Though the hypothesis that exchange rate regimes fully predetermine monetary policy in the face of external shocks hardly finds any advocates on theoretical ground it has crept in the most of empirical research. This study adopts a more discerning empirical approach that looks at monetary policy tools used in order to accommodate the recent financial crisis. We investigated the GDP growth in 45 emerging market economies in the most intense phase of the crisis and found out that there is no clear difference in the growth performance between countries at the opposite poles of the exchange rate regime spectrum. Depreciation cum international reserve depletion outperforms the other policy options, especially the rise in the interest rate spread. We discovered certain complementarities between the information on the policy option and on exchange rate regime. Taking into account non-Gaussian settings, we decided to use quantile regression, which provide in addition, more complete picture of relationship between the covariates and the distribution of the GDP growth.
We examine the insulating property of flexible exchange rate in CEE economies using the fact that they have adopted different regimes. A set of Bayesian structural VAR models with common serial correlations is estimated on data spanning 1998q1-2015q4. The long-term identifying restrictions are derived from a macroeconomic model. We find that irrespective of the exchange rate regime output is driven mainly by real shocks. Its reactions to these shocks, however, are substantially stronger under less flexible regimes, whereas the responses to nominal shocks are similar. Hence, the insulating property of flexible regimes can reduce the costs from economic shocks.
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.