Working Paper: NBER ID: w23847
Authors: Michael D. Bordo; Pierre L. Siklos
Abstract: Central banks have evolved for close to four centuries. This paper argues that for two centuries central banks caught up to the strategies followed by the leading central banks of the era; the Bank of England in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and the Federal Reserve in the twentieth century. It also argues that, by the late 20th century, small open economies were more prone to adopt a new policy regime when the old one no longer served its purpose whereas large, less open, and systemically important economies were more reluctant to embrace new approaches to monetary policy. Our study blends the quantitative with narrative explanations of the evolution of central banks. We begin by providing an overview of the evolution of monetary policy regimes taking note of the changing role of financial stability over time. We then provide some background to an analysis that aims, via econometric means, to quantify the similarities and idiosyncrasies of the ten central banks and the extent to which they represent a network of sorts where, in effect, some central banks learn from others.
Keywords: No keywords provided
JEL Codes: E02; E31; E32; E42; E58
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| small open economies (F41) | flexibility in adopting new monetary policies (E63) |
| nature of an economy's openness (F43) | adaptability to new policy regimes (O24) |
| size of an economy (E20) | monetary policy evolution (E52) |
| central banks (E58) | learning regarding crisis management strategies (H12) |
| evolution of central banks (E58) | fiscal needs of emerging states (H69) |