Article
Dr. Albert Keidel
{
"authors": [
"Albert Keidel"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"East Asia",
"China",
"Japan"
],
"topics": [
"Economy",
"Trade"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Exchange-Rate Regimes and Capital Flows in East Asia
In most emerging-market economies in East Asia, domestic economic, political, and social pressures push governments in the direction of a relatively inflexible exchange rate and freer capital inflows. This is a bad combination. Exchange rate stability and predictability would be a boon to commerce and finance. But achieving it is easier said than done.
Published on Jun 13, 2004
In most emerging-market economies in East Asia, it seems that domestic economic, political, and social pressures push governments in the direction of a relatively inflexible exchange rate and freer short-term capital inflows. This is a bad combination. It potentially leads to a long cycle of exchange-rate and capital-account difficulties, crisis, and consolidation. Even though a country may be at the benign phase in this cycle, underlying conditions are unlikely to have changed, and the difficulty, disorderly, phases of the cycle are likely to return.
The general combination of inflexible exchange rates and freer capital flows leaves emerging market economies exposed to large transactions with maturity and currency mismatches. A better domestic regulatory system might help, but these are difficult to achieve in an emerging market economy. Regulating capital inflows may be seen as a substitute for better domestic regulation, and a number of background conditions, like large FDI flows and global markets that make it easier for emerging markets to run surpluses, could make it easier for governments to navigate their difficult policy course.
In general, however, each emerging market has to look at its own circumstances to find ways to reduce the risks from exchange rate inflexibility with freer capital flows. Market-based flexibility backed up by adequate hedging activities may be the ideal tool, and when this is not possible because of opposition by domestic interest groups, the choices are much more difficult.
What is more, the significant gap between China's circumstances and Japan's means that any harmonization of currencies in the region, to achieve better exchange-rate predictability, is many decades away.
Exchange-rate predictability for any given transaction is one important objective. To my mind, the overarching goal of economic policy, including exchange-rate regime determination, is orderly and sustained economic growth and poverty reduction. To this end, exchange rate stability and predictability would obviously be a boon to commerce and finance. Achieving it, however - even imperfectly - generally requires consideration and management of the impact of capital flows as well as domestic and international pressures.
For the full text of the paper, click on the link to the right.
About the Author
Dr. Albert Keidel
Former Senior Associate, China Program
Keidel served as acting director and deputy director for the Office of East Asian Nations at the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Before joining Treasury in 2001, he covered economic trends, system reforms, poverty, and country risk as a senior economist in the World Bank office in Beijing.
- As China's Exports Drop, Can Domestic Demand Drive Growth?
- China’s Fourth Quarter 2008 Statistical RecordArticle
Dr. Albert Keidel
Recent Work
More Work from Carnegie India
- Threading the Needle: India’s Path Forward with ChinaPaper
After the chill in ties between 2020 and 2024 that brought India–China relations to their lowest point in several decades, the two countries have engaged each other afresh. This paper argues that there are predominantly four imperatives guiding India’s approach to China, and they exist in an order of priority.
Saheb Singh Chadha
- Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026Article
This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.
Vrinda Sahai
- India’s Press Note 3 Gamble: Opening the FDI Door to ChinaArticle
On March 10, 2026, India’s Union Cabinet approved amendments to Press Note 3, a regulation that mandated government approval on all foreign direct investment (FDI) from countries sharing a land border with India. This amendment raises questions primarily about whether its stated benefits will materialize and if the risks have been adequately weighed. This piece will address the same.
Konark Bhandari
- The Impact of U.S. Sanctions and Tariffs on India’s Russian Oil ImportsCommentary
This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.
Vrinda Sahai
- India-China Economic Ties: Determinants and PossibilitiesPaper
This paper examines the evolution of India-China economic ties from 2005 to 2025. It explores the impact of global events, bilateral political ties, and domestic policies on distinct spheres of the economic relationship.
Santosh Pai
