Monetary Policy Trade-Offs with a Dominant Oil Producer

We model oil production decisions from optimizing principles rather than assuming exogenous oil price shocks and show that the presence of a dominant oil producer leads to sizable static and dynamic distortions of the production process. Under our calibration, the static distortion costs the U.S. around 1.6% of GDP per year. In addition, the dynamic distortion, reflected in inefficient fluctuations of the oil price markup, generates a trade-off between stabilizing inflation and aligning output with its efficient level. Our model is a step away from discussing the effects of exogenous oil price variations and toward analyzing the implications of the underlying shocks that cause oil prices to change in the first place.     

The Role of Oil Price Shocks in Causing U.S. Recessions

Although oil price shocks have long been viewed as one of the leading candidates for explaining U.S. recessions, surprisingly little is known about the extent to which oil price shocks explain recessions. We provide a formal analysis of this question with special attention to the possible role of net oil price increases in amplifying the transmission of oil price shocks. We quantify the conditional effect of oil price shocks in the net oil price increase model for all episodes of net oil price increases since the mid‐1970s, analyze its determinants, and show that the linear model fits the data better.     

Energy Price Shocks and the Macroeconomy: The Role of Consumer Durables

We create a model with a distinction between investment in consumer durables and capital goods, as well as energy use by households and firms, to evaluate the importance of energy price shocks for output fluctuations. Simulation results indicate that this economy has a smaller proportion of output fluctuations attributable to energy price shocks than one without durable goods and household energy use. We show that an energy price hike is absorbed by reducing investment in durables more than in fixed capital. This rebalancing effect cushions the hit to future production. Thus, productivity shocks remain the prime driver for output fluctuations.     

How do oil supply and demand shocks affect Asian stock markets?

This paper examines how oil market shocks affect Asian stock prices using the structural vector autoregression (VAR) approach. Global oil supply and demand shocks are disentangled using sign restrictions and elasticity bounds. Oil price increases are bad news only if the source is from oil-market-specific demand shifts. Northeast Asian stock markets are more resilient as investors’ expectation of continued economic growth outweighs the adverse effect of higher oil prices. Increased global economic activity also stimulates stock prices. Global oil shocks are more important in explaining variability in Asian stock returns compared with the United States, suggesting different dynamics in Asia.     

Why Don’t Oil Shocks Cause Inflation? Evidence from Disaggregate Inflation Data

This paper uses disaggregate U.S. inflation data to evaluate explanations for the breakdown of the relationship between oil price shocks and consumer price inflation. A data set with measures of inflation, energy intensity, labor intensity, and sensitivity to monetary policy is constructed for 97 sectors that make up core CPI inflation. A comparison of the 1973–85 and 1986–2006 time periods reveals that substitution away from energy use in production and monetary policy were both important, with approximately two‐thirds of the change in response of inflation to oil shocks being due to reduced energy usage, and one‐third to monetary policy. We find no evidence that other factors, such as changes in wage rigidities or changes in the persistence of oil shocks, played a role.     

Oil price dynamics,macro-finance interactions and the role of financial speculation

What is the role of financial speculation in determining the real oil price? We find that while macroeconomic shocks have been the main real oil price upward driver since mid-1980s, financial shocks have sizably contributed since early 2000s as well, and at a much larger extent since mid-2000s. Even though financial shocks contribute 44% out of the 65% real oil price increase over the period 2004–2010, the third oil price shock is a macro-finance episode: macroeconomic shocks actually largely account for the 2007–2008 oil price swing. While we then find support to the demand side view of real oil price determination, we however also find a much larger role for financial shocks than previously noted in the literature.     

Fundamental Economic Shocks and the Macroeconomy

We ask how macroeconomic and financial variables respond to empirical measures of shocks to technology, labor supply, and monetary policy. These three shocks account for the preponderance of output, productivity, and price fluctuations. Only technology shocks have a permanent impact on economic activity. Labor inputs have little initial response to technology shocks. Monetary policy has a small response to technology shocks but "leans against the wind" in response to the more cyclical labor supply shock. This shock has the biggest impact on interest rates. Stock prices respond to all three shocks. Other empirical implications of our approach are discussed.     

Identifying the interdependence between US monetary policy and the stock market

We estimate the interdependence between US monetary policy and the S&P 500 using structural vector autoregressive (VAR) methodology. A solution is proposed to the simultaneity problem of identifying monetary and stock price shocks by using a combination of short-run and long-run restrictions that maintains the qualitative properties of a monetary policy shock found in the established literature [Christiano, L.J., Eichenbaum, M., Evans, C.L., 1999. Monetary policy shocks: what have we learned and to what end? In: Taylor, J.B., Woodford, M. (Eds.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, vol. 1A. Elsevier, New York, pp. 65-148]. We find great interdependence between the interest rate setting and real stock prices. Real stock prices immediately fall by seven to nine percent due to a monetary policy shock that raises the federal funds rate by 100 basis points. A stock price shock increasing real stock prices by one percent leads to an increase in the interest rate of close to 4 basis points.     

