Should
a country have its own separate currency or whether it should enter into a common
currency union can be simply explained in terms of benefits and cost. In simple
terms, if the benefits are more than the cost, logic says that a country can enter
into a currency union. Well, if issues had been so simply resolved, then there
would have been researches, studies and economists. So, before getting into the
details of the concerned issues, let us first understand the economics of a common
currency.
The
Asian crisis of 199798 has left an indelible impression on the minds of many.
Since then, the very idea of having a common Asian currency has been encouraged.
Drawing lessons from the euro, it was further suggested that, the Asian countries
should collectively peg their currencies to the dollar, yen or a basket of currencies
and establish a monetary grid like the European Monetary Union. This would provide
the benefits of boosting intraregional trade, investments and also facilitate
the crossborder participation of the regional bond markets. Nobel Laureate Economist
Robert Mundell commented that the launch of the euro in 2000 was an obvious culmination
of the European Monetary Union. One of the primary requirements of a monetary
union lies in the creation of an Optimum Currency Union (OCA). Mundell's study
on the OCA is truly commendable. From the very beginning, he observed that America,
Europe and Asia are seeking three separate OCAs. Today, most of American countries
are dollarized to the US currency while Europe has introduced the euro that has
replaced 15 individual currencies. |