IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

How Costly is CPI Inflation Targeting: A Two Sector Model with No Labor Mobility

  • Onmus-Baykal Elif


    (Georgetown University)

Registered author(s):

    This paper studies the welfare costs of price rigidities in a closed economy without labor mobility. First, in a one-sector model, I find a significant welfare cost of price rigidities under a standard Taylor rule, especially when labor is immobile. In the one-sector model, strict CPI inflation targeting is able to eliminate the welfare cost of price rigidities, with or without labor mobility. Then, I develop a vertically integrated two-sector model with nominal and real rigidities where there is a natural distinction between the rates of inflation in the final and intermediate goods sectors. In the two-sector model, the real rigidities are introduced by assuming that labor is immobile across sectors and firms. In the model, labor immobility plays an allocative role and causes large fluctuations in hours of work. This, in turn, magnifies the welfare costs of nominal rigidities. I find that the welfare costs range from 1.62 percent to 2.33 percent of consumption per period for different degree of price rigidities under an estimated Taylor rule over the Volcker and Greenspan years. Taking the household welfare under optimal (Ramsey) monetary policy as a benchmark, I show that an optimal modified Taylor rule with two measures of inflation is able to bring welfare closer to the benchmark value and reduces the welfare costs substantially, even if labor mobility is restricted.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by De Gruyter in its journal The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics.

    Volume (Year): 11 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 1 (January)
    Pages: 1-32

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:bpj:bejmac:v:11:y:2011:i:1:n:1
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:bejmac:v:11:y:2011:i:1:n:1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Golla)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.