Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T05:51:19.228Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Neowicksellian in a New Classical World: The Methodology of Michael Woodford's Interest and Prices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2009

Kevin D. Hoover
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, University of California, 1 Shields Avenue, Davis, California 95616.

Extract

Michael Woodford's Interest and Prices: Foundations of a Theory of Monetary Policy (2003) is an important book. Woodford's title is, of course, a conscious revival of Wicksell's own famous work and it points to an effort to recast the analysis of monetary policy as centered on interest rates. I believe that Woodford's theoretical orientation is essentially correct. In repairing to Wicksell, he places the monetary aggregates into a more reasonable perspective, correcting the distortions of the monetarist and Keynesian diversions with respect to money. My money is, so to speak, where my mouth is: My own textbook-in-progress is also based around an IS/interest-rate rule/AS model, in which financial markets cleared by price rather than the LM curve are emphasized. Such an approach, as Woodford notes, has become standard in central banks, but has not yet captured either core undergraduate or graduate textbooks and instruction. My task here, however, was not to praise Woodford's economics nor to trace or evaluate its Wicksellian routes, but to consider Interest and Prices from a methodological point of view.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Arrow, Kenneth (1951) Social Choice and Individual Values (New York: Wiley).Google Scholar
Debreu, G. (1974) Excess Demand Functions, Journal of Mathematical Economics, 1 (1), pp. 1521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, Neil and Irons, John S. (1995) The Lucas Critique in Practice: Theory Without Measurement, in: Hoover, Kevin D. (Ed) Macroeconometrics: Developments, Tensions, and Prospects (Boston, MA: Kluwer), pp. 263324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estrella, Arturo and Fuhrer, Jeffrey C. (2000) Are “Deep” Parameters Stable? The Lucas Critique as an Empirical Hypothesis, working paper, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.Google Scholar
Favero, Carlo and Hendry, David F. (1992) Testing the Lucas Critique: A Review, Econometric Reviews, 11(3), pp. 265306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felipe, Jesus and Fisher, Franklin M. (2003) Aggregation in Production Functions: What Applied Economists Should Know, Metroeconomica, 54 (2–3), pp. 208–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorman, W. M. (1953) Community Reference Fields, Econometrica, 21 (1), pp. 6380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipsey, Richard G. and Lancaster, Kelvin (1956/1957) The General Theory of Second Best, Review of Economic Studies, 24 (1), pp. 1132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mantel, R. (1974) On the Characterization of Aggregate Excess Demand, Journal of Economic Theory, 7 (3), pp. 348–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marschak, Jacob (1953) Economic Measurements for Policy and Predictions, in: Hood, W. C. and Koopmans, T. C. (Eds) Studies in Econometric Method, Cowles Foundations Monograph no. 14 (New York: Wiley).Google Scholar
Sonnenschein, Hugo (1973) Do Walras' Identity and Continuity Characterize the Class of Community Excess Demand Functions?? Journal of Economic Theory, 6 (4), pp. 345–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sonnenschein, Hugo (1972) Market Excess Demand Functions, Econometrica, 40 (3), pp. 549–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodford, Michael (2003) Interest and Prices: Foundations of a Theory of Monetary Policy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar