Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Review of Economic Perspectives

Národohospodárský obzor; The Journal of Masaryk University

4 Issues per year

CiteScore 2016: 0.50

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.262
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.516

Open Access
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 15, Issue 2


An Evaluation of Selected Economic Areas according to Similarity of Supply and Demand Shocks

Stanislav Kappel
  • Corresponding author
  • VŠB – Technical University of Ostrava, Department of Economic Policy, Faculty of Economy, Sokolská třída 33, 701 21 Ostrava, Czech Republic
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2015-07-16 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/revecp-2015-0018


The Euro Area remains a well-known monetary union in the World. But the possibilities of creation of new monetary unions are discussed. It is spoken about NAFTA (Canada, Mexico and the United States) or MERCOSUR (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela). The aim of this paper is to assess the similarity of demand and supply shocks in the countries of NAFTA and MERCOSUR, and to compare it with the countries of the Euro Area. For these aims, correlation and structural vector autoregression methods are used. Methods are based on Blanchard and Quah (1989) and Bayoumi and Eichengreen (1993). We confirm the existence of core states and periphery states in the Euro Area with some exceptions. If we compare supply and demand shocks, we find more similarity in the case of supply shocks in the countries of the Euro Area. According to the results, the countries of NAFTA are more appropriate for the creation of monetary union than the countries of MERCOSUR. The countries of NAFTA achieve high correlation coefficients of supply and demand shocks (except Mexico for supply shocks).

Keywords: OCA theory; supply and demand shocks; the Euro Area; NAFTA; MERCOSUR


  • BAYOUMI, T., EICHENGREEN, B. (1993). Shocking Aspects of European Monetary Integration. In Adjustment and Growth in the European Monetary Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 193-230. ISBN 978-05214400196.Google Scholar

  • BLANCHARD, O. J., QUAH, D. (1989). The Dynamics Effects of Aggregate Demand and Supply Disturbances. American Economic Review.79 (4), pp. 655 - 673. ISSN 0002-8282.Google Scholar

  • CHRISZT, M. (2000).Perspective in a Potential North American Monetary Union. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. Economic Review. 2000 (4), pp. 29-38. ISSN 0732-1813.Google Scholar

  • COHEN, B. J. (2004). North American Monetary Union: A United States Perspective. Orfalea Centre for Global & International Studies. UC Santa Barbara: Global and International Studies.Google Scholar

  • DĚDEK, O. (2008). Historie evropské měnové integrace. Od národních měn k euru. Praha: C. H. Beck. ISBN 978-80-7400-076-8.Google Scholar

  • Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. (2014). CEPALSTAT. Database and Statistical Publications. Retrieved August 20, 2014, from http://estadisticas.cepal.org/cepalstat/WEB_CEPALSTAT/estadisticasIndicadores.asp?idioma=i.Google Scholar

  • Eurostat. (2014). Statistics Database. Retrieved July 15, 2014, from http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/statistics/search_database.Google Scholar

  • FIDRMUC, J., KORHONEN, I. (2003). Similarity of Supply and Demand Shocks Between the Euro Area and the CEECs. Economic Systems. 27 (3), pp. 313-334. ISSN 0939-3625.Google Scholar

  • FIDRMUC, J., KORHONEN, I. (2006). Meta-Analysis of the Business Cycle Correlation between the Euro Area and the CEECs. CESifo Working Paper No. 1693.Google Scholar

  • FRANKEL, J. A., ROSE, A. K. (1996). The Endogenity of the Optimum Currency Area Criteria. NBER Working Papers 5700. Cambridge (MA): National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar

  • FRENKEL, M., NICKEL, C. (2002). How Symmetric Are the Shocks and the Shock Adjustment Dynamics Between the Euro Area and Central and Eastern European Countries? IMF Working Paper 02/222.Google Scholar

  • GRAUWE, P. de (2014). Economics of Monetary Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-968444-1.Google Scholar

  • GRIGOLI, F. (2012). The Impact of Trade Integration on Business Cycle Synchronization for Mercosur Countries. European Journal of Comparative Economics. 9 (1), pp. 103-131, pp. 103-131. ISSN 1722-4667.Google Scholar

  • HORVATH, J., RÁTFAI, A. (2004). Supply and Demand Shocks in Accession Countries to the Economic and Monetary Union. Journal of Comparative Economics. 32 (2), pp. 202-211. ISSN 0147-5967.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • HUŠEK, R. (2009). Aplikovaná ekonometrie: teorie a praxe. Praha: Oeconomica. ISBN 978-80-345-1623-3.Google Scholar

  • HUŠEK, R., FORMÁNEK, T. (2011). Srovnání konvergence ekonomik ČR a vybraných zemí eurozóny na základě analýzy funkcí odezvy a nabídkových či poptávkových šoků. Politická ekonomie. 2011 (3), pp. 291-309. ISSN 0032-3233.Google Scholar

  • KENEN, Peter B., (1969). The Theory of Optimum Currency Areas. In Monetary Problems of the International Economy. Chicago University Press, pp. 41-60.Google Scholar

  • KRČÍLKOVÁ, M., ZÁPAL, J. (2012). Mundell in 3D, Synchronization of Supply and Demand Shocks among Sectors no Countries, with Application to CEEC. Empirica. 39 (3), pp. 407-434. ISSN 1573-6911.Google Scholar

  • KRUGMAN, P. (1993). Lesson of Massachusetts for EMU. In Adjustment and Growth in the European Monetary Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 241-261 ISBN 978-0521440196.Google Scholar

  • KUČEROVÁ, Z. (2005). Teorie optimální měnové oblasti a možnosti její aplikace na země střední a východní Evropy. Studie Národohospodářského ústavu Josefa Hlávky 3/2005. ISBN 80-86729-18-4.Google Scholar

  • LACINA, L. (2007). Měnová integrace: náklady a přínosy v měnové unii. Praha: C. H. Beck. ISBN 978-80-7179-560-5.Google Scholar

  • LÜTKEPOHL, H., KRÄTZIG, M. (eds.). (2004). Applied Time Series Econometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-54787-3.Google Scholar

  • McKINNON, R. I. (1963). Optimum Currency Areas. American Economic Review. 53 (4), pp. 717-725. ISSN 0002-8282.Google Scholar

  • MONGELLI, F. P. (2002). “New“ Views on the Optimum Currency Area Theory: What is EMU Telling us? European Central Bank Working Paper, no. 138, April 2002.Google Scholar

  • MUNDELL, R. A. (1961). Theory of Optimum Currency Areas. American Economic Review.51 (4), pp. 657-665. ISSN 0002-8282.Google Scholar

  • NUMA, M. (2011).The Feasibility of a Monetary Union in MERCOSUR. Michigan Journal of Business.4 (2), pp. 11-59. ISSN 1941-5745.Google Scholar

  • Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (2014). OECD StatExtracts. Retrieved July 22, 2014, from http://stats.oecd.org/.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2015-07-16

Published in Print: 2015-06-01

Citation Information: Review of Economic Perspectives, Volume 15, Issue 2, Pages 221–240, ISSN (Online) 1804-1663, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/revecp-2015-0018.

Export Citation

© by Stanislav Kappel. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in