Blog Post

Exchange Rates and GVCs

Since mid-July, when the Fed suggested its willingness to continue with its quantitative easing policy, the Euro quickly began to appreciate against the dollar, reaching a 8 percent increase at the end of October (from 1.28 to 1.38 dollars per Euro). This shift has now been partly reversed by the ECB decision to cut again […]

By: Date: January 8, 2014 Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance

Since mid-July, when the Fed suggested its willingness to continue with its quantitative easing policy, the Euro quickly began to appreciate against the dollar, reaching a 8 percent increase at the end of October (from 1.28 to 1.38 dollars per Euro). This shift has now been partly reversed by the ECB decision to cut again the interest rates, but it was not painless for firms: in most cases, quarterly reports by European multinationals, which now heavily rely on exports as a source of gain given the sluggish continental demand, showed a downward revision of earnings. Most of these Multinational Enterprises (MNEs) blamed the “strong euro” as one of the reasons for the negative reporting season.

The latter gave rise to a debate on the possibility that the ECB could adopt a policy of more explicit management of the exchange rate, avoiding it to be completely determined by the market or influenced by the actions of other Central Banks in the world. For those supporting this policy stance, the ECB should aim at preventing an excessive appreciation of the euro against other currencies, thus avoiding stifling the weak recovery currently emerging in Europe. On the other hand, the ECB President reiterated that exchange rates ‘are not an objective of monetary policy’.

This debate clearly relies on the assumption that there is a clear causal relationship between exchange rates and competitiveness. However, given the complex reality of the global economic environment, this assumption should be treated with caution.

Looking at figures presented in a recent research by Barclays, in fact, there does not seem to be a strong statistical relationship in Europe between corporate profits and the level of the exchange rate, neither this relationship seems to be different, as it should be, in sectors more exposed to international competition (such as manufacturing) and sectors that are typically non-tradable (such as personal services).

But how is it possible that a euro strengthening against the dollar does not automatically hinder European exports?

This happens because, in a world characterized by global value chains and international fragmentation of production, companies that produce on a global scale are partially protected from the effects of fluctuations of the exchange rate in the domestic market.

To understand this concept, we can refer to a very simple example:  tracking the global value chain of an electronic toothbrush manufactured by a well-known European MNE, one finds that the toothbrush is assembled with components sourced from manufacturing facilities located in ten different countries over three continents, with seven different currencies. The production of any other industrial good is not very different, with more complex products (such as cars) having more complex and globally articulated value chains.

What role would play the exchange rate of the euro alone in determining the competitiveness of this product? And how about the case in which the product is assembled outside of Europe, in order to produce as close as possible to the target market (as it happens with large part of the production of German cars sold in Asia)?  What role does the euro play in determining the profitability of these firms?

In these cases a strong euro might actually have an effect, but purely from an accounting point of view: since profits from production abroad are recorded in local currency, but are consolidated at the parent level in euro, a sudden appreciation would reduce the value (expressed in euro) of foreign profits, even in the absence of structural effects on the local sales (or competitiveness) of the companies considered. Clearly, not all companies are large multinationals involved in these global production chains: SMEs might tend to sell through direct exports from their home country, rather than through production facilities located outside Europe. Moreover, not all European multinationals produce outside of Europe, although they might be sourcing inputs internationally. In all these cases, the potential effect of an appreciation of the single currency would be very heterogeneous across firms.

To this extent, a recent study by Amiti et al. (2012) shows that, in a very open economy like Belgium, a stronger exchange rate is indeed reflected in a proportional loss of competitiveness. But the same study also shows how large international companies are able to painlessly absorb almost 50 percent of the fluctuation in the exchange rate. This is because the largest exporters are also the largest importers: when hit by an exchange rate shock in their destination market, they can face a compensating movement in the marginal costs when importing their intermediate inputs.

Indeed, EFIGE data allows us to go further in assessing the relevance of an exchange rate movement for the external competitiveness of a country.

First, as shown in a recent Bruegel publication, which analyses the extent of firms’ participation in global value chains, large international companies in each country represent about 70-80 percent of the value of export. Thus, given the finding reported for Belgium, it is conceivable that a large part of the exports of a European country is actually partially isolated from the exchange rate effect.

Table 1.a

Firms that export and import at the same time

Country

Share of total exports

Share of total imports

Austria

80%

81%

France

95%

83%

Germany

51%

78%

Italy

90%

91%

Spain

79%

72%

Hungary (non euro-area)

81%

91%

UK (non euro-area)

94%

94%

Source: Bruegel on the basis of EFIGE data.
Note: Both the value of exports and imports are expressed in terms of firms’ turnover. Imports are imports of materials (intermediate goods).