A quantitative analysis of oil-price shocks, systematic monetary policy, and economic downturns

Are the recessionary consequences of oil-price shocks due to oil-price shocks themselves or to the monetary policy that responds to them? We investigate this question in a calibrated general equilibrium model in which oil use is tied to capital utilization. The response to an oil-price shock is examined under a variety of monetary policy specifications. Under our benchmark calibration, which approximates the Federal Reserve's behavior since 1979, monetary policy contributes about 40 percent to the drop in output following a rise in oil prices. Moreover, none of the commonly proposed policies we examine completely offsets the recessionary consequences of oil shocks.     

Tax distortions and the case for price stability

We investigate the case for price stability in the general version of the New Keynesian (NNS) model with capital and several shocks. The model includes, in addition to the standard imperfect competition and monetary frictions, a non-trivial, endogenous tax distortion. We find that the case for perfect price stability is not significantly weakened. Optimal policy tolerates a small amount of output gap and price variability by reacting less strongly to supply and fiscal shocks in comparison to a policy that aims at perfect price stabilization.     

Oil price shocks and their transmission mechanism in an oil-exporting economy: A VAR analysis informed by a DSGE model

This paper examines the macroeconomic effects of oil price shocks and the oil shock transmission mechanism in an oil-exporting country, Canada. We use a structural VAR with sign restrictions that comes from a two-country dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) model to jointly identify oil price, domestic supply and U.S. and domestic monetary policy shocks. This identification strategy not only controls for reverse causality from the Canadian and U.S. macroeconomic conditions to the real oil prices, but more importantly, it also allows for contemporaneous interactions between the Canadian and U.S. variables. We find that oil shocks have a stimulative effect on Canadian aggregate demand, appreciate the Canadian dollar, improve the terms of trade and reduce real wages. Foreign disturbances, including innovations in oil prices and the U.S. interest rate, have a significant influence on Canadian economic activities. Our counterfactual analysis indicates that the reaction of the U.S. interest rate as an indirect transmission channel for oil price shocks plays a moderate role in explaining the real exchange rate and inflation, but has negligible impacts on the Canadian output and interest rate.     

Optimal monetary policy with imperfect common knowledge

This paper determines optimal nominal demand policy in a flexible price economy in which firms pay limited attention to aggregate variables. Firms’ inattentiveness gives rise to idiosyncratic information errors and imperfect common knowledge about the shocks hitting the economy. This is shown to have strong implications for optimal nominal demand policy. In particular, if firms’ prices are strategic complements and economic shocks display little persistence, monetary policy has strong real effects, making it optimal to stabilize the output gap. Weak complementarities or sufficient shock persistence, however, cause price level stabilization to become increasingly optimal. With persistent shocks, optimal monetary policy shifts from output gap stabilization in initial periods following the shock to price level stabilization in later periods, potentially rationalizing the medium-term approach to price stability adopted by some central banks.     

New Keynesian Macroeconomics and the Term Structure

This article complements the structural New Keynesian macro framework with a no-arbitrage affine term structure model. Whereas our methodology is general, we focus on an extended macro model with unobservable processes for the inflation target and the natural rate of output that are filtered from macro and term structure data. We find that term structure information helps generate large and significant parameters governing the monetary policy transmission mechanism. Our model also delivers strong contemporaneous responses of the entire term structure to various macroeconomic shocks. The inflation target shock dominates the variation in the "level factor" whereas monetary policy shocks dominate the variation in the "slope and curvature factors."     

The Quantitative Importance of News Shocks in Estimated DSGE Models

We estimate a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) model with several frictions and both unanticipated and news shocks, using quarterly U.S. data from 1954 to 2004 and Bayesian methods. We find that unanticipated shocks dominate news shocks in accounting for the unconditional variance of output, consumption, and investment growth, interest rate, and the relative price of investment. The unanticipated shock to the marginal efficiency of investment is the dominant shock, accounting for over 45% of the variance in output growth. News shocks account for less than 15% of the variance in output growth. Within the set of news shocks, nontechnology sources of news dominate technology news, with wage markup news shocks accounting for about 60% of the variance share of both hours and inflation. We find that in the estimated DSGE model (i) the presence of endogenous countercyclical price and wage markups due to nominal frictions substantially diminishes the importance of news shocks relative to a model without these frictions, and (ii) while there is little change in the estimated contributions of technology news when we restrict wealth effects on labor supply, the contributions of nontechnology news shocks are relatively more sensitive.     

