Author
Abstract Fixed and flexible exchange rates each have advantages, and a country has the right to choose the regime suited to its circumstances. Nevertheless, several arguments support the view that the de facto dollar peg may now have outlived its usefulness for China. (i) Although foreign exchange reserves are a useful shield against currency crises, by now China's current level is fully adequate, and US treasury securities do not pay a high return. (ii) It may become increasingly difficult to sterilize the inflow over time. (iii) Although external balance could be achieved by expenditure reduction, e.g. by raising interest rates, the existence of two policy goals (external balance and internal balance) in general requires the use of two independent policy instruments (e.g. the real exchange rate and the interest rate). (iv) A large economy like China can achieve adjustment in the real exchange rate via flexibility in the nominal exchange rate more easily than via price flexibility. (v) The experience of other emerging markets points toward exiting from a peg when times are good and the currency is strong, rather than waiting until times are bad and the currency is under attack. (vi) From a longer-run perspective, prices of goods and services in China are low--not just low relative to the US (0.23), but also low by the standards of a Balassa--Samuelson relationship estimated across countries (which predicts 0.36). In this specific sense, the yuan was undervalued by ∼35 percent in 2000, and is by at least as much as that today. The study finds that, typically across countries, such gaps are corrected halfway, on average, over the subsequent decade. These six arguments for increased exchange rate flexibility need not imply a free float. China is a good counter-example to the popular "corners hypothesis" prohibition on intermediate exchange rate regimes. However, the specific changes announced by the Chinese authorities in July 2005 have not yet resulted in a de facto abandonment of the dollar peg (JEL classification: F41). Copyright 2006, Oxford University Press.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
More about this item
JEL classification:
- F41 - International Economics - - Macroeconomic Aspects of International Trade and Finance - - - Open Economy Macroeconomics
Statistics
Access and download statistics
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cesifo:v:52:y:2006:i:2:p:246-275. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.