scholarly journals SECTORAL LABOR MOBILITY AND OPTIMAL MONETARY POLICY

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
Alessandro Cantelmo ◽  
Giovanni Melina
Keyword(s):  
Labor Mobility ◽  
Central Banks ◽  
New Keynesian ◽  
Optimal Monetary Policy ◽  
Relative Prices ◽  
Optimal Weights ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
Keynesian Model ◽  
Inflation Rates ◽  
The Us

How should central banks optimally aggregate sectoral inflation rates in the presence of imperfect labor mobility across sectors? We study this issue in a two-sector New-Keynesian model and show that a lower degree of sectoral labor mobility, ceteris paribus, increases the optimal weight on inflation in a sector that would otherwise receive a lower weight. We analytically and numerically find that, with limited labor mobility, adjustment to asymmetric shocks cannot fully occur through the reallocation of labor, thus putting more pressure on wages, causing inefficient movements in relative prices, and creating scope for central bank’ s intervention. These findings challenge standard central banks’ practice of computing sectoral inflation weights based solely on sector size and unveil a significant role for the degree of sectoral labor mobility to play in the optimal computation. In an extended estimated model of the US economy, featuring customary frictions and shocks, the estimated inflation weights imply a decrease in welfare up to 10% relative to the case of optimal weights.

Optimal Inflation for the US Economy

2011 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 29-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto M Billi
Keyword(s):  
Inflation Rate ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Policy Instrument ◽  
New Keynesian ◽  
Worst Case ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
Keynesian Model ◽  
Long Run ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Government

This paper studies the optimal long-run inflation rate (OIR) in a small New Keynesian model, where the only policy instrument is a short-term nominal interest rate that may occasionally run against a zero lower bound (ZLB). The model allows for worst-case scenarios of misspecification. The analysis shows first, if the government optimally commits, the OIR is below 1 percent annually. Second, if the government re-optimizes each period, the OIR rises markedly to 17 percent. Third, if the government commits only to an inertial Taylor rule, the inflation bias is eliminated at very low cost in terms of welfare for the representative household. (JEL E12, E31, E43, E52, E58)

The new macroeconometrics: A Bayesian approach

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Challenor ◽  
Doug McNeall ◽  
James Gattiker
Keyword(s):  
Central Banks ◽  
Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium ◽  
Public Institutions ◽  
New Keynesian ◽  
Dsge Models ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
Private Organizations ◽  
Final Good ◽  
The Us ◽  
Dynamic Stochastic

This article examines the dynamics of the US economy over the last five decades using Bayesian analysis of dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) models. It highlights an example application in what is commonly referred to as the new macroeconometrics, which combines macroeconomics with econometrics. The article describes a benchmark New Keynesian DSGE model that incorporates four types of agents: households that consume, save, and supply labour to a labour ‘packer’; a labour ‘packer’ that puts together the labour supplied by different households into an homogeneous labour unit; intermediate good producers, who produce goods using capital and aggregated labour; and a final good producer that mixes all the intermediate goods. It also considers the application of the model in policy analysis for public institutions such as central banks, along with private organizations and businesses. Finally, it discusses three avenues for further research in the estimation of DSGE models.

Is risk shock a key factor driving business cycles in China?

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhe Li ◽  
Shuixing Luo
Keyword(s):  
Business Cycles ◽  
Chinese Economy ◽  
New Keynesian ◽  
Macroeconomic Policies ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
Keynesian Model ◽  
The Us ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Investment Capital ◽  
The Impact

Abstract This paper studies the impact of risk shock on the Chinese economy using a New-Keynesian model with financial frictions. The study shows that risk shock is an important driving force for the fluctuations of GDP, investment, capital, credit, and credit spread in China. However, the role of risk shock in driving China’s business cycles is not as crucial as in the US economy (see Christiano, Motto, and Rostagno 2014). There are three main reasons that explain the different performance of risk shocks in China and the US: the volatility of risk shock, the effect of equity shock, and the influence of macroeconomic policies are all different in China and in the US. Our paper contributes to an understanding of the business cycles in China during the period from 1999 to 2015, particularly in comparison with business cycles in the US.

