and Andrew Hughes Hallett, with Anupam Rastogi, adapt the Keynesian literature on `optimal currency areas' to assess the costs of macroeconomic instability arising in a European monetary union with low labour mobility, a negligible fiscal offset to national shocks, and short-run nominal wage and price rigidity. They argue that the loss of national exchange rates as a stabilizing mechanism will be damaging, and they undertake simulations on the Liverpool world model which confirm that floating outperforms EMU for all member countries, under both fixed money supply rules and strategically responsive monetary policy. Indeed, even if the rest of the Community proceeds with EMU, the UK would do better to remain outside, and their simulations on the more refined Liverpool model of the UK reinforce the latter conclusion.

Patrick Minford presented this paper at a March lunchtime meeting, reported more fully in this issue of the Bulletin.

The Price of EMU RevisitedPatrick Minford, Anupam Rastogi and Andrew Hughes Hallett

Discussion Paper No. 656, March 1992 (IM)