Does the Effectiveness of Monetary Policy Depend on the Choice of Policy Instrument? Empirical Evidence from South Korea

IF 1.7 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.2478/jcbtp-2023-0021
M. C. Zuniga, D. Senbet
{"title":"Does the Effectiveness of Monetary Policy Depend on the Choice of Policy Instrument? Empirical Evidence from South Korea","authors":"M. C. Zuniga, D. Senbet","doi":"10.2478/jcbtp-2023-0021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study provides robust evidence on how the choice of the policy instrument for monetary policy influences its impact on economic activity. We study the case of South Korea for the period 1980-2017. We use FAVAR models that allow a comprehensive exploration of different areas of economic activity by overcoming limitations on a number of variables that can be included in the analysis in a traditional VAR model. Following the actual use of instruments, we test the effectiveness of monetary policy in two separate periods: 1980-1999, when the Bank of Korea mostly used M2 as the policy instrument; and then 2000-2017, when interest rate was the policy instrument. Our results show that monetary policy that uses interest rate as the policy instrument is markedly more effective in economic activity than M2. This is observable in the reaction from prices as well as variables that measure industrial production. In contrast, the impact of M2 mostly occurs in prices and it is short lived. We use robustness checks that switch the use of instrument for each subperiod and also test the use of each policy instrument for the entire period of analysis. The results hold, interest rates as policy instrument of monetary policy are more effective than M2.","PeriodicalId":44101,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/jcbtp-2023-0021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This study provides robust evidence on how the choice of the policy instrument for monetary policy influences its impact on economic activity. We study the case of South Korea for the period 1980-2017. We use FAVAR models that allow a comprehensive exploration of different areas of economic activity by overcoming limitations on a number of variables that can be included in the analysis in a traditional VAR model. Following the actual use of instruments, we test the effectiveness of monetary policy in two separate periods: 1980-1999, when the Bank of Korea mostly used M2 as the policy instrument; and then 2000-2017, when interest rate was the policy instrument. Our results show that monetary policy that uses interest rate as the policy instrument is markedly more effective in economic activity than M2. This is observable in the reaction from prices as well as variables that measure industrial production. In contrast, the impact of M2 mostly occurs in prices and it is short lived. We use robustness checks that switch the use of instrument for each subperiod and also test the use of each policy instrument for the entire period of analysis. The results hold, interest rates as policy instrument of monetary policy are more effective than M2.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
货币政策的有效性取决于政策工具的选择吗?来自韩国的经验证据
摘要本研究为货币政策工具的选择如何影响其对经济活动的影响提供了有力的证据。我们研究了1980-2017年期间韩国的情况。我们使用FAVAR模型,通过克服传统VAR模型中可以包含在分析中的许多变量的限制,可以全面探索不同的经济活动领域。根据工具的实际使用,我们在两个不同的时期测试了货币政策的有效性:1980-1999年,当时韩国银行大多使用M2作为政策工具;然后是2000-2017年,当时利率是政策工具。我们的研究结果表明,以利率为政策工具的货币政策在经济活动中明显比M2更有效。这可以从价格和衡量工业生产的变量的反应中观察到。相比之下,M2的影响主要发生在价格上,而且是短暂的。我们使用稳健性检查,在每个子周期切换工具的使用,并在整个分析周期测试每个政策工具的使用。结果表明,利率作为货币政策的政策工具比M2更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
57.10%
发文量
31
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice is a scientific journal dedicated to publishing quality papers and disseminating original, relevant and applicable economic research. Scientific and professional papers that are published in the Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice cover theoretical and practical aspects of central banking, monetary policy, including the supervision issues, as well as banking and management in central banks. The purpose of the journal is to educate the general public about the key issues that the central bankers globally face, as well as about contemporary research and achievements in the field of central banking theory and practice.
期刊最新文献
DLT Options for CBDC1 Swiss National Bank: Is the Recent Loss a Threat to Monetary Policy? A Research Note1 Central Bank Digital Currency Adoption Challenges, Solutions, and a Sentiment Analysis Do Financial Markets Allow the Independence of Central Banks? Financial Fragility in Developing Countries: An Analysis in the Context of Monetary Policy and Central Bank Independence
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1