12.07.2015 Views

Is inflation targeting dead? Central Banking After the Crisis - Vox

Is inflation targeting dead? Central Banking After the Crisis - Vox

Is inflation targeting dead? Central Banking After the Crisis - Vox

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Cheap talk is no alternative to <strong>inflation</strong> <strong>targeting</strong>error bands for <strong>inflation</strong> that are wider and more difficult to interpret. Alternatively, ifyou think you are going to hit <strong>the</strong> nominal-GDP target, <strong>the</strong> error band of how much ofit is going to be new growth versus <strong>inflation</strong> would be extremely wide. The net effectwould be to increase <strong>the</strong> volatility of <strong>inflation</strong> by a large measure. This does not seemlike an improvement when you have been <strong>targeting</strong> an <strong>inflation</strong> rate with reasonableaccuracy.The point is simple to illustrate with an example. Say we have very slow growth, aswe do now – perhaps because of <strong>the</strong> Eurozone <strong>Crisis</strong>, financial factors, and/or fiscalausterity. With a nominal-GDP target of, say, 5%, you end up with an <strong>inflation</strong> rate of3% or 4% as an intentional policy. But In this case, <strong>the</strong> markets will rightly say, “Ohmy god, this is a much less credible <strong>inflation</strong> regime. The government and <strong>the</strong> centralbank are consciously choosing a higher <strong>inflation</strong> rate than <strong>the</strong>y have been for years.”The likely outcome, in my opinion, is that you will get higher <strong>inflation</strong> and lose <strong>the</strong>anchoring effect of <strong>inflation</strong> <strong>targeting</strong> that my Bank of England colleagues and Icounted on. When <strong>inflation</strong> shot up to 5%, people expected it would come back downto 2% – as it did, broadly speaking.The lack of stimulus impact is not <strong>the</strong> fault of <strong>inflation</strong><strong>targeting</strong>Inflation <strong>targeting</strong> was not <strong>the</strong> reason why quantitative easing failed to achieve <strong>the</strong> strongrecovery we hoped for and though was possible. I do believe quantitative easing wasreasonably effective and, for various political reasons, some o<strong>the</strong>r forms of quantitativeeasing that I think could have added to effectiveness were not pursued (Posen 2012).But <strong>the</strong> reason <strong>the</strong>y were not pursued had nothing to do with <strong>the</strong> <strong>inflation</strong> target. Theyhad to do with governance, organisational decisions and ideological beliefs on <strong>the</strong> partof central bank committee members. They were never argued against such measures on<strong>the</strong> basis of: “We can’t do that because that will be contrary to target.”63

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!