We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter provides an overview of the state of the art in constitutional and political theory with regard to the topic of central banks. Central banking, I show, is a highly political domain of policy making that raises thorny and under explored normative questions. I challenge accounts of central banking as involving limited discretion and distributional choices in the pursuit of low inflation, as well as the narrow range of normative questions that such accounts raise. I then ask what to make of central bankers’ political power from a normative perspective. As I argue, some delegation of important decisions to unelected officials is almost unavoidable, often desirable and by itself not undemocratic. I conclude by explaining that we should nonetheless be reluctant to allow for extensive central bank discretion by highlighting six crucial issues that are currently not sufficiently understood: the central bank’s actual level of autonomy from governments, the effectiveness of accountability mechanisms, the effects of depoliticizing money on the broader political system, the effects of democratic insulation on the effectiveness of central banks, the specific practices of deliberation within central banks and the scope for coordination with elected government.
We construct a Divisia money measure for U.K. households and private non-financial corporations and a corresponding dual user cost index employing a consistent methodology from 1977 up to the present. Our joint construction of both the Divisia quantity index and the Divisia price dual facilitates an investigation of structural vector autoregresssion models (SVARs) over a long sample period of the type of non-recursive identifications explored by Belongia and Ireland (2016, 2018), as well as the block triangular specification advanced by Keating et al. (2019). An examination of the U.K. economy reveals that structures that consider a short-term interest rate to be the monetary policy indicator generate unremitting price puzzles. In contrast, we find sensible economic responses in various specifications that treat our Divisia measure as the indicator variable.
How do geopolitical risk shocks impact monetary policy? Based on a panel of 18 economies, we develop and estimate an augmented panel Taylor rule via constant and time-varying local projection regression models. First, the panel evidence suggests that the interest rate decreases in the short run and increases in the medium run in the event of a geopolitical risk shock. Second, the results are confirmed in the time-varying model, where the policy reaction is accommodating in the short run (1 to 2 months) to limit the negative effects on consumer sentiment. In the medium term (12 to 15 months), the central bank is more committed to combating inflation pressures.
Central banks are increasingly communicating their economic outlook in an effort to manage the public and financial market participants’ expectations. We provide original causal evidence that the information communicated and the assumptions underlying a central bank’s projection can matter for expectation formation and aggregate stability. Using a between-subject design, we systematically vary the central bank’s projected forecasts in an experimental macroeconomy where subjects are incentivized to forecast the output gap and inflation. Without projections, subjects exhibit a wide range of heuristics, with the modal heuristic involving a significant backward-looking component. Ex-Ante Rational dual projections of the output gap and inflation significantly reduce the number of subjects’ using backward-looking heuristics and nudge expectations in the direction of the rational expectations equilibrium. Ex-Ante Rational interest rate projections are cognitively challenging to employ and have limited effects on the distribution of heuristics. Adaptive dual projections generate unintended inflation volatility by inducing boundedly-rational forecasters to employ the projection and model-consistent forecasters to utilize the projection as a proxy for aggregate expectations. All projections reduce output gap disagreement but increase inflation disagreement. Central bank credibility is significantly diminished when the central bank makes larger forecast errors when communicating a relatively more complex projection. Our findings suggest that inflation-targeting central banks should strategically ignore agents’ irrationalities when constructing their projections and communicate easy-to-process information.
We experimentally test monetary policy decision making in a population of inexperienced central bankers. In our experiments, subjects repeatedly set the short-term interest rate for a computer economy with inflation as their target. A large majority of subjects learn to successfully control inflation by correctly putting higher weight on inflation than on the output gap. In fact, the behavior of these subjects meets a stability criterion. The subjects smooth the interest rate as the theoretical literature suggests they should in order to enhance stability of the uncertain system they face. Our study is the first to use Taylor-type rules as a framework to identify inflation weighting, stability, and interest-rate smoothing as behavioral outcomes when subjects try to achieve an inflation target.
This chapter looks at how new forms of digital money – in particular stablecoins, digital banknotes (retail central bank digital currencies or CBDC), and crypto currencies (Bitcoin) – impact the ability of the central bank to effectively implement monetary policy. This chapter first illustrates how central banks typically steer market interest rates to the desired level. It then shows how these new forms of money change the balance sheets of the central bank, commercial banks, and households and firms. We find that impact of stablecoins, retail CBDC, and cryptocurrencies on the effectiveness of monetary policy appears to be modest. Since retail CBDC will reduce the deposits at commercial banks, the central bank may have to increase its lending to them to keep the credit provision to the economy at the previous level.
