Moving To Greater Exchange Rate Flexibility

A growing number of countries are adopting flexible exchange rate regimes because flexibility offers more protection against external shocks and greater monetary independence. Other countries have made the transition under disorderly conditions, with the sharp depreciation of their currency during a crisis. Regardless of the reason for adopting a flexible exchange rate, a successful transition depends on the effective management of a number of institutional and operational issues. The authors of this Economic Issue describe the necessary ingredients for moving to a flexible regime, as well as the optimal pace and sequencing under different conditions.

Many countries have moved towards more flexible exchange rate regimes over the last decade to take advantage of greater monetary policy autonomy and flexibility in responding to external shocks. Some reluctance to let go of pegged exchange rates persists, however, despite the benefits of flexibility. The institutional and operational requirements needed to support a floating exchange rate, as well as difficulties in assessing the right time and manner to exit, tend to be additional factors in this reluctance. This volume presents the concrete steps taken by a number of countries in transition to greater exchange rate flexibility and elaborates on the operational ingredients that proved helpful in promoting successful and durable transitions. It attempts to provide a better understanding (and hence a "road map") of how these various operational ingredients were established and coordinated, how their implementation interacted with macro and other conditions, and how they contributed to the smoothness of each transition.

This paper identifies the institutional and operational requisites for transitions to floating exchange rate regimes. In particular, it explores key issues underlying the transition, including developing a deep and liquid foreign exchange market, formulating intervention policies consistent with the new regime, establishing an alternative nominal anchor in the context of a new monetary policy framework, and building the capacity of market participants to manage exchange rate risks and of supervisory authorities to regulate and monitor them. It also assesses the factors that influence the pace of exit and the appropriate sequencing of exchange rate flexibility and capital account liberalization.

NULL

This volume contains the papers presented and comments made at two conferences on the controversial subject of greater flexibility of exchange rates. The first of the conferences was held at Oyster Bay, New York, early in 1969, the second at Bürgenstock, Switzerland, in the summer of 1969. One half of the 40 conferees were academic economists, the others were practitioners of the foreign exchange markets, mostly bankers and a few executives of international business firms. Both the opposition to greater flexibility of exchange rates and the advocacy of more flexible systems are represented in these papers. The contrast between fixed or jumping exchange rates and gliding exchange rates is clearly described and the various systems of increased flexibility, such as the "wider band" and the "crawling peg," are explained and examined. Originally published in 1970. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.

This paper reviews the issues involved in moving towards greater exchange rate flexibility and capital account liberalization in China. A more flexible exchange rate regime would allow China to operate a more independent monetary policy, providing a useful buffer against domestic and external shocks. At the same time, weaknesses in China’s financial system suggest that capital account liberalization poses significant risks and should be a lower priority in the short term. This paper concludes that greater exchange rate flexibility is in China’s own interest and that, along with a more stable and robust financial system, it should be regarded as a prerequisite for undertaking a substantial liberalization of the capital account.

Volatile exchange rates and how to manage them are a contentious topic whenever economic policymakers gather in international meetings. This book examines the broad parameters of exchange rate policy in light of both high-powered theory and real-world experience. What are the costs and benefits of flexible versus fixed exchange rates? How much of a role should the exchange rate play in monetary policy? Why don't volatile exchange rates destabilize inflation and output? The principal finding of this book is that using monetary policy to fight exchange rate volatility, including through the adoption of a fixed exchange rate regime, leads to greater volatility of employment, output, and inflation. In other words, the "cure" for exchange rate volatility is worse than the disease. This finding is demonstrated in economic models, in historical case studies, and in statistical analysis of the data. The book devotes considerable attention to understanding the reasons why volatile exchange rates do not destabilize inflation and output. The book concludes that many countries would benefit from allowing greater flexibility of their exchange rates in order to target monetary policy at stabilization of their domestic economies. Few, if any, countries would benefit from a move in the opposite direction.

Milton Friedman argued that flexible exchange rates would facilitate external adjustment. Recent studies find surprisingly little robust evidence that they do. We argue that this is because they use composite (or aggregate) exchange rate regime classifications, which often mask very heterogeneous bilateral relationships between countries. Constructing a novel dataset of bilateral exchange rate regimes that differentiates by the degree of exchange rate flexibility, as well as by direct and indirect exchange rate relationships, for 181 countries over 1980–2011, we find a significant and empirically robust relationship between exchange rate flexibility and the speed of external adjustment. Our results are supported by several “natural experiments” of exogenous changes in bilateral exchange rate regimes.