Aghevli, Bijan B., Tamim Bayoumi, and Guy Meredith, eds. 1998, Structural Change in Japan: Macroeconomic Impact and Policy Challenges (Washington: International Monetary Fund).
Bayoumi, Tamim, 1999, “The Morning After: Explaining the Slowdown in Japanese Growth in the 1990s,” IMF Working Paper No. WP/99/13 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).
Bernanke, Ben S., and Alan S. Blinder, 1992, “The Federal Funds Rate and the Channels of Monetary Transmission,” American Economic Review, Vol. 82 (September), pp.901–21.
Bernanke, Ben S., and Mark Gertler, 1995, “Inside the Black Box: The Credit Channel of Monetary Policy Transmission,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 9 (Fall), pp. 27–28.
Christiano, Lawrence J., Martin Eichenbaum, and Charles Evans, 1996, “The Effects of Monetary Policy Shocks: Evidence from the Flow of Funds,” Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 78 (February), pp. 16–34.
Christiano, Lawrence J., Martin Eichenbaum, and Charles Evans, 1999, “Monetary Policy Shocks: What Have We Learned and To What End?” in Handbook of Macroeconomics, ed. by John B. Taylor Michael Woodford (Amsterdam: Elsevier).
Gibson, Michael, 1995, “Can Bank Health Affect Investment? Evidence from Japan,” Journal of Business Vol. 68 (July) pp. 281–308.
Ito, Takatoshi, and Yuri Nagataki Sasaki, 1998, “Impacts of the Basle Capital Standard on Japanese Banks’ Behavior,” NBER Working Paper No. 6730 (Cambridge, Massachusetts: National Bureau of Economic Research).
Kasa, Ken, and Helen Popper, 1997, “Monetary Policy in Japan: A Structural VAR Analysis” Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 275–95.
Kashyap, Anil K., and Jeremy C. Stein, 1997, “What Do a Million Observations on Banks Say About the Transmission of Monetary Policy?” NBER Working Paper No. 6065 (Cambridge, Massachusetts: National Bureau of Economic Research).
Krugman, Paul R., 1998, “It’s Baaack: Japan’s Slump and the Return of the Liquidity Trap,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: 2, Brookings Institution pp. 137–205.
Kwon, Eunkyung, 1998 “Monetary Policy, Land Prices, and Collateral Effects on Economic Fluctuations: Evidence from Japan,” Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Vol. 12.
Leeper, Eric M., Christopher A. Sims, and Tao Zha, 1996, “What Does Monetary Policy Do?” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: 2, Brookings Institution pp.1–78.
Lipworth, Gabrielle, and Guy Meredith, 1998, “A Reexamination of Indicators of Monetary Policy and Financial Conditions,” in Structural Change in Japan, ed. by Bijan B. Aghevli, Tamim Bayoumi, and Guy Meredith (Washington: International Monetary Fund).
Mishkin, Frederick, 1995, “Symposium on the Monetary Transmission Mechanism,” Journal of Economics Perspective, Vol. 9 (Fall), pp. 3–10.
Ogawa, Kazuo, 1999, “Monetary Policy, Credit, and Real Activity: Evidence from the Balance Sheets of Japanese Firms,” paper prepared for the NBER Japan Project meeting in Palo Alto.
Okina, Kunio, 1993, “Market Operations in Japan: Theory and Practice,” in Japanese Monetary Policy, ed. by Kenneth J. Singleton (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
Ramaswamy, Ramana, and Christel Rendu, 1999, “Japan’s Stagnant Nineties: A Vector Autoregression Perspective,” IMF Working Paper No. WP/99/45 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).
Sekine, Toshitaka, 1999. “Firm Investment and Balance-Sheet Problems in Japan,” IMF Working Paper No. WP/99/111 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).
Sims, Christopher A., 1992, “Interpreting the Macroeconomic Time Series Facts: The Effects of Monetary Policy,” European Economic Review, Vol. 36, No. 5, pp. 875–1011.
Ueda, Kazuo, 1993, “A Comparative Perspective on Japanese Monetary Policy: Short-Term Monetary Control and the Transmission Mechanism,” in Japanese Monetary Policy, ed. by Kenneth J. Singleton (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
Woo, David, 1999, “In Search of Capital Crunch: Supply Factors Behind the Credit Slowdown in Japan,” IMF Working Paper No. WP/99/3 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).
