Working Paper: CEPR ID: DP6447
Authors: Michael Woodford
Abstract: 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'.
Keywords: Bandpass Regression; ECB; Monetary Policy Strategy; Monetarism
JEL Codes: E52; E58
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| money growth (O42) | inflation (E31) |
| common stochastic trend (C22) | inflation (E31) |
| common stochastic trend (C22) | money growth (O42) |