Stability of business cycles and economic openness of monetary union

A Kaldorian two-country model
  • Masato NakaoEmail author


In this study, we focus on the relationship between the stability of business cycle and the criteria for an optimum currency area. We do so by investigating the effect of satisfying the criterion of the degree of economic openness on the stability of the business cycle, using a Kaldorian two-country model with a monetary union and imperfect capital mobility. We find that an increase in capital mobility is a destabilizing factor, whereas an increase in the degree of openness of an economy and a counter-cyclical fiscal policy are stabilizing factors. Furthermore, we obtain the result that a high degree of economic openness can adjust a shock in the monetary union regardless of whether the shock is asymmetric. The criterion of degree of economic openness serves as one of the criteria for optimum currency area, even if an asymmetric shock tends to occur by regional concentration of industry due to high degree of openness of the economy.


Optimum currency area Economic openness Kaldorian two-country model Business cycle stability Euro area 

JEL classification

E12 F13 F15 F41 F44 F45 



An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 8th Spring Meeting of The Japan Society of International Economics at Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan, June 16, 2018. I would like to thank Prof. Hiroaki Sasaki (Kyoto University) for helpful comments at the presentation. Then, I am also grateful to the anonymous reviewers of this journal for their constructive comments on earlier version of this paper. Needless to say, any remaining errors are solely my responsibility.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares that there are no conflicts of interest.


  1. Asada T (2004) A two-regional model of business cycles with fixed exchange rates: a Kaldorian approach. Stud Reg Sci 34(2):19–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asada T (2014) Macrodynamics of deflationary depression: a japanese perspective. In: Asada T (ed) The development of economics in Japan: from the Inter-war period to the 2000s, vol 2014. Routledge, London, pp 155–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asada T, Chiarella C, Flaschel P, Franke R (2003) Open economy macrodynamics: an integrated disequilibrium approach. Springer, Berlin, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Asada T, Inaba T, Misawa T (2001) An interregional dynamic model: the case of fixed exchange rates. Stud Reg Sci 31(2):29–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baldwin R, Wyplosz C (2015) The economics of european integration, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill Education, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. De Grauwe P (2016) Economics of monetary union, 11th edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  7. De Grauwe P, Ji Y (2016) Flexibility versus stability a difficult trade-off in the eurozone. Credit Capital Markets - Kredit und Kapital 49(3):375–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. European Commission (1990) One market, one money - an evaluation of the potential benefits and costs of forming an economic and monetary union. European Economy 44Google Scholar
  9. Gächter M, Riedl A, Ritzberger-Grünwald D (2012) Business cycle synchronization in the euro area and the impact of the financial crisis. Monetary Policy Econ 2:33–60Google Scholar
  10. Gandolfo G (2009) Economic dynamics, 4th edn. Springer, BerlinBerlin, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Glick R, Rose AK (2002) Does a currency union a ect trade? The time-series evidence. Eur Econ Rev 46:1125–1151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaldor N (1940) A model of the trade cycle. Econ J 50(197):78–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kaldor N (1971) The dynamic effects of the common market. New Statesman, 12 March. Reprinted in Kaldor N (1978), Collected Economic Essays 6, London: Duckworth:187–220Google Scholar
  14. Kenen PB (1969) The theory of optimum currency areas: an eclectic view. In: Mundell R, Swoboda A K (eds) Monetary Problems of International Economy, The University of Chicago Press, pp 41–60Google Scholar
  15. Krugman P (1991) Geography and trade. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. McKinnon RI (1963) Optimum currency areas. Am Econ Rev 53(4):717–725Google Scholar
  17. Mongelli FP (2002) ‘New’ views on the optimum currency area theory: what is EMU telling us? European Cenral Bank Working Paper Series No. 138Google Scholar
  18. Mundell R (1961) A theory of optimum currency areas. Am Econ Rev 51:657–665Google Scholar
  19. Murakami H, Asada T (2018) Inflation-deflation expectations and economic stability in a Kaleckian system. J Econ Dyn Control 92:183–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nakao M (2017) Macroeconomic instability of a capital markets union and stability of a fiscal union in the Euro area: Keynesian and Kaldorian two-country models. Int Econ 20:13–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nikaido H (1968) Convex structures and economic theory. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Ninomiya K (2007) Open economy financial instability. J Korean Econ 8(2):329–355Google Scholar
  23. Robson P (1998) The economics of international integration, 4th edn. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Rose AK (2000) One money, one market: the effect of common currencies on trade. Econ Policy 30:9–45Google Scholar
  25. Rose AK, Van Wincoop E (2001) National money as a barrier to international trade: the real case for currency union. Am Econ Rev 91(2):386–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tavlas GS (1994) The theory of monetary integration. Open Econ Rev 5(2):211–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Association for Evolutionary Economics 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Commerce and EconomicsChiba University of CommerceIchikawa-shiJapan

Personalised recommendations