Structural reforms are expected to lift growth and employment, but their effects are surprisingly difficult to pin down empirically. One reason is their potential endogeneity to the economic environment in which they are conducted. For example, the impact of a reform implemented shortly before a cyclical upswing is difficult to distinguish from the recovery itself. Similarly, macroeconomic policies conducted along a structural reform could affect the estimated impact. Exploring various options, this paper develops robust estimates of the impact of labor and product market reforms by using local projection techniques while controlling for endogeneity of reforms and other biases. The results suggest that labor and product market reforms have a lagged but positive impact on employment creation, and the positive effect remains even after controlling for the endogeneity of the decision to reform. Supportive macroeconomic policies are found to increase the effect of labor and product market reforms, consistent with the view that some structural reforms are best initiated in conjunction with supportive fiscal or monetary policy.
This paper develops a cost-benefit approach that helps to quantify the optimal level of international reserves in low-income countries, focusing on the role of reserves in preventing and mitigating absorption drops triggered by large external shocks. The approach is applied to a sample of 49 LICs over the period 1980-2008 to yield estimates of the likelihood and severity of a crisis. The calibration results suggest that the standard metric of three months of imports is inadequate for countries with fixed exchange rate regimes. The results also highlight the role of overall policy frameworks and availability of Fund-support in determining optimal reserve levels, raising questions about the uniform applicability of standard rules of thumb across countries.
This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF. The views expressed in this Working Paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the IMF or IMF policy. Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate. Since the 1997 Asian currency crisis, new interest has emerged in the formation of a common currency area in East Asia. This paper provides estimates of trade and welfare effects of East Asian currency unions, using a micro-founded gravity model. Counter-factual experiments to assess the effects of various hypothetical currency arrangements for East Asia suggest that an East Asian currency union will double bilateral trade in the region, but the resulting welfare effects will be moderate. However, if Japan, a major trade partner for East Asia, is included in the union, welfare effects increase substantially. The evidence thus suggests that certain regional currency arrangements in East Asia will stimulate regional trade rigorously and can generate economically significant welfare gains.
This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF. The views expressed in this Working Paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the IMF or IMF policy. Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate. This paper examines the role of Japan against that of China in the exchange rate regime in East Asia in light of growing interest in forming a currency union in the region. The analysis suggests that currency unions with China tend to generate higher average welfare gains for East Asian countries than currency unions with Japan or the United States. Overall, Japan does not appear to be a dominant player in forming a currency union in East Asia, and this trend is likely to continue if China's relative presence continues to rise in the regional trade.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.