scholarly journals Fiscal Volatility Shocks and Economic Activity

2015 ◽  
Vol 105 (11) ◽  
pp. 3352-3384 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesús Fernández-Villaverde ◽  
Pablo Guerrón-Quintana ◽  
Keith Kuester ◽  
Juan Rubio-Ramírez
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effect ◽  
Economic Activity ◽  
The United States ◽  
New Keynesian ◽  
Time Varying ◽  
New Keynesian Model ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
Keynesian Model ◽  
The Us ◽  
Previous Step

We study how unexpected changes in uncertainty about fiscal policy affect economic activity. First, we estimate tax and spending processes for the United States with time-varying volatility to uncover evidence of time-varying volatility. Second, we estimate a VAR for the US economy using the time-varying volatility found in the previous step. Third, we feed the tax and spending processes into an otherwise standard New Keynesian model. Both in the VAR and in the model, we find that unexpected changes in fiscal volatility shocks can have a sizable adverse effect on economic activity. An endogenous increase in markups is a key mechanism. (JEL E12, E23, E32, E52, E62)

scholarly journals Kuznets meets Lucas: structural change and human capital

2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 848-873
Author(s):  
Edgar Cruz
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Structural Change ◽  
Capital Accumulation ◽  
Human Capital Accumulation ◽  
Relative Prices ◽  
Services Sector ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
The Us ◽  
Balanced Growth Path ◽  
Cross Country

Abstract This paper develops a multi-sector growth model with human capital accumulation. In this model, human capital induces structural change through two channels: changes in relative prices and changes in the investment rate of physical and human capital. We show that the specifications of the model give rise to a generalized balanced growth path (GBGP). Furthermore, We show that the model is consistent with (i) the decline in agriculture, (ii) the hump-shaped of manufacturing, (iii) the rise of the services sector, and (iv) the path of human capital accumulation in the US economy during the 20th century. Given the findings, We outline that imbalances between physical and human capital contribute to explain cross-country differences in the pace of structural change.

ARE MAJOR CENTRAL BANKS BLINDED BY THE ANALYTICAL ELEGANCE OF THEIR MODELS? POSSIBLE COSTS OF UNCONVENTIONAL MONETARY POLICY MEASURES

2017 ◽  
Vol 62 (01) ◽  
pp. 87-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
PIOTR CIŻKOWICZ ◽  
ANDRZEJ RZOŃCAZ
Keyword(s):  
Monetary Policy ◽  
Global Financial Crisis ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Central Banks ◽  
New Keynesian ◽  
New Keynesian Model ◽  
Unconventional Monetary Policy ◽  
Keynesian Model ◽  
Policy Measures ◽  
The Global Financial Crisis

We survey the possible costs of the unconventional monetary policy measures undertaken by major central banks after the outbreak of the global financial crisis in 2008. We argue that these costs are not easily discernable in the new Keynesian (NK) model, which defines a theoretical framework for monetary policy. First, the costs may result from the effects of unconventional monetary policy measures on the intensity of restructuring and the persistence of uncertainty (which increased after the outbreak of the crisis). However, neither of these processes is considered in the new Keynesian model. Second, costs may be generated not only by distortions in the choices made by economic agents but may also be a result of the decisions made by governments, particularly in terms of the fiscal deficit level. However, the new Keynesian model does not consider the effects of unconventional monetary policy measures on the quality of fiscal policy. Without carefully considering the costs, there is a significant risk that unconventional monetary policy measures could become a conventional response to recurrent crises.

scholarly journals Dynamic Debt Deleveraging and Optimal Monetary Policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 310-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierpaolo Benigno ◽  
Gauti B. Eggertsson ◽  
Federica Romei
Keyword(s):  
Monetary Policy ◽  
Lower Bound ◽  
New Keynesian ◽  
New Keynesian Model ◽  
Optimal Monetary Policy ◽  
Natural Rate ◽  
Keynesian Model ◽  
Natural Rate Of Interest ◽  
Standard Framework

