Evolution of Monetary and Exchange Rate Policy in Sri Lanka
and the Way Forward
by
Dr. P. Nandalal Weerasinghe1
Senior Deputy Governor
Central Bank of Sri Lanka
I am deeply honoured to have been invited to deliver the Olcott Oration 2017 and to
join a list of great Anandians who have delivered this Oration before. I cannot think
of a greater honour that my school could confer on me. I accepted this invitation
with humbleness, with gratitude and respect, and with great pride. Let me also take
this opportunity to appreciate the support and guidance I received during my school
career at Ananda College. The guidance our teachers gave us laid the foundation for
any success later on in our lives.
My oration today, is on the rather technical topic of monetary and exchange rate
policy. The biggest challenge that I have to face is to present such a topic to an
audience with a majority who might not be familiar with the technical jargon
involved. However, I will attempt to keep the discussion as simple as possible.
Central Banking and Price Stability
The prime responsibility of any central bank around the world is to maintain price
stability by way of maintaining low and stable inflation on a sustainable basis. At the
outset, I would like to discuss why low and stable inflation is important for growth
and stability of the economy.
Based on experiences of many countries and different time periods, we have seen
varying levels of inflation. When countries experience hyperinflation, domestic
prices of goods and services will rise every minute. In such a situation, no one will
1
I would like to note that the views expressed in this oration are my own as an economist and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka. I also would like to acknowledge the
technical support received in preparing the oration from Dr Chandranath Amarasekara and his team
at the Economic Research Department of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka.
want to hold the local currency, and people will rush straight from the bank to the
shops to buy goods, fearing that their currency holding will lose value along the
way. In fact, the banking system itself will collapse. As people lose faith in local
currency, the barter system, or the exchange of goods for goods or services will
become the norm, making transactions significantly more difficult. Hyperinflation
will also cause adverse redistributive effects, destroying real value of middle class
savings in local currency and real incomes of fixed income earners such as workers
and pensioners. One can read horror stories of hyperinflation in Germany and
Australia in the 1920s, and more recently in several Latin American countries and
also in countries like Zimbabwe. The episode of hyperinflation in the inter-war
Germany is said to have facilitated the rise of Hitler and the global destruction that
followed. The famous economics author Neil Irwin, in his book titled "The
Alchemists: Three Central Bankers and a World on Fire", called the Governor of the
German Reichsbank at the time, the "worst central banker in history"!
Let us also look at the other extreme case of price movements, namely deflation. The
example that will come to anyone's mind is Japan, which underwent what was
known as the "lost decade". Now it is termed the "lost 20 years"! Since early 1990s
Japan experienced deflation, a continued decline in prices of goods and services. One
may think that this is great! But what could be considered good for a consumer in
the short-term may not be good for the entire economy, as evidenced by the
experience of Japan. Since then, the Japanese economy had experienced negative
economic growth, a drop in nominal GDP, declining wages and negative interest
rates! Some indications of sustained growth in Japan are seen only now.
Fortunately, Sri Lanka has never experienced such episodes in the past, and clearly
we want neither hyperinflation nor deflation even in the future. But what about
double-digit inflation hovering around 10-20 per cent, as experienced in Sri Lanka
for several decades from 1970s? Empirical evidence clearly shows that this kind of
double digit inflation is bad for sustained growth. High and volatile inflation causes
lenders like banks and other financial institutions to demand a higher fixed interest
rate on loans to compensate for the risk that inflation will move around, thus raising
the cost of finance for investment. At the same time, financial institutions need to
offer higher nominal and real interest rates to encourage savers to deposit their
money to mitigate the risk of high and volatile inflation eroding the real value of
their savings. High and volatile inflation increases the margin between lending rates
and deposits, and this high cost of financial intermediation penalises both savers and
borrowers. High and volatile inflation encourages workers to bargain for higher
wages. High and volatile inflation also prompts producers and sellers in the
economy to add higher markups in pricing of goods and services. The combined
result of this self-fulfilling cycle will be lower economic growth and higher current
account deficits, depleting reserves and volatile exchange rates, and the country will
end up with a commercial capitalist class of buyers and sellers of imported goods, or
a class of middlemen!
