A Note on the Monetary Sector of Prometeia's Model: The Flow of Funds and the Reaction Function

1989 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 431-437
Author(s):  
L. Vincenzi
1991 ◽  
Vol 30 (4II) ◽  
pp. 931-941
Author(s):  
M. Aynul Hasan ◽  
Qazi Masood Ahmed

Monetary policy, in general, refers to those steps taken by the Central Bank to achieve such broader objectives of the economy as growth, employment, external balance and price stability through changes in the money supply, interest rates and credit policies. The money supply thus created by the Central Bank should be in response to the changes in key macroeconomic target variables such as GNP, balance of payments, inflation, internal debt and unemployment. Indeed, a properly estimated monetary policy reaction function can provide useful information regarding such matters as to whether the Central Bank, in fact, has been systematically accommodating to the changes in the target variables. The reaction function can also provide insight into the question as to what should be the relevant indicators of the monetary policy. In addition, as argued by Havrilesky (1967), it may also play a crucial role in the formulation of long-term monetary policy strategy. The other important consideration in the development of a monetary policy reaction function pertains to the endogeneity of the monetary policy. As pointed out by Goldfeld and Blinder (1972), if a policy variable responds to the lagged (or expected) target values, then considering such a policy variable as exogenous would not only introduce the problem of misspecification but will also produce serious biases in the parameters estimated from those models. In particular, if the monetary policy variable happens to be strongly influenced by target variables, then the standard result of the relative effectiveness of the monetary policy vis-a-vis fiscal policy can be questionable on the grounds of reverse causation problem.


2017 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-175
Author(s):  
Rajiv Gauba

The investment needs in basic infrastructure that determine the pace of development of cities are considerably higher than the quantum of flow of funds. The key indicators of the major urban services reveal that there is a failure to achieve even moderate success in service delivery. The components of the traditional approach to financing urban services have been grants and loans from government-owned financial institutions on basis of guarantees. The urban local bodies (ULBs) in India are weak in terms of capacity to raise both resources and financial autonomy. Given the major risks involved, private sector has also largely stayed away from urban infrastructure projects, until very recently. These have resulted in huge gap between the demand and supply of urban basic services. The present government has launched several Missions to promote urban development in the country through strict adherence to reforms to strengthen financial and governance capacities of ULBs and participating in competition at state and city levels to qualify for accessing resources apart from other grants-based missions. In this context, the article discusses the investment requirements, progress of programmatic interventions for urban development in India and their financing mechanism. The article focuses on recently completed Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) and the newly launched National Urban Mission programmes.


1993 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica Hargraves ◽  
Garry J. Schinasi ◽  
Steven R. Weisbrod

1990 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-87
Author(s):  
Roger W. Spencer ◽  
Daniel T. Walz

1963 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Cohen

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document