Abstract
In this paper we develop Dixon and Hansen (1997) to allow for two-sector small open economy in which the non-traded sector is monopolistic. The closed economy version of the model generalises Dixon/Hansen to allow for diminishing returns on the traded sector. We compare the short-run impact of menu costs on the economy and also the size of menu costs needed to sustain nominal rigidity in both the open and closed economies. We find that whilst the welfare gains from monetary expansion are of a similar magnitude, nominal rigidity can occur for much smaller menu costs than in the closed economy case. Hence we argue that menu costs and the resultant nominal rigidities are more likely to be important in an open economy.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Akerlof, G.A. and J.L. Yellen (1985) “A Near-Rational Model of the Business Cycle, with Wage and PriceInertia.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 100, supplement, 823–838.
Ball, L. and D. Romer (1990) “Real Rigidities and the Nonneutrality of Money.” Review of Economic Studies 57, 183–203.
Ball, L. and D. Romer (1991) “Sticky Prices as Coordination Failure.” American Economic Review 81(3), 539–552.
Blanchard, O.J. and N. Kiyotaki (1987) “Monopolistic Competition and the Effects of Aggregate Demand.” American Economic Review 77, 647–666.
Dixon, H.D. and C.T. Hansen (1997) “Industrial Structure, Menu Costs, and the Non-Neutrality of Money.” Mimeo graph, University of York (forthcoming European Economic Review).
Mankiw, N.G. (1985) “Small Menu Costs and Large Business Cycles: A Macroeconomic Model of Monopoly.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 100, 529–539.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dixon, H.D., Pompermaier, A. A Comparison of Menu Costs in Open and Closed Economies with a Mixed Industrial Structure. Open Economies Review 10, 365–384 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008329530140
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008329530140