DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Optimal Monetary Policy System for Both Macroeconomics and Financial Stability

거시경제와 금융안정을 종합 고려한 최적 통화정책체계 연구

  • Joonyoung Hur (Department of Economics, Sogang University) ;
  • Hyoung Seok Oh (Economic Modeling Division, Research Department, The Bank of Korea)
  • 허준영 (서강대학교 경제학부) ;
  • 오형석 (한국은행 조사국 경제모형실)
  • Received : 2023.11.04
  • Published : 2024.02.29

Abstract

The Bank of Korea, through a legal amendment in 2011 following the financial crisis, was entrusted with the additional responsibility of financial stability beyond its existing mandate of price stability. Since then, concerns have been raised about the prolonged increase in household debt compared to income conditions, which could constrain consumption and growth and increase the possibility of a crisis in the event of negative economic shocks. The current accumulation of financial imbalances suggests a critical period for the government and central bank to be more vigilant, ensuring it does not impede the stable flow of our financial and economic systems. This study examines the applicability of the Integrated Inflation Targeting (IIT) framework proposed by the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) for macro-financial stability in promoting long-term economic stability. Using VAR models, the study reveals a clear increase in risk appetite following interest rate cuts after the financial crisis, leading to a rise in household debt. Additionally, analyzing the central bank's conduct of monetary policy from 2000 to 2021 through DSGE models indicates that the Bank of Korea has operated with a form of IIT, considering both inflation and growth in its policy decisions, with some responsiveness to the increase in household debt. However, the estimation of a high interest rate smoothing coefficient suggests a cautious approach to interest rate adjustments. Furthermore, estimating the optimal interest rate rule to minimize the central bank's loss function reveals that a policy considering inflation, growth, and being mindful of household credit conditions is superior. It suggests that the policy of actively adjusting the benchmark interest rate in response to changes in economic conditions and being attentive to household credit situations when household debt is increasing rapidly compared to income conditions has been analyzed as a desirable policy approach. Based on these findings, we conclude that the integrated inflation targeting framework proposed by the BIS could be considered as an alternative policy system that supports the stable growth of the economy in the medium to long term.

한국은행은 금융위기 이후인 2011년 법 개정을 통해 기존의 물가안정 이외에 금융안정 책무를 추가로 부여받았는데, 그 이후 장기간에 걸쳐 가계신용이 소득 여건에 비해 빠르게 증가해 온 결과 최근의 가계부채 상황은 소비와 성장을 제약하고 부정적 경제충격발생 시 위기 발생 가능성을 높일 수 있다는 우려가 제기되고 있다. 현재의 금융불균형 누증 상황이 앞으로 우리 금융·경제의 안정적 흐름을 제약하지 않도록 정부와 중앙은행이 더욱 유의해야 할 시기인 것으로 판단된다. 본 연구는 BIS가 중장기 경제안정화를 위해 거시·금융안정(macro financial stability)을 모색하고자 제안한 정책운용 체계인 통합적 물가안정목표제(IIT)의 국내 적용 가능성을 점검해 보고, 정책적 시사점을 도출해 보았다. 우선 VAR 모형을 통해 통화정책의 주택가격, 가계부채 파급효과를 살펴본 결과, 금융위기 이후 금리 인하에 따른 위험선호 경향이 뚜렷하게 증대된 것으로 나타났다. 또한 DSGE 모형을 통해 2000년 이후 2021년까지 약 20여 년간의 통화정책 운영 행태를 분석해 본 결과, 한국은행은 기준금리 결정 시 물가와 성장을 종합적으로 고려하면서, 가계신용 증가에도 일부 대응한 것으로 나타나 약한 형태의 IIT를 운영한 것으로 분석되었다. 다만, 금리평활화 계수가 매우 높게 추정되어 금리 조정에 상당히 신중했던 것으로 나타났다. 한편, 중앙은행 손실함수를 최소화하는 최적 금리준칙을 추정해 본 결과, 물가와 성장을 균형적으로 감안하면서, 경제 여건 변화에 대응하여 기준금리를 보다 적극적으로 조정하고, 소득 여건에 비해 가계부채가 빠르게 증가하는 경우에는 가계신용 상황에도 유의하는 정책이 바람직한 정책방안으로 분석되었다. 이 같은 연구결과를 고려할 때 BIS가 제안한 통합적 물가안정목표제는 중장기시계에서 우리 경제의 안정적 성장을 뒷받침할 수 있는 정책체계 대안으로 고려해 볼 수 있을 것으로 판단된다.

