An EMU with Different Transmission Mechanisms?

  • Giorgia Giovannetti
  • Ramon Marimon
Part of the ZEI Studies in European Economics and Law book series (ZEIS, volume 1)


As already stated in the Maastricht Treaty, the ECB has the primary objective of maintaining price stability. In fact, its initial practice has been consistent with this goal. However, a policy of price stability -say, an inflation target policy- is implemented through different instruments (e.g., interest rates changes) that may have different effects on domestic economies if the, so called, transmission mechanism of monetary policy differs among EMU countries. Such differences can be even more accenituated if -as it is also stated in the Treaty- the ECB takes into account possible licquidity problems and, as some will argue, the more general state of the economy (more precisely, of the EMU economies). There may be consensus on goals and generial principles, but as long as monetary interventions have different “national effects,” an underlying conflict of interests will persist, even if so far may have not been explicit, or understood.


Monetary Policy Transmission Mechanism Monetary Union Financial Intermediary Regional Aspect 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alvarez, F., A. Atkenson and P. Kehoe. (1996) “Money and interest rates in segmented assets markets.” mimeo, April.Google Scholar
  2. Bagliano, F. and C. Favero. (1997) “Measuring monetary policy with VAR models: an evaluation.” mirneo, May.Google Scholar
  3. Bank for International Settlements. (1995) Financial structure and the monetary policy transmission mechanism. Basle, March.Google Scholar
  4. Barran F., V. Coudert and B. Mojon. (1996) “The transmission of monetary policy in the European countries.” CEPII, Paris, document de travail, 96–03.Google Scholar
  5. Bernanke B. and M. Gertler. (1995) “Inside the black box: the credit channel of monetary transmission mechanism.” Journal of Economic Perspective 5, 9.Google Scholar
  6. Borio, C. (1995) “The structure of credit to the non-government sector and the transmission mechanism of monetary policy: a cross-country comparison.” Bank for International settlements working paper, Basle, April.Google Scholar
  7. Britton E. and J.Whitley. (1997) “Comparing the monetary transmission mechanism in France, Germany and the UK: some issues and results.” Bank of England Quarterly Bulletin, May.Google Scholar
  8. Christiano, L. and M. Eichenbaum. (1992) “Liquidity effects and the monetary transmission mechanism.” American Economic Review, vol 82, 346–353.Google Scholar
  9. Christiano, L., M. Eichenbaum and C. Evans. (1996) “Sticky price and limited participation models of money: a comparison.” mimeo, October.Google Scholar
  10. Christiano, L., M. Eichenbaum and C. Evans. (1998) “Monetary policy shocks: what have we learned and to what end?” NBER WP 6400, February.Google Scholar
  11. Clarida R and M. Gertler. (1996) “How the Bundesbank conducts monetary policy.” NBER WP 5581.Google Scholar
  12. Davis, P. (1996) “The role of institutional investors in the evolution of financial structure and behavior.” LSE Financial Market Group, Special paper 89, November.Google Scholar
  13. Dombusch R, C, Favero and F. Giavazzi. (1998) “Immediate challenges for the European Central Bank.” Economic Policy 26, April, 15–64.Google Scholar
  14. European Economy, Supplement A. (1997) “Advancing financial integration.” n. 12, December.Google Scholar
  15. Fuerst T. (1992) “Liquidity, loanable funds, and real activity.” Journal of Monetary Economics 29, 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gennari E. and G. Giovannetti. (1998) “Heterogeneity of the financial structure and the monetary transmission channels in Europe.” mimeo, EUI, Florence, June.Google Scholar
  17. Giovannetti G. and R. Marimon. (1996) “A monetary union for a heterogeneous Europe.” in Torres (ed.) Monetary reform in Europe. Universidade Catblica Editora, Lisbon, 1996.Google Scholar
  18. Gual J. and D. Neven. (1993) “Banking in European economy.” Reports and studies 1993 (3).Google Scholar
  19. Mishkin, Frederic. (1996) “The channels of monetary transmission: lessons for monetary policy.” NBER working paper 5464, February.Google Scholar
  20. Ramaswamy R. and T. Sloeck. (1998) “The real effect of monetary policy in the EU: what are the differences?” IMF Staff Papers, Fall.Google Scholar
  21. Rodriguez Mendizabal H. (1998) “Monetary unions and the transaction cost saving of a single currency.” mimeo, UPF, Barcelona, May.Google Scholar
  22. Seitz F. (1995) “The circi.lation of Deutsche Mark abroad.” DP 1/95, Deutsche Bundesbank, May.Google Scholar
  23. Sims C.A. (1992) “Interpreting the macroeconomic time series facts: the effects of monetary policy.” European Economic Rev. ew 36, 975–1011.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giorgia Giovannetti
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ramon Marimon
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Università di Firenze and European University InstituteFlorenceItaly
  2. 2.European University Institute and Universitat Pompeu FabraBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations