2016
DOI: 10.1086/688175
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Downward Nominal Wage Rigidity, Currency Pegs, and Involuntary Unemployment

Abstract: This paper analyzes the inefficiencies arising from the combination of fixed exchange rates, nominal rigidity, and free capital mobility. We document that nominal wages are downwardly rigid in emerging countries. We develop an open-economy model that incorporates this friction. The model predicts that the combination of a currency peg and free capital mobility creates a negative externality that causes overborrowing during booms and high unemployment during contractions. Optimal capital controls are shown to b… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

7
158
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 355 publications
(166 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
7
158
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, the relation between household debt and the business cycle is spuriously generated by expected income shocks in the credit demand hypothesis, leaving no special role for regulation. However, under the credit supply hypothesis, households may over-extend themselves when borrowing during a credit supply boom, necessitating the need for macro-prudential regulation.We present a number of results that reject the credit demand hypothesis and support the credit 1 See, e.g., Mian and Sufi (2014) and IMF (2012) for empirical evidence and Eggertsson and Krugman (2012), Guerrieri and Lorenzoni (2015), Farhi and Werning (2015), Korinek and Simsek (2016), Schmitt-Grohé and Uribe (2016), and Martin and Philippon (2014) for theoretical analysis.1 supply hypothesis. We show that an increase in the household debt to GDP ratio over a three year period 2 in a given country predicts subsequently lower output growth.…”
mentioning
confidence: 68%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, the relation between household debt and the business cycle is spuriously generated by expected income shocks in the credit demand hypothesis, leaving no special role for regulation. However, under the credit supply hypothesis, households may over-extend themselves when borrowing during a credit supply boom, necessitating the need for macro-prudential regulation.We present a number of results that reject the credit demand hypothesis and support the credit 1 See, e.g., Mian and Sufi (2014) and IMF (2012) for empirical evidence and Eggertsson and Krugman (2012), Guerrieri and Lorenzoni (2015), Farhi and Werning (2015), Korinek and Simsek (2016), Schmitt-Grohé and Uribe (2016), and Martin and Philippon (2014) for theoretical analysis.1 supply hypothesis. We show that an increase in the household debt to GDP ratio over a three year period 2 in a given country predicts subsequently lower output growth.…”
mentioning
confidence: 68%
“…We present a number of results that reject the credit demand hypothesis and support the credit 1 See, e.g., Mian and Sufi (2014) and IMF (2012) for empirical evidence and Eggertsson and Krugman (2012), Guerrieri and Lorenzoni (2015), Farhi and Werning (2015), Korinek and Simsek (2016), Schmitt-Grohé and Uribe (2016), and Martin and Philippon (2014) for theoretical analysis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…Another factor proposed by the literature as an explanation for downturns is nominal rigidities, especially on the downside (e.g., Schmitt‐Grohé and Uribe ()). Figure explores the full dynamics of consumer prices and wages in early‐relative to late‐deregulation states.…”
Section: Credit Expansion and Business Cycle Amplificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, our paper is related to a large literature that investigates possible sources of shocks that trigger long recessions and liquidity traps in environments with New Keynesian frictions. Many papers have emphasized demand shocks driven by household deleveraging or tightening borrowing constraints (Eggertsson and Krugman 2012;Christiano et al 2015;Korinek and Simsek 2016;Schmitt-Grohé and Uribe 2016), long-run factors such as aging demographics or safe asset shortages (Summers 2013;Eggertsson et al 2016;Caballero and Farhi 2017), or overinvestment of capital (Rognlie et al 2014). By highlighting the role of rational asset bubbles, our analysis offers a complementary narrative to those in the literature.…”
mentioning
confidence: 96%