This paper surveys the recent literature on sovereign debt and relates it to the evolution of the legal principles underlying the sovereign debt market and the experience of the most recent debt crises and defaults. It finds limited support for theories that explain the feasibility of sovereign debt based on either external sanctions or exclusion from the international capital market and more support for explanations that emphasize domestic costs of default. The paper concludes that there remains a case for establishing institutions that reduce the cost of default but the design of such institutions is not a trivial task.

We study the relationship between exchange rate regimes and economic growth for a sample of 183 countries over the post-Bretton Woods period, using a new de facto classification of regimes based on the actual behavior of the relevant macroeconomic variables. In contrast with previous studies, we find that, for developing countries, less flexible exchange rate regimes are associated with slower growth, as well as with greater output volatility. For industrial countries, regimes do not appear to have any significant impact on growth. The results are robust to endogeneity corrections and a number of alternative specifications borrowed from the growth literature. (JEL F31, F41)

Detailed case studies of debt defaults by Russia, Ukraine, Pakistan, Ecuador, Moldova, and Uruguay, framed by a comprehensive discussion of the history, economic theory, legal issues, and policy lessons of sovereign debt crises. The debt crises in emerging market countries over the past decade have given rise to renewed debate about crisis prevention and resolution. In Debt Defaults and Lessons from a Decade of Crises, Federico Sturzenegger and Jeromin Zettelmeyer examine the facts, the economic theory, and the policy implications of sovereign debt crises. They present detailed case histories of the default and debt crises in seven emerging market countries between 1998 and 2005: Russia, Ukraine, Pakistan, Ecuador, Argentina, Moldova, and Uruguay. These accounts are framed with a comprehensive overview of the history, economics, and legal issues involved and a discussion from both domestic and international perspectives of the policy lessons that can be derived from these experiences. Sturzenegger and Zettelmeyer examine how each crisis developed, what the subsequent restructuring encompassed, and how investors and the defaulting country fared. They discuss the new theoretical thinking on sovereign debt and the ultimate costs entailed, for both debtor countries and private creditors. The policy debate is considered first from the perspective of policymakers in emerging market countries and then in terms of international financial architecture. The authors' surveys of legal and economic issues associated with debt crises, and of the crises themselves, are the most comprehensive to be found in the literature on sovereign debt and default, and their theoretical analysis is detailed and nuanced. The book will be a valuable resource for investors as well as for scholars and policymakers.

Most of the empirical literature on the relative merits of alternative exchange rate regimes uses the IMF de jure classification based on the regime that governments claim to have, abstracting from the fact that many countries that in theory follow flexible regimes intervene in the exchange market to an extent that in practice makes them indistinguishable from fixed rate regimes, and vice versa. To address this problem, in this paper we construct a de facto classification of exchange rate regimes. Using cluster analysis techniques, we group different regimes according to their behavior along three classification dimensions: the nominal exchange rate, changes in the nominal exchange rate, and international reserves. We compare our results with the IMF classification, and discuss the main discrepancies. The paper provides an exchange rate classification for each country and each year during the period 1990-1998 which is readily available for downloading at

Most of the empirical literature on the relative merits of alternative exchange rate regimes uses the IMF de jure classification based on the regime that governments claim to have, abstracting from the fact that many countries that in theory follow flexible regimes intervene in the exchange market to an extent that in practice makes them indistinguishable from fixed rate regimes, and vice versa. To address this problem, in this paper we construct a de facto classification of exchange rate regimes. Using cluster analysis techniques, we group different regimes according to their behavior along three classification dimensions: the nominal exchange rate, changes in the nominal exchange rate, and international reserves. We compare our results with the IMF classification, and discuss the main discrepancies. The paper provides an exchange rate classification for each country and each year during the period 1990-1998 which is readily available for downloading at