Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate why “financial fragility” carries different definitions in the economic literature. This is a useful task as the detection of “financial fragility” depends, in part, upon how one defines it. According to Post Keynesian economists, financial fragility is a process that can culminate in financial instability (an event). For mainstream or New Keynesian economists, financial fragility has been traditionally defined as a state in which a shock can trigger instability. More recently, however, mainstream economists have recast their definition as a particular form of financial instability – an event. Each definition of financial fragility is intimately linked to the theoretical foundation upon which it rests. This carries important implications for the ability of policymakers to assess and manage the health of an economy.

The different approaches to the definition and detection of financial fragility are compared using corresponding sets of indicators. Indicators for the Post Keynesian approach are derived from a simple cash‐flow accounting framework, in the spirit of Hyman Minsky. The economy selected for study is New Zealand.

According to the Post Keynesian approach, New Zealand has been in a financially fragile state for over three years, a period during which policymakers could have been creating ways to make New Zealand more resilient to the onset of instability. According to the New Keynesian approach, New Zealand may just now be experiencing fragility, giving policymakers much less time to react.

This study traces the definitions of financial fragility to their underlying theoretical frameworks and draws the implications for the methods of detecting financial fragility.

Sufficiently persistent rise in nominal interest increases inflation rate in short-run. This short-run comovement of nominal interest rate and inflation rate is known as Neo-Fisherianism. This chapter proposes a policy based on Neo-Fisherianism to escape Zero Lower Bound (ZLB) using a textbook Forward Looking New Keynesian Model. I have shown that proposed policy with properly chosen inflation target and persistence can stimulate economy and escape ZLB by raising nominal interest rate. I have also shown that the proposed policy is robust to varying degrees of price stickiness.

This paper seeks to explore the sensitivity of these parameters and their impact on fiscal policy outcomes. We use the existing literature to establish possible ranges for each parameter, and we examine how changes within these ranges can alter the outcomes of fiscal policy. In this way, we aim to highlight the importance of these parameters in the formulation and evaluation of fiscal policy.

The role of fiscal policy, its effects and multipliers continues to be a subject of intense debate in macroeconomics. Despite adopting a New Keynesian approach within a macroeconomic model, the reactions of macroeconomic variables to fiscal shocks can vary across different contexts and theoretical frameworks. This paper aims to investigate these diverse reactions by conducting a sensitivity analysis of parameters. Specifically, the study examines how key variables respond to fiscal shocks under different parameter settings. By analyzing the behavioral dynamics of these variables, this research contributes to the ongoing discussion on fiscal policy. The findings offer valuable insights to enrich the understanding of the complex relationship between fiscal shocks and macroeconomic outcomes, thus facilitating informed policy debates.

This paper aims to investigate key elements of New Keynesian Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) models. The focus is on the calibration of parameters and their impact on macroeconomic variables, such as output and inflation. The study also examines how different parameter settings affect the response of monetary policy to fiscal measures. In conclusion, this study has relied on theoretical exploration and a comprehensive review of existing literature. The parameters and their relationships have been analyzed within a robust theoretical framework, offering valuable insights for further research on how these factors influence model forecasts and inform policy recommendations derived from New Keynesian DSGE models. Moving forward, it is recommended that future work includes empirical analyses to test the reliability and effectiveness of parameter calibrations in real-world conditions. This will contribute to enhancing the accuracy and relevance of DSGE models for economic policy decision-making.

This study is motivated by the aim to provide a deeper understanding of the roles macroeconomic model parameters play concerning responses to expansionary fiscal policies and the subsequent reactions of monetary authorities. Comprehensive reviews that encompass this breadth of relationships within a single text are rare in the literature, making this work a valuable contribution to stimulating discussions on macroeconomic policies.

One of the most significant changes in monetary economics at the beginning of the twenty-first century has been the virtual disappearance of what was once a dominant focus, the role of money in monetary policy, and parallelly, the disappearance of the liquidity preference-money supply (LM) curve. Economists used to consider monetary policy with the help of the LM curve as part of the analytical framework which captures the demand for money. However, the workhorse model of modern monetary theory and policy, the New Keynesian Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) framework, only comprises the dynamic investment-savings (IS) curve, the New Keynesian (NK) Phillips curve, and a monetary policy rule. The monetary policy rule is generally known as the Taylor rule. It relates the nominal interest rate to the output-gaps and inflation-gaps, but typically not to either the quantity or the growth rate of money. This change in the modern monetary model reflects how the central banks make monetary policy now. This study provides a detailed discussion on the role of money in monetary policy formulation in the context of the NK and the New Monetarist perspectives. The pros and cons of abandonment of money or the LM curve from monetary policy models have been discussed in detail.

This chapter analyzes the empirical relationship between the pricesetting/consumption behavior and the sources of persistence in inflation and output. First, a small-scale New-Keynesian model (NKM) is examined using the method of moment and maximum likelihood estimators with US data from 1960 to 2007. Then a formal test is used to compare the fit of two competing specifications in the New-Keynesian Phillips Curve (NKPC) and the IS equation, that is, backward- and forward-looking behavior. Accordingly, the inclusion of a lagged term in the NKPC and the IS equation improves the fit of the model while offsetting the influence of inherited and extrinsic persistence; it is shown that intrinsic persistence plays a major role in approximating inflation and output dynamics for the Great Inflation period. However, the null hypothesis cannot be rejected at the 5% level for the Great Moderation period, that is, the NKM with purely forward-looking behavior and its hybrid variant are equivalent. Monte Carlo experiments investigate the validity of chosen moment conditions and the finite sample properties of the chosen estimation methods. Finally, the empirical performance of the formal test is discussed along the lines of the Akaike's and the Bayesian information criterion.

We test the determinacy properties of the standard and financial-sector-augmented Taylor rules in a new Keynesian model with a presence of banking activities. We extend the basic fully rational environment to the setting with heterogeneous expectations. We observe that the benefits from extra financial targeting are limited. Financial targeting, if well designed, can compensate for the improper output-gap targeting through the financial-production channel. The analysis demonstrates however possible threats resulting from the misspecification of the augmented rule. A determinate mix of output-gap and inflation weights can turn indeterminate if compensated by too extreme financial targeting. The results are robust to the presence of heterogeneous expectations.