The FOMC versus the Staff: Where Can Monetary Policymakers Add Value? / Christina D. Romer, David H. Romer.
Material type:data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/752e6/752e6942bd3b7b7c72280cd405e4d458d14c8e82" alt="Text"
- Hardcopy version available to institutional subscribers
Item type | Home library | Collection | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode | Item holds | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Working Paper | Biblioteca Digital | Colección NBER | nber w13751 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Not For Loan |
January 2008.
Should monetary policymakers take the staff forecast of the effects of policy actions as given, or should they attempt to include additional information? This paper seeks to shed light on this question by testing the usefulness of the FOMC's own forecasts. Twice a year, the FOMC makes forecasts of major macroeconomic variables. FOMC members have access to the staff forecasts when they prepare their forecasts. We find that the optimal combination of the FOMC and staff forecasts in predicting inflation and unemployment puts a weight of essentially zero on the FOMC forecast and essentially one on the staff forecast: the FOMC appears to have no value added in forecasting. The results for predicting real growth are less clear-cut. We also find statistical and narrative evidence that differences between the FOMC and staff forecasts help predict monetary policy shocks, suggesting that policymakers act in part on the basis of their apparently misguided information.
Hardcopy version available to institutional subscribers
System requirements: Adobe [Acrobat] Reader required for PDF files.
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
Print version record
There are no comments on this title.