National Bureau of Economic Research

About: National Bureau of Economic Research is a nonprofit organization based out in Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Monetary policy & Population. The organization has 2626 authors who have published 34177 publications receiving 2818124 citations. The organization is also known as: NBER & The National Bureau of Economic Research.

An Historical Analysis of Monetary Policy Rules

Abstract: This paper examines several episodes in U.S. monetary history using the framework of an interest rate rule for monetary policy. The main finding is that a monetary policy rule in which the interest rate responds to inflation and real output more aggressively than it did in the 1960s and 1970s, or than during the time of the international gold standard, and more like the late 1980s and 1990s, is a good policy rule. Moreover, if one defines rule, then such mistakes have been associated with either high and prolonged inflation or drawn out periods of low capacity utilization.

Implied Volatility Functions: Empirical Tests

Abstract: Derman and Kani (1994), Dupire (1994), and Rubinstein (1994) hypothesize that asset return volatility is a deterministic function of asset price and time, and develop a deterministic volatility function (DVF) option valuation model that has the potential of fitting the observed cross section of option prices exactly. Using S&P 500 options from June 1988 through December 1993, we examine the predictive and hedging performance of the DVF option valuation model and find it is no better than an ad hoc procedure that merely smooths Black–Scholes (1973) implied volatilities across exercise prices and times to expiration.

Combination forecasts of output growth in a seven-country data set

Abstract: This paper uses forecast combination methods to forecast output growth in a seven-country quarterly economic data set covering 1959‐1999, with up to 73 predictors per country. Although the forecasts based on individual predictors are unstable over time and across countries, and on average perform worse than an autoregressive benchmark, the combination forecasts often improve upon autoregressive forecasts. Despite the unstable performance of the constituent forecasts, the most successful combination forecasts, like the mean, are the least sensitive to the recent performance of the individual forecasts. While consistent with other evidence on the success of simple combination forecasts, this finding is difficult to explain using the theory of combination forecasting in a stationary environment. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Leverage, Investment, and Firm Growth

Abstract: We show that there is a negative relation between leverage and future growth at the firm level and, for diversified firms, at the segment level. Further, this negative relation between leverage and growth holds for firms with low Tobin's q, but not for high-q firms or firms in high-q industries. Therefore, leverage does not reduce growth for firms known to have good investment opportunities, but is negatively related to growth for firms whose growth opportunities are either not recognized by the capital markets or are not sufficiently valuable to overcome the effects of their debt overhang.

Does Monetary Policy Matter? a New Test in the Spirit of Friedman and Schwartz

Abstract: This paper uses the historical record to isolate episodes in which there were large monetary disturbances not caused by output fluctuations. It then tests whether these monetary changes have important real effects. The central part of the paper is a study of postwar U.S. monetary history. We identify six episodes in which the Federal Reserve in effect decided to attempt to create a recession to reduce inflation. We find that a shift to anti-inflationary policy led, on average, to a rise in the unemployment rate of two percentage points, and that this effect is highly statistically significant and robust to a variety of changes in specification. We reach three other major conclusions. First, the real effects of these monetary disturbances are highly persistent. Second, the six shocks that we identify account for a considerable fraction of postwar economic fluctuations. And third, evidence from the interwar era also suggests that monetary disturbances have large real effects.