220 likes | 483 Views
Real Exchange Rate and Output Growth in Inflation-Targeting Small Open Economies. Ignacio Perrotini Hernández Santiago Capraro Rodríguez. http://tmypfunam.wordpress.com/. Outline. Introduction Inflation targeting A Cumulative Causation Model Econometric Results Conclusions.
E N D
Real Exchange Rate and Output Growth in Inflation-Targeting Small Open Economies Ignacio Perrotini Hernández Santiago Capraro Rodríguez http://tmypfunam.wordpress.com/
Outline • Introduction • Inflationtargeting • A CumulativeCausationModel • EconometricResults • Conclusions
I. Introduction Crises of ortodoxmonetarypolicies: Monetaristexperiment (1970s-1980s) (Kaldor, 1970, 1979, 1986; Desai, 1981; Moore, 1986). RationalExpectationsexperiment (1980s-1990s) Collapse of fixedexchangerateregimes (1980s, 1990s, 2000s).
Mainmessage of thepaper: Accordingtoourempiricalfindings, theredoesn’tseemtobe a positive relationshipb’nthe real exchangerate (q) and GDP duringtheperiodunderscrutiny (1960-2010) in Brazil, South Korea and Mexico. Heterogenouseffects of q onConsumption, Investment and exports in eachdifferent country. Ergo, notpossibletorecommend a general policyforallcountrieswithouttakingintoaccountthespecificstructure of theeconomyunderconsiderationbeforewe can predicttheeffect of real exchangeratefluctuations.
1987-1992: gradual drop of M aggregates. • “wedidnotabbandonmonetaryaggregates; instead, theydidabbandonus” (a curious central banker). • Henceinflationtargeting (Taylor, 2001; Woodford, 2003; Svensson, 2007). • Oldwine in new goatskins (Wicksell, 1898).
The new monetaryconsensus (IT monetarypolicyframeworks): Itissaidtodiminishinflation and guaranteelong-runpricestabilitythroughinterestratereactionfunctionswith no intermediate targets whatsoever. Yet, the role of real exchangerates in IT monetarypolicystrategies: Fear of floating Exchange marketsterilisedinterventions
The role of theexchangerate as a nominal anchorforinflationtendstoappreciatethecurrency. Tobesure, theexchange has playedanoutstanding role in IT models. However, it has beensaid, thismayentailnegativeeffectsongrowth and employment (cf. Frenkel, Ros, Bresser-Pereira, Rapetti, López, Sánchez and Spanos).
A Cumulativecausationmodel: con (1) con (2) con (4) con (6) (7)
A Cumulativecausationmodel: (8) con con (11) .
A Cumulativecausationmodel: (13) . .(15) . .(16) .
.(15) • Condition (15) impliesthat a currencydevaluationwillbear a positive impactongrowthif and onlyifthe positive impactonexportsisgreaterthanthenegativeimpactonaggregatedemandduetothereduction in real wages.
.(16) . Condition (16) meansthatanincrement (diminution) in nominal wageswillincrease(diminish) effectivedemandif and onlyifthenegative (positive) effectonexportsiscompensatedbythe positive (negative) effect of anincreasingwageonaggregatedemand.
IV. EconometricResults Mexico:
(20) (21) (22) (23).
V. Conclusions and final remarks • Expansionaryeffectsorcontractionaryeffects of devaluations?
V. Conclusions and final remarks No positive relationshipb’n real exchangerate and output in Brazil and Mexico. Therefore, thecontractionaryeffects of IT should be foundelsewhere. Fiscal policy, forinstance (thereis a positive relationshipb’n fiscal policy and growth). Swan (1955).