In particular Table 1.a shows that firms that engage simultaneously in both export and import activities account for the majority of export turnover in each country as well as for the bulk of imports[1]. On top of this, these companies are also likely to be engaged in some kind of foreign production activity, such as FDI or outsourcing, thus adding a degree of complexity to the scenario of potential exchange rate effects.

Table 1.b

Firms that export, import and produce abroad at the same time

Country

Share of total exports

Share of total imports

Austria

64%

14%

France

48%

39%

Germany

23%

17%

Italy

33%

15%

Spain

15%

9%

Hungary

1%

2%

UK

10%

9%

Source: Bruegel on the basis of EFIGE data.
Note: Both the value of exports and imports are expressed in terms of firms’ turnover. Imports are imports of materials (intermediate goods).

In addition, firms that export, import and produce abroad (through FDI or outsourcing) at the same time, although few in numbers[2], still account for a considerable share of the total value of exports and imports. (Table 1.b)

The other finding that can be gathered from EFIGE data is that SMEs tend in a more than proportional way to export within the euro area, rather than outside it. This is a second reason for which a potential movement in the euro exchange rate might not play a large role on external competitiveness.

Table 2.a

Pure exporting firms by country and size

Size class

Austria

France

Germany

Italy

Spain

SMEs

74%

83%

64%

89%

87%

Large

26%

17%

36%

11%

13%

Total

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

Source: Bruegel on the basis of EFIGE data. Note: SMEs: 10-49 employees. Large: 50 – >250 employees. Pure exporting firms are those firms that engage in export activities only (ie do not import or produce abroad). The value of exports is expressed in terms of firms’ turnover

SMEs account for the majority of purely exporting firms, i.e. those not engaging in other types of international activities (Table 2.a). At the same time, their share of total export value is lower than that of large firms, with some degree of heterogeneity across countries (Table 2.b).

Table 2.b

Export value (pure exporters only) by size and country

 

Austria

France

Germany

Italy

Spain

SMEs

3%

37%

16%

48%

20%

Large

97%

63%

84%

52%

80%

Source: Bruegel on the basis of EFIGE data.

Moreover, if we look at the main destination country of their export activities, we can underscore how both SMEs and large firms are euro-zone-oriented, as most of the firms claim the first destination of their export activities is a euro-zone country (Table 2.c).

Table 2.c

Share of firms among pure exporters with a euro zone country as a first destination[3] for exports: by country and size

Size class

Austria

France

Germany

Italy

Spain

SMEs

75%

55%

50%

57%

74%

Large

84%

52%

56%

69%

78%

Source: Bruegel on the basis of EFIGE data. Note: SMEs: 10-49 employees. Large: 50 – >250 employees. Pure exporting firms are those firms that engage in export activities only (ie do not import or produce abroad).

This basic evidence allows us to claim that, even though SMEs are less prone to engage in global value chains and complex strategies, and thus in principle are more exposed to the effects of exchange rate fluctuations, their relatively limited share of the total export volume in any given country, as well as the Euro-orientation of 50% or more of their exports, are all additional factors that tend to further dampen the effects of a “strong euro” on the export volume of a country.

To sum up, in today’s global world, the relationship between exchange rate and competitiveness is in principle rather complex. Moreover, the evidence now available thanks to detailed firm-level data on the international activities of European firms (EFIGE) allows to cast more than a reasonable doubt on the overall effect of an exchange appreciation on the volume of exports of a given country. Hence, a debate on how to improve efficiency, innovation and integration along global value chains of European firms would probably be more effective in driving competitiveness rather than a discussion on the levels of the exchange rate.

This article has been translated and integrated from the Italian version published on “Il Foglio” on 8th November 2013Excellent research assistance by Francesca Barbiero is gratefully acknowledged.

References

Barclays, Global Macro daily of 5th November 2013, Focus ‘Has the strong EUR hurt euro area corporate earnings?’ by G. Felices and A. Stewart.

Veugelers, R., Barbiero, F., Blanga-Gubbay, M. (2013), “Meeting the manufacturing firms involved in GVCs” in ‘Manufacturing Europe’s future’, Blueprint 21, Bruegel

Amiti, M., Itskhoki, O. and Konings, J. (2012) ‘Importers, exporters, and exchange rate disconnect’, Working Paper Research 238, National Bank of Belgium.

Altomonte, C., Aquilante, T. and Ottaviano, G. (2012) ‘The triggers of competitiveness: the EFIGE cross-country report’, Blueprint 17, Bruegel


[1] We impose a threshold to make sure that a firm is a “substantial” exporter (importer). For more details, see Veugelers et al. (2013).

