No abstract

No abstract

El presente documento analiza los efectos de la liberalización y/o exclusión del sector agrícola en los procesos de integración en los que se encuentran inmersos los países latinoamericanos a partir de la comparación de cuatro diferentes modos de liberalización. El objetivo central consiste en determinar si es o no necesario que este sector reciba un tratamiento especial en comparación con el resto de sectores económicos, o si es más favorable la liberalización completa o la exclusión del agro en los procesos de integración. Para ello, empleamos como herramienta un modelo EGC estático, multipaís y multisectorial de corto y largo plazo, el cual cuenta con una desagregación predominantemente agrícola. Entre los principales resultados encontramos que si bien los cuatro tipos de liberalización generan resultados positivos en las economías latinoamericanas, para el Perú, Venezuela, Ecuador-Bolivia, Argentina y Uruguay la estrategia multilateral que excluye al sector agrícola genera mayores beneficios que la liberalización netamente arancelaria. No obstante, si se compara la liberalización netamente arancelaria versus la total (que incluye eliminación de los subsidios a la exportación y franja de precios), todos los países, con excepción de Perú y Venezuela, registran mayores beneficios con la liberalización total.

This paper discusses the role of sterilized foreign exchange (FX) interventions as a monetary policy instrument for emerging market economies in response to external shocks. We develop a model for a commodity-exporting small open economy in which FX intervention is considered as a balance sheet policy induced by a financial friction in the form of an agency problem between banks and their creditors. The severity of banks agency problem depends directly on a bank-level measure of currency mismatch. Endogenous deviations from the standard UIP condition arise at equilibrium. In this context, FX interventions moderate the response of financial and macroeconomic variables to external shocks by leaning against the wind with respect to real exchange rate pressures. Our quantitative results indicate that, conditional on external shocks, the FX intervention policy successfully reduces credit, investment, and output volatility, along with substantial welfare gains when compared to a free-floating exchange rate regime. Finally, we explore distinct generalizations of the model that eliminate the presence of endogenous UIP deviations. In those cases, FX intervention operations are considerably less effective for the aggregate equilibrium.

Partial currency substitution typically occurs in small economies amid economic crises, when the local currency loses some of its essential functions and a foreign currency, usually the US Dollar, is widely adopted. Interestingly, the coexistence of two currencies often persists after macroeconomic stability has been restored, which imposes challenges to the conduct of monetary policy. Central banks have responded by applying de-dollarization policies. This paper studies the effectiveness of three of them: (1) taxes on transactions in foreign currency among domestic agents, (2) storage costs on foreign currency holdings, and (3) information on the acceptance rate of the foreign currency among local agents. We extend the model in Matsuyama et al. (1993) to study the effects of these policies, both theoretically and experimentally. We contribute to the theoretical literature by characterizing a new circulation regime where agents use the foreign currency solely for international trade and settle domestic transactions exclusively in local currency. Our experimental evidence suggests that both taxes and storage costs reduce the overall acceptability of foreign currency in international and domestic transactions (around 40 percent in both cases). Information treatment does not have a significant impact relative to baseline.