This chapter looks at central bank digital currencies and aims to extend our understanding and the use cases for CBDCs in line with domestic and international economic policies. It examines central bank transactions and how money supply can be controlled and maintained using CBDCs. Over the years, the use of quantitative tightening has been limited due to the current functionality and utility of a country’s financial system. The “Klair Effect” is a form of quantitative tightening; it does not use the apparatus of interest rates to control the inflation rate; instead, a “delete button” to control the money supply on a central banks’ balance sheet.
There has been progress made in the adoption of digital assets by institutional investors. Large institutions including Fidelity, BlackRock, and several investment banks have started providing products and services to satisfy the needs of their clients. Hedge funds and venture capital funds are also investing in digital assets. Global exchanges have introduced investable products based on cryptocurrency derivatives. The number of ways one can invest in digital assets is expected to grow with the introduction of new products. Digital assets are still very new and carry considerable risk. It is prudent of regulators to cautiously approach regulation. At the same time, the markets are looking for clarity from financial regulators. If and when there is more regulatory clarity, the pace of adoption is likely to pick up.
This paper investigates the bidirectional relation between the Brazilian Central Bank communication and the yield curve. Using latent factors, observable macroeconomic variables, and observable variables representing Central Bank communication, we estimate a model that summarizes the yield curve. We find evidence of the effects of Brazilian Central Bank communication on the movements of the yield curve and the impact of the yield curve components in Brazilian Central Bank communication. In particular, Central Bank communication can shape yield curve curvature and slope. Additionally, we find a strong relation between Central Bank communication and the curvature of the yield curve. These results show that Central Bank communication impacts market players, making it a valuable instrument for monetary policy.
An idée fixe of Great Moderation economic policy was that central banks are only effective macroeconomic managers when they are segregated from electoral politics. That idea made a swift transition from radical heterodoxy to commonsensical orthodoxy during the 1980s and proved remarkably resistant to reality during the 2008 financial crisis. After almost twenty years of ‘unconventional’ monetary policy, scholars, policymakers, and politicians are justifiably searching for more credible ways to conceptualise and use the nation-state’s monetary authority. Two recent books provide vital energy for that intellectual exercise. Éric Monnet’s Balance of Power is a bold re-conceptualisation of monetary authority as a welfare-state support in liberal democracies. In addition to dissipating the illusion that central banks are simply interest-rate-setting inflation-fighters, Monnet presents a systematic argument for integrating them into a web of deliberative institutions (including public development banks and economically empowered parliaments) to bolster the legitimacy and effectiveness of monetary policy. Relatedly, Manuella Moschella’s Unexpected Revolutionaries attacks the idea that central bankers are responsive only to technocratic doctrine and private-market behaviour, showing how monetary authorities sculpt policies to bolster their reputation with political actors. Paying close reference to private-market liquidity guarantees and quantitative easing, Moschella maps the fortunes of unconventional policy in alignment with political support for financial-market backstops and exceptional economic stimulus. Both books provoke readers to jettison the anodyne generalities of central banks’ own glossy pamphlets and think afresh about the possibilities of economic policy’s new normality.
This paper introduces a global banking system in a small open economy DSGE model and features global relative price adjustments with incomplete asset market to investigate the role of international financial imperfections. We show that credit policy could be more powerful than monetary policy to alleviate foreign financial shocks since an expansionary monetary policy and alternative policy rules are not a sufficient tool in the global financial crisis. In particular, credit policy based on international credit spread outperforms credit policy based on domestic credit spread since the former attempts to remove distortions from international financial imperfections and reduces real costs of foreign loans. Accordingly, the lower costs of external finance further boost investment and effectively stabilize the economy without substantial asset purchases.
Quantitative easing (QE) has been a favourite tool of central banks in their post-financial crisis monetary policy apparatus. Social science literature has interpreted QE as a shift away from performative governance characterising pre-crisis monetary policy. With reference to the Bank of England’s experience, I offer a reinterpretation of QE as a performative intervention in the conditions of financial markets, as an attempt to alter the state of financial markets away from dysfunctionality and towards efficiency. I claim that, following the financial crisis, the model of complete and efficient markets – a mainstay in central banking prior to the crisis – was transformed from a real-world approximation to a ‘performative object’ to be achieved. In deploying the balance sheet, central banks attempt to performatively enact complete and efficient markets. The article rejects the claim of discontinuity between pre-crisis and post-crisis monetary policy, arguing that QE is a continuation of inflation targeting though with important innovations. While pre-crisis performativity relied on central bankers’ communicative framing of market expectations, QE is performative via the ontological shaping of financial markets, driven by epistemic models. The article relies on a set of 51 interviews with central bankers and financial market participants and a corpus of documents.
