HONDA Yuzo Kobe Univ.: The School of Business Administration, 経営学部, 教授 (80137249)
FUJIWARA Kenya Hiroshima Univ.: Faculty of Economics: Ass. Professor, 経済学部, 助教授 (30229067)
UE Katsuya Univ. of Marketing and Distribution Sciences: Faculty of Information Science: Le, 情報学部, 講師 (10203423)
JINUSHI Toshiki Kobe Univ.: Faculty of Economics: Ass. Professor, 経済学部, 助教授 (60171089)
ISHIGAKI Kenichi Kobe Univ.: Research Institute for Economics and Business Administration: Profes, 経済経営研究所, 教授 (40047486)
山上 宏人 神戸市外国語大学, 外国語学部, 教授 (00094524)
|Budget Amount *help
¥6,300,000 (Direct Cost: ¥6,300,000)
Fiscal Year 1991: ¥2,500,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,500,000)
Fiscal Year 1990: ¥3,800,000 (Direct Cost: ¥3,800,000)
Final Research Results are to be published as a book titled World Financial Deregulation and Monetary Policy. Its first part deals with theories of monetary policy; it surveys standard literatures and shows the most recent developments. In the macro chapter, "the neutrality of money" is highlighted and, the theoretical developments are summarized, from the Keynesian --Monetarist debate to the recent New Classical-- New Keynesian debate. In the micro chapter, "the asymmetry of information" is the central concept; problems like the opotimality of the debt contract, credit rationing, and bank run are treated theoretically. In the chapter of international coordination, the possibility of adverse results caused by macro policy coordination is emphasized, and the justification for the BIS regulation is theoretically clarified, both using the game theoretic approach.
The second part has nine chapters on the country case studies; Japan, USA, Canada, Germany, France, England, Australia, and EC.
The evolution of financial system reforms, and the corresponding changes in monetary policy regimes, and the resulting macroeconomic performances are summarized for each country with clear division of time periods.
The third part compares the country case studies and tries to extract lessons from them. Firstly, among final policy goals, most countries gave top priority to high employment till the mid 70s and did so to low inflation since then to the mid 80s; but, currently, they are divided into two groups, the inflation-first group and the pragmatic group which adjust policy priorities corresponding to economic situations. Secondly, the history of the operating strategies shows the same pattern; "the discretion" was common till the mid 70s, and "the rule" was common since then till the mid 80s; currently, the pragmatic group adopts "the discretion" and the inflation-first group adapts "the rule". However, the distance between the two procedures have been lessened; neither groups no longer utilize the extreme strategies. Finally, it is asserted that the macroeconomic performances are not evidently different between the two groups. It might be the results of the significant convergence in the ways of policy operation but we must wait until future large shocks to evaluate the two directions fully. Less