Monetary Discretion, Pricing Complementarity and Dynamic Multiple Equilibria



3.1 Complementarity under homogeneous monetary policy

There are two mechanisms for complementarity in (17) and (18) that will be operative
in our analysis of both point-in-time and steady-state equilibria. First, holding fixed
the weights, P
0,t has a positive effect on the right-hand side in (17): it enters linearly
with a coefficient of
(εε¾) θt,t+imt+1, which is positive because firms are forward-looking
and the monetary authority raises nominal M
t+1 proportionately with P0,t . Hence the
specification of monetary policy has introduced some complementarity into an economy
in which it was previously absent.

Second, the weights in these expressions vary with the current price P0,t (or its normal-
ized counter part p
0,t). This additional channel plays an important role in our analysis.
A reference value for the weight θ
t,t+1 is one-half, since (12) implies that the weight is
β∕
(1 + β) with β close to one if if Pt = Pt+1. An upper bound on this weight is one: this
is a situation where firms place full weight on the future. Increases in the weight raise the
extent of the effect discussed above, i.e., they raise the coefficient ^ε>¾) θ
t,t+1mt+1 that
measures the extent of complementarity. The second mechanism is then that an increase
in P
0,t (or its normalized counterpart p0,t) raises the weight on the future. This occurs
because a firm’s profits are not symmetric around its optimal price. As the firm’s relative
price rises, its profits decline gradually, asymptotically reaching zero as the price goes to
infinity. By contrast, as the price falls, the firms profits decline sharply toward zero and
may even become highly negative if the firm is not allowed to shut down its operations.8
Thus, when P
0,t increases for all other firms, future monetary accommodation — and the
associated higher
nominal price set by firms in the future — automatically lower’s the
firm’s future relative price. The costliness of a low relative price leads the firm to put
increased weight on future marginal cost.

3.2 Equilibrium analysis of steady states

To characterize steady-state equilibria for arbitrary constant, homogeneous monetary
policies, we impose constant m and p
0 on the right hand side of (18). Steady-state
equilibria are fixed points of the resulting steady-state best-response function for p
0 :

εχ

Po =----τm[1 - θ(po,Po) + θ(po, Po)po],                      (20)

ε-1

8 At this point in the analysis, we do not explicitly take into account the shut-down possibility. But,
when we calculate discretionary equilibria, we do verify that the equilibria are robust to allowing firms to
shut down.

15



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. The name is absent
3. The name is absent
4. Personal Experience: A Most Vicious and Limited Circle!? On the Role of Entrepreneurial Experience for Firm Survival
5. The name is absent
6. Skills, Partnerships and Tenancy in Sri Lankan Rice Farms
7. Running head: CHILDREN'S ATTRIBUTIONS OF BELIEFS
8. Langfristige Wachstumsaussichten der ukrainischen Wirtschaft : Potenziale und Barrieren
9. Industrial Employment Growth in Spanish Regions - the Role Played by Size, Innovation, and Spatial Aspects
10. The name is absent
11. The name is absent
12. fMRI Investigation of Cortical and Subcortical Networks in the Learning of Abstract and Effector-Specific Representations of Motor Sequences
13. Consumer Networks and Firm Reputation: A First Experimental Investigation
14. The name is absent
15. The name is absent
16. FASTER TRAINING IN NONLINEAR ICA USING MISEP
17. An Interview with Thomas J. Sargent
18. A Bayesian approach to analyze regional elasticities
19. Citizenship
20. Midwest prospects and the new economy