Publication: The impact of unconventional monetary policy on gendered wealth inequality
Loading...
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2018
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Instituto Complutense de Estudios Internacionales (ICEI)
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
Unconventional monetary policy was implemented as a result of the financial crisis and resulted in rising asset prices in the stock markets. While the increase in asset prices is not exclusively triggered by unconventional monetary policy, central bankers accept that unconventional monetary policy has resulted in distributional effects on wealth, and that these are not negligible. What is missing are studies analyzing whether these non-standard monetary policies have different distributional effects on women and men. The intent of the paper is to interrogate whether unconventional monetary policy of central banks has a gender bias that operates in favor of men as gender and against women as gender. Relying on insights from feminist economics, the paper uses the results of the ECB Household Finance and Consumption Survey (HFCS) of 62,000 household across 15 euro-area countries. While the results are tentative, they show an asymmetric distributional gendered impact. Since the rich own more assets than the poor, and since monetary easing works in part by raising asset prices, these unconventional policies may unintentionally benefit the wealthier quintile (on average more male) at the expense of the poorer strata of society (on average more female).
La política monetaria no convencional fue implementada como resultado de la crisis financiera, resultando en precios crecientes de los activos en los mercados de valores. Mientras que este incremento en los precios de los activos no está causado exclusivamente por la política monetaria, los bancos centrales aceptan que la política monetaria no convencional ha causado efectos redistributivos sobre la riqueza, y que éstos no son despreciables. Sin embargo, son inexistentes los estudios que analicen si estas políticas monetarias no convencionales tienen diferentes efectos redistributivos entre mujeres y hombres. El objetivo de este artículo es cuestionar si la política monetaria no convencional tiene un sesgo de género que opera a favor del hombre como género y en contra de la mujer como género. Apoyándonos en las aportaciones de economistas feministas, el artículo emplea los resultados de la Encuesta del Eurosistema sobre la Situación Financiera y el Consumo de los Hogares (HFCS) realizada por el BCE sobre una muestra de 62.000 hogares de la UE-15. Si bien los resultados son tentativos, muestran un impacto redistributivo asimétrico en cuanto al género. Como las clases altas poseen más activos que las bajas y, como la política monetaria funciona en parte incrementando los precios de los activos, estas políticas no convencionales posiblemente beneficien de manera no intencional al quintil más adinerado (por lo general masculino) a expensas del estrato más pobre de la sociedad (por lo general femenino).
La política monetaria no convencional fue implementada como resultado de la crisis financiera, resultando en precios crecientes de los activos en los mercados de valores. Mientras que este incremento en los precios de los activos no está causado exclusivamente por la política monetaria, los bancos centrales aceptan que la política monetaria no convencional ha causado efectos redistributivos sobre la riqueza, y que éstos no son despreciables. Sin embargo, son inexistentes los estudios que analicen si estas políticas monetarias no convencionales tienen diferentes efectos redistributivos entre mujeres y hombres. El objetivo de este artículo es cuestionar si la política monetaria no convencional tiene un sesgo de género que opera a favor del hombre como género y en contra de la mujer como género. Apoyándonos en las aportaciones de economistas feministas, el artículo emplea los resultados de la Encuesta del Eurosistema sobre la Situación Financiera y el Consumo de los Hogares (HFCS) realizada por el BCE sobre una muestra de 62.000 hogares de la UE-15. Si bien los resultados son tentativos, muestran un impacto redistributivo asimétrico en cuanto al género. Como las clases altas poseen más activos que las bajas y, como la política monetaria funciona en parte incrementando los precios de los activos, estas políticas no convencionales posiblemente beneficien de manera no intencional al quintil más adinerado (por lo general masculino) a expensas del estrato más pobre de la sociedad (por lo general femenino).
Description
I want to thank Martina Metzger for her very helpful comments and insights on monetary policies of central banks, and Diane Elson for the many discussions on this topic. I also wish to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their comments. The usual caveat applies that in the end, I am responsible for the arguments presented in this paper.
