You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
The Dynamic Effects of Money: Combining Short-Run and Long-Run Identifying Restrictions Using Bayesian Techniques
William D. Lastrapes
The Review of Economics and Statistics
Vol. 80, No. 4 (Nov., 1998), pp. 588-599
Published by: The MIT Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2646840
Page Count: 12
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Economic models, Money supply, Statistical models, Parametric models, Supply shocks, Vector autoregression, Macroeconomic modeling, Commodity prices, Mathematical independent variables, Economic growth models
Were these topics helpful?See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
This paper proposes a Bayesian approach to incorporating specification and identification uncertainty into a VAR analysis of the dynamic effects of money supply shocks on the macroeconomy. The approach follows Poirier (1991) in averaging over discrete model specifications in forming posterior densities of the dynamic responses to such shocks. Two distinct means of identifying money supply shocks are considered here: one that imposes contemporaneous restrictions, and one that imposes long-run monetary neutrality. I estimate bounds on dynamic responses that account for specification and parameter uncertainty, and find strong evidence of short-run real effects of money on the economy, including a liquidity effect for both long-term and short-term interest rates. Furthermore, some results differ substantially across identifying restrictions if model uncertainty is ignored.
The Review of Economics and Statistics © 1998 The MIT Press