Romain Restout

Long Run Determinants of Real Exchange Rates in Latin America

This paper investigates the long run behavior of real exchange rates in nineteen countries of Latin America over the period 1970 - 2006. Our data does not support the Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) hypothesis, implying that real shocks tend to have permanent effects on Latin Americas real exchange rates. By exploiting the advantage of non stationary panel econometrics, we are able to determinate factors that drive real exchanges rate in the long run : the Balassa-Samuelson effect, government spending, the terms of trade, the openness degree, foreign capital flows and the de facto nominal exchange regime. The latter effect has policy implications since we find that a fixed regime tends to appreciate the real exchange rate. This finding shows the non neutrality of exchange rate regime regarding its effects on real exchange rates. We also run estimations for country subgroups (South America versus Caribbean and Central America). Regional results highlight that several real exchange rates determinants are specific to one geographic zone. Finally, we compute equilibrium real exchange rate estimations. Two main results are derived from the investigation of misalignments, [i ] eight real exchange rates are quite close to their equilibrium level in 2006, and [ii ] our model shows that a part of currencies crises that arose in Latin America was preceded by a real exchange rate overvaluation.

Permanent vs.temporary fiscal expansion in a two-sector small open economy model

This contribution shows that the duration of a fisscal shock together with sectoral capital intensity matter in determining the dynamic and steady-state effects in an intertemporal-optimizing two-sector small open economy model. First, unlike a permanent shock, net foreign asset position always worsens in the long-run after a transitory fiscal expansion. Second, steady-state changes in physical capital depend on sectoral capital-labor ratios but their signs may be reversed compared to the corresponding permanent public policy. Third, investment and the current account may now adjust non monotonically. Fourth, a temporary fiscal shock always crowds-out (crowds-in) investment in the long-run whenever the non traded (traded) sector is more capital intensive.

Fiscal Shocks in a Two-Sector Open Economy with Endogenous Markups

We use a two-sector neoclassical open economy model with traded and non-traded goods to investigate both the aggregate and the sectoral effects of temporary fiscal shocks. One central finding is that both sectoral capital intensities and labor supply elasticity matter in determining the response of key economic variables. In particular, the model can produce a drop in investment and in the current account, in line with empirical evidence, only if the traded sector is more capital intensive than the non-traded sector, and labor is supplied elastically. Irrespective of sectoral capital intensities, a fiscal shock raises the relative size of the non-traded sector substantially in the short-run. Additionally, allowing for the markup to depend on the number of competitors, the two-sector model can produce the real exchange rate depreciation found in the data. Finally, markup variations triggered by firm entry modify substantially the response of the real wage and the sectoral composition of GDP in the short-run.

Monopolistic Competition and the Dependent Economy Model

This paper explores the consequences of introducing a monopolistic competition in an intertemporal two-sector small open economy model which produces traded and non traded goods. It is assumed that the non traded sector is the locus of the imperfectly competition. Our analysis shows that markup depends on the composition of aggregate non traded demand and is therefore endogenously determined in the model. Calibrating the model with OECD parameters, the effects of fiscal and technological shocks are simulated. Our findings are as follows. First, the model is consistent with the observed saving-investment correlations found in the data. Second, unlike the perfectly framework and in accordance with empirical studies, fiscal shocks cause real appreciation of the relative price of non traded goods, which in turn enlarges the responses of current account and investment. Third, the model is consistent with the empirical report that technological shocks result in current account deficits and investment rises. Fourth, the strength of the relative price appreciation following sector productivity differentials, i.e. the Balassa-Samuelson effect, is affected by the monopolistic competition hypothesis. Assume perfect competition when it is not, biases upward estimates of the Balassa-Samuelson effect.