HE Asian currency crisis of 1997 and its reverberations in financial markets of developing countries around the world have intensified the debate over regulating the movement of capital, as capital flows to developing countries have grown rapidly since the early 1990s. One main feature of recent capital flows to developing countries is that private (bond and equity) flows, as opposed to official flows, have become a crucial source for financing large current account imbalances. The evolution and magnitude of capital movements have presented both opportunities and challenges to the developing countries. The degree of capital mobility has typically been assessed by the extent to which expected returns are equalized between domestic and foreign assets of the same type. The equalization of returns can be measured by simple interest arbitrage which typically focuses on the short-run relationship between capital flows and interest differentials. Capital mobility is defined as the absence of barriers to the movement of short-term capital across national boundaries. We can examine covered interest differentials for only a subset of countries with relatively well-developed forward markets, and many papers have looked at the mobility of financial capital for industrial countries. 1 Unfortunately, for a majority of countries that are liberalizing or contemplating liberalization, forward markets are either extremely thin or nonexistent, rendering covered interest parity tests irrelevant and making it difficult to judge the economic impact of capital account liberalization. Therefore, tests of uncovered interest parity conditions have been applied to examine the degree of capital mobility in most developing countries, although there is little evidence to show that uncovered interest parity conditions hold. This paper examines interest rate determination in two polar cases related to the degree of openness of the economy. If the economy under consideration is one that
Read full abstract