Then the question is, what is the appropriate level of low and stable inflation, which
will result in more desirable outcomes? Most advanced economies set their inflation
target in the low single digits around 2 per cent. For example, the United States and
the United Kingdom desire to maintain inflation at around 2 per cent, while in the
Eurozone it is below but close to 2 per cent. Australia has an inflation target of 2-3
per cent, and in New Zealand it is 1-3 per cent. Within emerging market and
developing economies, the targets are slightly higher. The Philippines and Chile
target 2-4 per cent, Indonesia 2.5-4.5 per cent, Brazil 4.5 per cent, South Africa 3-6 per
cent, while India targets 2-6 per cent of inflation.
It must be noted here that a central bank could only effectively control demand
driven inflation. Central banks could do little to address short-term disruptions to
prices due to adverse domestic supply developments or unexpected international
commodity price movements. However, central bank responses will be required to
contain demand driven inflation, usually identified by movements in core inflation
indices.
Monetary Policy Frameworks
In order to maintain low and stable, single digit inflation, central banks around the
world are entrusted with the task of conducting monetary policy with varying
degrees of independence. Central banks use various monetary policy frameworks, as
there needs to be a mechanism to operationalise the achievement of the end objective
of price stability using the policy tools given to central banks to fulfil this task.
Monetary policy frameworks differ across countries depending on country-specific
circumstances such as the level of financial market sophistication, openness of the
economy, strengths, capacities and independence of institutions, etc. For example,
monetary policy frameworks in some countries are based on currency board
arrangements where the value of domestic currency is strictly pegged to an
international currency. In currency board arrangements, domestic inflation is
directly linked to inflation of the country of which its currency is pegged, and then
the anchor for inflation will be the exchange rate. In such strict exchange rate
targeting regimes, the country's business cycles in terms of growth and inflation
would be fully synchronised with the other country's business cycles. In these
countries, monetary authorities have very little leeway to use monetary policy as a
countercyclical policy measure to stabilise growth and inflation in the domestic
economy. In the other extreme end, monetary policy frameworks are based on fully
fledged inflation targeting regimes where inflation is directly anchored through
inflation targets and interest rate policy, while maintaining fully floating exchange
rates. Under this arrangement, the exchange rate acts as the shock absorber to
minimise the impact of external shocks on the real economy. In such regimes, central
banks have more autonomy to use interest rates as an instrument to counter any
cyclical economic shocks. There are many central banks that have a combination of
these two extremes, where some are closer to inflation targeting and others being
closer to exchange rate targeting with soft pegs with some leeway to use interest rate
as an instrument to manage inflation and growth. One cannot argue that one regime
is superior to the other. It all depends on country circumstances, and even within
one country, monetary policy frameworks move in different directions at different
times. Monetary aggregate targeting frameworks fall between these two extreme
regimes depending on the extent of exchange rate flexibility of such policy regimes.
Evolution of Monetary Policy Framework in Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka's monetary policy framework has also evolved from a currency board
arrangement before the establishment of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka in 1950. This
history has been well covered in the masterpiece, "From dependent currency to
central banking in Ceylon" written by Professor H A de S Gunasekera, in whose
honour my retired senior central bank colleague Sirimevan Colombage delivered an
eloquent speech recently at the University of Peradeniya.
From 1950 to 1977 Sri Lanka's monetary policy framework was largely based on
maintaining a fixed exchange rate regime in terms of fixing the value of Sri Lanka
rupee first to the sterling pound and then to the US dollar. Under this fixed exchange
rate regime, domestic inflation was directly linked to foreign inflation and therefore
there was no need for an explicit monetary anchor to manage inflation. The Central
Bank did not have much leeway to control domestic inflation as the fixed exchange
rate was the anchor to manage inflation. Like many other things, inflation was also
more or less imported from the United Kingdom those days!
This system worked well as long as Sri Lanka earned sufficient foreign exchange to
meet expenditure on imports without any restriction. For example, during the
periods of export booms particularly in the early 1950s, the fixed exchange rate
regime worked well, as foreign exchange earnings, which arose due to external
factors rather than domestic export promoting policies, were not only sufficient to
meet current expenditure but also helped build up foreign reserves so that currency
peg could be maintained without foreign grants or borrowings. The necessary
condition for any country to maintain a currency peg with a strong reserve currency
like sterling pound on a sustainable basis is the country's ability to earn sufficient
foreign exchange. In other words, such a country would require a strong set of
export oriented policies. In technical terminology, a country should run at least a
balanced current account in the balance of payments on a long-term basis for it to be
able to maintain a peg with a strong foreign currency. Economies like Japan early on,
and later Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan and even China, given their strong export
oriented policies, were able not only to generate current account surpluses on
sustainable basis, but as a result, also saw the value of their currencies appreciating
against major currencies like the sterling pound and the US dollar.
