OU blog

Personal Blogs

Alfred Anate Bodurin Mayaki

Default amplification in a New Keynesian sovereign risk model

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Alfred Anate Bodurin Mayaki, Tuesday 21 October 2025 at 16:37

Overview

Speaker: Ozge Akinci

This discussion reviews a paper proposing an open-economy New Keynesian DSGE model with two frictions—sticky prices and sovereign default risk—to study how fiscal policy interacts with monetary policy when default risk is present. The core result: expectations of default act like a cost-push shock in the New Keynesian framework, making inflation stabilization harder and generating co-movements observed in data: high inflation, high sovereign spreads, high nominal interest rates, and low output.

Model and Mechanism: “Default Amplification”

  • Adverse productivity shock triggers an output collapse. In a small open economy, agents borrow internationally to smooth consumption, raising external debt.
  • Higher external debt increases the likelihood of default. Because default states feature low consumption and high inflation, firms expect higher future inflation and higher marginal utility of consumption.
  • Via the New Keynesian Phillips curve, higher expected future inflation (and higher marginal utility) raises current pricing, lifting current inflation even without directly linking inflation to productivity.
  • Under a standard Taylor rule, the central bank increases the nominal interest rate, which reduces current domestic consumption (via the Euler equation), amplifying the downturn.
  • Outcome: the mechanism aligns with observed episodes of high inflation, high spreads, high nominal rates, and low output.

Scope of Shocks and Key Questions Raised

  • Beyond supply/productivity shocks: Does the mechanism extend to any shock that raises default likelihood (e.g., demand shocks)?
  • Global financial cycle: Can the New Keynesian default framework reconcile empirical spillovers from US monetary policy to emerging markets (EM), notably the inflation response?
  • Exchange rate role: In EM contexts, how do exchange rate movements contribute to the mechanism and observed outcomes?

Global Financial Cycle Evidence and Interpretation

  • Empirical results (quarterly data for 25 EM from 1965; local projections on identified US monetary policy shocks):
    • An unexpected 100 basis point increase in the federal funds rate reduces US GDP by 0.8%.
    • EM GDP falls by more than the US; EM headline inflation rises significantly, and short-term PPI (domestic prices) also increases.
    • EM central banks raise policy rates (Taylor rule) despite the output drop.
  • State dependence: When EM inflation is elevated, PPI and nominal interest rates increase markedly despite a large output decline.
  • Limitation of the New Keynesian Reference Model (Gali-Monecelli): It delivers spread and output spillovers but implies falling producer price inflation and lower nominal interest rates—at odds with EM inflation dynamics.
  • Alternative (discussant’s prior work with Albert Geraldo): Unanchored inflation expectations (partly adaptive) can explain co-movement of high inflation and low output after large depreciations; the default-risk mechanism may be complementary.

Authors’ Responses

  • Generalization across shocks: The mechanism persists for any shock that raises future default risk; through the New Keynesian Phillips curve, higher default risk increases expected future inflation or raises future marginal utility, acting like a cost-push shock that lifts current inflation.
  • US monetary policy shock: Not studied in the paper; in the model, tighter US policy raises international borrowing costs and default risk, triggering the same amplification. The net effect among channels merits future study.
  • Exchange rate: With flexible exchange rates (as in EM inflation targeting), model-implied exchange rate movements are consistent with data, though not very volatile.

Audience Q&A Highlights

  • EM specificity: The framework applies to any country with default risk and inflation targeting; the author cautioned it may not yet be a good model for France because of the monitoring unit.
  • Global factor in risk pricing: For EM, about 80% of the variation in the CBS price is attributed to a global factor, underscoring the importance of global shocks (including US monetary policy and related shocks). Authors agree risk-per-membership would be another useful shock to assess.
  • Debt maturity: The paper uses long-term debt following the literature; in a simple example, short-term debt also works.

Next Steps / Actions

  • Extend the framework to a two-country setting to analyze US monetary policy spillovers, tracking how default likelihood transmits and affects EM inflation and output.
  • Quantify the relative strength of default-amplification versus demand channels under US monetary tightening.
  • Evaluate additional shocks (e.g., risk-per-membership) and assess model fit against global factor-driven movements in EM spreads.
  • Further examine the role and volatility of exchange rate dynamics under flexible regimes within the model.
Permalink Add your comment
Share post

This blog might contain posts that are only visible to logged-in users, or where only logged-in users can comment. If you have an account on the system, please log in for full access.

Total visits to this blog: 139386