|
|
Monetary
Unions
Optimum sizes
Recent events in the European Community and the former
Soviet bloc have brought the theory of optimum currency areas (OCAs) to
the forefront of discussion. In Discussion Paper No. 847, Research
Fellow Jacques Mélitz integrates this theory with modern
approaches to international trade and macroeconomics. He likens the
benefits and costs of widening a currency area to a reduction in
transport costs and a slowing of the terms-of-trade adjustment
respectively. With many trading nations of different sizes, each engages
in inter-industry trade based on comparative advantage and
intra-industry trade based on economies of scale. Foreign trade imposes
particular costs, which are in part monetary, relating to multiple
currencies and units of account; its non- monetary costs include not
only transport but also information, distribution, litigation and
insurance arising from differences in language, custom and law.
As the union expands in size, the monetary sales costs of its members'
trade fall while their welfare rises but at a diminishing rate. With
sticky prices in goods and factor markets, the costs associated with a
monetary union of any size will depend on its composition. High levels
of internal intra-industry trade imply that its members' industrial
structures are similar so the terms of trade among themselves will
change little, while low levels of non-monetary sales costs indicate
that its members are geographically, culturally and juridically close,
which also facilitates trade adjustment. Finally, the union's costs also
rise as the union and national currencies' equilibrium real exchange
rates diverge. As the union's size increases, the quality of the best
potential new members progressively worsens, so enlargement entails a
rising marginal cost. Taken together with the diminishing marginal
benefits of enlarging a monetary union, this implies that there does
exist an optimum size for a currency area.
The Theory of Optimum Currency Areas, Trade Adjustment and Trade
Jacques Mélitz
Discussion Paper No. 847, October 1993 (IM)
|
|