Macroeconomics of the Euro

While it is a long-standing idea in international macroeconomic theory that flexible nominal exchange rates have the potential to facilitate adjustment in international relative prices, a monetary union necessarily forgoes this mechanism for facilitating macroeconomic adjustment among its regions. Twenty years of experience in the eurozone monetary union, including the eurozone crisis, have spurred new macroeconomic research on the costs of giving up nominal exchange rates as a tool of adjustment, and the possibility of alternative policies to promote macroeconomic adjustment. Empirical evidence paints a mixed picture regarding the usefulness of nominal exchange rate flexibility: In many historical settings, flexible nominal exchanges rates tend to create more relative price distortions than they have helped resolve; yet, in some contexts exchange rate devaluations can serve as a useful correction to severe relative price misalignments. Theoretical advances in studying open economy models either support the usefulness of exchange rate movements or find them irrelevant, depending on the specific characteristics of the model economy, including the particular specification of nominal rigidities, international openness in goods markets, and international financial integration. Yet in models that embody certain key aspects of the countries suffering the brunt of the eurozone crisis, such as over-borrowing and persistently high wages, it is found that nominal devaluation can be useful to prevent the type of excessive rise in unemployment observed. This theoretical research also raises alternative polices and mechanisms to substitute for nominal exchange rate adjustment. These policies include the standard fiscal tools of optimal currency area theory but also extend to a broader set of tools including import tariffs, export subsidies, and prudential taxes on capital flows. Certain combinations of these policies, labeled a “fiscal devaluation,” have been found in theory to replicate the effects of a currency devaluation in the context of a monetary union such as the eurozone. These theoretical developments are helpful for understanding the history of experiences in the eurozone, such as the eurozone crisis. They are also helpful for thinking about options for preventing such crises in the future.

After the lockdown: macroeconomic adjustment to the COVID-19 pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa

The COVID-19 pandemic is ripping around most of the world, but not in Africa; at least, not yet. At the same time, the policy response is remarkably uniform: most of sub-Saharan Africa went into lockdown from the second week in March. What happens next for the pandemic across Africa is uncertain, but the March lockdowns are unlikely to have contained the epidemic by themselves. What is clear is that the combination of domestic lockdowns and the spill-over from the global recession means immediate and severe hardship. This paper looks beyond the public health aspects of the pandemic to examine the medium-term macroeconomic adjustment challenge confronting domestic policy-makers and international donors. We combine epidemiological and macroeconomic models to calibrate the scale of the combined shock to a representative low-income African economy and to show how alternative policy options for slowing transmission of COVID-19 impact on public revenue, and on GDP in the short run, and hence shape the path to recovery. Noting that the first lockdown, however costly, does not by itself eliminate the likelihood of a re-emergence of the epidemic, we then frame the agenda for key macroeconomic and public finance policies to sustain recovery, growth, and poverty reduction in sub-Saharan Africa. The initial hit to consumption will be up to one-third. All the public policy options are grim. International donor finance of US$40–50 billion, together with domestic reform to accelerate recovery, would make a significant difference to the outlook for poverty.

Comparative economics, globalisation and the eurozone in the quest for a new eurozone paradigm

The Eurozone is at a crossroads. Its neoliberal and ordoliberal construction proved to be unworkable and, after the crisis, made the macroeconomic adjustment slow and costly – causing financial and real divergence among the member countries. Kolodko’s writings offer interesting insights. This article considers Kolodko’s study of Poland and Greece and adds two other paradigmatic cases, those of Germany and Italy. Kolodko’s case studies and criticism of neoliberalism lead him to propose a New Pragmatism in policy making. This proposal offers important insights, but neglects two fundamental problems: moral hazard and institutional differences. These have to be included in the New Pragmatism to give this the strength and ability to contribute to solve the Eurozone problems.