Fiscal multiplier: Difference between revisions
imported>Nick Gardner |
imported>Nick Gardner |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
==Estimates== | ==Estimates== | ||
Economists' views about the size of the fiscal multiplier have usually been associated with their opinions about [[Keynesian economics]] - a subject on which they differ widely. The post-war consensus in favour of discretionary fiscal policy was associated with an implied assumption of a multiplier substantially above one, but the subsequent consensus in favour of the use of [[monetary policy]] implicitly assumed a fractional or negligible fiscal multiplier. When discretionary fiscal policy found favour again following the [[crash of 2008]] (with the prospect of a [[recession]] too deep to be managed, even by reducing the short-term interest rate to its zero bound), Christine Romer (chair of his Council of Economic Advisors) advised President Obama | Economists' views about the size of the fiscal multiplier have usually been associated with their opinions about [[Keynesian economics]] - a subject on which they differ widely. The post-war consensus in favour of discretionary fiscal policy was associated with an implied assumption of a multiplier substantially above one, but the subsequent consensus in favour of the use of [[monetary policy]] implicitly assumed a fractional or negligible fiscal multiplier. When discretionary fiscal policy found favour again following the [[crash of 2008]] (with the prospect of a [[recession]] too deep to be managed, even by reducing the short-term interest rate to its zero bound), Christine Romer (chair of his Council of Economic Advisors) advised President Obama that the [[fiscal stimulus]] then proposed would have a multiplier of about 1.6. That advice was contested at the time by Professor Barro, who argued on [[a priori]] grounds that the value would be near zero. A series of academic papers published some two years previously provided estimates in the range 1 to 1.5<ref>[http://fatasmihov.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/underestimating-fiscal-policy.html Antonio Fatas and Ilian Mihov, ''Underestimating Fiscal Policy Multipliers'', Vox, October 8 2012]</ref>, and Barry Eichengreen has derived an estimate of 1.6 from study of 27 countries in the 1930s (the last time when interest rates were at or near zero) | ||
<ref>[http://www.voxeu.org/article/gauging-multiplier-lessons-history Barry Eichengreen and Kevin H O’Rourke: ''Gauging the multiplier: Lessons from history'', Vox, 23 October 2012]</ref> | |||
<!-- | <!-- | ||
Christine Romer has argued that that it is "incredibly hard" to estimate the value of a multiplier because fiscal actions are often taken in response to other things happening in the economy, and separating the impact of those other factors from the impact of fiscal change very difficult. Failure to do so can result in [[omitted-variable bias]] resulting in an underestimate of the multiplier - an error that Ms Romer believes to be common. | Christine Romer has argued that that it is "incredibly hard" to estimate the value of a multiplier because fiscal actions are often taken in response to other things happening in the economy, and separating the impact of those other factors from the impact of fiscal change very difficult. Failure to do so can result in [[omitted-variable bias]] resulting in an underestimate of the multiplier - an error that Ms Romer believes to be common. | ||
Revision as of 02:49, 12 November 2012
The fiscal multiplier is the factor which relates an increase or decrease in real GDP, to the decrease or increase in the country's budget balance, that causes it.
Theoretical background
The multiplier effect model is an extension of the basic spending multiplier model that relaxes the simplifying assumptions of that model. In doing so, it extends an identity, that was concerned with the multiplicative effect of circular monetary flows, to create a relationship between a monetary injection and the consequent change in real (inflation-corrected) GDP. The outcome, though still termed "the multiplier", is a factor that is not necessarily greater than one, and whose value is dependent upon a range of behavioural and environmental influences. Theoretical considerations suggest that the size of the multiplier is influenced by an economy's exchange rate regime, its openness to trade, the effectiveness of its monetary policy, the degree of access to credit, and the states of consumer and investor expectations[1]. Its magnitude may be expected to depend critically upon the amount of unused capacity in an economy, and it is expected to be larger than average when the economy is in recession. Available theory provides little guidance as to the relative magnitude of those influences, however.
Applications
The fiscal multiplier is not just a component of economic forecasting models: it is also one of the determinants of fiscal policy. It determines the size of the fiscal stimulus necessary to counter a given recession. It determines the extent to which the benefits of fiscal consolidation are offset by reductions in output and employment. Also, by allowing for the resulting falls in tax revenue and rises in welfare payments, it can set a limit upon the rate of fiscal consolidation above which it would cause an increase - rather than the intended reduction - in the level of public debt.
Estimates
Economists' views about the size of the fiscal multiplier have usually been associated with their opinions about Keynesian economics - a subject on which they differ widely. The post-war consensus in favour of discretionary fiscal policy was associated with an implied assumption of a multiplier substantially above one, but the subsequent consensus in favour of the use of monetary policy implicitly assumed a fractional or negligible fiscal multiplier. When discretionary fiscal policy found favour again following the crash of 2008 (with the prospect of a recession too deep to be managed, even by reducing the short-term interest rate to its zero bound), Christine Romer (chair of his Council of Economic Advisors) advised President Obama that the fiscal stimulus then proposed would have a multiplier of about 1.6. That advice was contested at the time by Professor Barro, who argued on a priori grounds that the value would be near zero. A series of academic papers published some two years previously provided estimates in the range 1 to 1.5[2], and Barry Eichengreen has derived an estimate of 1.6 from study of 27 countries in the 1930s (the last time when interest rates were at or near zero) [3]
Policy implications
References
- ↑ Giancarlo Corsetti, Andre Meier, and Gernot J. Müller What Determines Government Spending Multipliers?, IMF Working Paper WP/12/150, June 2012
- ↑ Antonio Fatas and Ilian Mihov, Underestimating Fiscal Policy Multipliers, Vox, October 8 2012
- ↑ Barry Eichengreen and Kevin H O’Rourke: Gauging the multiplier: Lessons from history, Vox, 23 October 2012