During the period of Sri Lanka's fixed exchange rate regime, successive governments
did not pursue export oriented policies continuously. There were short episodes
where policies focused on export promotion, but there were more times of policy
reversals towards encouraging import substitution and inward looking polices.
From a long-term perspective, such polices were inconsistent with the need to
maintain a fixed exchange rate regime. Under these circumstances, the key challenge
the Central Bank had to face was how to defend the exchange rate peg amidst
policies which did not promote exports. The only choice available for the Central
Bank at the time was to restrict the use of available foreign reserves and impose
severe exchange control restrictions. In a way, the Central Bank at the time was
successful in maintaining low inflation, which is one of the key responsibilities of the
Bank, but it failed to support the multiple objectives, which were often in conflict
with each other, of the then Central Bank.
In addition to pursuing inward looking economic policies, successive governments
also ran high budget deficits mainly to provide subsidies and various free
entitlements. Such budget deficits, even at moderate levels, caused more demand
for imports in the midst of weak export performance, creating continued current
account deficits, while the Central Bank was required to maintain a fixed exchange
rate regime. This was an impossible task for the Central Bank. As a result, the
Central Bank, from time to time, either devalued the rupee or maintained a dual
exchange rate along with severe restrictions on the use of foreign exchange. This
monetary policy framework lacked credibility and created severe distortions to
market pricing.
Meanwhile, on the global front, the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, with the
United States declaring in 1971 that it would cease to redeem US dollars for gold
from its reserves, challenged the system of fixed exchange rates that the global
economy was used to operate in. In addition, the 1973 oil crisis caused inflation to
escalate in all countries, including Sri Lanka, often resulting in a destructive wage-
price spiral. In Sri Lanka, inflation increased to 14.4 per cent by December 1973, the
highest level of inflation the country experienced until then during its post-
independent history.
Elsewhere in the world, following the collapse of the Bretton Woods system of
exchange rates, the international community was getting used to floating exchange
rates, where each currency's value was determined by the international demand for
the currency. This was a new normal, prior to which money has historically been
based on a valuable commodity such as gold.
Post-liberalisation Monetary Policy Framework
In November 1977, Sri Lanka embarked on a major economic liberalisation move,
marking paradigm shift from inward looking restrictive policies towards a liberal
regime under which trade and payments were liberalised to a great extent. To be
consistent with the new liberal regime, the Central Bank abandoned the fixed
exchange rate regime and moved to a more market based system of exchange rate
management. On 15th November 1977, the prevailing dual exchange rates were
unified at an initial rate of Rs. 16 against the US dollar. This was an overnight
devaluation of the basic exchange rate by 120 per cent! The rupee was then allowed
to float under a managed exchange rate regime. Accordingly, compared to the end
1976 exchange rate of Rs. 8.83 per US dollar, the exchange rate was recorded at Rs.
15.56 at end 1977.
This sharp devaluation addressed the overvaluation of the rupee observed under the
fixed regime. The subsequent managed exchange rate regime allowed some
flexibility to determine the value of currency largely on the basis of market demand
and supply, while attempting to prevent the overvaluation of the rupee by
maintaining the real value of the rupee against movements of a basket of major
currencies.
The Aftermath of the Managed Float
The introduction of the managed floating exchange rate was a welcome move from
the perspective of a liberal macroeconomist. However, this resulted in new
challenges to the conduct of monetary policy, particularly as the exchange rate was
no longer available to anchor inflation expectations like in the past. The Central Bank
also had to face a new challenge, as the government started to run extremely large
fiscal deficits funded mainly by concessional external funding to develop public
infrastructure such as the accelerated Mahaweli scheme. Annual fiscal deficits
averaged 13.3 per cent of GDP between 1978 and 1983, External current account
deficits averaged 10.8 per cent of GDP between 1979 and 1983. Year-on-year inflation
averaged 15.6 per cent during February 1978 and January 1985, with a peak of 32.5
per cent in August 1980. It must be mentioned here that rising inflation was a main
cause for the 1980 general strike, which resulted in over 40,000 public and private
sector workers losing their jobs.
Little wonder that the Central Bank of Sri Lanka started looking for a new
framework to contain inflation and inflation expectations in the absence of the
pegged exchange rate system.
Beginning of Monetary Aggregate Targeting in Sri Lanka
The relationship between monetary expansion in terms of the amount of money held
by the public and inflation has been well recognised in Sri Lanka from the beginning
of central banking in the country. However, the first mentioning of "desired
monetary targets" in a Central Bank annual report in Sri Lanka could be found in
1982. The 1982 annual report states that "the National Credit Plan for 1982 was
formulated against the perspective of the prevailing monetary and credit policies. It
attempted to rationalise the use of private sector credit among different sectors of the
economy as an instrument of selective credit policy. Having taken into consideration
the real growth, estimated rate of price increase and increased monetisation of the
economy, the desired monetary targets were set in the Plan with a view to
maintaining the consistency between financial and real output flows in the economy.
The monetary targets were then translated into a permissible level of credit to the
private sector by commercial banks after allowing for the impact of the behaviour of
the external sector and the credit requirements of the government."
This is a classic characterisation of an annual monetary programme, which is a
crucial element in monetary aggregate targeting. Based on Irving Fisher's Quantity
Theory of Money, monetary aggregate targeting seeks to explain the relationship
between money growth and nominal economic growth (which is the combination of
real economic growth and inflation). In this framework, as monetary policy
instruments attempt to influence the final objective of inflation by first affecting
monetary aggregates, broad money supply was considered the intermediate target.
For operational purposes, reserve money or base money, which could be influenced
and monitored by the Central Bank on a daily basis, was considered the operating
target. The operating target and the intermediate target, both being monetary
aggregates, were linked to each other through the money multiplier.
An Evolving Exchange Rate System
While monetary aggregate targeting remained the framework for the conduct of
monetary policy in Sri Lanka, the exchange rate regime also underwent a gradual
evolution. The managed floating exchange rate system broadly remained a crawling
band arrangement as the margin associated with the foreign exchange transactions
was increased from time to time. The degree of Central Bank intervention in the
foreign exchange market varied over time with balance of payments developments
and the view of the Central Bank on the direction of the exchange rate.
Under this monetary targeting framework with a crawling exchange rate, achieving
price stability proved challenging, as successive governments continued to run high
fiscal deficits even after the completion of the accelerated Mahaweli scheme to
finance large scale housing and road development programmes. In addition, the
three decades of ethnic conflict required successive governments to spend more
money on defense expenditure. In order to maintain competitiveness of the rupee,
the Central Bank had to let the currency depreciate to, at least partly, compensate for
the inflation differential between Sri Lanka and its trading partners under the
crawling peg system. Even though this arrangement helped to alleviate the adverse
impact on exports to some extent, higher domestic demand created through
excessive fiscal deficits led to large current account deficits in the balance of
payments, making it difficult to maintain the crawling peg without a sharp
depreciation.
By the year 2000, Sri Lanka experienced a significant decline in its official
international reserves, as a result of the considerable increase in expenditure on
imports. The increased demand for foreign exchange placed tremendous pressure on
the exchange rate. Within the managed floating exchange rate regime, this naturally
resulted in increased pressure on international reserves. In order to defend the
managed float, the Central Bank raised its policy interest rates to unprecedented
levels, which later proved not only to be an unsuccessful exercise but also a costly
experiment, which largely contributed to the only negative annual real GDP growth
rate of the country's history of -1.5 per cent in 2001.
This prompted the Central Bank to revisit its exchange rate policy. On 23rd of
January 2001, the Central Bank took the major step of allowing the commercial banks
to determine the exchange rate depending on the supply and demand of foreign
exchange in the domestic foreign exchange market. With this move, the Central Bank
refrained from announcing daily buying and selling rates of foreign exchange, thus
allowing freer foreign exchange transactions. The change in the exchange rate
regime resulted in an overshooting effect with the rupee depreciating by Rs.13 from
Rs. 98 per US dollar within the first three days, but a relatively quick stabilisation of
the exchange rate followed.
