Abstract:
Previous studies have interpreted the rise and fall of U.S. in ation after World War II in terms of the Fed's changing views about the natural rate hypothesis but have left an important question unanswered. Why was the Fed so slow to implement the low-in ation policy recommended by a natural rate model even after economists had developed statistical evidence strongly in its favor? Our answer features model uncertainty. Each period a central bank sets the systematic part of the in ation rate in light of updated probabilities that it assigns to three competing models of the Phillips curve. Cautious behavior induced by model uncertainty can explain why the central bank presided over the in ation of the 1970s even after the data had convinced it to place much the highest probability on the natural rate model.
Ordering information: This working paper can be ordered from Press and Information Division, European Central Bank, Kaiserstrasse 29, 60311 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
More papers in Working Paper Series from European Central Bank Address: Postfach 16 03 19, Frankfurt am Main, Germany Contact information at EDIRC. Series data maintained by Official Publications ().
This site is part of RePEc
and all the data displayed here is part of the RePEc data set.
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to
contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .