speeches · March 4, 2008
Regional President Speech
Sandra Pianalto · President
Outlook for the Economy and Inflation :: March 5, 2008 :: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
home | news & media | careers | site map
o f
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK CLEVELAND
About U For the Public Com munit y De velopment I Our I Region I Research I Banking I Learning Center
Tours News & Media Streaming Media Speakers Bureau Savings Bonds
Forefront Magazine
Home > For the Public > News and Media > Speeches > 2008 > Outlook for the Economy and Inflation
□ SHRRE
Outlook for the Economy and
Inflation
Additional Information
Sandra Pianalto
Introduction
President and CEO,
The last time I spoke to the Money Marketeers was in spring of 2005, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
when our monetary policy issues were vastly different than those we Money Marketeers of New York
are facing today. Three years ago, I told you about the Federal University
Reserve's move toward greater transparency and a new
New York, NY
communications strategy that I hoped would enhance the
effectiveness of our policy. Those communications have certainly
March 5, 2008
gotten a healthy workout with the changes we have seen in economic
conditions over the past several months.
After expanding at a solid pace from 2004 through most of last year,
the economy has stalled, largely due to problems that began in the
housing sector. Financial market conditions have been fragile since
last August and inflation has become elevated, both of which are
posing risks to the economic outlook.
As you know, the Federal Open Market Committee has been tracking
developments in the economy and financial markets very closely, and
our policy actions have been aggressive. Since August, the FOMC has
lowered its federal funds rate target by 225 basis points. In January
alone, the FOMC reduced the funds rate by 125 basis points,
recognizing that a tightening in credit markets could lead to an even
steeper-than-expected slowing in economic activity.
Tonight I will offer you my perspective on the economy and inflation.
I will explain how some critical assumptions affect my economic
projections. Finally, I will also talk about the role that inflation
expectations play in the current environment.
Please note that the views I express this evening are mine alone and
do not necessarily reflect the views of my colleagues in the Federal
Reserve System.
The Economic Outlook
The Federal Reserve just released its latest economic projections for
2008, 2009, and 2010. I know that many of you have memorized
these projections, but for the few of you here tonight who have had
other pressing business issues, let me briefly summarize them.
The most recent economic projections made by the Federal Reserve
Board members and Reserve Bank presidents, which were submitted
in January, show a central tendency for real GDP growth this year of
1.3 to 2.0 percent. This central tendency is considerably lower than
the one provided in October. A number of factors led to the
downward revisions, including a steeper-than-expected housing
market correction, tighter credit conditions, and higher oil prices.
http://www.clevelandfed.org/For_the_Public/News_and_Media/Speeches/2008/Pianalto_20080305.cfm[4/29/2014 2:02:59 PM]
Outlook for the Economy and Inflation :: March 5, 2008 :: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
Real GDP is projected to accelerate somewhat in 2009 and to reach
2.5 to 3 percent by 2010.
The central tendency projection for core PCE inflation in 2008 is 2.0
to 2.2 percent, revised up from 1.7 to 1.9 percent projected in
October. However, the FOMC participants' projections call for
inflation to moderate over the next two years. Overall PCE inflation
is projected to decline from its current elevated rate, assuming that
energy and food prices flatten out. This measure is projected to
return to a range of 1.7 to 2 percent in 2010.
Those are the projections of the FOMC participants, and the
projections that I submitted in January fall within those central
tendency ranges. My baseline projections - or what I believe is most
likely to occur - are, of course, just one of many plausible outcomes.
Critical Economic Assumptions
Let me explain a bit about how I formulate my projections and some
key assumptions I am making in my current projections for growth
and inflation. Of course, I rely on econometric models when making
my projections because they offer the discipline of economic theory
and historical experience. But models are by nature a simplification
of a complex and dynamic economy, so they cannot always capture
every important dimension. Nor are they always flexible enough to
adapt to breaks with historical norms.