As the use of monetary policy to defend the foreign exchange rate was no longer
necessary under the floating exchange rate regime, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka
was able to conduct monetary policy with an increased focus on achieving the
Bank's objective of price stability. However, maintenance of price stability came
under heavy pressure under this regime whenever aggregate demand was excessive
as a result of expansionary fiscal policies.
Therefore, at times of such excessive domestic demand through fiscal dominance,
the Central Bank of Sri Lanka intervened in the foreign exchange market to defend
the exchange rate from depreciation. Although this was done with the good
intention of maintaining macroeconomic stability in difficult times, experience
repeatedly showed that managing the exchange rate extensively was always
associated with a substantial loss of limited international reserves followed by a
large depreciation. The most recent of such events were in 2011/2012 and 2015.
During the 2011/2012 episode, the Central Bank supplied US dollars 4.2 billion to
the market on a net basis, while the Central Bank supplied US dollars 3.2 billion to
the market on a net basis during the year 2015. In spite of these considerable losses of
reserves, the rupee depreciated against the US dollar by 13.5 per cent by the end of
the 2011/2012 episode and by 9.0 per cent during 2015.
Since then, the Central Bank has explicitly announced that international reserves will
not be used to defend an overvalued exchange rate. Instead, the Central Bank
intervention in the foreign exchange market will aim to buildup international
reserves. So far during 2017, the Central Bank has been able to purchase over US
dollars 1.3 billion from the market on a net basis for this purpose, and improved
market confidence is shown by the limited depreciation of the currency this year.
Gradual Modifications to the Monetary Policy Conduct
Returning to the previous discussion, it was clear by late 1990s and early 2000s, that
a serious rethink of central banking in Sri Lanka was necessary. In addition to the
increasingly popular view within international central banking and academic circles
that price stability must be the overriding objective of a central bank, financial
innovations, including the development of electronic payments and fund transfer
systems, also prompted the Central Bank to upgrade its view on financial system
stability. These factors, as well as many others which are beyond the purview of this
speech, prompted the Central Bank of Sri Lanka Modernisation Project, resulting in
legislative, procedural and operational changes in relation to central banking in Sri
Lanka.
With regard to legislative changes, the amendments to the Monetary Law Act (MLA)
in 2002 were the most important. Accordingly, the multiple objectives of the original
MLA, which included stabilisation and development objectives as well as
maintaining domestic and external value of the rupee, were streamlined to define
the core objectives of the Central Bank as maintaining economic and price stability
and financial system stability.
By this time, the Central Bank had gradually moved away from direct controls to
market based tools of monetary policy, a process which started with the adoption of
open economy policies since 1977. The significant advancement in monetary policy
operations during this period was the introduction of the Repurchase rate and the
Reverse Repurchase rate of the Central Bank. The Central Bank introduced its
repurchase facility in 1993 to mop up overnight excess liquidity from the market,
while introducing the reverse repurchase facility in 1995 to inject overnight liquidity
to the market. These two rates served as the floor and the ceiling for movements of
the interbank call money market rate. This policy interest rate corridor was used
from early 2000s to signal changes in the monetary policy stance of the Central Bank.
Today this policy corridor is called the Standing Rate Corridor with the floor and the
ceiling rates being known, respectively, as the Standing Deposit Facility Rate (SDFR)
and the Standing Lending Facility Rate (SLFR) of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka.
Open market operations are conducted in a more active auction based framework
with overnight, short-term and long-term operations to maintain market liquidity
and thereby market interest rates in line with the announced monetary policy stance
of the Central Bank.
The key operational changes to the conduct of monetary policy included the
establishment of the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) of the Central Bank in 2001
to strengthen monetary policy analysis and to improve the transparency of the
decision making process. The Central Bank also began issuing regular press releases
on monetary policy decisions to the public, based on an advance release calendar.
This press release was often followed by a press conference chaired by the Governor
and accompanied by the senior officials of the Central Bank. The Central Bank also
introduced a Monetary Policy Consultative Committee (MPCC) comprising
academics, professionals and private sector representatives, enabling the Central
Bank to obtain views of the private sector to be used in the monetary policy
formulation process. In addition, the Central Bank started to enunciate its monetary
and financial policies for a medium-term horizon though a Road Map, which was
unveiled at the beginning of each year.
