|
|
|
| Quantity Rule or Price Rule: Theoretical Foundation of the Admixed Monetary Rule in China's Transition Period |
| LI Hongjin, SU Naifang
|
Research Bureau, the People's Bank of China;
Research Institute, the People's Bank of China |
|
|
|
Abstract In recent years, the Chinese economy has been shifting from rapid growth to high-quality development. In this situation, monetary policy should adopt aggregated and structural regulations to keep liquidity at an adequate level and to help the real economy. With the rapid development of Chinese financial innovation and financial disintermediation, the effects of quantity regulation (which controls the money supply as the intermediate goal) are decreasing. In particular, Chinese interest rate marketization has entered a new stage, where the core feature is a mechanism for the formation and control of market-oriented interest rates. Monetary policy should now be transformed from quantity-based regulation to price-based regulation.
The regulation of quantity and price are interactive processes. It is necessary to maintain the balance between quantity and price. In the transformation of China's monetary policy, the combination of quantity and price regulation has played a vital role in stabilizing economic growth and inflation. A lot of studies have shown that purely quantity-regulating rules such as the McCallum rule, or purely interest rate-regulating rules such as the Taylor rule cannot fully explain China's monetary policy. Therefore, it is important to study the relationship between monetary rules regarding both quantity and price, and to explore a quantity-price admixed monetary policy. Such an admixed rule policy can help us to comprehensively understand Chinese monetary policy regulation during transformation.
In this study, we construct our model based on the Fisher equation and the money-in-the-utility model. We analyze the relationship between the monetary quantity rule and the price rule, and construct a quantity-price admixed monetary policy rule. It is of great theoretical and practical importance for interpreting the regulation of China's monetary policy. On one hand, the admixed monetary policy rule verifies the equivalence of the quantity rule and the price rule. When output deviates from potential output, or inflation deviates from the inflation target, we can regulate these imbalances through either interest rate instruments or currency instruments. Quantitative instruments and interest rate instruments complement each other. At the same time, when the currency deviates from the target level, we can also regulate the problem through interest rate instruments. When the interest rate deviates from the natural rate, we can use currency instruments. However, in terms of practice, the quantity and price of money are equivalent as two sides of a coin, so that the money supply and the market interest rate both have important roles in monetary regulation. The admixed monetary policy rule is important for analyzing the typical issues that arise during the transformation of China's monetary policy regulations.
We make some inferences based on our admixed monetary policy. First, we find that under equilibrium conditions, the directions of quantity regulation and of interest rate regulation are opposite. If the interest rate is lower than the natural interest rate's level, then the actual growth rate of the money supply will be greater than the optimal growth rate. This inference explains the fact that although our interest rate is controlled at low levels, and our money supply exceeds the potential level, the Chinese economy has not experienced severe inflation. Second, we construct a modified Taylor principle that is suitable for China's monetary policy. With the admixed quantity-price rule, when the money supply's rate of growth exceeds the potential level, the adjustment of interest rates can be less than the change of the inflation rate, and the prices can also be stable. This inference explains why the standard Taylor principle is not established in China. Therefore, with a distorted interest rate, we can also achieve price stability. Third, we analyze the liquidity effect in China. We find that with the admixed rule, if the growth rate of the money supply is smaller than the optimal level, the interest rate's fluctuation will be larger than that indicated by the principle Taylor rule. However, when the money supply's rate of growth is higher than the optimal level, the interest rate will be stable. This inference explains the fluctuations of interest rate with the changes to the liquidity conditions, and especially the growing fluctuations of interest rates seen since 2011. The study's empirical analysis verifies the assumptions of our model and our inferences.
It is urgent to transform our monetary policy from a quantity-based to a price-based system of regulation. In the future, the central bank should further improve open market operation and develop innovative liquidity management tools, so as to effectively regulate the interest rates, thereby creating a favorable financial environment for high-quality development of the Chinese economy.
