dc.contributor.author | Dholakia, Ravindra H. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2010-07-15T04:30:58Z | |
dc.date.available | 2010-07-15T04:30:58Z | |
dc.date.copyright | 1996 | |
dc.date.issued | 1996-07-15T04:30:58Z | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11718/5306 | |
dc.description | Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 31, Issue No. 47, 23 Nov, 1996 | en |
dc.description.abstract | IN a recent paper, Pronab Sen has defended
Cooper's contractionary devaluation hypothesis
in a very interesting and lucid way
('Cooper's Contractionary Devaluation
Hypothesis: A Note', EPW, July 27). In the
true spirit of macro modelling, he has effectively
demonstrated the validity of Cooper's
hypothesis with important modifications
through the six propositions derived from
a simplified macro model. His most important
proposition is his Result 4 which states that
gross complementarity of home goods and
imports in the domestic consumption is the
necessary condition for the devaluation to
be contractionary. Since it is a distinct (and
maybe most likely) possibility to find gross
complementarity between the home goods
and imports in the domestic consumption in
several developing countries, Sen concludes
"that 'maxi' devaluations do not always
need to be accompanied by contractionary
fiscal and monetary policies". Something
more is needed to arrive at this conclusion
than what is contained in Sen's note. | |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.subject | Maxi Devaluation | en |
dc.title | Maxi devaluations and cooper s hypothesis | en |
dc.type | Article | en |