Once we appropriately control for relevant policy and institutional factors, we show that the institutional settings of prudential policy and monetary policy do not have a significant effect on inflation outcomes
This policy brief note is based on a
study that revisits an old debate about the way the institutional
settings that determine the conduct of monetary policy and prudential
regulation and supervision of the banking system influence policymakers’
actions in pursuing their designated mandates. We assess whether the
allocation of policy mandates affects central banks’ primary objective
of inflation stabilization by employing dynamic heterogeneous panel
methods, using data for 25 industrialised countries from 1960 to 2018.
In its recent monetary
policy strategy review, the European Central Bank acknowledges the
importance of taking into account financial stability considerations in
its monetary policy decision processes, calling for an enhanced role of
the monetary analysis pillar.1,2
It stresses that financial stability is a precondition for price
stability and vice versa. Although microprudential and macroprudential
policies should be considered the first line of defence against the
build up of financial stability risks, the review emphasises that the
monetary policy strategy of the ECB should retain and follow a flexible
approach to deal with financial stability concerns. This conclusion
strongly expresses the importance given to financial stability and its
interlinkages with monetary policy, despite the existence of an
effective macroprudential framework.
The macroprudential oversight of the
financial system was introduced as a response to the Global Financial
Crisis in 2008. In some countries, the financial stability mandate was
explicitly assigned to macroprudential authorities that were endowed
with proper instruments to deal with financial imbalances, while
monetary authorities remained responsible for price stability. Such
institutional arrangements in which stability mandates are assigned to
separate policymakers with different instruments improve policy outcomes
and therefore welfare according to the Tinbergen rule, provided that
the policies have complementary effects on the two objectives. In
contrast, when the effects from policy interplay are conflicting and
coordination between policymakers is limited, internalising negative
externalities by assigning both mandates to a central bank reduces the
possible welfare losses.
The interaction between
macroeconomic policies occurs because both macroprudential and monetary
policy share the same transmission channels. Under specific
economic circumstances, price and financial stability policy goals may
conflict with one another, with policy actions potentially offsetting
each other. First, although largely pro-cyclical, financial cycles tend
to be longer than business cycles, which may lead to a decoupling
between financial circumstances and economic fundamentals. Second, and
perhaps more importantly, several propagation channels of monetary
policy transmission are likely to interact with bank stability and
ultimately with the stability of the financial system, in an asymmetric
fashion. Policy rate adjustments influence asset and collateral prices
which, through the financial accelerator mechanism (see Bernanke and
Gertler, 1995), may encourage excessive risk-taking behaviour,
undermining the goal of financial stability. Asset and collateral prices
respond positively to a policy rate cut, especially when perceived to
be prolonged, leading to an ease of credit standards, which stimulates
credit provision and encourages banks and borrowers to take on greater
risks. As such, monetary policy transmission via the asset pricing and
risk-taking channels may sow the seeds for financial instability (see
Borio and Zhu, 2012).
In this brief, we revisit an old
debate regarding the separation of the two policy mandates, taking also
into consideration the new institutional arrangements encompassing
macroprudential policy. We examine whether the institutional
structure of policymaking affects macroeconomic outcomes by influencing
the monetary and prudential policies interaction and the central banks’
primary objective of inflation stabilisation.
SUERF
© SUERF
Key
Hover over the blue highlighted
text to view the acronym meaning
Hover
over these icons for more information
Comments:
No Comments for this Article