Dornbusch Overshooting Model
Dornbusch Overshooting Model
Dornbusch Overshooting Model
Interpretation:
prices are sticky:
cant jump at a moment in time
but adjust gradually
= ( ).
Appreciation: S
Financial markets
UIP
i i* =
Regressive expectations
See table for evidence of
regressive expectations.
interest differential
pulls currency above
LR equilibrium.
Financial markets
What determines
i & i* ?
Money market equilibrium:
Subtract
equations:
SR
LR
<=
;&
]
=> Inverse relationship between
s & p to satisfy financial
market equilibrium.
The
Dornbusch
Diagram
(p - ) = - ( ). - New p
Experiment: a one-time
monetary expansion
- Old p
| overshooting |
(m/p) => i
|
Sticky p =>
In the SR, we need not be on the
goods market equilibrium line (PPP),
but we are always on the financial
market equilibrium line (inverse
1
proportionality between p and s): = (p-).
In the instantaneous
overshooting
equilibrium (at C),
S rises more-thanproportionately to
M to equalize
expected returns.
Excess Demand at
C causes P to rise
over time
until reaching LR
equilibrium at B.
Goods markets
The experiment:
a permanent m
How do we get
from SR to LR?
I.e., from inherited P,
to PPP?
P responds gradually
to excess demand:
Neutrality
at point B
Sticky p
at point C
= overshooting from
a monetary expansion
Solve differential
equations for p & s:
=>
[SEE APPENDIX I]
=>
We now know how far s and p have moved along
the path from C to B , after t years have elapsed.
= .
In the very special case = = , we jump to B at the start -- the flexible-price case.
Other strategies
Use the forward rate; or interest differential;
random walk (the best guess as to future spot rate
is todays spot rate)
SUMMARY OF FACTORS
DETERMINING THE EXCHANGE RATE
(1) LR monetary equilibrium:
/
.
= ( ) =
( ,)/ (,)
Neutrality
at point B
at point C
= overshooting from
a monetary expansion
Solve differential
equation for p:
Use inverse proportionality between p & s:
Use it again:
Solve differential
equation for s:
Bubble paths
(2) Forecasting
At long horizons,
the monetary models
have lower prediction
error than the random walk.
Forecasting, continued