Monetary Policy and Financial (In)stability: An Integrated Micro–Macro Approach
Journal of Financial Stability,
Evidence on central banks’ twin objective, monetary and financial stability, is scarce. We suggest an integrated micro–macro approach with two core virtues. First, we measure financial stability directly at the bank level as the probability of distress. Second, we integrate a microeconomic hazard model for bank distress and a standard macroeconomic model. The advantage of this approach is to incorporate micro information, to allow for non-linearities and to permit general feedback effects between financial distress and the real economy. We base the analysis on German bank and macro data between 1995 and 2004. Our results confirm the existence of a trade-off between monetary and financial stability. An unexpected tightening of monetary policy increases the probability of distress. This effect disappears when neglecting microeffects and non-linearities, underlining their importance. Distress responses are largest for small cooperative banks, weak distress events, and at times when capitalization is low. An important policy implication is that the separation of financial supervision and monetary policy requires close collaboration among members in the European System of Central Banks and national bank supervisors.
Evaluating the German (New Keynesian) Phillips Curve
IWH Discussion Papers,
This paper evaluates the New Keynesian Phillips Curve (NKPC) and its hybrid
variant within a limited information framework for Germany. The main interest rests on the average frequency of price re-optimization of ﬁrms. We use the labor income share as the driving variable and consider a source of real rigidity by allowing for a ﬁxed ﬁrm-speciﬁc capital stock. A GMM estimation strategy is employed as well as an identiﬁcation robust method that is based upon the Anderson-Rubin statistic. We ﬁnd out that the German Phillips Curve is purely forward looking. Moreover, our point estimates are consistent with the view that ﬁrms re-optimize prices every two to three quarters. While these estimates seem plausible from an economic point of view, the uncertainties around these estimates are very large and also consistent with perfect nominal price rigidity where ﬁrms never re-optimize prices. This analysis also oﬀers some explanations why previous results for the German NKPC based on GMM diﬀer considerably. First, standard GMM results are very sensitive to the way how orthogonality conditions are formulated. Additionally, model misspeciﬁcations may be left undetected by conventional J tests. Taken together, this analysis points out
the need for identiﬁcation robust methods to get reliable estimates for the NKPC.
Why do we have an interbank money market?
IWH Discussion Papers,
The interbank money market plays a key role in the execution of monetary policy. Hence, it is important to know the functioning of this market and the determinants of the interbank money market rate. In this paper, we develop an interbank money market model with a heterogeneous banking sector. We show that besides for balancing daily liquidity fluctuations banks participate in the interbank market because they have different marginal costs of obtaining funds from the central bank. In the euro area, which we refer to, these cost differences occur because banks have different marginal cost of collateral which they need to hold to obtain funds from the central bank. Banks with relatively low marginal costs act as intermediaries between the central bank and banks with relatively high marginal costs. The necessary positive spread between the interbank market rate and the central bank rate is determined by transaction costs and credit risk in the interbank market, total liquidity needs of the banking sector, costs of obtaining funds from the central bank, and the distribution of the latter across banks.