This paper proposes a postcrisis New Keynesian model that incorporates agent heterogeneity in borrowing and lending with a minimum set of assumptions. Unlike the standard framework, this model makes the natural rate of interest endogenous and dependent on macroeconomic policy. The main application is to study optimal monetary policy at the zero lower bound (ZLB). Such policy succeeds in raising the natural rate of interest by creating an environment that speeds up deleveraging and thus endogenously shortens the crisis and the duration of binding ZLB. Inflation should be front-loaded and should overshoot its long-term target during the ZLB episode. (JEL E12, E31, E32, E43, E52)

scholarly journals ROBUST MONETARY POLICY IN A NEW KEYNESIAN MODEL WITH IMPERFECT INTEREST RATE PASS-THROUGH

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 1504-1526 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafael Gerke ◽  
Felix Hammermann
Keyword(s):  
Monetary Policy ◽  
Interest Rate ◽  
Central Bank ◽  
Model Misspecification ◽  
New Keynesian ◽  
Optimal Monetary Policy ◽  
Loan Rate ◽  
Keynesian Model ◽  
Pass Through ◽  
Policy Shifts

We use robust control to study how a central bank in an economy with imperfect interest rate pass-through conducts monetary policy if it fears that its model could be misspecified. We find that, first, whether robust optimal monetary policy under commitment responds more cautiously or more aggressively depends crucially on the source of shock. Imperfect pass-through amplifies the robust policy. Second, if the central bank is concerned about uncertainty, it dampens volatility in the inflation rate preemptively but accepts higher volatility in the output gap and loan rate. However, for highly sticky loan rates, insurance against model misspecification becomes particularly pricy. Third, if the central bank fears uncertainty only in the IS equation or the loan rate equation, the robust policy shifts its concern for stabilization away from inflation.

scholarly journals Should Inequality Factor into Central Banks' Decisions?

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (196) ◽  
Author(s):  
Niels-Jakob Hansen ◽  
Alessandro Lin ◽  
Rui Mano
Keyword(s):  
Monetary Policy ◽  
Potential Role ◽  
Central Banks ◽  
New Keynesian ◽  
New Keynesian Model ◽  
Taylor Rules ◽  
Keynesian Model

Inequality is increasingly a concern. Fiscal and structural policies are well-understood mitigators. However, less is known about the potential role of monetary policy. This paper investigates how inequality matters for monetary policy within a tractable Two-Agent New Keynesian model that captures important dimensions of inequality. We find some support for making inequality an explicit target for monetary policy, particularly if central banks follow standard Taylor rules.

scholarly journals The Aftermath of the Tariff War on China

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 22
Author(s):  
Nicholas Bitar
Keyword(s):  
Monetary Policy ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
New Keynesian ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
The Us ◽  
Short Run ◽  
The Interest Rate ◽  
Positive Effect ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Trump Administration

Will the US sustain its economy after the tariff war with China, or will the economy regress? This paper offers a conceptual framework, based on the tenets of New-Keynesian theory, to answer this question. I anticipate that the tariff will have a positive effect on the GDP of the US economy in the short run while prices will rise. When adding the most recent reforms of interest cut by the Fed to 1.75% in September (2019) the model concludes a better outcome. Followed by an expansionary monetary policy by reducing the interest rate, the aftermath of the tariff war on China seems to have a positive impact on the US income and productivity. Obviously, some critics to the Trump Administration indeed shed light on the curtailed global and US social welfare that is caused by the inflationary effect of the tariff war, in addition to the deteriorating conditions for some trading sectors in the US which would certainly lead to unemployment. But the benefits to the US economy that are translated by the New-Keynesian theoretical framework show a positive impact on US production, employment, and GDP.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document