Search Options
Home Media Explainers Research & Publications Statistics Monetary Policy The €uro Payments & Markets Careers
Sort by

Cédric Tille

25 March 2019
Does distance matter for the volatility of international real and financial transactions? We show that it does, in addition to its well-established relevance for the level of trade. A simple model of trade with endogenous markups shows that demand shocks have a larger impact on trade between more distant countries. We test this implication in two steps, relying on a broad range of real and financial transactions measures, as well as several different metrics of distance (physical, linguistic, and internet). We first show that during the Great Trade Collapse of 2007-09 international transactions fell more between countries that are more distant along the various metrics, and find that the different distance measures magnify each other’s respective impacts. We then focus on a longer panel analysis of trade in goods and show that trade is more volatile between more distant countries, with again a magnification pattern across metrics of distance.
JEL Code
F10 : International Economics→Trade→General
F30 : International Economics→International Finance→General
4 December 2019
We add to the literature on the influence of the global financial cycle (GFC) and gyrations in capital flows. First, we build a new measure of the GFC based on a structural factor approach, which incorporates theoretical priors in its definition. This measure can also be decomposed in a price-based and quantity-based version of the GFC, which is novel in the literature. Second, we compare our measure to other common existing indicators of the GFC. Third, we estimate the influence of the fluctuations in the GFC on capital flow episodes (sudden stops, flights, retrenchments, surges) and currency crises, also testing for its stability and linearity. We find that the nexus between the GFC and capital flow episodes is generally consistent and not very wobbly. In line with theoretical priors, we find some evidence that the GFC is more important for sudden stops when it is more negative, i.e. the relationship is (mildly) convex, in keeping with a role for occasionally binding constraints, but the evidence for this feature is not strong.
JEL Code
F32 : International Economics→International Finance→Current Account Adjustment, Short-Term Capital Movements
F33 : International Economics→International Finance→International Monetary Arrangements and Institutions
F36 : International Economics→International Finance→Financial Aspects of Economic Integration
F42 : International Economics→Macroeconomic Aspects of International Trade and Finance→International Policy Coordination and Transmission
F44 : International Economics→Macroeconomic Aspects of International Trade and Finance→International Business Cycles