We find significant evidence of model misspecification, in the form of neglected serial correlation, in the econometric model of the U.S. housing market used by Taylor (2007) in his critique of monetary policy following the 2001 recession. When we account for that serial correlation, his model fails to replicate the historical paths of housing starts and house price inflation. Further modifications allow us to capture both the housing boom and the bust. Our results suggest that the counterfactual monetary policy proposed by Taylor (2007) would not have averted the pre-financial crisis collapse in the housing market. Additional analysis implies that the burst of house price inflation during the COVID-19 pandemic was not caused by the deviations from the Taylor rule that occurred during this period.
In a series of academic publications, Edward Nelson has contended that from the 1950s until the late 1970s, UK policymakers failed to recognise the primacy of monetary policy in controlling inflation. He argues that the highwater mark of monetary policy neglect occurred in the 1970s. This thesis has been rejected by Duncan Needham who has explored several experiments with monetary policy from the late 1960s and challenged the assertion that the authorities neglected monetary policy during the 1970s. Drawing on evidence from the archives and other sources, this article documents how the UK authorities wrestled with monetary policy following the 1967 devaluation of sterling. Excessive broad money growth during the early 1970s was followed by the highest level of peacetime inflation by 1975. The article shows that despite the experiments with monetary policy, a nonmonetary view of inflation dominated the mindset of policymakers during the first half of the 1970s. In the second half of the 1970s there was a change in emphasis and monetary policy became more prominent in economic policymaking, particularly when money supply targets were introduced. Despite this, the nonmonetary view of inflation dominated the decision processes of policymakers during the 1970s.
Monetary policy in the USA affects borrowing costs for state and local governments, incentivizing municipal borrowing and spending, which in turn affects economic outcomes. Using municipal bond indices and transaction-level data, I find that responses to monetary policy are dampened relative to treasuries and heterogeneous across location and bond characteristics. In my baseline estimate, muni yields move 26 bp after a 100 bp monetary shock. To study implications for local fiscal policy, I model US localities as small open economies in a monetary union with independent fiscal agents. In a calibrated model, monetary transmission is significantly affected by municipal borrowing costs.
Paul Johnson began his relationship with the series with his analysis of Conservative economic policy in The Coalition Effect and will return, with his team, to his conclusions then, analysing not just the first period of austerity but also how Conservative economic policy has evolved through the post-referendum premierships of Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak.
Is the working capital channel big, and does it vary across industries? To answer this question, I estimate a dynamic stochastic macro-finance model using firm-level data. In aggregate, I find a partial channel —about three-fourths of firms’ labor bill are borrowed. However, the strength of this channel varies across industries, reaching as low as one-half for retail firms and as high as one for agriculture and construction. This provides evidence that monetary policy could have varying effects across industries through the working capital channel.
There is an uncomfortably large gulf between academic research and what policy economists use to understand the economy. A Practical Guide to Macroeconomics shows how economists at policy institutions approach important real-world questions and explains why existing academic work – theoretical and empirical – has little to offer them. It argues that this disconnect between theory and practice is problematic for policymaking and the economics profession and looks at what's needed to make academic research more relevant for policy. The book also covers topics related to economic measurement and provides a compact overview of US macroeconomic statistics that will help researchers use these data in a better-informed way.
In this commentary, I argue that Leon Wansleben’s focus on financial plumbing as a source of central banks’ epistemic and instrumental power will be met by the profession with a mixture of relief, incredulity, and worry. More importantly, I maintain that central bankers’ relationship with finance varies according to whether or not they are independent from elected government, an under researched area. All this works as a point of departure for remarks, drawing on my own memories, on central banking’s relationship with neoliberalism in monetary policy, monetary operations, and banking. Finally, I urge that Wansleben’s method be applied to anti-trust and the micro-economic regulation of utility services.
Leon Wansleben’s new book, The Rise of Central Banks: State Power in Financial Capitalism, tells an intricately complex story of the world’s most influential central banks successfully harnessing the forces of financial globalization to build their institutional power as the principal managers of their national economies. The book argues that, regardless of central banks’ rationales and rationalizations, the resulting expansion of global money markets has failed to generate the intended macroeconomic and societal benefits. Instead, as became evident in the post-2008 era, the world’s most powerful central banks are now structurally dependent on the increasingly self-referential markets for financial assets. While the book’s narrative is focused on inflation targeting and other monetary policy innovations since the 1970s, it raises much broader questions and invites further reflection on the nonlinear dynamics of power in today’s financial markets and the uncertain future of central banks.