pp 1–19 | Cite as

Who benefits from euro depreciation in the euro zone?

  • Mohsen Bahmani-OskooeeEmail author
  • Amirhossein Mohammadian
Original Paper


In this paper, we try to assess the short-run and long-run effects of changes in the value of the euro on the trade balance of 12 original members of the euro zone to identify those who benefit from euro depreciation. After estimating a linear and a nonlinear trade balance model for each country, the results favor the nonlinear adjustment of the real euro and nonlinear models. We find that while seven members will benefit from a euro depreciation, Germany is the only country that will also benefit from a euro appreciation, perhaps due to an inelastic world demand for German goods. The results also support asymmetric effects of euro appreciation and euro depreciation in most countries in the zone, in the short run as well as in the long run.


Euro zone Euro Trade balance Asymmetry 

JEL Classification




Valuable comments of three anonymous referees are greatly appreciated. However, any remaining error is our own.


  1. Aftab M, Shah Syed K, Katper NA (2017) Exchange-rate volatility and Malaysian-Thai bilateral industry trade flows. J Econ Stud 44:99–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Shayeb A, Hatemi-J A (2016) Trade openness and economic development in the UAE: an asymmetric approach. J Econ Stud 43:587–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amiti M, Itskhoki O, Konings J (2014) Importers, exporters, and exchange rate disconnect. Am Econ Rev 104:1942–1978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arize AC (1994) Cointegration test of a long-run relation between the real effective exchange rate and the trade balance. Int Econ J 8:1–9Google Scholar
  5. Arize AC, Malindretos J, Igwe EU (2017) Do exchange rate changes improve the trade balance: an asymmetric nonlinear cointegration approach. Int Rev Econ Finance 49:313–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baghestani H, Kherfi S (2015) An error-correction modeling of US consumer spending: Are there asymmetries? J Econ Stud 42:1078–1094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bahmani-Oskooee M (1991) Is there a long-run relation between the trade balance and the real effective exchange rate of LDCs? Econ Lett 36(4):403–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bahmani-Oskooee M, Alse J (1994) Short-run versus long-run effects of devaluation: error correction modeling and cointegration. East Econ J 20:453–464Google Scholar
  9. Bahmani-Oskooee M, Ardalani Z (2006) Exchange rate sensitivity of U.S. trade flows: evidence from industry data. South Econ J 72:542–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bahmani-Oskooee M, Fariditavana H (2015) Nonlinear ARDL approach, asymmetric effects and the J-curve. J Econ Stud 42:519–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bahmani-Oskooee M, Fariditavana H (2016) Nonlinear ARDL approach and the J-curve phenomenon. Open Econ Rev 27:51–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bahmani-Oskooee M, Gelan A (2012) Is there J-curve effect in Africa? Int Rev Appl Econ 26:73–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bahmani-Oskooee M, Hegerty SW (2010) The J- and S-curves: a survey of the recent literature. J Econ Stud 37:580–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bahmani-Oskooee M, Kanitpong T (2017) Do exchange rate changes have symmetric or asymmetric effects on the trade balances of Asian countries? Appl Econ 49:4668–4678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bahmani-Oskooee M, Kutan A (2009) The J-curve in the emerging economies of Eastern Europe. Appl Econ 41:2523–2532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bahmani-Oskooee M, Ratha A (2004) The J-curve: a literature review. Appl Econ 36(13):1377–1398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Banerjee A, Dolado J, Mestre R (1998) Error-correction mechanism tests in a single equation framework. J Time Ser Anal 19:267–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Belke A, Goecke M (2005) Real options effects on employment: Does exchange rate uncertainty matter for aggregation? Ger Econ Rev 6:185–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Belke A, Kronen D (2016) Exchange rate bands of inaction and play-hysteresis in Greek exports to the euro area, the US and Turkey: sectoral evidence. Empirica 43:349–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Belke A, Goecke M, Guenther M (2013) Exchange rate bands of inaction and play-hysteresis in German exports—sectoral evidence for some OECD destinations. Metroeconomica 64:152–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Belke A, Goecke M, Werner L (2015) Exchange rate volatility and other determinants of hysteresis in exports—empirical evidence for the euro area. Rev Econ Anal 7:24–53Google Scholar
  22. Boyd D, Caporale GM, Smith R (2001) Real exchange rate effects on the balance of trade: cointegration and the Marshall–Lerner condition. Int J Finance Econ 6:187–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Bussiere M (2013) Exchange rate pass-through to trade prices: the role of nonlinearities and asymmetries. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 75:731–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Delatte A-L, Lopez-Villavicencio A (2012) Asymmetry exchange rate pass-through: evidence from major countries. J Macroecon 34:833–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Di Mauro F, Ruffer R, Bunda I (2008) The changing role of the exchange rate in a globalised economy. Occasional Paper Series, 94, European Central Bank, Frankfurt/MainGoogle Scholar
  26. Dong W (2012) The role of expenditure switching in the global imbalance adjustment. J Int Econ 86:237–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Durmaz N (2015) Industry level J-curve in Turkey. J Econ Stud 42:689–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. European Commission (2014) Quarterly Report on the Euro Area, vol 13. no. 3, Brussels, pp 1–41Google Scholar
  29. Gogas P, Pragidis I (2015) Are there asymmetries in fiscal policy shocks? J Econ Stud 42:303–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gregoriou A (2017) Modelling non-linear behavior of block price deviations when trades are executed outside the bid-ask quotes. J Econ Stud 44:206–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Halicioglu F (2007) The J-curve dynamics of Turkish bilateral trade: a cointegration approach. J Econ Stud 34:103–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Halicioglu F (2008) The bilateral J-curve: Turkey versus her 13 trading partners. J Asian Econ 19(3):236–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lal AK, Lowinger TC (2002) The J-curve: evidence from East Asia. J Econ Integr 17:3997–4150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lima L, Foffano Vasconcelos C, Simão J, de Mendonça H (2016) The quantitative easing effect on the stock market of the USA, the UK and Japan: an ARDL approach for the crisis period. J Econ Stud 43:1006–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Narayan P (2005) The saving and investment nexus for China: evidence from cointegration tests. Appl Econ 37:1979–1990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nusair SA (2016) The J-curve phenomenon in European transition economies: a nonlinear ARDL approach. Int Rev Appl Econ 31(1):1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RJ (2001) Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. J Appl Econom 16(3):289–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rose AK, Yellen JL (1989) Is there a J-curve? J Monet Econ 24:53–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Scott Hacker R, Hatemi-J A (2003) Is the J-curve effect observable for small North European economies? Open Econ Rev 14:119–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Senhadji A (1998) Time-series estimation of structural import demand equations: a cross-country analysis. IMF Staff Pap 45:236–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shin Y, Yu BC, Greenwood-Nimmo M (2014) Modelling asymmetric cointegration and dynamic multipliers in a nonlinear ARDL framework. In: Sickels R, Horrace W (eds) Festschrift in Honor of Peter Schmidt: Econometric Methods and Applications. Springer, Berlin, pp 281–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Upadhyaya KP, Dhakal D (1997) Devaluation and the trade balance: estimating the long-run effect. Appl Econ Lett 4:343–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Center for Research on International Economics and Department of EconomicsThe University of Wisconsin-MilwaukeeMilwaukeeUSA

Personalised recommendations