Effect of monetary and fiscal shocks on macroeconomic Variables of Iran in different volatility regimes: Markov Switching DSGE Approach

Document Type : Research Article


1 phd student

2 Professor of Economics, Urmia university

3 Assistant Professor of economic collage in urmia university


Goal: In an environment where economic structures break, variances change, distributions shift, conventional policies weaken and past events tend to reoccur, economic agents have to form expectations over different regimes. This makes the regime-switching dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model (RS-DSGE) the natural framework for analyzing the dynamics of macroeconomic variables. Therefore, unlike other studies that addressed time-invariant parameters, the present paper analyzed the behavior of the major Iranian economic variables using small open-economy DSGE models and allowing for Markov switching in certain parameters estimated by Bayesian methods.
Methodology: The method proposed by Farmer et al. (2008) was used to solve the MS-DSGE model. The method consists in rewriting the model so that it includes fixed parameters with extended states, whose MSV solution written as an MS-VAR solves the original model. Therefore, this study investigates the effect of monetary and fiscal shocks on macroeconomic variables under different volatility regimes in Iran by applied Markov switching DSGE macroeconometrics approach. In this regard, theoretical framework of New Keynesian Open Economy (NKOE) and quarterly time series data during the period from 1369 to 1393 has been used. The theoretical structure of the model includes five sectors of households, firms, governments, central banks and the foreign economy. Household consumption is divided into two parts of tradeable and non-tradable goods, where tradable goods divided into domestic and foreign goods. Moreover, the firm’s section separated into two parts of the domestic and foreign firms, where domestic firms are divided into tradable and non-tradable firms. In other hand, foreign firms included three parts of importer, exporter and capital goods. The governments and the Central Bank sectors has been modeled based on the dependence of Iran economy on oil revenues. The foreign economy is modelled as a standard three-equation closed economy DSGE model which is included output, inflation and monetary policy equations.
Results: The results of volatility regimes filtering probabilities shows that the variance of monetary and fiscal shocks in three time periods of 1372-1375; 1377-1378, and 1390 to 1393 is greater than other periods that is known as a high-volatilities regime. The influential role of increasing inflation is noteworthy in high volatility periods. Results of impulse response functions reveal that the response of macroeconomic variables to fiscal and monetary impulses in high-volatility regimes is greater than low- volatility regimes. However, it is noteworthy that the intensity of the impulse response functions in high-volatility regimes is short-run, because after a maximum of four periods the reaction of the variables to impulses is very close to the low-volatility regimes. The results of central bank's foreign reserves impulse response function indicated that the production and inflation of tradable goods has been reduction and in contrary, increase of production and inflation of non-tradable goods. Results of government expenditure shock to inflation reveal that the increase of non-tradable and reduce of tradable goods inflation. However, this shock leads to increases production of both goods under consideration. The impulse of government tax revenues has a short-run and little impact on the variables under consideration which that leads to inflation increases and the decline in productions of tradable and non-tradable goods. Eventually, the monetary base shock has the greatest impact on the money supply and also increased other variables under consideration including the production and inflation of tradable and non-tradable goods.
Conclusion: According to the dependence of fiscal and monetary policies in Iranian economy on oil revenues, the results implicitly point out the possibility of Dutch disease in Iran. The Dutch disease problem generally refers to a contraction in the industrial or manufacturing tradable sector originating from an increase in the income generated by the export of some commodity that is oil export revenues in Iran.