The authors would like to thank an anonymous referee and their IMF colleagues for valuable comments, especially Timothy Callen, Charles Collyns, Patricia Reynolds, and participants in an IMF Asia and Pacific Department seminar, and Fritz Pierre-Louis for excellent research assistance..
By contrast, the wealth channel may be relatively unimportant in Japan given the limited ownership of equities by individuals.
Two different views of the banking crisis are contained in the literature. Krugman (1998) argues that bank weakness has had little impact on the effectiveness of monetary policy as impaired banks tend to lend too much, not too little. By contrast, Bayoumi (1999) finds that the negative shocks to bank lending, either autonomous or caused by falling asset prices, provided a major deflationary impetus over the 1990s.
The inclusion of the real effective exchange rate yields similar results for these variables and plausible results for the exchange rate. Given that Japan—like the U.S.—is a relatively closed economy and that the exchange rate channel is not the focus of this paper, we omit the exchange rate from subsequent models.
An alternative interpretation is that the multiplier on government spending is unity, a value used in other IMF work (Lipworth and Meredith, 1998), although recent empirical work has pointed to a somewhat lower value (Bayoumi, 1999).
The data sources are provided in Appendix I. Since activity and money are measured as ratios to potential output, prices are in logarithms, and the nominal interest rate is a ratio, a change of 0.01 represents a 1 percentage point change in the relevant variable.
See also Singleton (1993) and Ueda (1993) in the same volume. Kasa and Popper (1997), who use a structural VAR approach to study the objectives and operating procedures of the BOJ, also conclude that short rates are important.
The stock price index for the banking sector from the Tokyo Stock Exchange is available starting in 1983, truncating the sample period. The variable is normalized to unity over the sample period, so that changes have the interpretation of percentage deviations. This variable was ordered last in the VAR, given that market prices generally respond quickly to all types of shocks.
Detailed results for this VAR and the others reported in the paper are contained in Appendix II, including two-standard-error bands around the impulse responses. The analytic asymptotic standard errors are computed according to the formula given in Hamilton (1994, page 339). Similar results were obtained using Monte Carlo standard errors.
This multiplier is similar to that obtained by Bayoumi (1999), who uses a VAR methodology with a different set of variables, although only about half of that obtained by Lipworth and Meredith (1998), who use the Japan block of the IMF’s MULTIMOD model, and at the lower end of the range of estimates from large econometric models presented by Krugman (1998).
The introduction of commodity prices reduces this source of bias in empirical work on the United States (see, for example, Christiano, Eichenbaum, and Evans, 1996). However, neither commodity prices nor stock prices resolved the price puzzle in Japan.
The source of the forecast error is the variation in current and future values of the innovations to each variable in the VAR.
Since broad money is roughly equivalent to the liabilities of the banking system, this result also suggests that banks in particular may play an important role in the transmission mechanism. This is further supported by other results (not reported for the sake of brevity) in which M2 was divided into M1 and quasi-money. The results from this model indicate that it is quasi-money (time and savings deposits) rather than Ml (currency and demand deposits) that primarily affects real demand.
The equation for base money is ordered second to last (before broad money but after the short-term interest rate to account for the impact of interest rate changes on base money). The results are similar if base money is ordered last.
The components of private demand being consumption, business investment, residential investment, exports, and imports.
Note that the sum of these components—0.3 percent of potential—is very close to the result found for total private demand in the basic model, indicating that the decomposition into separate components of demand is broadly consistent with the aggregate results.
These data come from the flow of funds accounts. The securities markets series aggregates funds from bonds, corporate paper, and equities.
Responses of short-term interest rates are not reported as they were small and insignificant in the main model, as discussed earlier.
When the VAR is run without broad money, the impulse responses of private demand to innovations in bank loans and securities are somewhat larger, consistent with the view that these variables to some extent capture money shocks.
Balance-sheet-based measures of bank strength, such as a bank’s reported capital adequacy ratio, are suspect. For example, Long-Term Credit Bank reported a capital adequacy of over 10 percent for March 1998, just a few months before it was found to have negative net worth equivalent to over 14 percent of risk assets.
The results of the decomposition are similar if the VAR is reordered with the financial variables preceding the real variables.