Does a "two-pillar Phillips curve" justify a two-pillar monetary policy strategy?
Arguments for a prominent role for attention to the growth rate of monetary aggregates in the conduct of monetary policy are often based on references to low-frequency reduced-form relationships between money growth and inflation. The "two-pillar Phillips curve" proposed by Gerlach (2004) has recently attracted a great deal of interest in the euro area, where it is sometimes supposed to provide empirical support for the wisdom of a "two-pillar strategy" that uses distinct analytical frameworks to assess shorter-run and longer-run risks to price stability. I show, however, that regression coefficients of the kind reported by Assenmacher-Wesche and Gerlach (2006a) among others are quite consistent with a "new Keynesian" model of inflation determination, in which the quantity of money plays no role in inflation determination, at either high or low frequencies. I also show that empirical results of this kind do not in themselves establish that money growth must be useful in forecasting inflation, either in the short run or over a longer run. Hence they provide little support for the ECB's monetary "pillar."
|Date of creation:||2007|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (212) 854-3680
Fax: (212) 854-8059
Web page: http://www.econ.columbia.edu/
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:clu:wpaper:0607-06. 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: (Discussion Paper Coordinator)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.