LEADER 03136nam  2200637Ia 450 
001 9910463993403321
005 20170821161816.0
010   $a1-4623-8300-9
010   $a1-4527-5006-8
010   $a1-4518-7333-6
010   $a9786612843969
010   $a1-282-84396-6
035   $a(CKB)3170000000055334
035   $a(EBL)1608424
035   $a(SSID)ssj0000942995
035   $a(PQKBManifestationID)11566061
035   $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000942995
035   $a(PQKBWorkID)10994190
035   $a(PQKB)11641521
035   $a(OCoLC)527722840
035   $a(MiAaPQ)EBC1608424
035   $a(EXLCZ)993170000000055334
100   $a20090903d2009      uf             0
101 0 $aeng
135   $aur|n|---|||||
181   $ctxt
182   $cc
183   $acr
200 10$aOne money, one market$b[electronic resource] $ea revised benchmark /$fprepared by Theo Eicher and Christian Henn
210   $a[Washington, D.C.] $cInternational Monetary Fund, Strategy, Policy, and Review Dept.$d2009
215   $a1 online resource (25 p.)
225 1 $aIMF working paper ;$vWP/09/186
300   $a"September 2009."
311   $a1-4519-1758-9 
327   $aContents; I. Introduction; II. Data; III. Empirical Implementation of the Gravity Model; IV. Multilateral Resistance and the Trade Effects of Currency Unions; V. Benchmark CU Trade Effects addressing Multilateral Resistance and Unobserved Bilateral Heterogeneity; VI. Sensitivity Analysis; VII. Conclusion; Tables; 1. Trade Effects of Currency Unions; 2. Sensitivity Analysis: Average Currency Union Effects on Trade; 3. Sensitivity Analysis: Trade Effects of Individual Currency Unions; Appendix Table; A1. Countries in Sample; A2. Membership and Observations for Currency Unions and Boards
327   $aA3. Membership in Preferential Trade AgreementsA4. Bilateral Preferential Trade Agreements; References
330   $aThe introduction of the euro generated substantial interest in measuring the impact of currency unions (CUs) on trade flows. Rose's (2000) initial estimates suggested a tripling of trade and created a literature in search of ""more reasonable"" CU effects. A recent meta-analysis of this literature shows that subsequent papers quantify CU trade impacts at 30-90 percent. However, most recent studies use shorter time series and fewer countries than Rose in his original work. We revisit Rose's original benchmark, extend the dataset, and address Baldwin's (2006) critiques regarding the proper speci
410  0$aIMF working paper ;$vWP/09/186.
606   $aMonetary unions
606   $aTariff
606   $aFree trade
608   $aElectronic books.
615  0$aMonetary unions.
615  0$aTariff.
615  0$aFree trade.
676   $a332.4566094
700   $aEicher$b Theo S$0895009
701   $aHenn$b Christian$f1978-$0895010
712 02$aInternational Monetary Fund.$bStrategy, Policy, and Review Dept.
801  0$bMiAaPQ
801  1$bMiAaPQ
801  2$bMiAaPQ
906   $aBOOK
912   $a9910463993403321
996   $aOne money, one market$92110725
997   $aUNINA