It has been well-established in the literature that portfolio inflows appreciate the real effective exchange rate. However, the literature lacks a systematic empirical analysis of the impact of portfolio inflows by institutional sector or borrower type. This paper fills this gap by exploring the impact of the inflows of portfolio capital into three institutional sectors (government, banks and corporates) on the real effective exchange rate. Using a large sample of 73 countries, it shows that the effect of portfolio inflows on the real effective exchange rate depends on the sector the investment flows in. The findings are robust to different econometric methods, additional variables in the model, and various indicators of real effective exchange rates.

This paper analyzes the impact of capital inflows and exchange rate flexibility on the real exchange rate in developing countries based on panel cointegration techniques. The results show that public and private flows are associated with a real exchange rate appreciation. Among private flows, portfolio investment has the highest appreciation effect-almost seven times that of foreign direct investment or bank loans-and private transfers have the lowest effect. Using a de facto measure of exchange rate flexibility, we find that a more flexible exchange rate helps to dampen appreciation of the real exchange rate stemming from capital inflows.

Attracting capital and foreign exchange flows is crucial for developing countries. Yet, these flows could lead to real exchange rate appreciation and may thus have detrimental effects on competitiveness, jeopardizing exports and growth. This paper investigates this dilemma by comparing the impact of six types of capital and foreign exchange flows on real exchange rate behavior in a sample of 57 developing countries covering Africa, Europe, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East. The results reveal that portfolio investments, foreign borrowing, aid, and income lead to real exchange rate appreciation, while remittances have disparate effects across regions. Foreign direct investments have no effect on the real exchange rate, contributing to resolve the above dilemma.

It has been well-established in the literature that portfolio inflows appreciate the real effective exchange rate. However, the literature lacks a systematic empirical analysis of the impact of portfolio inflows by institutional sector or borrower type. This paper fills this gap by exploring the impact of the inflows of portfolio capital into three institutional sectors (government, banks and corporates) on the real effective exchange rate. Using a large sample of 73 countries, it shows that the effect of portfolio inflows on the real effective exchange rate depends on the sector the investment flows in. The findings are robust to different econometric methods, additional variables in the model, and various indicators of real effective exchange rates.

Attracting capital and foreign exchange flows is crucial for developing countries. Yet, these flows could lead to real exchange rate appreciation and may thus have detrimental effects on competitiveness, jeopardizing exports and growth. This paper investigates this dilemma by comparing the impact of six types of capital and foreign exchange flows on real exchange rate behavior in a sample of 57 developing countries covering Africa, Europe, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East. The results reveal that portfolio investments, foreign borrowing, aid, and income lead to real exchange rate appreciation, while remittances have disparate effects across regions. Foreign direct investments have no effect on the real exchange rate, contributing to resolve the above dilemma.