[2] Firms simultaneously engaging in export, import and production abroad (FDI or outsourcing) represent 11% of the total number of substantial exporters in Austria, 14% in France, 11% in Germany, 8% in Italy, 5% in Spain, 3% in Hungary and 9% in UK.

[3] This represents the share of exporting firms answering to the question "What are the top three destinations of your export activities?" and indicating as the first destination a euro-zone country.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.


Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /home/bruegelo/public_html/wp-content/themes/bruegel/content.php on line 449
View comments
Read about event More on this topic

Upcoming Event

Oct
23
12:30

Europe: Back to the future of a political project

This event will feature a discussion on different ideas for reforming European Governance.

Speakers: Ulrike Guerot, Adriaan Schout and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

The international use of the euro: What can we learn from past examples of currency internationalisation?

The recent State of the Union speech by Jean-Claude Juncker sparked a discussion about the potential wider use of the euro on the international stage. Historically, it is not the first debate of this kind. Emmanuel Mourlon-Druol analyses four previous cases of debates on international currencies to reveal the different scenarios associated with their greater use, as well as the need to have a clear objective for a currency’s internationalisation.

By: Emmanuel Mourlon-Druol Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: October 15, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Podcast

Podcast

Director’s Cut: How does Italy’s budget fit with EU fiscal rules?

In this Director’s Cut of ‘The Sound of Economics’, Guntram Wolff welcomes Bruegel research fellow Grégory Claeys to assess how the new Italian budget proposals measure up against the existing EU fiscal rules.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: October 9, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Greece: What to expect after the bail-out

After being under the close scrutiny of three financial assistance programmes since May 2010, Greece has finally left the bail-out in August 2018. How different is the post-bail-out era from the preceding eight years? Will Greece be able to stand on its own? And how might the country improve its economic outlook? In this post, which summarises a presentation recently given at an Athens conference, the author answers these three questions.

By: Zsolt Darvas Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: October 9, 2018
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Improving the efficiency and legitimacy of the EU: A bottom-up approach

The 2019 European elections promise to be a watershed moment for the EU. A recent Bruegel paper made the case for restructuring the Union’s model of governance and integration. The authors of this post critically assess this proposed institutional engineering, and argue for the principle of “an ever closer union” to be safeguarded by a bottom-up approach to respond to the common needs of the citizens.

By: Silvia Merler, Simone Tagliapietra and Alessio Terzi Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: October 9, 2018
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Italy’s new fiscal plans: the options of the European Commission

The Italian government has announced an increase of its deficit for 2019, breaking the commitment from the previous government to decrease it to 0.8% next year. This blog post explores the options for the European Commission and the procedures prescribed by the European fiscal framework in this case.

By: Grégory Claeys and Antoine Mathieu Collin Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: October 8, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

One club does not fit all in Europe

In this column, Jean Pisani-Ferry argues how the EU can become a more effective global player, following the Policy Brief "One size does not fit all: European integration by differentiation.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: October 2, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Podcast

Podcast

Director’s Cut: Is economics asking the right questions?

Bruegel deputy director Maria Demertzis welcomes Financial Times commentator Martin Sandbu to explore the journey taken by the field of economics since the financial crisis struck 10 years ago, and discuss what new tools economics has now that it didn’t have then.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: October 2, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Digesting the Salzburg Summit

As the moment of truth for Brexit negotiations is approaching, with the October European Council around the corner, we review opinions on the outcome and meaning of the Salzburg summit.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: October 1, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Podcast

Podcast

Director’s Cut: The Italian government budget proposal for 2019

Guntram Wolff welcomes Bruegel affiliate fellow Silvia Merler to evaluate the Italian government’s planned budget for 2019, in this Director’s Cut of ‘The Sound of Economics’

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: September 28, 2018
Read article Download PDF

Policy Contribution

European Parliament

Excess liquidity and bank lending risks in the euro area

In this Policy Contribution prepared for the European Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) as an input to the Monetary Dialogue, the authors clarify what excess liquidity is and argue that it is not a good indicator of whether banks’ have more incentives in risk-taking and look at indicators that might signal that bank lending in the euro area creates undue risks.

By: Zsolt Darvas and David Pichler Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, European Parliament, Testimonies Date: September 26, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Something Putin and Juncker appear to agree on – the euro

“It is absurd that Europe pays for 80% of its energy import bill – worth €300 billion a year – in US dollars when only roughly 2% of our energy imports come from the United States,” said President Juncker in his state of the union speech.* Europe’s largest supplier of energy – Russia, who accounts for a third of that bill – couldn’t agree more. Russia’s offer to switch to euros in trade with the EU will likely be costly to implement, but the US switch towards unilateralism is forcing its long-standing partners to question the dollar’s global dominance.

By: Elina Ribakova Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: September 25, 2018
Load more posts