Skip navigation
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://arks.princeton.edu/ark:/88435/dsp01c247dv44q
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisorDelatte, Anne-Laure-
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Claire-
dc.date.accessioned2015-07-20T18:01:19Z-
dc.date.available2015-07-20T18:01:19Z-
dc.date.created2015-04-15-
dc.date.issued2015-07-20-
dc.identifier.urihttp://arks.princeton.edu/ark:/88435/dsp01c247dv44q-
dc.description.abstractWhile the European Monetary Union (EMU) differs from fixed exchange regimes of the past, historical fixed regimes help to frame the benefits and costs of EMU exit. Using a panel of 141 countries since 1980, I draw lessons about typical trends of macroeconomic variables at entry and exit, place recent economic shocks in Europe in context of history, and identify the scale of possible exit costs based on historical trends. I find no evidence that recent export and credit shocks to Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, and Spain (GIIPS) are severe enough to justify exit, based on the severity of historical shocks. I support the use of capital controls in the event of an exit, finding that capital openness is associated with higher costs of exit, particularly banking crises. Finally, I find that Greece and Ireland are particularly at risk for negative balance sheet effects of exit.en_US
dc.format.extent104 pagesen_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.titleWhat Are the Costs of Eurozone Exit? Lessons From Historical Fixed Exchange Rate Regimesen_US
dc.typePrinceton University Senior Theses-
pu.date.classyear2015en_US
pu.departmentEconomicsen_US
pu.pdf.coverpageSeniorThesisCoverPage-
Appears in Collections:Economics, 1927-2020

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
PUTheses2015-Liu_Claire.pdf3.08 MBAdobe PDF    Request a copy


Items in Dataspace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.