4.6 Article

Banks, Liquidity Management, and Monetary Policy

期刊

ECONOMETRICA
卷 90, 期 1, 页码 391-454

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.3982/ECTA16599

关键词

Banking; liquidity management; credit channel of monetary policy

资金

  1. Fondation Banque de France
  2. Smith Richardson Foundation
  3. National Science Foundation [1324395]
  4. Divn Of Social and Economic Sciences
  5. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie [1324395] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We have developed a tractable model to study the credit channel of monetary policy, which includes an over-the-counter interbank market for banks' liquidity management. Our research shows how monetary policy affects the banking system by changing the trade-off between profiting from lending and facing greater liquidity risk. We present two applications, one examining the connection between the implementation of monetary policy and the pass-through to lending rates, and another analyzing a quantitative decomposition of the collapse in bank lending during the 2008 financial crisis. Our analysis highlights the importance of liquidity frictions and the functioning of interbank markets for the conduct of monetary policy.
We develop a tractable model of banks' liquidity management with an over-the-counter interbank market to study the credit channel of monetary policy. Deposits circulate randomly across banks and must be settled with reserves. We show how monetary policy affects the banking system by altering the trade-off between profiting from lending and incurring greater liquidity risk. We present two applications of the theory, one involving the connection between the implementation of monetary policy and the pass-through to lending rates, and another considering a quantitative decomposition behind the collapse in bank lending during the 2008 financial crisis. Our analysis underscores the importance of liquidity frictions and the functioning of interbank markets for the conduct of monetary policy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据