Suchergebnisse

This paper examines empirically the impact of financial stress on the transmission of monetary policy shocks in Canada. The model used is a threshold vector autoregression in which a regime change occurs if financial stress conditions cross a critical threshold. Using the financial stress index developed by Illing and Liu (2006) as a measure of the Canadian financial stress conditions, the authors examine questions such as: Do contractionary and expansionary monetary policy shocks have symmetric effects? Do financial stress conditions play a role as a nonlinear propagator of monetary policy shocks? Does monetary policy have the same effect on the real economy in the low financial stress regime and in the high financial stress regime? Suppose that the economy is currently in a given financial stress regime, do monetary policy shocks have a substantial effect on the transition probability of moving from the given regime to the other? The empirical findings reveal that (i) contractionary monetary shocks typically have a larger effect on output than expansionary monetary shocks; (ii) the effects of large and small shocks are approximately proportional; (iii) expansionary monetary shocks have larger effects on output in the high financial stress regime than in the low financial stress regime; (iv) large expansionary monetary shocks increase the likelihood of moving to, or remaining in, the low financial stress regime; (v) typically, high financial stress regime has been characterized by weaker output growth, higher inflation, and higher interest rates.

Since the early 1980s, the firm entry rate and the rate of new entrepreneurship have trended downward in Canada. This article documents these trends and discusses potential explanations. A shift-share analysis suggests that industrial and demographic structure changes cannot explain these long-term trends, although population aging accounts for part of the decline in new entrepreneurship since around 2000. The article discusses other factors that could contribute to the downward trends: increased industrial concentration, changing labour market conditions, increased college wage premium, higher student debt, and government regulation. Some of these may be important, but more research is needed before firm conclusions can be reached.

Estimating potential output and the output gap - the difference between actual output and its potential - is important for the proper conduct of monetary policy. However, the measurement and interpretation of potential output, and hence the output gap, is fraught with uncertainty, since it is unobservable. It is therefore important that we continually expand and improve upon existing models, and innovate by testing new approaches and incorporating them into the analysis of potential output and the output gap. Within this context, this paper first provides an assessment of the extended multivariate filter (EMVF), which the Bank has used since the late 1990s to come up with a baseline measure of the output gap. It is determined that the EMVF has several limitations that need to be addressed. Consequently, a modified version of the EMVF incorporating revised conditioning information is presented. In addition, a newly developed methodology, the integrated framework (IF), provides a separate analysis of trend labour input and trend labour productivity, and in doing so accounts for more long-term structural changes in the economy. While neither of these approaches is perfect, and both have limitations, they represent improvements over the conventional method. The paper also outlines how the modified EMVF, the IF, and information from the Bank's Business Outlook Survey and other sources are used to come up with an estimate of the current output gap and the future growth rate of potential output. ; L'estimation de la production potentielle et de l'écart de production – soit la différence entre la production effective et potentielle – est importante pour la conduite appropriée de la politique monétaire. Cependant, la production potentielle n'étant pas observable, la mesure et l'interprétation de cette variable, et par conséquent de l'écart de production, sont entourées d'incertitude. Il est donc essentiel de continuellement développer et améliorer les modèles existants, d'innover en mettant à l'essai de nouvelles ...

In this paper, we examine and compare twelve private and public sector models of the Canadian economy with respect to their paradigm, structure, and dynamic properties. These open-economy models can be grouped into two economic paradigms. The first is the "conventional" paradigm (or Phillips curve paradigm) and the second is the "money matters" paradigm. Under the conventional paradigm, inflation is determined by price adjustments in response to inflation expectations and by factor disequilibrium in labour or product markets. Under the money matters paradigm, inflation is determined mainly by monetary disequilibrium. Although most models are based on the conventional paradigm, there are nevertheless important differences within that paradigm. In particular, there are differences in the inflation process (linear/non-linear Phillips curve), the channels through which monetary policy affects the economy (short-term interest rates or the yield curve), and the sensitivity of output and inflation to changes in interest rates and the exchange rate. The authors also examine the dynamic properties of the various models when those models use the simple monetary reaction function proposed by [Taylor, J. B. (1993). Discretion versus policy rules in practice. Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, 39, 195-214]. Deterministic shocks considered in this report reveal significant differences in the dynamic properties of the participating models. A comparison of the models' impulse-response functions with those of a vector autoregression suggests that some models do better than others in reflecting the typical response of the Canadian economy to certain shocks. [Copyright 2006 The Society for Policy Modeling; published by Elsevier Inc.]

Abstract.  In this paper, we evaluate seven simple monetary policy rules in a wide range of models of the Canadian economy. Our results indicate that none of the seven simple policy rules we examined is robust to model uncertainty, in that no single rule performs well in all models. In fact, our results show that the performance of some of the simple rules, particularly rules with interest rate smoothing and rules with a high coefficient on the inflation gap, can substantially deviate from that of the optimal rule and can even be unstable in some models. Furthermore, we find that "open‐economy" rules do not perform well in many models. We find that adding an exchange rate term to a simple policy rule often increases the value of the policy‐maker's loss function. Although it is not robust, we find that a simple nominal Taylor‐type rule that has a coefficient of 2 on the inflation gap and 0.5 on the output gap outperforms the other simple rules in a certain class of models. However, even in those models, the loss‐function value of this simple rule can be substantially higher than that of the optimal or base‐case rule. JEL classification: E52, E58