Monetary Policy Transmission in the Euro Area 2003
DOI: 10.1017/cbo9780511492372.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The monetary transmission mechanism in the euro area: evidence from VAR analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

52
272
4
4

Year Published

2004
2004
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 265 publications
(332 citation statements)
references
References 203 publications
52
272
4
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Following an increase in the policy interest rate, prices tend to increase and IRFs thus exhibit the appearance of a "price-puzzle". This result contrasts with some studies on MPT mechanisms applied either to the euro area or to the CEECs (for instance, Peersman and Smets (2003) and EFN (2004) for the euro area; Gunduz (2003) for the Czech Republic; Creel and Levasseur (2004) for the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland). Exceptions are Ganev et al (2002) in the Czech case; Anzuini and Levy (2004) for the Czech Republic and Poland (but the "price puzzle" is not robust to the adoption of a shorter sample period); Hericourt and Matei (2004) in the Czech case, and Jarocinski (2004) for a group of CEECs countries.…”
Section: The Baseline Varcontrasting
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Following an increase in the policy interest rate, prices tend to increase and IRFs thus exhibit the appearance of a "price-puzzle". This result contrasts with some studies on MPT mechanisms applied either to the euro area or to the CEECs (for instance, Peersman and Smets (2003) and EFN (2004) for the euro area; Gunduz (2003) for the Czech Republic; Creel and Levasseur (2004) for the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland). Exceptions are Ganev et al (2002) in the Czech case; Anzuini and Levy (2004) for the Czech Republic and Poland (but the "price puzzle" is not robust to the adoption of a shorter sample period); Hericourt and Matei (2004) in the Czech case, and Jarocinski (2004) for a group of CEECs countries.…”
Section: The Baseline Varcontrasting
confidence: 81%
“…Nevertheless, too short time series impede to make explicit cointegration estimations. Thus, we have decided to estimate the VAR in levels rather than in differences as in EFN (2004), Gunduz (2003) or Peersman and Smets (2003) for instance.…”
Section: The Var Specificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They conclude that following a contractionary monetary policy shock economic activity declines quickly in a hump-shaped manner, while the negative reaction of the price level is more delayed and persistent. Similarly, Peersman & Smets (2001) provide evidence for the euro area as a whole, while Mojon & Peersman (2001) investigate the effects of monetary policy shocks in the individual countries of the euro area.…”
Section: Var Models and The Price Puzzlementioning
confidence: 99%
“…They find that monetary policy is best measured by innovation in the federal funds rate and monetary policy affects the real economic activity in the US and concluded that firstly, the funds rate is a good indicator of monetary policy, secondly, nominal interest rates are good forecast of real variables and lastly, monetary policy works in part by 4 affecting the composition of bank assets. Peersman and Smets (2001) measure the macroeconomic effects of an unanticipated change in monetary policy in Euro area by using VAR model and concluded that a rise in the short term nominal interest rate leads to a real appreciation of the exchange rate with a fall in output, while prices shows sluggish behavior and fall significantly after several quarters. Miyao (2002) examine the effects of monetary policy on macroeconomic variables over the last two decades in Japan and used VAR model.…”
Section: Empirical Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%