توکلیان، حسین (1391). «بررسی منحنی فیلیپس کینزین­های جدید در قالب یک مدل تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی برای ایران»، تحقیقات اقتصادی، 47: 22-1.
جعفری صمیمی، احمد؛ طهرانچیان، امیرمنصور؛ ابراهیمی، ایلناز و بالونژاد نوری، روزبه (1393). «اثر تکانه­های پولی و غیرپولی بر تولید و تورم در یک الگوی تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی در شرایط اقتصاد باز: مطالعه موردی اقتصاد ایران»، مطالعات اقتصادی کاربردی ایران، 10: 32-1.
خیابانی، ناصر و امیری، حسین (1393). «جایگاه سیاست­های پولی و مالی ایران با تأکید بر بخش نفت با استفاده از مدل­های DSGE». فصلنامه پژوهشنامه اقتصادی، 54: 173-133.
زمانزاده، حمید؛ جلالی نائینی، سید احمدرضا و شادرخ، مهریه (1393). «سازوکار انتشار بیماری هلندی در اقتصاد ایران»، پژوهش­های پولی و بانکی، 19: 101-69.
شاه حسینی، سمیه و بهرامی، جاوید (1391). «طراحی یک مدل تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی کینزی جدید برای اقتصاد ایران با در نظر گرفتن بخش بانکی»، پژوهش­های اقتصادی ایران، 53: 83-55.
فطرس، محمد حسن؛ توکلیان، حسین و معبودی، رضا (1394). «تأثیر تکانه­های پولی و مالی بر متغیرهای کلان اقتصادی – رهیافت تعادل عمومی تصادفی پویای کینزی جدید 1340 -1391»، پژوهش­های رشد و توسعه اقتصادی، 19: 94-73.
فطرس، محمدحسن و معبودی، رضا (1395). «اثر تکانه­های پولی و مالی بر رشد اقتصاد و توزیع درآمد ایران: رویکرد تعادل عمومی تصادفی پویا»، مطالعات اقتصادی کاربردی ایران، 19: 82-59.
کمیجانی، اکبر و توکلیان حسین (1391). «سیاست­گذاری پولی تحت سلطه مالی و تورم هدف ضمنی در قالب یک مدل تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی برای اقتصاد ایران»، فصلنامه تحقیقات مدلسازی اقتصادی، 8: 118-87.
متوسلی، محمود؛ ابراهیمی، ایلناز؛ شاهمرادی، اصغر و کمیجانی، اکبر (1389). «طراحی یک مدل تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی نیوکینزی برای اقتصاد ایران به‌عنوان یک کشور صادرکننده نفت»، فصلنامه پژوهش­های اقتصادی، 10 (4): 116-87.
محمدی، تیمور و میرابی­زاده، معصومه (1395). «تحلیل اثر درآمدهای نفتی بر اقتصاد ایران: مدل تعادل عمومی تصادفی پویا»، فصلنامه اقتصاد مقداری، 13(4): 74-45.
Adolfson, M.; Laseen, S.; Linde, J. and Villani, M. (2007). “Bayesian Estimation of an open economy DSGe model with incomplete pass-through”. Journal of International Economics, 72(2): 481-511.
Bernanke, B. S.; Gertler, M. and Gilchrist, S. (1999). “The _nancial accelerator in a quantitative business cycle framework”. In Taylor, J. B. and Woodford, M., editors, Handbook of Macroeconomics, volume 1, chapter 21, 1341-1393. Elsevier, 1 edition.
Burriel, P.; Ramirez, J. and Villaverde, J. (2010). “MEDEA: a DSGE model for the Spanish economy”. Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, 1: 175-243.
Choi, J. and Hur, J. (2015). “An examination of macroeconomic fluctuations in Korea exploiting a Markov-switching DSGE approach”, Economic Modelling, 51: 183-199.
Cogley, T.; Sargent, T. J. and Surico, P. (2012). The return of the Gibson paradox. Working paper, New York University
Davig, T. and Leeper, E. M. (2007). Fluctuating macro policies and the fiscal theory. NBER Macroeconomics, volume 21, pages 247-316. National Bureau of Economic Research.
Duarte, P. (2015). From real business cycle and new Keynesian to DSGE Macroeconomics: facts and models in the emergence of a consensus. Department of Economics- FEA/USP, Working Paper, Nº 2015-05: 1-37.
FARMER, R.; WAGGONER, D. F. and ZHA, T. )2008). Minimal State VariableSolutions to Markov-Switching Rational Expectations Models. Working Paper 2008-23, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
Folawewo, A.O. and Osinubi, T.S. (2006). “Monetary Policy and Macroeconomic Instability in Nigeria (A Rational Expectation Approach)”. Social Science, 12(2): 93-100.
Gonçalves, C.; Portugal, M. and Aragón, E. (2016). “Assessing Brazilian Macroeconomic Dynamics Using a Markov-Switching DSGE Model”, ECONOMIA, 17: 23-42.
Justiniano, A. and Primiceri, G.E. (2008). “The time-varying volatility of macroeconomic fluctuations”. American Economic Review, 98(3): 604{41}.
KIM, C. J. and NELSON, C. R. (1999). State-Space Models with Regime Switching:Classical and Gibbs-Sampling Approaches with Application. The MIT Press.
Liu, P. and Mumtaz, H. (2011). “Evolving Macroeconomic Dynamics in a Small Open Economy: An Estimated Markov Switching DSGE Model for the UK”. Journal ofMoney, Credit and Banking, 43(7): 1223-1474.
Liu, Z.; Waggoner, D. F. and Zha, T. (2009). “Asymmetric Expectation Effects of Regime Shifts in Monetary Policy”, Review of Economic Dynamics, 12(2): 284-303.
Lubik, T. A. and Schorfheide, F. (2004). “Testing for indeterminacy: An application to u.s. monetary policy”. American Economic Review, 94(1): 190{217}.
Maih, J. (2015). Efficient Perturbation Methods for Solving Regime-Switching DSGE Models, CAMP Working Paper, 10.
Majuca, R. and Dacuycuy, L. (2014). An Open-Economy DSGE Model for the Philippines, Working Paper, De La Salle University – Manila.
Musil, K. (2009). “An Estimated Model of the Small Open Czech Economy with a Non-tradable Sector”, Bulletin of the Czech Econometric Society, The Czech Econometric Society, vol. 16(26): 1-150.
Sims, C. A. and Zha, T. (2006). “Were there regime switches in US monetary policy?”, American Economic Review, 96(1): 54-81.
Sims, C. (2001). “Solving Linear Rational Expectations Models”. ComputationalEconomics, 20: 1-20.
Stock, J. H. and Watson, M. W. (2003). Has the business cycle changed? Evidence and explanations. FRB Kansas City symposium, Jackson Hole.
Svensson, L. E. O. and Williams, N. (2009). Optimal monetary policy under uncertainty in dsge models: A markov jump-linear-quadratic approach. In Schmidt- Hebbel, K., Walsh, C. E., and Loayza, N., editors, Central Banking, Analysis, and Economic Policies, volume 13 of Monetary Policy under Uncertainty and Learning, pages 077-114. Central Bank of Chile.
Vavra, M. (2013).Testing for linear and Markov switching DSGE models, Working paper NBS, ISSN 1337-5830: 1-29.