Pros and Cons of Currency Board Arrangements in the Lead-Up to EU Accession and Participation in the Euro Zone
February 1, 2000
Download PDF
More Formats on IMF eLibrary
Order a Print CopyDisclaimer: This Policy Dicussion 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
Summary
Historically, countries with currency board arrangements (CBAs) have experienced lower inflation and higher growth than those with other regimes. The experiences of three candidates for EU membership with CBAs (Estonia, Lithuania, and Bulgaria) have also been generally favorable. Can CBAs serve these transition countries well all the way up to the adoption of the euro? After considering the pros and cons, this paper provides an affirmative answer, but notes that to preserve the viability of their CBAs throughout the process, these countries need to maintain strict policy discipline and be prepared to deal with large capital inflows and asymmetric shocks.
Subject: Conventional peg, Currency boards, Exchange rate arrangements, Exchange rates, Foreign exchange, Inflation, Prices
Keywords: anchor currency country, Baltics, CBA country, CBA to EMU, Conventional peg, currency board, currency board arrangement, Currency boards, deutsche mark, EMU, EMU accession, EMU country, EMU membership, EMU participant, Estonia, EU accession, euro, European Union, Exchange rate arrangements, exchange rate peg, Exchange rates, Inflation, inflation performance, PDP, peg to an anchor currency, transition country, transition economy
Pages:
26
Volume:
2000
DOI:
Issue:
001
Series:
Policy Discussion Paper No. 2000/001
Stock No:
PPIEA0012000
ISBN:
9781451974928
ISSN:
1564-5193
