Disinflation and the Recession-Now-Versus-Recession-Later Hypothesis; Evidence From Uruguay
Both analytical models and casual empiricism suggest that the timing of the recessionary costs associated with inflation stabilization in chronic inflation countries may depend on the nominal anchor which is used. Under money-based stabilization, the recession occurs at the beginning of the program, while under exchange rate-based stabilization the recession occurs later in the program. This paper provides a first attempt to formally test this hypothesis using a vector-autoregression model for Uruguay. The impulse response of output to different stabilization policies is broadly consistent with the “recession-now-versus-recession-later” hypothesis. The evidence also suggests, however, that the effectiveness of a monetary anchor in reducing inflation is hindered by the high degree of dollarization of the Uruguayan economy.
|Date of creation:||01 Oct 1995|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (202) 623-7000
Fax: (202) 623-4661
Web page: http://www.imf.org/external/pubind.htm
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/pubs/ord_info.htm|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:imf:imfwpa:95/99. 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: (Jim Beardow)or (Hassan Zaidi)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.