Ever since the introduction of the Euro, there have been discussions about whether Europe constitutes an optimal currency area. The Great Recession and the European debt crisis have rekindled and intensified this debate. Heterogeneous country experiences have led to questioning the rationale for a common monetary policy in the absence of a common fiscal framework to cushion macroeconomic shocks. In this paper, we examine whether the impact of typical macroeconomic shocks at the European Monetary Union (EMU) level varies across countries and sectors. We follow Furlanetto et al. (2017) and estimate common euro area macroeconomic supply, demand, monetary, investment, and financial shocks using sign restrictions. We calculate the impulse responses to these shocks at the country-sector level using local linear projections and propose a measure for business cycle synchronisation based on the similarity of the responses. We find varying degrees of heterogeneity across member countries' responses to common EMU shocks. Although the responses of economic sectors are themselves heterogeneous, different sector-decompositions across countries cannot explain the cross-country heterogeneity. Contrary to e.g. Bayoumi and Eichengreen (1993, 2017), we identify Italy to be a core country. In line with recent literature, the level of heterogeneity was the most pronounced during the financial crisis compared to pre- and post-crisis periods.

自从引入欧元以来，一直在讨论欧洲是否构成最佳货币区。大萧条和欧洲债务危机重新点燃并加剧了这场辩论。不同国家的经验导致人们在缺乏共同的财政框架来缓冲宏观经济冲击的情况下质疑共同的货币政策的理由。在本文中，我们研究了典型的宏观经济冲击对欧洲货币联盟（EMU）级别的影响是否因国家和部门而异。我们遵循Furlanetto等。（2017年），并使用符号限制估计常见的欧元区宏观经济供应，需求，货币，投资和金融冲击。我们使用局部线性预测来计算国家/地区对这些冲击的冲动响应，并基于响应的相似性提出一种用于商业周期同步的措施。我们发现各成员国对共同的动车组冲击的反应程度不同。尽管经济部门的反应本身是异质的，但是各国间不同的部门分解并不能解释跨国异质性。与Bayoumi和Eichengreen（1993，2017）相反，我们确定意大利是一个核心国家。与最近的文献一致，与金融危机前后相比，金融危机期间的异质性水平最为明显。我们发现各成员国对共同的动车组冲击的反应程度不同。尽管经济部门的反应本身是异质的，但各国间不同的部门分解并不能解释跨国异质性。与Bayoumi和Eichengreen（1993，2017）相反，我们确定意大利是一个核心国家。与最近的文献一致，与金融危机前后相比，金融危机期间的异质性水平最为明显。我们发现各成员国对共同的动车组冲击的反应程度不同。尽管经济部门的反应本身是异质的，但各国间不同的部门分解并不能解释跨国异质性。与Bayoumi和Eichengreen（1993，2017）相反，我们确定意大利是一个核心国家。与最近的文献一致，与金融危机前后相比，金融危机期间的异质性水平最为明显。