|
|
Received: 09 September 2019
Published: 02 November 2020
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] |
葛结根和向祥华,2008,《麦卡勒姆规则在中国货币政策中的实证检验》,《统计研究》第11期,第24~29页。
|
| [2] |
李宏瑾,2012,《基于标准泰勒规则的我国货币市场利率偏离估算》,《金融评论》第2期,第43~53页。
|
| [3] |
李宏瑾,2019,《货币政策两分法、操作(中间)目标与货币调控方式》,《金融评论》第3期,第1-17页。
|
| [4] |
刘斌,2003,《最优货币政策规则的选择及在我国的应用》,《经济研究》第9期,第3~13页。
|
| [5] |
孟宪春,张屹山和李天宇,2018,《转型时期中国最优货币政策反应机制研究》,《世界经济研究》第7期,第15~24页。
|
| [6] |
孟宪春,张屹山和李天宇,2019,《中国经济“脱实向虚”背景下最优货币政策规则研究》,《世界经济》第5期,第27~48页。
|
| [7] |
王曦、汪玲、彭玉磊和宋晓飞,2017,《中国货币政策规则的比较分析——基于 DSGE模型的三规则视角》,《经济研究》第9期,第24~38页。
|
| [8] |
王宇和李宏瑾,2015,《利率市场化条件下的中央银行基准利率》,《金融评论》第2期,第43~56页。
|
| [9] |
熊海芳和王志强,2014,《基于市场利率的利率偏离与央行学习行为》,《宏观经济研究》第11期,第39~46页。
|
| [10] |
徐宁和丁一兵,2020,《混合型货币政策规则的宏观调控效应研究——基于宏观经济稳增长和金融系统防风险双重视角》,《浙江社会科学》第4期,第27~36页。
|
| [11] |
徐忠,2018,《经济高质量发展阶段的中国货币调控方式转型》,《金融研究》第4期,第1~19页。
|
| [12] |
易纲,2019,《新中国成立70年金融事业取得辉煌成就》,《中国金融》第19期,第9~13页。
|
| [13] |
张晓慧,2015,《货币政策的发展、挑战与前瞻》,《中国金融》第19期,第28~30页。
|
| [14] |
中国人民银行营业管理部,2013,《中央银行利率引导——理论、经验分析与中国的政策选择》,《金融研究》第9期,第44~55页。
|
| [15] |
周小川,2013,《新世纪以来中国货币政策主要特点》,《中国金融》第2期,第9~14页。
|
| [16] |
Beyer, A., V. Gaspar, C. Gerberding and O. Issing, 2013, “Opting out of the Great Inflation”, in The Great Inflation: The Rebirth of Modern Central Banking, Bordo, M. and A. Orphanides (eds.), 301~346.
|
| [17] |
Bindseil, U., 2004, Monetary Policy Implementation: Theory, Past and Present. New York: Oxford University Press.
|
| [18] |
Friedman, B., 1990, “Targets and Instruments of Monetary Policy”, in Handbook of Monetary Economics, (2): 1185~1230.
|
| [19] |
Friedman, B. and K. Kuttner, 2011, “Implementation of Monetary Policy”, in Handbook of Monetary Economics, (3):1345~1438.
|
| [20] |
Gali, J., 2015, Monetary Policy, Inflation, and the Business Cycle: A Introduction to the New Keynesian Framework. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
|
| [21] |
Hartmann, P. and F. Smets, 2018, “The First Twenty Years of the European Central Bank”, European Central Bank Working Papers, No. 2219.
|
| [22] |
He, D. and H. Wang, 2012, “Dual-Track Interest Rate and the Conduct of Monetary Policy in China”, China Economic Review, 23(4): 928-947.
|
| [23] |
Kahn, G., 2012, “The Taylor Rule and the Practice of Central Banking”, in The Taylor Rule and the Transformation of Monetary Policy, Koenig, E., R. Leeson and G. Kahn (ed.), 70~101
|
| [24] |
Kilponen, J. and K. Leitemo, 2008, “Model Uncertainty and Delegation”, Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 40(2/3): 547~556.
|
| [25] |
Li, H. and N. Su, 2020, “Financial Factors, Openness and the Natural Interest Rate in China”, China & World Economy, 28(4):76~100
|
| [26] |
McCallum, B., 1984. “Monetarist Rules in the Light of Recent Experience”, American Economic Review, 74(2): 388~391.
|
| [27] |
McCallum,B. and E. Nelson, 1998. “Performance of Operational Policy Rules in an Estimated Semi-Classical Structural Model,” NBER Working Paper, No. 6599.
|
| [28] |
Nelson, E., 2012, “A Comparison with Milton Friedman”, in The Taylor Rule and the Transformation of Monetary Policy, Koenig, E., R. Leeson and G. Kahn (ed.), 102~129.
|
| [29] |
Orphanides,A., 2003, “Historical Monetary Policy Analysis and the Taylor Rule”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 50(5): 983~1022.
|
| [30] |
Poole, W., 1970, “Optimal Choice of Monetary Policy Instrument in A Simple Stochastic Macro Model”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(2): 197~216.
|
| [31] |
Sargent,T., and P. Surico, 2011, “Two Illustrations of the Quantity Theory of Money: Breakdowns and Revivals”,American Economic Review, 101(1): 109~128.
|
| [32] |
Samarina, A. and N. Apokoritis, 2020, “Evolution of Monetary Policy Frameworks in the Post-Crisis Environment”, DNB Working Papers, No.664.
|
| [33] |
Taylor, J., 1993, “Discretion Versus Policy Rules in Practice”, Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, 39(1): 195~214.
|
| [34] |
Taylor, J., 1999, “A Historical Analysis of Monetary Policy Rules”, in Monetary Policy Rules, Taylor, J. (ed.), 319~348.
|
| [35] |
Woodford, M., 2001, “The Taylor Rule and Optimal Monetary Policy”, American Economic Review, 91(2): 232~237.
|
| [36] |
Woodford, M., 2008, “How Important Is Money in the Conduct of Monetary Policy？”, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 40(8): 1561~1598.
|
|
|
|
