The Feasibility of Coordinating International Monetary Policy Strategies in the Context of Asymmetric Demand Shocks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of the increasing interdependence of countries due to the development of international trade, a relevant question arises as to whether it is necessary to conduct independent monetary policies for each country or whether it is advisable to coordinate these policies. This question becomes a key in the debate on optimal monetary policy strategies in open economies. The aim of this study is to analyze the impact of asymmetric aggregate demand shocks on the appropriateness of monetary policy coordination in a simple stochastic model of two interacting countries. The analysis of equilibrium states of the monetary authorities’ interaction strategies under study was carried out analytically by minimizing the loss function and solving one-period static optimization problems. The equilibrium states of macroeconomics of interacting countries under coordination of monetary policy and in cases of lack of coordination (Nash and Stackelberg equilibrium) in the presence of asymmetric, serially uncorrelated demand shocks have been analyzed. It is proven that the response of inflation to asymmetric demand shocks is smaller in the case of coordinated policy than in the case of non-cooperative policy. The loss function analysis shows that the compensation of demand shocks is found to be more costly in Nash equilibrium than in the case of monetary authority coordination policy. The analysis of the monetary authorities’ interaction strategies showed that the real exchange rate plays an important role in balancing supply and demand in the two economies.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".