Policymakers’ Revealed Preferences and the Output–Inflation Variability Trade–off: Implications for the European System of Central Banks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores two aspects of the conduct of monetary policy under a monetary union. First, even if the preferences of policymakers over inflation and output variability are identical across member countries, differences in economic structure will mean different desired policy responses to even a common shock. Second, policymakers may be forced to make important concessions in their preferences over inflation and output variability. To examine these issues, in this paper we estimate the objective functions that the European national central banks were implicitly maximizing over the 15 or so years prior to monetary union, as well as the slopes of the inflation–output variability trade–off in each country. While the slopes of the trade–offs vary dramatically across countries, the objective functions are quite similar, with most countries having weights in excess of three–quarters on inflation variability and less than one–quarter on output variability. Our findings suggest that the concessions (in terms of preferences over output and inflation variability) that current inflation–targeting countries such as the UK and Sweden would have to make on accession to the European Monetary Union (EMU) are likely to be minimal. On the other hand, the differences in economic structure across the Eurosystem countries might make it difficult to formulate a common policy even in the face of common goals, suggesting that there may still be significant costs to joining for countries currently outside the EMU.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it