190 likes | 323 Views
The Valuation Channel of International Adjustment By F. Ghironi , J. Lee, and A. Rebucci. Risk Sharing Conference, October 22-23, 2010. The views expressed are those of the discussant and not those of the IDB or its Executive Board. Motivation.
E N D
The Valuation Channel of International AdjustmentByF. Ghironi, J. Lee, and A. Rebucci Risk Sharing Conference, October 22-23, 2010 The views expressed are those of the discussant and not those of the IDB or its Executive Board.
Motivation • The relative importance, working, and risk sharing role of the “financial channel” of external adjustment (GR, 2007) are the subject of an ongoing policy and academic debate • Changes in NFA can arise from: • changes in quantities and prices of goods and services: the "trade" channel of adjustment • or changes in asset prices and returns: the "financial" channel of adjustment.
This paper • Focuses on the pure “capital gain and loss” component of the of the financial channel of adjustment • Consistent with statistical practices and data availability
It makes three points: • The predictable component of valuation effects can be modeled without resorting to higher order approximations of the portfolio decision • This component is non-negligible in NFA dynamics, although its risk sharing role is difficult to isolate • The source of the shock triggering external adjustment matters
Outline • Model overview • Decomposing NFA • Key result • Robustness • Other results • Conclusions
Model overview • Standard, symmetric, two-country, DSGEportfoliomodel with: • International trade in equity • No transaction costs (results in early analysis robust) • Production under monopolistic competition (endogenous labor) and flex prices • Productivity and government shocks (asset markets are incomplete) • No trade frictions: LOP and PPP hold and no role for RER
Decomposing first-order changes in NFA (Solution details skipped)
Valuation effects in response to productivity shocks are predictable
Robustness • Persistent shocks (DS, 2009) • When the shocks are permanent, CA does not move: the predictable component of Val is zero and the two definitions coincide (see Nguyen, 2009 for more discussion) • In NPV terms, they are irrelevant for sustainability perspective (TvW, 2008): • True, but their time profile may matter in practice (i.e., illiquidity may lead to insolvency as in some emerging market crisis of the past)
Other results • Government shocks don’t give rise to predictable valuation effects in our simple model • Interesting to investigate relative role of different shocks under alternative model structures • Role for risk sharing: valuation effects are a channel of risk sharing in the model. • Any quantification is model-dependent • More interesting to investigate this in the data from the lenses of a particular model