IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Endogenous Fluctuations in Open Economies: the Perils of Taylor Rules Revisited

  • Marco Airaudo
  • Luis-Felipe Zanna

Can active Taylor rules (i.e. monetary rules where the nominal interest rate responds more than proportionally to inflation) deliver global equilibrium uniqueness in small open economies? By studying the local and global dynamics of a standard small open economy we point out the misleading results and policy advices that one would derive from a standard local analysis. We show that rules that guarantee a local unique equilibrium may actually lead the economy into liquidty traps, cycles and chaos. More importantly we find that there is an interesting interaction between the relative risk aversion coefficient and the degree of openness that determines the nature of the global dynamics of the aforementioned economy. In particular, given the relative risk aversion coefficient, we show that the more open the economy is, the more likely is that a contemporaneous rule will drive the economy into a liquidity trap. On the other hand, the more closed the economy is, the more likely is that the same rule will lead to cycles and chaotic dynamics around the inflation target. In contrast for forward-looking rules we find that given the relative risk aversion coefficient, it is more likely that these rules will lead the economy into cycles and chaos, the higher the degree of openness of the economy is. Although the perils of Taylor rules are evident, the monetary authority can still play a role by at least eliminating cyclical equilibria without giving up its local stability properties. This can be achieved by targeting a high enough inflation level and by being “not too aggressive†with respect to this target, with such relative levels being functions of the “cash dependency†of the economy. Through a simple calibration exercise, we provide a quantitative evaluation of how feasible and relevant our analytically derived results are for the design of monetary policy. In this sense the theoretical results of this paper might provide some warning for small open economies moving to inflation targeting regimes through interest rates feedback rules and Ricardian fiscal rules

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: http://repec.org/esLATM04/up.27551.1081237737.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Econometric Society in its series Econometric Society 2004 Latin American Meetings with number 80.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 11 Aug 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ecm:latm04:80
Contact details of provider: Phone: 1 212 998 3820
Fax: 1 212 995 4487
Web page: http://www.econometricsociety.org/pastmeetings.asp
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Schmitt-Grohé, Stephanie & Uribe, Martín, 2002. "Closing Small Open Economy Models," CEPR Discussion Papers 3096, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  2. Galí, Jordi & Monacelli, Tommaso, 2002. "Monetary Policy and Exchange Rate Volatility in a Small Open Economy," CEPR Discussion Papers 3346, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  3. Svensson, Lars E.O., 1998. "Open-Economy Inflation Targeting," Seminar Papers 638, Stockholm University, Institute for International Economic Studies.
  4. Julio J. Rotemberg & Michael Woodford, 1999. "Interest Rate Rules in an Estimated Sticky Price Model," NBER Chapters, in: Monetary Policy Rules, pages 57-126 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Jess Benhabib & Stephanie Schmitt-Grohe & Martin Uribe, 1999. "Monetary Policy and Multiple Equilibria," Departmental Working Papers 199914, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
  6. Clarida, Richard & Galí, Jordi & Gertler, Mark, 1998. "Monetary Policy Rules and Macroeconomic Stability: Evidence and Some Theory," CEPR Discussion Papers 1908, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  7. Fabio Ghironi & Alessandro Rebucci, 2000. "Monetary Rules for Emerging Market Economies," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 476, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 13 Aug 2001.
  8. Taylor, John B., 1993. "Discretion versus policy rules in practice," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 195-214, December.
  9. Kollmann, Robert, 2002. "Monetary Policy Rules in the Open Economy: Effects on Welfare and Business Cycles," CEPR Discussion Papers 3279, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  10. Benhabib, Jess & Schmitt-Grohe, Stephanie & Uribe, Martin, 2001. "The Perils of Taylor Rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 96(1-2), pages 40-69, January.
  11. Ben S. Bernanke & Michael Woodford, 1997. "Inflation Forecasts and Monetary Policy," NBER Working Papers 6157, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Benhabib, Jess & Schmitt-Grohe, Stephanie & Uribe, Martin, 2001. "Chaotic Interest Rate Rules," Computing in Economics and Finance 2001 259, Society for Computational Economics.
  13. Clarida, Richard & Gali, Jordi & Gertler, Mark, 1998. "Monetary policy rules in practice Some international evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1033-1067, June.
  14. Michael B. Devereux & Philip R. Lane, 2000. "Exchange Rates and Monetary Policy in Emerging Market Economies," Working Papers 072000, Hong Kong Institute for Monetary Research.
  15. Richard Clarida & Jordi Gali & Mark Gertler, 2001. "Optimal Monetary Policy in Open versus Closed Economies: An Integrated Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 248-252, May.
  16. James M. Poterba & Julio J. Rotemberg, 1986. "Money in the Utility Function: An Empirical Implementation," Working papers 408, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  17. Fabio Ghironi, 2000. "Alternative Monetary Rules for a Small Open Economy: The Case of Canada," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 466, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 30 Oct 2000.
  18. Holman, Jill A, 1998. "GMM Estimation of a Money-in-the-Utility-Function Model: The Implications of Functional Forms," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 30(4), pages 679-98, November.
  19. Luis-Felipe Zanna, 2003. "Interest rate rules and multiple equilibria in the small open economy," International Finance Discussion Papers 785, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  20. De Fiore, Fiorella & Liu, Zheng, 2005. "Does trade openness matter for aggregate instability?," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 29(7), pages 1165-1192, July.
  21. Imrohoroglu, Selahattin, 1994. "GMM Estimates of Currency Substitution between the Canadian Dollar and the U.S. Dollar," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 26(4), pages 792-807, November.
  22. Leeper, Eric M., 1991. "Equilibria under 'active' and 'passive' monetary and fiscal policies," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 129-147, February.
  23. Mendoza, Enrique G, 1995. "The Terms of Trade, the Real Exchange Rate, and Economic Fluctuations," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 36(1), pages 101-37, February.
  24. Feenstra, Robert C., 1986. "Functional equivalence between liquidity costs and the utility of money," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 271-291, March.
  25. Mendoza, Enrique G, 1991. "Real Business Cycles in a Small Open Economy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(4), pages 797-818, September.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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:ecm:latm04:80. 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: (Christopher F. Baum)

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.