2002
DOI: 10.1007/s181-002-8362-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Output gap uncertainty: Does it matter for the Taylor rule?

Abstract: Fax: +41 61 / 280 91 00 and +41 61 / 280 81 00The present publication is also available on the BIS Web site (www.bis.org). This paper analyses the effect of measurement error in the output gap on efficient monetary policy rules in a simple estimated model of the US economy. While it is a well-known result that such additive uncertainty does not affect the optimal feedback rule in a linear-quadratic framework, it is shown that output gap uncertainty can have a significant effect on the efficient response coeffi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

9
128
0
4

Year Published

2004
2004
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 127 publications
(141 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
(21 reference statements)
9
128
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…This backward-looking nature of the model makes it subject to the Lucas critique, according to which reducedform relations in traditional macroeconomic models depend implicitly on the agents'expectations of the policy process and are hence unlikely to remain stable as policymakers changed their rules. However, empirical backward-looking models without explicit expectations are still widely used for monetary policy analysis, as in Rudebusch andSvensson (1998, 2002), Onatski and Stock (2002), Smets (1998), Dennis (2001), Laubach and Williams (2003), Fagan, Henry and Mestre (2001) and Fabiani and Mestre (2004). Moreover, several articles suggest that such models appear to be fairly robust empirically, notably Rudebusch and Svensson (1998), Bernanke and Mihov (1998), Estrella and Fuhrer (1999), Dennis (2001) and Leeper and Zha (2002).…”
Section: Speci…cationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This backward-looking nature of the model makes it subject to the Lucas critique, according to which reducedform relations in traditional macroeconomic models depend implicitly on the agents'expectations of the policy process and are hence unlikely to remain stable as policymakers changed their rules. However, empirical backward-looking models without explicit expectations are still widely used for monetary policy analysis, as in Rudebusch andSvensson (1998, 2002), Onatski and Stock (2002), Smets (1998), Dennis (2001), Laubach and Williams (2003), Fagan, Henry and Mestre (2001) and Fabiani and Mestre (2004). Moreover, several articles suggest that such models appear to be fairly robust empirically, notably Rudebusch and Svensson (1998), Bernanke and Mihov (1998), Estrella and Fuhrer (1999), Dennis (2001) and Leeper and Zha (2002).…”
Section: Speci…cationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless the presence of uncertainty with respect to potential output results, of course, in welfare losses and has effects on simple Taylor-like rules in standard macroeconomic models (Smets, 2002). Extensions and quantitative illustrations of these results are found in Ehrmann and Smets (2003) who build a small stochastic general equilibrium model with endogenous persistence calibrated to the euro area.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…We thus re-estimate (2) including a foreign interest rate series defined as the German day-to-day money rate for the period 1990-1998; and the output stabilisation. For further discussion, see Smets (2002), Ehrmann and Smets (2003) and the references therein. 12 We also calculated potential output running a regression of actual output on a linear and a quadratic trend, as in Clarida et al (1998).…”
Section: Linear Models Of Monetary Policymentioning
confidence: 99%