Most of the empirical literature on the relative merits of alternative exchange rate regimes uses the IMF de jure classification based on the regime that governments claim to have, abstracting from the fact that many countries that in theory follow flexible regimes intervene in the exchange market to an extent that in practice makes them indistinguishable from fixed rate regimes, and vice versa.
To address this problem, in this paper we construct a de factoclassification of exchange rate regimes. Using cluster analysis techniques, we group different regimes according to their behavior along three classification dimensions: the nominal exchange rate, changes in the nominal exchange rate, and international reserves. We compare our results with the IMF classification, and discuss the main discrepancies.
1.1 Introduction
In this section, Classifying Exchange Rate Regimes: Deeds and Words is discussed, with relevant and recent citations. As a prelude to other parts of this study, this chapter will discuss the background upon which this study was initiated, the statement of problems that led to this study, the aim and objectives of the study. Others are significance of the study, scope of work, research hypothesis and questions, limitation of the study and definition of terms.