We have detected that the browser you are using is no longer supported. As a result, some content may not display correctly.
We suggest that you upgrade to the latest version of any of the following browsers:
close notification
Date
: 02/09/2003
Source: SA Reserve Bank
Title: Mboweni: BIS/SARB Reserve Management Seminar dinner
SPEECH BY MR TT MBOWENI, GOVERNOR OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN RESERVE
BANK, AT THE BIS/SARB RESERVE MANAGEMENT SEMINAR DINNER, South
African Reserve Bank, 2 September 2003
It is my pleasure to welcome you, our guests and Reserve Bank
personnel, to a dinner I gladly host in your honour. I know that
you have formally been welcomed to the Reserve Bank this morning by
Mr Plenderleith. But at a seminar of this stature, co-hosted by our
good friends at the Bank for International Settlements, I, as
Governor, felt it correct to re-iterate a warm welcome. I am
especially delighted that we are able to co-host this reserve
management seminar as I believe that all of us can learn from each
other's experiences regarding this important central-bank
function.
I know you have had a long day at the seminar and, I believe, a
productive one, so I shall keep my speech brief. I have chosen not
to focus on reserve management in the South African Reserve Bank,
as the topic was covered to some degree in the seminar this
afternoon, but rather to talk to you briefly about inflating
targeting.
As you probably know, inflation targeting, initially adopted by New
Zealand in 1990, has been the choice of a growing number of central
banks in both industrialised and emerging countries. As on November
2000, authors Mishkin and Schmidt-Hebbel had counted 19
inflation-targeting countries. Since then, the numbers have
increased. Precisely by how many is debatable and will depend on
the precise definition of inflation-targeting countries but I note
that the merits of inflation targeting continue to be debated in
the US.
Inflation targeting in South Africa was formally introduced on 23
February 2000 with the announcement of a 3 to 6 per cent target for
2002. At that time, CPIX inflation - the rate we target - stood at
7 per cent. (Just for your information, we define CPIX as the CPI
excluding the interest cost of mortgage bonds, for the historical
metropolitan and other urban areas.) The target range of 3 to 6 per
cent set was an ambitious one. Whilst there may be debates today
about whether the target range was set at the correct level, it is
important to note that for both the credibility of the central
bank, as well as the management of expectations in respect of
inflation being a problem, the target range had to be set at a
level which would properly demonstrate commitment to lowering
inflation. In spite of the above-mentioned quite ambitious target,
by September 2001, twelve-month CPIX inflation had decelerated to
5,8% per cent and many analysts thought that the 2002 target would
be met fairly easily.
To say the least, circumstances changed! The exchange rate
depreciation of some 37 per cent in 2001 - that is another
interesting story! - mostly in the closing stages of the year, was
significantly responsible for pushing up CPIX inflation up to a
peak of 11,3% per cent in November 2002. On 12 September 2002, the
Reserve Bank's Monetary Policy Committee had announced the fourth
and final 100 basis points increase for the year of the Bank's
repurchase rate. As you may well imagine, I was not everyone's most
favourite Governor!
Fortunately, inflationary pressures have abated, partly related to
the rand's appreciation since December 2001 and as reflected in the
year-on-year change in CPIX falling to 6,6 per cent in July 2003,
and the MPC has seen fit to lower the repo rate. On 14 August 2003,
following the most recent meeting of the MPC, the repo rate was
further reduced by 100bp to 11 per cent effective from 15 August
2003. (Should there be anyone amongst you interested in the factors
weighing on this decision, I refer you to the statement of the
Monetary Policy Committee which is on the Reserve Bank website).
Whilst a Governor is certainly more popular during a declining
interest-rate cycle, rest assured there were critics who felt that
the Bank had not been bold enough and should have, at least,
reduced the repo rate by 150 basis points!
Technically, what the Reserve Bank is doing could more accurately
be described as inflation-forecast targeting. Given the roughly 12
to 24-month lag between interest-rate changes and their having
their full impact felt on inflation, the repurchase rate is set at
a level judged to be consistent with bringing inflation to within
the target range within an 12 to 24-month time horizon. I am
referring to the intricacies of the transmission mechanism, the
clear understanding of which represents the single biggest
challenge for any inflation-targeting central bank. Inflation
targets of 3 to 6 per cent for 2004 and 2005 have been set by the
Government, and guide current policy formulation. Given the lags,
current policy changes clearly have virtually no impact on the 2003
inflation outcome; the focus is further ahead.
With the CPIX again approaching the target range, it is relatively
easily to somewhat superficially argue the merits of an
inflation-targeting regime. Some disadvantages of inflation
targeting must, however, be acknowledged. Whilst easily understood
in terms of its objective, it is a complicated approach, more
demanding and more difficult to implement than a monetary framework
based on targeting monetary growth or a more discretionary
framework. It implies greater reliance on forward indicators of
inflation and a continuous assessment of the relationship between
the instruments of monetary policy and the inflation target. Where
forecasts turn out to be wrong, even if for completely
unforeseeable reasons, the central bank's credibility could be
impaired. Of course, the counter-argument being that it simply
makes visible the uncertainty that would remain hidden in other
monetary-policy frameworks.
Inflation targeting, if pursued at any costs, runs the risk of
inefficient output stabilisation. Significant supply shocks to the
economy such as sharp oil price movements, could require very large
monetary-policy adjustments to bring inflation back inside the
target range within the stated time horizon. For such exceptional
events, some discretion and patience in re-achieving the target
range should be allowed for.
In this regard I wish to confirm that the Reserve Bank generally
views it inappropriate to resort to the escape clause, and would
rather provide an explanation to any deviation from the target
range once the final outcome of the CPIX average for that year had
been published. This view is held so that the market has no doubt
regarding the Bank's vigilance and commitment to achieving its
targets. Indeed, following the CPIX average for the year 2002,
which could only be calculated early in 2003, where the average
exceeded the target, an explanation was provided in the Monetary
Policy Review document of April 2003. (The bi-annual Monetary
Policy Review is also available on our website).
The advantages of inflation targeting are also worth highlighting.
Firstly, transparency - the concept is easily understandable, with
the ultimate policy objective translated into an explicit target
value. Secondly, inflation targeting provides enhanced clarity
about the objective of monetary policy, which is conducive to sound
planning in both private and public sectors. Thirdly, the framework
provides for improved accountability of the Reserve Bank. It
eliminates the need to rely on a stable relationship between the
money stock and inflation, which has become increasingly difficult
to identify; inflation targeting enhances economic policy
co-ordination with government and the central bank both publicly
committed to the same inflation target. And lastly inflation
targeting provides an anchor for inflation expectations and price
and wage setting, thus reducing the friction which arises from
widely divergent inflation expectations.
May I conclude with the comment that, whilst inflation targeting is
certainly no panacea, the Reserve Bank still regards it as the most
appropriate framework for achieving relative price stability. I
quote from our Annual Economic report 2003, released last week:
"Sound and consistent price signals are invaluable in directing
resources towards their most efficient uses"; achieving this goal
is, we believe, our most important contribution we can make towards
optimal economic growth and development.
Finally, I also, as Governor, thank the BIS most sincerely for
their invaluable role in co-hosting the seminar. Our relationship
with the BIS is excellent and we have derived much value in our
interaction with this much-esteemed institution over many years. I
hope you, as delegates, will extract maximum value from the
expertise which is available to be shared. May you all safely
return home, and your return on your FX assets be stable and
gratifying!
I thank you.
Source: South African Reserve Bank
(http://www.reservebank.co.za)