{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029045643153526972, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0027662517289073307, 'mean_word_length': 5.518018018018018, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Which Monetary Shocks Matter in Small Open Economies? Evidence from SVARs

This paper investigates the nature of monetary policy transmission in four small open economies — Australia, Canada, South Korea, and the U.K. — and the U.S. (the benchmark) by estimating structural vector autoregressive models using the external instrument identification method. Differing from related studies on U.S. monetary policy, which mostly employ high-frequency futures data on monetary policy operating instruments (federal fund futures rates) to identify monetary policy shocks, we propose and test alternative sets of external instruments for the four focal open economies that do not yet have well-established futures markets in monetary policy instruments. The empirical results obtained by applying this data-oriented method yield important messages from both the econometric and macroeconomic perspectives. First, U.S. monetary policy plays an important role in monetary transmission in SOEs, presumably hampering the effectiveness of domestic monetary policy. In particular, the effect of domestic monetary policy shocks on medium- and long-term interest rates is quite weak and short-lived, while U.S. monetary innovation significantly and persistently influences domestic financial variables. Second, the paper provides some evidence that foreign exchange rates in this process respond to monetary shocks as Dornbusch (1976)’s overshooting hypothesis.