105 Consecutive Months of Single Digit Inflation
In spite of these modifications to the framework of conducting monetary policy over
time, Sri Lanka continued to suffer from double digit inflation until 2009 as a
combined outcome of high budget deficits and loose fiscal policy, reactive rather
than proactive monetary policy, frequent domestic supply disruptions and
international commodity price shocks. In June 2008, inflation increased to 28.2 per
cent, the highest level of inflation since 1980s. In order to manage this situation
within the monetary targeting framework, the Central Bank used strict quantitative
monetary targets with increased policy interest rates while also imposing restrictions
on access to the Central Bank reverse repurchase facility. In a display of validity of
monetary targeting, the Central Bank was able to bring down inflation from the peak
to near zero levels within a 12-month period. It was the sharpest disinflation the
country has experienced in the history of Sri Lanka, but it must also be noted that the
weak global commodity prices also contributed to this decline to some extent.
Nevertheless, the intent of the Central Bank to maintain inflation at mid-single digit
levels, which was made clear through action as well as through communication,
enabled the Central Bank to change the mindset of the people that Sri Lanka is
typically an economy with double digit inflation. The change in the mindset was
visible in improving inflation expectations. Since February 2009, inflation has
remained in single digits, and 105 consecutive months of single digit inflation is
considered an achievement in the recent history of Central Banking in Sri Lanka.
Infeasibility of Monetary Aggregate Targeting
However, Sri Lanka's achievement of single digit inflation for 105 consecutive
months had little to do with monetary aggregate targeting. From July 2009 to
September 2017, the year-on-year broad money growth was, on average, 17.1 per
cent. Year-on-year inflation during the same period averaged 5.2 per cent. Based on
the earlier discussed Fisher's Quantity Theory of Money, the gap between these two
figures, that is 11.9 per cent, must reflect average real economic growth during this
period. However, real economic growth averaged only 6.0 per cent during this
period. If the argument is reversed, there is a gap of 11.1 per cent between broad
money growth and real economic growth. According to the Quantity Theory, this
should reflect average inflation during the period, which was not the case. Even if
some allowance is made for changes in velocity of money or money demand due to
possible behavioral changes and financial sector development, the growth of money
vs. the real growth of the economy and inflation cannot be explained for this period.
This was sufficient evidence that the strong and reliable relationship between the
goal of price stability and the nominal anchor of money growth, which was essential
for the success of the monetary aggregate targeting framework, has significantly
weakened over time. This phenomenon was not limited to Sri Lanka, but was
observed over time in many other economies as well. With the ending of monetary
aggregate targeting in Canada in as early as 1982, Gerald Bouey, Bank of Canada
Governor at the time famously stated "we did not abandon monetary aggregates.
Monetary aggregates abandoned us." Even the recent experience with quantitative
easing in many advanced economies yet again proved that the tremendous
expansion of central bank balance sheets that these countries undertook was
insufficient to raise either growth or inflation.
Earlier it was argued that Sri Lanka's achievement of single digit inflation for 105
consecutive months had little to do with monetary aggregate targeting. Instead, it
was a result of the Central Bank's ability to anchor inflation expectations, by
repeatedly emphasising its utmost desire to maintain inflation at mid-single digit
levels. The behaviour of the Central Bank during the 2008-2009 episode of
disinflation would have raised credibility of monetary policy. Improved
communication also would have played a key role in this achievement. It must be
noted that the neighbouring economies struggled with double digit inflation during
some parts of the same period. For example, India was unable to tame inflation until
2014. One might argue that international commodity prices were in our favour.
However, this was not always true, as global crude oil prices remained, on average,
above US dollars 100 per barrel during the period from February 2011 to September
2014.
Inflation Targeting as an Alternative: Lessons from Other Countries
Therefore, without a formal announcement, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, similar to
many other central banks in the world, has moved to a monetary policy framework
governed by expectations and credibility, rather than by monetary aggregates or
exchange rates.
In the global economy, such a monetary policy framework that emphasised the role
of expectations and credibility existed, and it was known as "inflation targeting" that
I briefly referred to at the beginning. First adopted by New Zealand in 1990, inflation
targeting was chosen as the monetary policy framework in Canada, the United
Kingdom, Australia, and Sweden in quick succession. Encouraged by the success of
inflation targeting, a number of other advanced economies as well as emerging
market economies adopted this fra