So, from time to time, we need to adjust a model-based forecast so
that it adequately represents our best thinking about the forces
influencing the economy both now and in the future. In other words,
model-based forecasts are often conditioned by judgment.
As I developed my economic projections in January, I made critical
assumptions in two key areas. One assumption concerns the
availability of credit, and the other pertains to the process driving
the price statistics. I'll talk about the credit issue first.
Widespread credit market disruptions are uncommon events, but their
consequences are sobering. During these episodes, even some
financially healthy borrowers can have trouble finding credit, and the
credit that is available is expensive. For their part, lenders act to
safeguard their capital and preserve liquidity. Trading volumes can
plummet in some markets, and the lack of counterparties can
complicate risk strategies. As many financial institutions retrench at
the same time, their collective behavior can cause a slowdown in
consumption and investment spending throughout the entire
economy.
We have good reason to think that current financial strains have
substantially slowed the pace of economic activity. High-quality
borrowers in a number of markets are having trouble obtaining credit.
Many financial institutions have seen a sharp rise in the cost of
capital and in the price of credit default swaps. Risk spreads have
widened in many financial markets. The Federal Reserve's Senior Loan
Officer Survey for January noted tighter lending standards for
housing, commercial real estate, and consumer loans. The stories I
am hearing from my banking supervisors and the CEOs at large
banking organizations echo these reports. And there is one more
important element to keep in mind - the ongoing decline in home
prices.
Credit contractions have been thankfully rare in the United States in
recent decades, so we have limited practical experience in dealing
with them. But both the academic literature and our limited
experience suggest that the real rate of interest that is consistent
with a neutral monetary policy will decline during a credit crunch,
http://www.clevelandfed.org/For_the_Public/News_and_Media/Speeches/2008/Pianalto_20080305.cfm[4/29/2014 2:02:59 PM]
Outlook for the Economy and Inflation :: March 5, 2008 :: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
and that the nominal federal funds rate target needs to adjust
accordingly to keep policy from becoming unduly restrictive. During
such episodes, it is also important to address the liquidity needs of
the banking system.
Because credit contractions can emerge and spread rather quickly,
the central bank must be prepared to act in an aggressive and timely
manner to counteract their effects. And indeed, the Federal
Reserve's policy actions since last August have been designed to ease
the strains in financial markets and to counteract a projected
weakening in economic activity.
So a key assumption underlying my 2008 projections is that economic
activity is, in fact, highly vulnerable to a significant credit crunch.
Because credit crunches can restrain economic activity through
channels that are not fully captured by econometric models or
historical experience, my forecast builds in a slower growth
trajectory for consumer spending, residential investment, and non-
residential investment than the model would have called for
otherwise. These adjustments, of course, are only an educated
judgment. A credit crunch could impose even more restraint on
economic activity, presenting a downside risk to my baseline
projection.
The second area where I made critical assumptions in my projections
relates directly to inflation dynamics. I realize that most economic
forecasters have under-predicted headline inflation for the past
couple of years. Nevertheless, I am sticking with my model and
projecting both headline and core inflation to moderate over the
next few years as resource utilization rates slacken. In addition, my
inflation projection assumes that increases in energy and other
commodity prices do not continue to accelerate and that inflation
expectations remain anchored. Let me elaborate.
We all know that energy prices have risen dramatically over this
business cycle1 - in fact, they have nearly doubled from 2001 to
2007, at an average annual rate of about 12 percent. The CPI
excluding food and energy has risen at a much slower annual pace on
average than the headline CPI - 2.1 percent versus 2.9 percent for
the headline number.
Economists tend to rely on the core measures as the better guide to
the "true state" of inflation, since the headline measures can reflect
transitory volatility in the prices of individual items. But as we all
know, the key word here is transitory - that is, the large price
fluctuations are usually expected to reverse to some degree, or at
least to diminish. Over time, we expect the total change in headline
and core measures of inflation to be similar. As I mentioned, the
FOMC's inflation projection follows this pattern over the 2008-2010
horizon.
