The literature on international monetary standards emphasises the link between the adherence of countries to a given regime and the combined impact on trade and financial integration. So, for instance, the international gold standard (1870-1913) is supposed to have fostered both trade and financial integration, contributing to the wave of globalisation and growth taking place before the WWI.
By melting these two aspects into one, however, this well-established approach to the functioning of international monetary regimes hides some relevant questions and some still-unsolved puzzles. For instance, did countries join these standards (or did not abandon them) in the attempt to foster (protect) their position in the international trade, or to attract financial flows (or to stabilise them), or both? In doing so, which were the options (gold; bimetallism; silver) available under different regimes and why did countries choose one solution? Did peripheral and core countries behave differently, and why? What is the role played by interest groups and political forces?
The aim of this section is to shed light on some of these issues by analysing various aspects of the functioning of monetary regimes in the long-run. The session looks at the long period starting with the mid-19th century international monetary and financial integration, followed by an analysis of what standards were available under the “classic gold standard” and why and how different countries opted for different solutions, to finish with the issue of devaluation and international debts in the 1930.