A Snapshot of Central Bank (Two-Year) Forecasting: A Mixed Picture

IF 3.4 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Charles A. E. Goodhart, Manoj Pradhan
{"title":"A Snapshot of Central Bank (Two-Year) Forecasting: A Mixed Picture","authors":"Charles A. E. Goodhart,&nbsp;Manoj Pradhan","doi":"10.1002/for.3244","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Between 2001 and 2023, Central Bank forecasts were patently inaccurate. In this paper, we argue that many of such forecast failings were already present during the earlier years of inflation targetry. Central Banks normally adjust monetary policy so that inflation hits the Inflation Target (IT) within two years. Since a central bank must believe its policy stance is appropriate to achieve this goal, its inflation forecast at the two-year horizon should generally be close to target. We examine whether this has held for three main Central Banks, Bank of England, ECB, and Fed. Although over the IT period prior to 2020, both forecasts and outcomes were commendably close to target, we found that this was due to a sizeable forecast <i>underestimate</i> of the effects of policy and inherent resilience to revive inflation after the GFC crisis hit, largely offset by an <i>overestimate</i> of the effect of monetary policy to restore inflation to target during the more normal times. We attribute such latter overestimation to an unwarranted belief in forward-looking, “well anchored”, expectations amongst households and firms, and to a failure to recognize the underlying disinflationary trends, especially in 2010–2019. We outline a novel means for assessing whether these latter trends were primarily demand driven, e.g. secular stagnation, or supply shocks, a labor supply surge. Finally, we examine how forecasts for the uncertainty of outcomes and relative risk (skew) to the central forecast have developed by examining the Bank of England's fan chart, again at the two-year horizon.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47835,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forecasting","volume":"44 3","pages":"1097-1131"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Forecasting","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/for.3244","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Between 2001 and 2023, Central Bank forecasts were patently inaccurate. In this paper, we argue that many of such forecast failings were already present during the earlier years of inflation targetry. Central Banks normally adjust monetary policy so that inflation hits the Inflation Target (IT) within two years. Since a central bank must believe its policy stance is appropriate to achieve this goal, its inflation forecast at the two-year horizon should generally be close to target. We examine whether this has held for three main Central Banks, Bank of England, ECB, and Fed. Although over the IT period prior to 2020, both forecasts and outcomes were commendably close to target, we found that this was due to a sizeable forecast underestimate of the effects of policy and inherent resilience to revive inflation after the GFC crisis hit, largely offset by an overestimate of the effect of monetary policy to restore inflation to target during the more normal times. We attribute such latter overestimation to an unwarranted belief in forward-looking, “well anchored”, expectations amongst households and firms, and to a failure to recognize the underlying disinflationary trends, especially in 2010–2019. We outline a novel means for assessing whether these latter trends were primarily demand driven, e.g. secular stagnation, or supply shocks, a labor supply surge. Finally, we examine how forecasts for the uncertainty of outcomes and relative risk (skew) to the central forecast have developed by examining the Bank of England's fan chart, again at the two-year horizon.

央行(两年)预测简况:喜忧参半
2001年至2023年间,央行的预测显然是不准确的。在本文中,我们认为,在通胀目标制实施的前几年,许多这样的预测失误已经存在。中央银行通常会调整货币政策,使通货膨胀在两年内达到通胀目标。由于央行必须相信其政策立场是适当的,以实现这一目标,因此其未来两年的通胀预测通常应接近目标。我们检查这是否举行了三个主要的中央银行,英格兰银行,欧洲央行和美联储。虽然在这期间在2020年之前,预测和结果都很好地接近目标,我们发现这是由于一个相当大的预测低估的影响政策和固有的弹性恢复通胀GFC危机爆发后,在很大程度上抵消高估货币政策恢复的影响通货膨胀目标在正常时期。我们将后一种高估归因于对家庭和企业前瞻性、“锚定”预期的毫无根据的信念,以及未能认识到潜在的反通胀趋势,特别是在2010-2019年。我们概述了一种新的方法来评估后一种趋势主要是由需求驱动的,例如长期停滞,还是供应冲击,即劳动力供应激增。最后,我们通过检查英格兰银行的扇形图,再次在两年的范围内,研究了对结果的不确定性和相对风险(偏倚)的预测是如何发展的。
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
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
91
期刊介绍: The Journal of Forecasting is an international journal that publishes refereed papers on forecasting. It is multidisciplinary, welcoming papers dealing with any aspect of forecasting: theoretical, practical, computational and methodological. A broad interpretation of the topic is taken with approaches from various subject areas, such as statistics, economics, psychology, systems engineering and social sciences, all encouraged. Furthermore, the Journal welcomes a wide diversity of applications in such fields as business, government, technology and the environment. Of particular interest are papers dealing with modelling issues and the relationship of forecasting systems to decision-making processes.
×
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