New Economy-New Policy Rules?

Comment

IntroductionRecent Developments in Monetary Macroeconomics David Altig The contents of this volume hardly require explanation beyond its title: "Recent Developments in Monetary Macroeconomics." Our intent for the conference was to collect a set of papers reflecting the cutting edge of applied monetary macroeconomics. As befitting such an ambitious-sounding goal, the contributions are wide ranging. For purposes of this brief introduction, however, we might organize the papers as answers to three questions. (1) What is the "optimal" Taylor rule? (2) Are "New Keynesian" or "New Neoclassical Synthesis" models the final word on the monetary transmission mechanism? (3) Is there a role for money in the conduct of monetary policy? What is the "Optimal" Taylor Rule The inclusion of the Taylor rule issue is almost a prerequisite for any collection of papers purporting to survey recent developments in monetary macroeconomics. In policy discussions, the Taylor rule is ubiquitous, and it is currently the choice among alternative specifications of central bank behavior. More precisely, perhaps, the general form of the Taylor rule is the choice, as it has come to represent the general class of equations that relate the federal funds rate to some measure of an output gap and inflation rate. There is substantially less unanimity about whether output gaps and inflation rates should be past, present, or (expected) future values, whether past values of the funds rate need to be included, and what are the appropriate magnitudes of the responses to each of these measures. Marc Giannoni and Michael Woodford offer the natural approach to addressing the dispute: find the representation that is optimal within the framework being employed for policy analysis. The model in question here is essentially a derivative of the "New Neoclassical Synthesis" class of models that are currently the workhorses of most monetary policy analyses among academic and central bank staffs alike. Their approach to discovering the optimal policy within this structure has the flavor of [End Page 1039] the "Ramsey problem" familiar from optimal tax policy, although with the strong requirement that the derived policy rule be "robustly optimal": it must support the optimal equilibrium no matter what the distribution of disturbances the model policymakers face. Giannoni and Woodford offer two essential lessons. First, whether optimal policy incorporates forecasts of future price-level growth or output gaps depend critically on the dynamics of the inflation rate. If the adjustment of the price-level to shocks is inertial, then optimal policy necessarily depends on forecasts of future inflation. Second, the response of the funds rate to its own past is inertial. In fact, it is super-inertial, meaning that (all else equal), the contemporaneous funds rate responds more than one-for-one with the lagged value of the funds rate (and lagged changes in the rate). The proposition that monetary authorities ought to aggressively respond to lagged values of the funds rate also arises in the papers by Jess Benhabib, Stephanie Schmitt-Grohé, and Martín Uribe, and George Evans and Seppo Honkapohja. In the latter case, the authors consolidate and expand on their well-known work on learning dynamics. A central contribution of the work presented in this article is the notion that convergence to a unique rational expectations equilibrium under learning, as well as the stability of that equilibrium, serves as basis for the choice (or rejection) of an optimal policy formulation. An apparent lesson from Evans and Honkapohja's analysis is that the learnability criterion prescribes a policy rule that differs in some important ways from the conventional wisdom coming from analyses that invoke the Taylor rule in a pure rational expectations environment. In particular, they conclude that the optimal policy rule in the environment they consider requires the monetary authority to respond directly to private-sector expectations. The environment they consider is essentially the same as in Giannoni and Woodford, with the exception of the central bank's assumed loss function: Giannoni and Woodford assume a preference for interest rate smoothing, Evans and Honkapohja do not. In his comments, John Duffy points out that the introduction of interest-smoothing motive yields an optimal policy rule under learning that is much closer to the conventional view. In particular, it does not require...

This paper uses a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) model with sticky information as a laboratory to study monetary policy. It characterizes the model's predictions for macro dynamics and optimal policy at prior parameters, and then uses data on five US macroeconomic series to update the parameters and provide an estimated model that can be used for policy analysis. The model answers a few policy questions. How does sticky information affect optimal monetary policy? What is the optimal interest rate rule? What is the optimal elastic price-level targeting rule? How does parameter uncertainty affect optimal policy? Are the conclusions for the Euro area different? (JEL E13, E31, E43, E52)

