2002
DOI: 10.1353/mcb.2002.0035
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Caution and Conservatism in the Making of Monetary Policy

Abstract: Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This implies: y à [ " y. We assume that policymakers cannot observe a multiplicative shock, i.e., l $ 1; r 2 l (for similar specifications, see, among others, Letterie 1997;Pearce and Sobue 1997;Lawler 2002;Schellekens 2002). 12 Note that the introduction of an additive shock does not affect the (average) outcome and the optimal policy of the model because of the linear-quadratic nature of the game.…”
Section: The Economic Benchmark 10mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This implies: y à [ " y. We assume that policymakers cannot observe a multiplicative shock, i.e., l $ 1; r 2 l (for similar specifications, see, among others, Letterie 1997;Pearce and Sobue 1997;Lawler 2002;Schellekens 2002). 12 Note that the introduction of an additive shock does not affect the (average) outcome and the optimal policy of the model because of the linear-quadratic nature of the game.…”
Section: The Economic Benchmark 10mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our theory predicts that this variable is indicative of the degree of independence of a central bank. Indeed, while the turnover of the monetary policy decision maker is crucial in our model to explain a better (or worse) macroeconomic performance, the cross-country data on the turnover of central bank governor that we have are silent about where 1 8 Exceptions include Alesina and Gatti (1995), Waller and Walsh (1996), and, more recently Schellekens (2002).…”
Section: Empirical Predictions and Evidencementioning
confidence: 94%
“…Much of this literature implies (see, e.g., Rogoff, 1985) that society delegates policy to achieve lower inflation variability, but at the cost of inducing higher variability in output (for notable exceptions see, e.g., Alesina and Gatti (1995) and Schellekens (2002)). This prediction is not, as discussed in our empirical section, consistent with the data.…”
Section: Equilibrium and Welfarementioning
confidence: 99%
“…They suggest symmetry between CBI and its reputation and assert that the former can serve as a pre-commitment device. Other writers including Bade and Parkin (1985) and Alesina and Tabellini (1987), Lohmann (1992), Debelle and Fischer (1994) and Schellekens (2002), extend the basic idea of Kydland and PrescottÕs notion of 'rulesÕ and their impact on the behavior of central bankers.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%