Supply or Demand? Policy Makers' Confusion in the Presence of Hysteresis

Antonio Fatás, Sanjay R. Singh
{"title":"Supply or Demand? Policy Makers' Confusion in the Presence of Hysteresis","authors":"Antonio Fatás, Sanjay R. Singh","doi":"10.24148/wp2023-21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Policy makers need to separate between temporary demand-driven shocks and permanent shocks in order to design optimal aggregate demand policies. In this paper we study the case of a central bank that ignores the presence of hysteresis when identifying shocks. By assuming that all low frequency output fluctuations are driven by permanent technology shocks, monetary policy is not aggressive enough in response to demand shocks. In addition, we show that errors in assessing the state of the economy can be self-perpetuating if seen through the lens of the mistaken views of the policymaker. We show that a central bank that mistakes a demand shock for a supply shock, will produce permanent effects on output through their suboptimal policies. Ex-post, the central bank will see an economy that resembles what they had forecast when designing their policies. The shock is indeed persistent and this persistence validates their assumption that the shock was a supply-driven one. The interaction between forecasts, policies and hysteresis creates the dynamics of self-perpetuating errors that is the focus of this paper.","PeriodicalId":250744,"journal":{"name":"Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, Working Paper Series","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, Working Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24148/wp2023-21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Policy makers need to separate between temporary demand-driven shocks and permanent shocks in order to design optimal aggregate demand policies. In this paper we study the case of a central bank that ignores the presence of hysteresis when identifying shocks. By assuming that all low frequency output fluctuations are driven by permanent technology shocks, monetary policy is not aggressive enough in response to demand shocks. In addition, we show that errors in assessing the state of the economy can be self-perpetuating if seen through the lens of the mistaken views of the policymaker. We show that a central bank that mistakes a demand shock for a supply shock, will produce permanent effects on output through their suboptimal policies. Ex-post, the central bank will see an economy that resembles what they had forecast when designing their policies. The shock is indeed persistent and this persistence validates their assumption that the shock was a supply-driven one. The interaction between forecasts, policies and hysteresis creates the dynamics of self-perpetuating errors that is the focus of this paper.
供给还是需求?滞后效应下决策者的困惑
政策制定者需要区分暂时性需求驱动的冲击和永久性冲击,以便设计出最优的总需求政策。在本文中,我们研究了央行在识别冲击时忽略滞后性存在的情况。假设所有低频产出波动都是由永久性技术冲击驱动的,那么货币政策在应对需求冲击方面就不够激进。此外,我们表明,如果从政策制定者错误观点的角度来看,评估经济状况的错误可能会自我延续。我们表明,将需求冲击误认为供给冲击的央行,将通过其次优政策对产出产生永久性影响。此后,央行将看到一个与他们在设计政策时所预测的相似的经济。冲击确实是持续的,这种持续证实了他们的假设,即冲击是由供应驱动的。预测、政策和滞后之间的相互作用创造了自我延续错误的动力,这是本文的重点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信