Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T06:01:42.640Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

INDETERMINACY IN CASH-IN-ADVANCE MODELS AND THE ROLE OF FRICTIONS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 December 2009

Koray Akay*
Affiliation:
Istanbul Bilgi University
*
Address correspondence to: Koray Akay, Department of Economics, Istanbul Bilgi University, Kurtulus Deresi Cad. No. 47, 34440 Dolapdere, Istanbul, Turkey; e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

A monetary cash-in-advance model is known to be prone to real indeterminacy if the intertemporal elasticity of substitution in consumption is sufficiently low. Moreover, if the model features habit formation in consumption, the scope of indeterminacy increases substantially. This paper shows that many of the nominal frictions and real rigidities commonly used in the New Keynesian paradigm act to decrease the scope of this indeterminacy. These frictions include stickiness in prices and wages, adjustment costs in investment, and variable capacity utilization. When they are all used together in the model, the problem of indeterminacy nearly vanishes, even when habit formation in consumption is allowed.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Altig, D., Christiano, L.J., Eichenbaum, M., and Linde, J. (2005) Firm-Specific Capital, Nominal Rigidities, and the Business Cycle. NBER Working Paper 11034, National Bureau of Economic Research.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Attanasio, O.P. and Weber, G. (1995) Is consumption growth consistent with intertemporal optimization? Evidence from the consumer expenditure survey. Journal of Political Economy 103, 11211157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auray, S., Collard, F., and Feve, P. (2005) Habit persistence, money growth rule and real indeterminacy. Review of Economic Dynamics 8, 4867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, L. and Romer, D. (1990) Real rigidities and the non-neutrality of money. Review of Economic Studies 57, 183203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanchard, O.J. and Kiyotaki, N. (1987) Monopolistic competition and the effects of aggregate demand. American Economic Review 77, 647666.Google Scholar
Campbell, J.Y. and Cochrane, J. (1999) Force of habit: A consumption-based explanation of aggregate stock market behavior. Journal of Political Economy 107, 205251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlstrom, C. and Fuerst, T. (2003) Money growth rules and price level determinacy. Review of Economic Dynamics 6, 263275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chari, V.V., Kehoe, P.J., and McGrattan, E.R. (2000) Sticky price models of the business cycle: Can the contract multiplier solve the persistence problem? Econometrica 68, 11511179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christiano, L.J., Eichenbaum, M., and Evans, C. L. (2005) Nominal rigidities and the dynamic effects of a shock to monetary policy. Journal of Political Economy 113, 145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danthine, J.P. and Kurmann, A. (2004) Fair wages in a New Keynesian model of the business cycle. Review of Economic Dynamics 7, 107142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennis, R. (2005) Specifying and Estimating New Keynesian Models with Instrument Rules and Optimal Monetary Policies. Working Paper 2004-17, Federal Reserve Bank of San Franscisco.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dotsey, M. and King, R.G. (2006) Pricing, Production, and Persistence. Journal of the European Economic Association 4, 893928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edge, R.M. (2000) Time-to-Build, Time-to-Plan, Habit-Persistence, and the Liquidity Effect. International Finance Working Paper 673, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellison, M. and Scott, A. (2000) Sticky prices and volatile output. Journal of Monetary Economics 46, 621632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erceg, C.J., Henderson, D.W., and Levin, A.T. (2000) Optimal monetary policy with staggered wage and price contracts. Journal of Monetary Economics 46, 281313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feenstra, R.C. (1986) Functional equivalence between liquidity costs and the utility of money. Journal of Monetary Economics 17, 271291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuhrer, J.C. (1998) An Optimizing Model for Monetary Policy Analysis: Can Habit Formation Help? Working Paper, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.Google Scholar
Hall, R.E. (1988) Intertemporal substitution in consumption. Journal of Political Economy 96, 339357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, Z. (1993) Intertemporal Substitution in Consumption Revisited. IMF Working Paper WP/93/26, International Monetary Fund.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keen, B.D. (2004) In search of the liquidity effect in a modern monetary model. Journal of Monetary Economics 51, 14671494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, J. (2003) Indeterminacy and investment adjustment costs: An analytical result. Macroeconomic Dynamics 7, 394406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakamura, E. and Steinsson, J. (2007) Five Facts about Prices: A Reevaluation of Menu Cost Models. Mimeo, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Pedersen, K. (1991) Intertemporal Substitution in Consumption: Evidence for Some High- and Middle-Income Countries. Policy Research Working Paper 641, World Bank.Google Scholar
Schmitt-Grohe, S. and Uribe, M. (2004) Optimal fiscal and monetary policy under sticky prices. Journal of Economic Theory 114, 198230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sims, C. (1994) A simple model for the determination of the price level and the interaction of monetary and fiscal policy. Economic Theory 4, 381399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, P. and Wen, Y. (2006) Another look at sticky prices and output persistence. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 30, 25332552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weder, M. (2006) Sticky Prices and Indeterminacy. CEPR Discussion Paper 5535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodford, M. (1994) Monetary policy and price level determinacy in a cash-in-advance economy. Economic Theory 4, 345380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yun, T. (1996) Nominal price rigidity, money supply endogeneity, and business cycles. Journal of Monetary Economics 37, 345370.Google Scholar