But we have not had that experience with the CPI during this
business cycle. The energy price shock has been large and persistent.
From December 2001 to December 2007, the total CPI advanced by
19 percent, compared with 13 percent when we exclude food and
energy. From 2004 to 2007, the figures are 10 percent versus 7
percent. So, which are the better estimates of inflation during these
intervals?
To answer that question, we need to make a crucial distinction -
between inflation and a relative price increase. Inflation is a
condition that affects all prices, not just the price of particular goods
or services. Changes in relative prices reflect changes in supply and
demand conditions in specific markets. Sometimes we experience
such a large and persistent relative price change that it temporarily
ripples through the inflation data, such as our experience with
http://www.clevelandfed.org/For_the_Public/News_and_Media/Speeches/2008/Pianalto_20080305.cfm[4/29/2014 2:02:59 PM]
Outlook for the Economy and Inflation :: March 5, 2008 :: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
energy prices.
The United States has experienced three episodes of sustained
increases in energy prices in the past 50 years. Energy prices doubled
from the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s; they doubled again from the
late 1970s to the early 1980s; and they have just doubled again in
the past six years. The first two episodes were marked by dramatic
accelerations in both the CPI and the CPI excluding food and energy,
and were accompanied by economic recessions. Today, we know that
the CPI has not accelerated by very much when compared with the
two prior episodes, and the CPI excluding food and energy has edged
up a little.
There are several ways of estimating core inflation, and I do not
think that simply removing the effects of food and energy prices from
the CPI always provides the best measure of trend inflation. Several
other measures, such as the median CPI and the 16 percent trimmed
mean CPI, have been tracking above the CPI excluding food and
energy for the past several years. And in recent months, more than
half of the CPI price distribution has risen at a rate of 3 percent or
more. These trends in the data pose an upside risk to my outlook for
inflation.
Inflation forecasts also require an assumption about inflation
expectations, and here the news is more positive. Despite the
acceleration in the price statistics during the past several years,
there is very little evidence that people's saving, investing, and work-
related decisions have been unduly influenced by inflation fears. This
is fortunate, because there is lasting harm to the economy when
inflation expectations begin to affect the decisions of households and
businesses. Let me now turn to that topic in more detail.
Inflation Expectations
Rising inflation expectations can both hinder economic performance
and sustain a higher inflation rate. As you know, people's actions to
guard against inflation consume precious resources that would be
used more productively in a world where people didn't have to worry
about inflation. Inflation expectations can also become part of the
inflation process itself, affecting any number of price and wage
decisions that would make bringing down the inflation rate a more
drawn-out and costly affair. These are the costs that a central bank
must keep in check if our economy is to achieve its full potential,
including maximum sustainable employment.
You might think that measuring inflation expectations is fairly
straightforward, but anyone who has tried to do so knows how
difficult this task can be. We have two kinds of tools at our disposal -
measures based on financial assets and measures based on surveys.
The most prominent financial-asset-based measures are derived from
Treasury Inflation Indexed Securities, commonly known as TIPS.
These securities give the investor a fixed real return because their
principal and interest payments are tied to the CPI. Regular Treasury
securities are not tied to the CPI so breakeven inflation, the
difference between nominal Treasury securities and TIPS, is used to
infer expected inflation over length of the contract. However, it is
difficult to extract a clean measure of inflation expectations from
breakeven inflation. Two prominent problems are inflation
uncertainty and liquidity risk.
A rise in inflation uncertainty is distinct from a rise in inflation
expectations, although both impose costs on the economy. Rising
inflation uncertainty - or, in other words, a widening in the range of
plausible inflation outcomes - introduces a risk in making long-term
contracts, particularly financial contracts. Investors look to be
http://www.clevelandfed.org/For_the_Public/News_and_Media/Speeches/2008/Pianalto_20080305.cfm[4/29/2014 2:02:59 PM]
Outlook for the Economy and Inflation :: March 5, 2008 :: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
compensated for this risk, as they would for any other risk, making
the terms of financial contracts more costly than they would be
otherwise.
