Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics

Editor-in-Chief: Cavalcanti, Tiago / Kambourov, Gueorgui

Ed. by Abraham, Arpad / Carceles-Poveda , Eva / Debortoli, Davide / Lambertini, Luisa / Nimark, Kristoffer / Wang, Pengfei

2 Issues per year

IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.378
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.462

CiteScore 2017: 0.62

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.553
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.605

See all formats and pricing
More options …

Signaling in monetary policy near the zero lower bound

Sergio Salas / Javier Nuñez
  • Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Valparaiso, Escuela de Negocios y Economia, AV Brasil 2830, Valparaiso, Chile
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2018-07-11 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/bejm-2016-0114


What are the consequences of asymmetry of information about the future state of the economy between a benevolent Central Bank (CB) and private agents near the zero lower bound? How is the conduct of monetary policy modified under such a scenario? We propose a game theoretical signaling model, where the CB has better information than private agents about a future shock hitting the economy. The policy rate itself is the signal that conveys information to private agents in addition to its traditional role in the monetary transmission mechanism. We find that only multiple “pooling equilibria” arise in this environment, where a CB privately forecasting a contraction will most likely follow a less expansionary policy compared to a complete information context, in order to avoid making matters worse by revealing bad times ahead. On the other hand, a CB privately forecasting no contraction is most likely to distort its complete information policy rate, the consequences of which are welfare detrimental. However, this is necessary because deviating from the pooling policy rate would be perceived by private agents as an attempt to mislead them into believing that a contraction is not expected, which would be even more harmful for society.

Keywords: monetary policy; signaling; zero lower bound

JEL Classification: E58; C72


  • Aoki, Kosuke. 2003. “On the Optimal Monetary Policy Response to Noisy Indicators.” Journal of Monetary Economics 50 (3): 501–523.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Baeriswyl, Romain, and Camille Cornand. 2010. “The Signaling Role of Policy Actions.” Journal of Monetary Economics 57: 682–695.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Benigno, Pierpaolo. 2009. “New-Keynesian Economics: An AS-AD View.” Working paper, NBER.Google Scholar

  • Cho, In-Koo, and David Kreps. 1987. “Signaling Games and Stable Equilibria.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 102 (2): 179–221.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cooper, Russell, and Andrew John. 1988. “Coordinating Coordination Failures in Keynesian Models.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 103 (3): 441–463.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Eichenbaum, Martin. 1992. “Interpreting Macroeconomic Time Series Facts: The Effects of Monetary Policy: Comments.” European Economic Review 36: 1001–1011.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Frankel, Alex, and Navin Kartik. 2017. “What Kind of Central Bank Competence?.” Technical report, Columbia University.Google Scholar

  • Gust, Christopher, Banjamin Johannsen, and David Lopez-Salido. 2015. “Monetary Policy, Incomplete Information, and the Zero Lower Bound.” Technical report, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.Google Scholar

  • Hubert, Paul. 2015. “Do Central Bank Forecasts Influence Private Agents? Forecasting Performance versus Signals.” Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 47 (4): 771–789.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Mankiw, Gregory, and Matthew Weinzierl. 2011. “An Exploration of Optimal Stabilization Policy.” Working paper, The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar

  • Melosi, Leonardo. 2015. “Signaling Effects of Monetary Policy.” Working paper, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.Google Scholar

  • OECD. 2003. “Business Tendency Surveys: A Handbook.” Technical report, Paris.Google Scholar

  • Pedersen, Michael. 2015. “What Affects the Predictions of Private Forecasters? The Role of Central Bank Forecasts in Chile.” International Journal of Forecasting 31: 1043–1055.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Peek, Joe, Eric Rosengreen, and Geoffrey Tootell. 2003. “Does the Federal Reserve Possess an Exploitable Informational Advantage?” Journal of Monetary Economics 50: 817–839.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Romer, Christina, and David Romer. 2000. “Federal Reserve Information and the Behavior of Interest Rates.” American Economic Review 90 (3): 429–457.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Sims, Christopher. 1992. “Interpreting the Macroeconomic Time Series Facts: The Effects of Monetary Policy.” European Economic Review 36: 975–1000.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Tang, Jenny. 2015. “Uncertainty and the Signaling Channel of Monetary Policy.” Working paper, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.Google Scholar

  • Vickers, John. 1986. “Signalling in a Model of Monetary Policy with Incomplete Information.” Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy 38 (3): 443–445.Google Scholar

  • Walsh, Carl. 2007. “Optimal Economic Transparency.” International Journal of Central Banking 3: 5–36.Google Scholar

  • Woodford, Michael. 2003. Interest and Prices: Foundations of a Theory of Monetary Policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2018-07-11

Citation Information: The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, 20160114, ISSN (Online) 1935-1690, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/bejm-2016-0114.

Export Citation

©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in