In many countries, the monetary policy instrument sometimes remains unchanged for a long period and shows infrequent responses to exogenous shocks. The purpose of this paper is to provide a new explanation on why the central bank's policy instrument remains unchanged. In the analysis, we explore how uncertainty on the private agents' expectations affects robust optimal monetary policy. We apply the Choquet expected decision theory to a new Keynesian model. A main result is that the policymaker may frequently keep the interest rate unchanged even when exogenous shocks change output gaps and inflation rates. This happens because a change of the interest rate increases additional uncertainty for the policymaker. To the extent that the policymaker has uncertainty aversion, it can therefore be optimal for the policymaker to maintain an unchanged policy stance for some significant periods and to make discontinuous changes of the target rate. Our analysis departs from previous studies in that we determine an optimal monetary policy rule that allows time-variant feedback parameters in a Taylor rule. We show that if the policymaker has small uncertainty aversion, the calibrated optimal stop-go policy rule can predict actual target rates of FRB and ECB reasonably well.

Optimal Simple and Implementable Monetary and Fiscal Rules

Optimal monetary policy under flexible exchange rates

Inflation Targeting and an Optimal Taylor Rule for an Open Economy: Evidence for Colombia 1990-2011

Financial Shocks and Optimal Policy

Most recent research on monetary-policy rules is restricted to considering a commitment to simple instrument rules, where the central-bank instrument is a simple function of available information about the economy, like the Taylor rule. However, a commitment to a simple instrument rule appears inadequate as a description of current goal-directed and forward-looking monetary policy, especially inflation targeting. The latter can to a large extent instead be seen as inflation-forecast targeting, setting the instrument so that the corresponding conditional inflation forecast is consistent with the inflation target. It is argued, both from a descriptive and a prescriptive perspective, that inflation targeting is better understood as a commitment to a targeting rule, either a general targeting rule in the form of clear objectives for monetary policy or a specific targeting rule in the form of a condition for (the forecasts of) the target variables, essentially the equality of the marginal rates of transformation and the marginal rates of substitution between the target variables. Targeting rules allow the use of judgment and extra-model information, are more robust and easier to verify than optimal instrument rules, and they can nevertheless bring the economy close to the socially optimal equilibrium. These ideas are illustrated with the help of simple examples. Some recent defense of commitment to simple instrument rules and criticism of forwardlooking monetary policy and targeting rules by McCallum, Nelson and Woodford are also addressed. In the concluding section, robust and optimal rules for monetary policy are suggested.

We examine the interplay between monetary and fiscal policies in a context where disturbances to the public deficit process are a primary source of macroeconomic instability. We perform simulations of optimal targeting rules on a sticky-price model a la Woodford (1996). Our investigation compares the dynamic adjustment path under inflation targeting with that arising from nominal income growth targeting. When fiscal shocks enter the picture, inflation targeting is a superior strategy. In opposition to Jensen (1999)'s results, we show that an inflation targeter is capable of bringing about the required degree of interest rate inertia. This does not occur at the cost of additional nominal instability.

The paper develops a small New-Keynesian FPAS model for Vietnam. The model closely matches actual data from 2000-2014. We derive an optimal monetary policy rule that minimizes variability of output, inflation, and the exchange rate. Compared to the baseline model, the optimal rule places a larger weight on output stabilization as the intermediate target to achieve inflation stability, while allowing greater exchange rate flexibility. We analyze the dynamics of key macro variables under various shocks including external and domestic demand shocks and a lift-off of U.S. interest rates. We find that the optimal monetary policy rule delivers greater macroeconomic stability for Vietnam under the shock scenarios. JEL Classification Numbers: E31, E47, E52

Optimal Monetary Policy Rules for the Euro Area: An Analysis Using the Area Wide Model

Optimal monetary policy in a small open economy with staggered wage and price contracts

This paper proposes a general method based on a property of zero-sum two-player games to derive robust optimal monetary policy rules—the best rules among those that yield an acceptable performance in a specified range of models—when the true model is unknown and model uncertainty is viewed as uncertainty about parameters of the structural model. The method is applied to characterize robust optimal Taylor rules in a simple forward-looking macroeconomic model that can be derived from first principles. Although it is commonly believed that monetary policy should be less responsive when there is parameter uncertainty, we show that robust optimal Taylor rules prescribe in general a stronger response of the interest rate to fluctuations in inflation and the output gap than is the case in the absence of uncertainty. Thus model uncertainty does not necessarily justify a relatively small response of actual monetary policy.

Technology shocks and monetary policy: assessing the Fed's performance