The second problem - liquidity risk - arises because the liquidity
characteristics of the regular Treasury markets and the TIPS markets
are not the same. The regular Treasury market is broader and
deeper. So in periods of financial stress, such as those we have
witnessed lately, large flights to quality might create a downward
bias in breakeven inflation as a measure of inflation expectations.
Perhaps a more straightforward way to gauge inflation expectations is
to simply ask people their views on inflation. In fact, the University
of Michigan's monthly survey does just that. Unfortunately, we have
problems with interpreting this data. For one thing, households'
beliefs about future inflation are typically much higher than the
actual inflation rate. Also, people are likely to report their inflation
predictions in terms of whole numbers, and particular whole numbers
at that. On average, women also tend to have higher inflation
expectations than men, the poor higher than the rich, and the young
and elderly higher than the middle-aged.,2
These patterns in survey responses lead many to question the
accuracy of using them to measure inflation expectations. When you
get right down to it, they underscore the fact that we really know
very little about how people form their inflation expectations.
Economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, like many
others, are pursuing research that seeks to better measure the
inflationary expectations of households and businesses and to shed
some much-needed light on the process by which inflation
expectations are formed.
Until that time, I am left with the data I have in hand. Both the TIPS-
based and survey-based measures of inflation expectations seem to
have been fluctuating in a stable range during the past couple of
years. In other words, inflation expectations appear to be anchored.
Conclusion
Let me conclude this evening where I began. Economic activity
slowed sharply last quarter, and that softness has clearly spilled over
into the current quarter. The projections I made at the end of
January show sub-par economic growth over the near term as the
fallout from residential real estate deepens, further straining
financial markets and disrupting the flow of credit to businesses and
households. Over time, I expect these restraining influences to
diminish. I also project that economic slack, combined with a leveling
off of energy and commodity prices, will help to bring inflation down
from its recently elevated readings to a level consistent with price
stability.
While my baseline projection represents my current thinking on the
economy's most likely path, I am well aware of the key assumptions
on which this outlook depends. I recognize that the validity of my
assumptions must be tested on an ongoing basis, and that is why I
spend so much time analyzing data and talking with business and
financial market participants.
The current economic environment is exceptionally fluid, and the
economy faces some substantial risks. The Federal Reserve is
committed to addressing these risks as we remain focused on
achieving our dual mandate of price stability and maximum
employment.
"'December 2001 to December 2007.
http://www.clevelandfed.org/For_the_Public/News_and_Media/Speeches/2008/Pianalto_20080305.cfm[4/29/2014 2:02:59 PM]
Outlook for the Economy and Inflation :: March 5, 2008 :: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
2See Bryan, Michael F. and Guhan Venkatu, “The Demographics of
Inflation Opinion Surveys,” Economic Commentary, Federal Reserve
Bank of Cleveland, October 15, 2001, and “The Curiously Different
Inflation Perspectives of Men and Woman,” Economic Commentary,
Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, November 2001.
Careers | Diversity | Privacy | Terms of Use | Contact Us | Feedback | RSS Feeds
http://www.clevelandfed.org/For_the_Public/News_and_Media/Speeches/2008/Pianalto_20080305.cfm[4/29/2014 2:02:59 PM]
Cite this document
APA
Sandra Pianalto (2008, March 4). Regional President Speech. Speeches, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_20080305_sandra_pianalto
BibTeX
@misc{wtfs_regional_speeche_20080305_sandra_pianalto,
author = {Sandra Pianalto},
title = {Regional President Speech},
year = {2008},
month = {Mar},
howpublished = {Speeches, Federal Reserve},
url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_20080305_sandra_pianalto},
note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}