×

Monetary policy rules under uncertainty: empirical evidence, adaptive learning, and robust control. (English) Zbl 1101.91346

Summary: We first explore empirical evidence of parameter and shock uncertainties in a state-space model with Markov switching. The evidence indicates that uncertainties in the U.S. economy have been too great to accurately define monetary policy rules. We then explore monetary policy rules under uncertainty with two approaches: the RLS learning algorithm and robust control. The former allows the parameters to be learned for a given model. Yet, as our results of the RLS learning in a framework of optimal control indicate, the state variables do not necessarily converge even in a nonstochastic model. The latter, by permitting uncertainty with respect to model misspecification, allows for a broader framework. Our study on robust control shows that robust optimal monetary policy rules reveal a stronger response to fluctuations in inflation and output than when no uncertainty exists, implying that uncertainty does not necessarily require caution.

MSC:

91B64 Macroeconomic theory (monetary models, models of taxation)
93E24 Least squares and related methods for stochastic control systems
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] DOI: 10.1007/s002110050241 · Zbl 0880.65045 · doi:10.1007/s002110050241
[2] DOI: 10.1016/j.jedc.2003.11.002 · Zbl 1202.49026 · doi:10.1016/j.jedc.2003.11.002
[3] DOI: 10.1016/S0014-2921(96)00055-4 · doi:10.1016/S0014-2921(96)00055-4
[4] DOI: 10.1016/S0014-2921(98)00016-6 · doi:10.1016/S0014-2921(98)00016-6
[5] DOI: 10.1093/rfs/15.2.363 · doi:10.1093/rfs/15.2.363
[6] DOI: 10.1162/003465302760556422 · doi:10.1162/003465302760556422
[7] DOI: 10.1017/S1365100502027050 · doi:10.1017/S1365100502027050
[8] DOI: 10.1017/S1365100502010325__S1365100502010325 · doi:10.1017/S1365100502010325__S1365100502010325
[9] Brainard, American Economic Review 52 pp 411– (1967)
[10] DOI: 10.1016/S0165-1889(01)00075-6 · Zbl 1100.91509 · doi:10.1016/S0165-1889(01)00075-6
[11] DOI: 10.1016/S0165-1889(98)00080-3 · Zbl 1007.91542 · doi:10.1016/S0165-1889(98)00080-3
[12] Jenkins, Bank of Canada Review 6 pp pp. 3– (2002)
[13] DOI: 10.1111/1467-9442.00275 · doi:10.1111/1467-9442.00275
[14] DOI: 10.1017/S1365100502027062 · doi:10.1017/S1365100502027062
[15] Sims, American Economic Review 91 pp 51– (2001) · doi:10.1257/aer.91.2.51
[16] DOI: 10.1017/S1365100504030019__S1365100503030013 · doi:10.1017/S1365100504030019__S1365100503030013
[17] DOI: 10.1162/003355300554692 · Zbl 1064.91512 · doi:10.1162/003355300554692
[18] Clarida, Journal of Economic Literature XXXVII pp 1661– (1999) · doi:10.1257/jel.37.4.1661
[19] DOI: 10.1162/00346530151143752 · doi:10.1162/00346530151143752
[20] DOI: 10.1023/A:1008753416708 · doi:10.1023/A:1008753416708
[21] DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3932(00)00023-4 · doi:10.1016/S0304-3932(00)00023-4
[22] DOI: 10.1016/S0165-1889(97)00062-6 · Zbl 0897.90051 · doi:10.1016/S0165-1889(97)00062-6
[23] DOI: 10.1016/S0165-1889(99)00075-5 · Zbl 0956.91068 · doi:10.1016/S0165-1889(99)00075-5
[24] DOI: 10.1111/1467-9442.00160 · doi:10.1111/1467-9442.00160
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.