UCM subjects
Unesco subjects
Keywords
Citation
Atkins, Ralph and Michael Mackenzie January 2015: Caught in a debt trap. Financial Times, (29. January) p. 7.
Bakker, Isabella 1994: The Strategic Silence: Gender and Economic Policy, London: Zed Books.
Bernanke, Ben 2015: Monetary policy and inequality. http://brookings.edu/blogs/ben-bernanke/posts/2015/06/01-monetary-policy-and-inequality.
Borio, Claudio 2011: Central Banking Post-Crisis: What Compass for Unchartered Waters? Bank for International Settlements Working Papers, No. 353, Basel: BIS.
Braunstein, Elissa 2013: Central bank policy and gender, in: Handbook of Research on Gender and Economic Life, ed. by Deborah M. Figart and Tonia Warnecke, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, USA: Edward Elgar, 345-358.
Braunstein, Elissa and James Heintz 2008: Gender bias and central bank policy: employment and inflation reduction, in: International Review of Applied Economics, 22:2: 173-186.
Claes, Gregory, Zsolt Darvas, Alvaro Leandro and Thomas Walsh 2015: The effects of ultra-loose monetary policies on inequality, Bruegel Policy Contribution, Issue 2015/09: 1-23.
Darvas, Zsolt and Olga Tschekassin 2015: Poor and under Pressure: The Social Impact of Europe’s Fiscal Consolidation, Bruegel Policy Contribution, Issue 2015/04, pp. 1-16.
Demertzis, Maria and Guntram B. Wolff 2016: The Effectiveness of the European Central Banks’ Asset Purchase Programme, Bruegel Policy Contribution, Issue 2016/10.
Deutsche Bundesbank 2014: How do households allocate their assets? – Stylized facts from the Eurosystem Household Finance and Consumption Survey, Discussion Paper, No. 12/2014.
Domanski, Dietrich, Scatigna, Michela, Zabai, Anna 2016: Wealth Inequality and Monetary Policy, in: BIS Quarterly Review, Marc 45-64.
European Central Bank 2013: The Eurosystem Household Finance and Consumption Survey. Methodological Report for the First Wave. Statistics Paper Series 1, European Central Bank.
European Central Bank 2017: Annual Report 2016. Frankfurt/Main.
Elson, Diane 1991: ed. Male Bias in the Development Process. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Elson, Diane and Nilufer Cagatay 2000: The social content of macroeconomic policies, in: World Development, 28:7: 1347-1364
Epstein, Gerald 2005: ed. Finananzialiation and the World Economy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Ertürk, Ismail 2014: Reconceptualizing Central Bank Unconventional Policies: Long Positions on No-Growth Capitalism, in: Central Banking at a Crossroads. Europe and Beyond. Ed. Charles Goodhart, Daniela Gabor, Jakob Vestergaard and Ismail Erturk, London/New York: Anthem Press.
Financial Times 2016: ECB ‘obeys law, not politicians’, Draghi says, in repost to German rates sniping, 22.4. 2016, p. 1.
Financial Times 2016: ECB cuts rates and boosts QE to ratchet up Eurozone stimulus, March 11, 2016: 1.
Financial Times 2015: QE ‘acted like an opaque tax’ on pension funds, FTfm, 2 November 2015: 12.
Fontan, Clément, François Claveau, Peter Dietsch 2015: Central Banking and Inequalities: Taking Off the Blinders, in: Politics, Philosophy & Economics (forthcoming).
Goodhart, Charles, Daniela Gabor, Jakob Vestergaard and Ismail Erturk 2014: Central Banking at a Crossroads. Europe and Beyond. London: Anthem Press.
