Monetary policy by committee: Consensus, chairman dominance, or simple majority?

70Citations
Citations of this article
59Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This paper studies the theoretical and empirical implications of monetary policy making by committee under four different voting protocols. The protocols are a consensus model, where a supermajority is required for a policy change; an agenda-setting model, where the chairman controls the agenda; a dictator model, where the chairman has absolute power over the committee; and a simple majority model, where policy is determined by the median member. These protocols give preeminence to different aspects of the actual decision-making process and capture the observed heterogeneity in formal procedures across central banks. The models are estimated by maximum likelihood using interest rate decisions by the committees of five central banks, namely the Bank of Canada, the Bank of England, the European Central Bank, the Swedish Riksbank, and the U.S. Federal Reserve. For all central banks, results indicate that the consensus model fits actual policy decisions better than the alternative models. This suggests that despite institutional differences, committees share unwritten rules and informal procedures that deliver observationally equivalent policy decisions. © 2010 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Riboni, A., & Ruge-Murcia, F. J. (2010). Monetary policy by committee: Consensus, chairman dominance, or simple majority? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(1), 363–416. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2010.125.1.363

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free