欧元对成员国和非成员国的影响，On the Euro: Impacts on Members and Non-Members，by Jeffrey Frankel Member, U.S. Council of Economic Advisers,发表于12/17/1998，It may be late in the game to debate the merits of EMU for its members. But I begin with a review of the pros and cons. The UK, Sweden and others have yet to decide whether to join, so for them the evaluation is still relevant. The second half of these notes will turn to the implications of the euro as a new international currency. Impacts on ountries outside EMU are discussed in addition to countries inside. Impact of EMU Per Se on the Members The two big  dvantages of fixing the exchange rate, for any country, are: (1) to reduce transactions costs and exchange rate risk, which can discourage trade and investment, and (2) to provide a credible nominal anchor for monetary policy. The big advantage of a floating exchange rate, on the other hand, is the ability to pursue an independent monetary policy.1 Which factors are likely to dominate, the advantages of fixed exchange rates or the advantages of floating? The answer must depend, in large part, on characteristics of the country in question. There is no one right answer for all countries or all times. Many of the country characteristics that are most important in this context are closely related to the size and openness of the country. This observation brings us to the theory of the Optimum Currency Area.