Advertisement

Journal of Economics

, Volume 128, Issue 2, pp 119–145 | Cite as

Heterogeneity and monetary policy

  • Nurlan TurdalievEmail author
Article
  • 124 Downloads

Abstract

In a simple environment with heterogeneous agents, we demonstrate that the central bank delivers a higher inflation rate than when population is homogeneous. This tendency to choose a higher level of inflation than efficiency dictates is due to the efficiency-vs-equity trade-off that the central bank faces in this heterogeneous economy: up to a certain level, inflation decreases inequality. Optimal delegation involves appointing a central bank that puts a higher weight on the utility of the high-productivity workers than society does. This effect of delegation that improves the macroeconomic outcome disappears as homogeneity is restored. However, the inflation level under optimal delegation does not reach the efficiency level.

Keywords

Monetary policy Heterogeneity Central bank Inflation Inequality 

JEL Classification

E31 E52 E58 

Notes

References

  1. Ahn S, Kaplan G, Moll B, Winberry T, Wolf C (2018) When inequality matters for macro and macro matters for inequality. In: NBER macroeconomic annual, vol 32, University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  2. Alesina A, Stella A (2010) The politics of monetary policy. In: Friedman B, Woodford M (eds) Handbook of monetary economics, vol 3B. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  3. Bewley T (1983) A difficulty with the optimum quantity of money. Econometrica 51:1485–1504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blancheton B (2016) Central bank independence in a historical perspective: myth, lessons and a new model. Econ Modell 52:101–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carlsson M, Westermark A (2016) Labor market frictions and optimal steady-state inflation. J Monet Econ 78:67–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carroll C (2013) Representing consumption and saving without a representative consumer. CFS Working Paper 464Google Scholar
  7. Chari VV, Christiano L, Eichenbaum P (1998) Expectation traps and discretion. J Econ Theory 81:462–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chari VV, Kehoe P (1999) Optimal fiscal and monetary policy. In: Taylor J, Woodford M (eds) Handbook of macroeconomics, vol 1. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen BL, Hsu YS, Lu CH (2011) Friedman meets Becker and Mulligan in a monetary neoclassical growth model. J Econ 104:99–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Christiano L, Trabandt M, Walentin K (2010) DSGE models for monetary policy analysis. In: Friedman B, Woodford M (eds) Handbook of monetary economics, vol 3A. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  11. Coibion O, Gorodnichenko Y, Wieland J (2012) The optimal inflation rate in New Keynesian models: should central banks raise their inflation targets in light of the zero lower bound? Rev EconStud 79:1371–1406Google Scholar
  12. Di Bartolomeo G, Tirelli P, Acocella N (2015) The comeback of inflation as an optimal public finance tool. Int J Cent Bank 11:43–70Google Scholar
  13. Dornbusch R, Giovannini A (1990) Monetary policy in the open economy. In: Friedman B, Hahn F (eds) Handbook of monetary economics, vol 2. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  14. Friedman M (1969) The optimum quantity of money. In: The optimum quantity of money and other essays. Aldine Publishing Company, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  15. Gomme P (2015) Measuring the welfare costs of inflation in a life-cycle model. J Econ Dyn Control 57:132–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heathcote J, Storesletten K, Violante G (2009) Quantitative macroeconomics with heterogeneous households. Ann Rev Econ 1:319–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Huggett M (1993) The risk-free rate in heterogeneous-agent incomplete-insurance economies. J Econ Dyn Control 17:953–969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Krusell P, Smith AA (2006) Quantitative macroeconomic models with heterogeneous agents. In: Blundell R, Newey W, Persson T (eds) Advances in economics and econometrics: theory and applications. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Lucas RE Jr (1973) Some international evidence on output-inflation tradeoffs. Am Econ Rev 63:326–334Google Scholar
  20. Menna L, Tirelli P (2017) Optimal inflation to reduce inequality. Rev Econ Dyn 24:79–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Molico M (2006) The distribution of money and prices in search equilibrium. Int Econ Rev 47:701–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rios-Rull J-V (1995) Models with heterogeneous agents. In: Cooley TF (ed) Frontiers of business cycle research. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  23. Rogoff K (1985) The optimal degree of commitment to an intermediate target. Q J Econ 100:1169–1190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Semmler W, Zhang W (1985) Monetary and fiscal policy interactions in the Euro area. Empirica 31:205–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schmitt-Grohé S, Uribe M (2010) The optimal rate of inflation. In: Friedman B, Woodford M (eds) Handbook of monetary economics, vol 3B. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  26. Schmitt-Grohé S, Uribe M (2012) Foreign demand for domestic currency and the optimal rate of inflation. J Money Credit Bank 44:1207–1224CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity of WindsorWindsorCanada

Personalised recommendations