MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124344124

Global Monetary Policy Under a Dollar Standard

2004· article· en· W3124344124 on OpenAlexaff
Michael B. Devereux, Kang Shi, Juanyi Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsMonetary policyLiberian dollarMonetary economicsExchange rateCurrencyMonetary hegemonyVolatility (finance)Rest (music)Inflation targetingInternational economicsFinancial economicsFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the past four or five decades, the international monetary system has operated on a ’dollar standard’. Popular discussion suggests that this gives the US an advantage in the use of monetary policy. This Paper analyses the determination of monetary policy in a world with a dollar standard, defined here as a environment in which all traded goods prices are set in US dollars. This generates an asymmetry whereby exchange rate pass-through into the US CPI is zero, while pass-through to other countries will be positive. We show that monetary policy in such a setting does seem to accord with popular discussion. In particular, the US is essentially indifferent to exchange rate volatility in setting monetary policy, while the rest of the world places a high weight on exchange rate volatility. More importantly, in a Nash equilibrium of the monetary policy game between the US and the rest of the world, the preferences of the US dominate. That is, the equilibrium is identical to one where the US alone chooses world monetary policy. Despite this, we find surprisingly that the US loses from the dollar’s role as an international currency. Even though US preferences dominate world monetary policy, the absence of exchange rate pass-through means that US consumers are worse off than those in the rest of the world, where exchange rate pass-through operates efficiently. Finally, we derive the conditions for a dollar standard to exist.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207