Do Inflation Expectations Propagate the Inflationary Impact of Real Oil Price Shocks?: Evidence from the Michigan Survey

This paper presents evidence that inflation expectations, as measured by the Michigan Survey of Consumers, only play a minimal role in the propagation of real oil price shocks into inflation. This is despite evidence that confirms that inflation expectations are sensitive to real oil price shocks. Further analysis suggests that after the 1990s, inflation expectations may have played no part in propagating real oil price shocks into inflation.     

Oil shocks and the zero bound on nominal interest rates

Beginning in 2008, in many advanced economies, policy rates reached their zero lower bound (ZLB) and almost at the same time, oil prices started rising again. We analyze how the ZLB affects the propagation of oil shocks. As these shocks move inflation and output in opposite directions, their effects on economic activity are cushioned when monetary policy is constrained. The burst of inflation from an oil price increase lowers real interest rates at the ZLB and stimulates the interest-sensitive component of GDP, offsetting the usual contractionary effects. We show that the mitigation of the output decline from the zero lower bound depends on the source of the shock and on the persistence that alternative shocks induce in the price of oil.     

Do heterogeneous oil price shocks really have different effects on earnings management?

Under the modern corporate governance structure, there is a knowledge gap in how companies' financial reporting practices respond to oil price shocks in China. To fill this gap, we employ China's A-share listed companies and follow Kilian (2009) study to investigate how the three types of classical oil shocks affect corporate earnings management heterogeneously. We also consider the role of oil implied volatility in this relationship and further examine the possible heterogeneity between energy-related and non-energy-related subsamples. The empirical results show that there are variant effects among the heterogeneous oil price shocks on earnings management. Specifically, oil supply shocks stimulate firms to manipulate more accrual and real earnings, and firms are more likely to carry out accrual earnings management downward. Oil aggregate demand shocks weaken the degree of accrual earnings manipulation and mainly reduce the negative accrual earnings manipulation. Oil-specific demand shocks constrain the earnings management behavior of companies and improve their accounting quality. Besides, the increased uncertainty of oil price weakens the promotion effect of oil supply shocks on earnings manipulation, and the moderating effect occurs mainly in downward earnings management. Furthermore, the subsample estimated results reveal that oil price shocks do not affect the degree of accrual earnings management of energy-related companies. Instead, they impact the non-energy-related companies. Overall, our findings provide a series of targeted policy recommendations to mitigate the principal-agent problems and cope with energy price volatility risks.     

Monetary policy for inattentive economies

We offer a contribution to the analysis of optimal monetary policy. We begin with a critical assessment of the existing literature, arguing that most work is based on implausible models of inflation-output dynamics. We then suggest that this problem may be solved with some recent behavioral models, which assume that price setters are slow to incorporate macroeconomic information into the prices they set. A specific such model is developed and used to derive optimal policy. In response to shocks to productivity and aggregate demand, optimal policy is price level targeting. Base drift in the price level, which is implicit in the inflation targeting regimes currently used in many central banks, is not desirable in this model. When shocks to desired markups are added, optimal policy is flexible targeting of the price level. That is, the central bank should allow the price level to deviate from its target for a while in response to these supply shocks, but it should eventually return the price level to its target path. Optimal policy can also be described as an elastic price standard: the central bank allows the price level to deviate from its target when output is expected to deviate from its natural rate.     

External shocks, U.S. monetary policy and macroeconomic fluctuations in emerging markets

Estimated structural VARs show that external shocks are an important source of macroeconomic fluctuations in emerging markets. Furthermore, U.S. monetary policy shocks affect interest rates and the exchange rate in a typical emerging market quickly and strongly. The price level and real output in a typical emerging market respond to U.S. monetary policy shocks by more than the price level and real output in the U.S. itself. These findings are consistent with the idea that “when the U.S. sneezes, emerging markets catch a cold.” At the same time, U.S. monetary policy shocks are not important for emerging markets relative to other kinds of external shocks.     

Demand and productivity components of business cycles: Estimates and implications

Standard stochastic growth models provide theoretical restrictions on output decomposition which can be used to investigate whether productivity shocks played a major role in observed business cycles. Applying these restrictions to US data leads to the following findings: (i) Business cycles implied by productivity shocks are mildly correlated to overall fluctuations and help account for a few episodes of US postwar recessions. However, only 20% of US fluctuations can be explained by these shocks. (ii) Most fluctuations seem instead to be due to “nominal demand” shocks, i.e. shocks which move output and prices in the same direction, but whose effects on output are ultimately transitory. (iii) Canonical sticky price models in the new-neoclassical synthesis tradition can account for the cyclical comovements of output and prices, but canonical, frictionless, RBC models cannot.