Keynesian government spending multipliers and spillovers in the euro area

被引:46
|
作者
Cwik, Tobias [1 ]
Wieland, Volker
机构
[1] Goethe Univ Frankfurt, D-6000 Frankfurt, Germany
关键词
MONETARY-POLICY; MACROECONOMIC POLICY; MODEL; LESSONS; RULES;
D O I
10.1111/j.1468-0327.2011.00268.x
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The global financial crisis has led to a renewed interest in discretionary fiscal stimulus. Advocates of discretionary measures emphasize that government spending can stimulate additional private spending - the Keynesian multiplier effect. Thus, we investigate whether the spending package announced by euro area governments for 2009 and 2010 is likely to boost GDP by more than one for one. Because of modelling uncertainty, it is essential that such policy evaluations be robust to alternative modelling assumptions and parameterizations. We use five different empirical macroeconomic models with Keynesian features such as price and wage rigidities to evaluate the impact of the fiscal stimulus. Four of them suggest that the planned increase in government spending will reduce private consumption and investment significantly. Only a model that largely ignores the forward-looking behavioural response of consumers and firms implies crowding-in of private spending. We review a range of issues that may play a role in the recession of 2008-2009. Implementation lags are found to reinforce crowding-out and may even cause an initial contraction. Zero-bound effects may lead the central bank to abstain from interest rate hikes and increase the GDP impact of government spending. Crowding-in, however, requires an immediate anticipation of at least two years at the zero bound. Using a multi-country model, we find that spillovers between euro area countries are negligible or even negative, because direct demand effects are offset by the indirect effect of a euro appreciation. New-Keynesian dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) models provide a strong case for government savings packages. Announced with sufficient lead time, spending cuts induce a significant short-run stimulus and crowding-in of private spending.
引用
收藏
页码:493 / 549
页数:57
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] New Keynesian versus old Keynesian government spending multipliers
    Cogan, John F.
    Cwik, Tobias
    Taylor, John B.
    Wieland, Volker
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC DYNAMICS & CONTROL, 2010, 34 (03): : 281 - 295
  • [2] The impact of r-g on Euro-Area government spending multipliers
    Di Serio, Mario
    Fragetta, Matteo
    Melina, Giovanni
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL MONEY AND FINANCE, 2021, 119
  • [3] On the size of the government spending multiplier in the euro area
    Feve, Patrick
    Sahuc, Jean-Guillaume
    [J]. OXFORD ECONOMIC PAPERS-NEW SERIES, 2015, 67 (03): : 531 - 552
  • [4] New Keynesian versus old Keynesian government spending multipliers (vol 34, pg 281, 2010)
    Cogan, John F.
    Cwik, Tobias
    Taylor, John B.
    Wieland, Volker
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC DYNAMICS & CONTROL, 2010, 34 (10): : 2229 - 2229
  • [5] Withering Government Spending Multipliers
    Canzoneri, Matthew
    Collard, Fabrice
    Dellas, Harris
    Diba, Behzad
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MONEY CREDIT AND BANKING, 2012, 44 : 185 - 210
  • [6] Fiscal spillovers in the Euro area
    Caporale, Guglielmo Maria
    Girardi, Alessandro
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL MONEY AND FINANCE, 2013, 38 : 84 - 84
  • [7] The euro-area government spending multiplier at the effective lower bound
    Amendola, Adalgiso
    Di Serio, Mario
    Fragetta, Matteo
    Melina, Giovanni
    [J]. EUROPEAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2020, 127
  • [8] On the size of government spending multipliers in Europe
    Kempa, Bernd
    Khan, Nazmus Sadat
    [J]. APPLIED ECONOMICS, 2015, 47 (51) : 5548 - 5558
  • [9] What determines government spending multipliers?
    Corsetti, Giancarlo
    Meier, Andre
    Mueller, Gernot J.
    [J]. ECONOMIC POLICY, 2012, (72) : 521 - 565
  • [10] Government spending multipliers in contraction and expansion
    Qazizada, W.
    Stockhammer, E.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF APPLIED ECONOMICS, 2015, 29 (02) : 238 - 258