Heintz, James 2012: Missing Women: The G20, Gender Equality and Global Economic Governance, Berlin: Heinrich Böll Stiftung. www.boell.org/downloads/Heintz_Missing_Women.pdf (accessed Jan 2013)
Marshall, Paul 2015: Central banks have made the rich richer, Financial Times, 23.09.2015: 9.
Mersch, Yves 2014: Monetary Policy and Economic Inequality. Keynote speech at the Corporate Credit Conference, Zurich (October 17, 2014).
Metzger, Martina, Brigitte Young, Distributional Impact of Monetary Policy on Inequality (forthcoming).
Oxfam Report 2016: An Economy for the 1 %: How privilege and power in the economy drive extreme inequality and how this can be stopped. Oxfam: Oxford (http://www.oxfam.de/economy-1-percent).
Piketty, Thomas 2014: Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Schneebaum, Alyssa, Miriam Rehm, Katharina Mader, Patricia Klopf, Katarina 2014: The Gender Wealth Gap in Europe, Wirtschafts-Universität Wien, Department of Economics, Working Paper No. 186 (October).
Schuberth, Helene and Brigitte Young 2011: The role of gender in governance of the financial sector, ed. B. Young, I. Bakker, and D. Elson, Questioning Financial Governance from a Feminist Perspective, Routledge IAFFE Advances in Feminist Economics, London/New York: Routledge.
Seguino, Stephanie 2013: From micro-level gender relations to the macro-economy and back again, in: Handbook of Research on Gender and Economic Life, ed. by Deborah M. Figart and Tonia L. Warnecke, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, USA,: Edward Elgar, pp. 325-344.
Seguino, Stephanie 2010: The global economic crisis, its gender and ethnic implications, and policy responses, in: Gender & Development, Vol. 18, No. 2, 179-199.
Seguino, Stephanie and James Heintz 2012: Monetary tightening and the dynamics of US race and gender stratification, in: American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 15:3: 323-353.
Summers, Lawrence H. 2014: US Economic Prospects: Secular Stagnation, Hysteresis, and the Zero Lower Bound, Business Economics, Vol. 49:2: 65-73.
Tachtamanova, Yelena and Eva Sierminksa 2009: Gender, monetary policy, and employment: the case of nine OECD countries, in: Feminist Economics, 15:3: 323-353.
Van Staveren, Irene 2014: The Lehman Sisters hypothesis, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 38, 995-1014.
Van Staveren, Irene 2015: Economics After the Crisis. An Introduction to Economics from a Pluralist and Global Perspective, London and New York: Routledge.
Weidman, Jens 2012: Monetary Policy is no Panacea for Europe, Financial Times, April 26.
Yellen, Janet L. 2014: Perspectives on Inequality and Opportunity from the Survey of Consumer Finances. Speech delivered at the Conference on Economic Opportunity and Inequality, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Boston, Massachusetts (October 17, 2014).
Young, Brigitte 2018: Financialization, unconventional monetary policy and gender inequality, ed. Juanita Elias/Adrienne Roberts, Handbook on the International Political Economy of Gender, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 241-251.
Young, Brigitte 2013: Structural power and the gender biases of technocratic network governance in finance, ed. Gülay Caglar, Elisabeth Prügl and Susanne Zwingel, Feminist Strategies in International Governance, London/New York: Routledge, 267-282.
Young, Brigitte 2010: The Gendered Dimension of Money, Finance, and Subprime Crisis, Gender and Economics. Feminist Kritik der politischen Ökonomie, Christine Bauhardt, Gülay Caglar (eds.), Wiesbaden: VS Verlag, 258-277.
Young, Brigitte 2002: On Collision Course: The European Central Bank, Monetary Policy, and the Nordic welfare model, in: International Feminist Journal of Politics, Vol. 4:3: 295-314.
Young, Brigitte, Isabella Baker, and Diane Elson 2011: Introduction, ed. B. Young, I. Bakker, and D. Elson, Questioning Financial Governance from a Feminist Perspective, London/New York: Routledge, 1-10.