Estimating the Effect of Currency Unions on Trade and Output

By Jeffrey A. Frankel, Andrew K. Rose. 2000

312 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Finance

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/817f8436d5ea7d08f96a8608aa6066be45309144

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Finance

Citations in the corpus

Classifying Exchange Rate Regimes: Deeds vs. Words (2005, background): “3 Indeed, the relatively new literature on the impact of currency unions on economic performance (Frankel and Rose, 2000; Rose, 2000), where exchange rate misclassi3cations are virtually nil, has tended to deliver stronger results.”
Assessing the Benefits of Trade Facilitation: A Global Perspective (2005, unknown): “Frankel and Rose (2000) included dummy variables for those geographical characteristics to allow for the intercept term to vary accordingly.”
To Float or to Fix: Evidence on the Impact of Exchange Rate Regimes on Growth (2003, background): “Arthur J. Rolnick Shang-Jin Wei (1998) for a more recent study, and Andrew Rose (2000) and Frankel and Rose (2000) on its indirect effect on growth.”
Trade openness and economic growth: a cross-country empirical investigation (2003, background): “3 See also Rodrik’s (2000) comments on Frankel and Rose (2000) on the same issue.”
Inflation Targets Versus International Monetary Integration - a Canadian Perspective (2005, background): “One study (Frankel and Rose 2000), widely cited in the Canadian media, has suggested that a gain of as much as 37 per cent in Canadian GDP might be created over a decade by the adoption of a common North American currency.”
The distance puzzle: on the interpretation of the distance coefficient in gravity equations (2004, background): “…(1997) 63 countries, 1965- 1992 bilateral trade GNP, GNP per capita, distance, common border, common language, free trade arrangements –0.4 (1965) and – 0.7 (1992) Frankel and Rose (2000) OLS and panel regressions 186 countries for the years 1970- 1995 log bilateral trade real GDP, real GDP per…”