No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
INTEREST RATE RULES AND EQUILIBRIUM STABILITY UNDER DEEP HABITS
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 July 2013
Abstract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.
This paper studies the determinacy of equilibrium in a new Keynesian model with deep habits under different interest rate rules. The main finding is that an interest rate rule satisfying the Taylor principle is no longer a sufficient condition to guarantee determinacy. Including interest rate smoothing and a response to output deviations from steady state significantly enlarges the regions of determinacy. However, under all the simple interest rate rules considered, determinacy is not guaranteed for a very high degree of deep habits. Deep habits give rise to countercyclical markups, which is in line with empirical evidence and makes them an appealing feature in the study of demand shocks. The countercyclicality of markups also leads to multiple equilibria because of self-fulfilling expectations for a high degree of deep habit formation.
Information
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013
References
REFERENCES
Benhabib, Jess, Schmitt-Grohé, Stephanie, and Uribe, Martin (2001) Monetary policy and multiple equilibria. American Economic Review 91 (1), 167–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calvo, Guillermo (1983) Staggered prices in a utility-maximizing framework. Journal of Monetary Economics 12, 383–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlstrom, Charles and Fuerst, Timothy (2001) Timing and real indeterminacy in monetary models. Journal of Monetary Economics 47 (2), 285–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gali, Jordi (1994) Monopolistic competition, business cycles, and the composition of aggregate demand. Journal of Economic Theory 63 (1), 73–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gali, Jordi, Lopez-Salido, David, and Valles, Javier (2004) Rule-of-thumb consumers and the design of interest rate rules. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 36 (4), 739–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ravn, Morten, Schmitt-Grohé, Stephanie, and Uribe, Martin (2006) Deep habits. Review of Economic Studies 73, 195–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ravn, Morten, Schmitt-Grohé, Stephanie, and Uribe, Martin (2007) Explaining the Effects of Government Spending Shocks on Consumption and the Real Exchange Rate. Manuscript, Duke University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rotemberg, Julio (1982) Sticky prices in the United States. Journal of Political Economy 90 (6), 1187–1211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rotemberg, Julio and Woodford, Michael (1992) Oligopolistic pricing and the effects of aggregate demand on economic activity. Journal of Political Economy 100 (6), 1153–1207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rotemberg, Julio and Woodford, Michael (1999) The cyclical behavior of prices and costs. In Taylor, J.B. and Woodford, M. (eds.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, vol. 1, no. 16, pp. 1051–1135. Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sbordone, Argia (2002) Prices and unit labor costs: A new test of price stickiness. Journal of Monetary Economics 49, 265–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt-Grohé, Stephanie (1997) Comparing four models of aggregate fluctuations due to self-fulfilling expectations. Journal of Economic Theory 72 (1), 96–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt-Grohé, Stephanie and Uribe, Martin (2004) Optimal fiscal and monetary policy under sticky prices. Journal of Economic Theory 114, 198–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sveen, Tommy and Weinke, Lutz (2005) New perspectives on capital, sticky prices and the Taylor Principle. Journal of Economic Theory 123, 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodford, Michael (2001) The Taylor rule and optimal monetary policy. American Economic Review 91, 232–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zubairy, Sarah (2009) Explaining the Effects of Government Spending Shocks. Mimeo, Bank of Canada.Google Scholar
You have
Access
- 17
- Cited by