What has foreign exchange market intervention since the Plaza Agreement accomplished?
We review the conduct and scale of official intervention by monetary authorities in the U.S.A., Japan, and West Germany since the Plaza Agreement. Relative to trading volume and the stock of internatonally traded assets denominated in foreign currencies, intervention is small-scale and sporadic, hence at best limited to transitory effects. It does not appear to reduce volatility of daily exchange rates. Monetary authorities gamble that they will not suffer losses on their foreign currency holdings. Evidence in favor of sterilized foreign exchange market intervention as a way of conveying information to the private sector is far from convincing. Since changes in relative monetary growth rates are sufficient to alter bilateral exchange rates, monetary authorities can achieve their exchange rate preferences with domestic monetary policy, but at the cost of possible distortionary effects on monetary growth rates, domestic interest rates, and international capital flows. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1991
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Dominguez, K.M., 1989.
"Market Responses To Coordinated Central Bank Intervention,"
179d, Harvard - J.F. Kennedy School of Government.
- Dominguez, Kathryn Mary, 1990. "Market responses to coordinated central bank intervention," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 121-163, January.
- Kathryn M. Dominguez, 1989. "Market Responses To Coordinated Central Bank Intervention," NBER Working Papers 3192, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Maurice Obstfeld, 1988. "The Effectiveness of Foreign-Exchange Intervention: Recent Experience," NBER Working Papers 2796, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Rogoff, Kenneth, 1984. "On the effects of sterilized intervention : An analysis of weekly data," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 133-150, September.
- Kathryn M. Dominguez and Jeffrey A. Frankel., 1992. "Does Foreign Exchange Intervention Matter? Disentangling the Portfolio and Expectations Effects," Center for International and Development Economics Research (CIDER) Working Papers C92-001, University of California at Berkeley.
- Dornbusch, Rudiger & Frankel, Jeffrey, 1988.
"The Flexible Exchange Rate System: Experience and Alternatives,"
Department of Economics, Working Paper Series
qt5ct1w459, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Rudiger Dornbusch & Jeffrey A. Frankel, 1987. "The Flexible Exchange Rate System: Experience and Alternatives," NBER Working Papers 2464, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Rudiger Dornbusch and Jeffrey Frankel., 1988. "The Flexible Exchange Rate System: Experience and Alternatives," Economics Working Papers 8868, University of California at Berkeley.
- Mussa, Michael, 1979. "Empirical regularities in the behavior of exchange rates and theories of the foreign exchange market," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 9-57, January.
- Frankel, Jeffrey A., 1982. "In search of the exchange risk premium: A six-currency test assuming mean-variance optimization," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 255-274, January.
- Martin Feldstein, 1988. "International Economic Cooperation," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number feld88-4, August.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:openec:v:2:y:1991:i:1:p:39-64. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.