Keywords

References

  1. 권도근.김대운.이시은.안주현. 2023. 「가계신용 누증 리스크 분석 및 정책적 시사점」, BOK이슈노트, 제2023-14호, 한국은행.
  2. 김인준.김성현.김소영.김진일.신관호. 2017. 「한국은행의 역할과 정책수단: 금융안정정책을 중심으로」, 「한국경제의 분석」, 23(1): 185-287. https://doi.org/10.22823/JKEA.23.1.201704.185
  3. 송인호. 2014. 「주택가격채널: 거시경제에 미치는 영향을 중심으로」, 「한국개발연구」, 36(4): 171-205.
  4. 오형석. 2014. 「칼만필터를 이용한 우리나라의 중립금리 추정」, 「금융연구」, 28(1): 1-26.
  5. 한국은행. 2018. 「2018년도 제22차 금융통화위원회(정기) 의사록」.
  6. 허준영. 2022. 「통화정책 운영체제별 정책효과 비교, 분석」, 「보험금융연구」, 107: 111-168.
  7. An, Sungbae and Frank Schorfheide. 2007. "Bayesian Analysis of DSGE Models," Econometric Reviews, 26(2-4): 113-172. https://doi.org/10.1080/07474930701220071
  8. Benigno, Pierpaolo and Michael Woodford. 2012. "Linear-quadratic Approximation of Optimal Policy Problems," Journal of Economic Theory, 147(1): 1-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jet.2011.10.012
  9. Bernanke, Ben S., Michael T. Kiley, and John M. Roberts. 2019. "Monetary Policy Strategies for a Low-rate Environment," American Economic Association Papers and Proceedings, 109: 421-426.
  10. Borio, Claudio and Haibin Zhu. 2012. "Capital regulation, risk-taking and monetary policy: A missing link in the transmission mechanism?" Journal of Financial Stability, 8(4): 236-251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfs.2011.12.003
  11. Cecchetti, Stephen G., Madhusudan S. Mohanty, and Fabrizio Zampolli. 2011. "The Real Effects of Debt", BIS Working Papers, No. 352.
  12. Christiano, Lawrence J., Martin Eichenbaum, and Charles L. Evans. 2005. "Nominal Rigidities and the Dynamic Effects of a Shock to Monetary Policy," Journal of Political Economy, 113(1): 1-45. https://doi.org/10.1086/426038
  13. Clarida, Richard, Jordi Gali, and Mark Gertler. 1998. "Monetary Policy Rules in Practice: Some International Evidence," European Economic Review, 42(6): 1033-1067. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-2921(98)00016-6
  14. Gali, Jordi and Tommaso Monacelli. 2005. "Monetary Policy and Exchange Rate Volatility in a Small Open Economy," Review of Economic Studies, 72(3): 707-734. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-937X.2005.00349.x
  15. Geweke, John. 1999. "Using Simulation Methods for Bayesian Econometric Models: Inference, Development, and Communication," Econometric Reviews, 18(1): 1-73. https://doi.org/10.1080/07474939908800428
  16. Han, Jong-Suk and Joonyoung Hur. 2020. "Macroeconomic Effects of Monetary Policy in Korea: A Time-varying Coefficient VAR Approach," Economic Modelling, 89: 142-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2019.10.002
  17. Iacoviello, Matteo. 2005. "House Prices, Borrowing Constraints, and Monetary Policy in the Business Cycle," American Economic Review, 95(3): 739-764. https://doi.org/10.1257/0002828054201477
  18. International Monetary Fund. 2010. Central Banking Lessons from the Crisis.
  19. Jorda, Oscar, Moritz Schularick, and Alan M. Taylor. 2015. "Leveraged Bubbles," Journal of Monetary Economics, 76(S): S1-S20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2015.08.005
  20. Kiley, Michael T. and John M. Roberts. 2017. "Monetary Policy in a Low Interest Rate World," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1: 317-396.
  21. Lombardi, Marco, Madhusudan S. Mohanty, and Ilhyock Shim. 2017. "The Real Effects of Household Debt in the Short and Long Run", BIS Working Papers, No. 607.
  22. Mountford, Andrew and Harald Uhlig. 2009. "What are the Effects of Fiscal Policy Shocks?" Journal of Applied Econometrics, 24(6): 960-992. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.1079
  23. Park, Donghyun, Kwanho Shin, and Shu Tian. 2022. "Household Debt, Corporate Debt, and the Real Economy: Some Empirical Evidence," Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 58(5): 1474-1490.
  24. Park, Donghyun, Kwanho Shin, and Shu Tian. 2023. "Debts and Depth of Recessions," International Review of Economics and Finance, 87: 468-485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2023.05.005
  25. Sims, Christopher A. 1980. "Macroeconomics and Reality," Econometrica, 48(1): 1-48. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912017
  26. Shin, Hyun Song and Kwanho Shin. 2023. "Macro-financial Stability Policy in a Globalised World: Lessons from Macro-Financial Policy in Korea," Chapter 11, Bank for International Settlements: 436-469.
  27. Uhlig, Harald. 2005. "What are the Effects of Monetary Policy on Output? Results from an Agnostic Identification Procedure," Journal of Monetary Economics, 52(2): 381-419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2004.05.007