Blog post

Inflation expectations and global risks: the need for ECB action

The ECB will have its next monetary decision meeting on Thursday. Instead of following politically motivated statements that complain about low nomina

Publishing date
21 October 2015

Let’s start from the observable facts. Euro area inflation has been falling since 2011Q4 and while there was a short pick-up in early 2015, it has fallen again recently. The recent fall, however, is less clearly visible in core inflation rates. Core inflation, i.e. inflation rates excluding prices for commodities that have recently fallen, has been rather stable at slightly below 1% since mid-2013. Observable inflation rates therefore speak for an easing bias rather than a tightening bias in monetary policy.

Figure 1: Headline and core inflation in the euro area

GW_21_10_15_1

Source: Datastream

Second, the price stability mandate is, of course, not about current inflation rates but rather medium-term expected inflation rates. A number of worrying indicators appear. Market-based inflation expectations have fallen since the summer. While in July markets were still expecting inflation to be at 1% in 2017, the expectation is now only slightly above 0.5%.

Figure 2: Market-based inflation expectations



GW_21_10_15_21



Source: Datastream

Notes: Market-based inflation expectations are based on one to ten year inflation-linked swaps.

The ECB itself got its inflation forecasts often wrong in the past. The figure shows that compared to actual inflation, the ECB's own forecasts tended to show an increase in inflation rates. In March the ECB was still forecasting inflation to be at 1.5% in 2016 and this number has already been revised downward to 1.1%.

Figure 3: Actual inflation vs ECB forecasts

GW_21_10_15_3

Source: Datastream, ECB Staff Macroeconomic Projections

The survey of professional forecasters (SPF) does not yet show a decline in inflation expectations but it also failed previously to forecast the decline in inflation rates (see chart). Moreover, the two-year-ahead inflation forecast suggests an inflation rate of only 1.5%. Again, this number would certainly speak against a tightening of monetary policy.

Figure 4: Inflation vs what was forecast

GW_21_10_15_4

Source: Datastream

Third, the ECB should learn from past mistakes and shift towards more active risk management. The ECB should end denying the risk of undershooting inflation expectations. True, some of the reasons for lower than expected inflation rates were exogenous factors such as a decline in commodity and oil prices. However, taking the numbers shown above together shows a clear picture of strong deflationary tendencies at work in the euro area. This is a major risk for policy making in the euro area. The lower inflation expectations are, the higher will be the real interest rate and the more difficult it will be for the ECB to prevent further deflationary tendencies. With constrained fiscal policies, the euro area may end up in a low-inflation trap from which it will not be able to escape. The consequences for debt sustainability and delayed macroeconomic adjustment have been discussed compellingly and at length. Conversely, the risk of overshooting the 2% inflation target is not only very low. It is also a risk that can far more easily be managed should it materialize by simply changing interest rates. The case for more active policy to prevent undershooting of inflation rates is therefore compelling.

Fourth, beyond the inherent domestic deflationary tendencies that risk undermining the ECB’s goal, also the global economy faces a number of important risk. Most importantly, there is uncertainty about China. The US Federal Reserve has just delayed a rate increase, and one of the main reasons for this delay was fears about the US economy because of the economic situation in China (as was clearly pronounced by New York Federal Reserve President William C Dudley at ). One can debate endlessly whether or not the Chinese political system will manage to engineer a soft landing of China’s economy. But unless we are a 100% certain that China will economic policy should manage that risk. We have shown before that . The ECB should therefore follow the lead of the Fed and carefully consider the risk China poses to fulfilling its price stability mandate.

The ECB, as an independent monetary authority, should be conscious of the risks that failing to fulfil its mandate pose. It should accept that inflation expectations have deteriorated and core inflation remains stubbornly below 1% while the global economy faces a number of risks that could have effects on the euro area.

At the very least, the ECB should continue its ongoing QE programme and clearly dispel doubts that it could bow to political pressures and end its programme prematurely. The ECB was right to expand its list of assets eligible for purchases further after its decision to start sovereign QE in January. A longer list would allow increasing or lengthening the purchase programme. In fact, the ECB could even consider dropping the 25% purchase limit on sovereign bonds with AAA rating. The purchase limit is a sensible measure on bonds with CACs to prevent the ECB from having a blocking vote in debt restructuring decisions. But it would be wrong to constrain QE because of this for bonds with very low risks. An announcement by the ECB to use this option and extend purchases into 2017 would be a strong message that the governing council is serious about risk management. Adding a small-scale programme to support the corporate bond market would be another option to consider. Governments, in turn, should focus on their task of reforming euro area economies so that new investment opportunities arise.

 

About the authors

  • Guntram B. Wolff

    Guntram Wolff is a Senior fellow at Bruegel. He is also a Professor of Economics at the Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB). 

    From 2022-2024, he was the Director and CEO of the German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP) and from 2013-22 the director of Bruegel. Over his career, he has contributed to research on European political economy, climate policy, geoeconomics, macroeconomics and foreign affairs. His work was published in academic journals such as Nature, Science, Research Policy, Energy Policy, Climate Policy, Journal of European Public Policy, Journal of Banking and Finance. His co-authored book “The macroeconomics of decarbonization” is published in Cambridge University Press.

    An experienced public adviser, he has been testifying twice a year since 2013 to the informal European finance ministers’ and central bank governors’ ECOFIN Council meeting on a large variety of topics. He also regularly testifies to the European Parliament, the Bundestag and speaks to corporate boards. In 2020,  ranked him one of the 28 most influential “power players” in Europe. From 2012-16, he was a member of the French prime minister’s Conseil d’Analyse Economique. In 2018, then IMF managing director Christine Lagarde appointed him to the external advisory group on surveillance to review the Fund’s priorities. In 2021, he was appointed member and co-director to the G20 High level independent panel on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response under the co-chairs Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Lawrence H. Summers and Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala. From 2013-22, he was an advisor to the Mastercard Centre for Inclusive Growth. He is a member of the Bulgarian Council of Economic Analysis, the European Council on Foreign Affairs and advisory board of Elcano. He is also a fellow at the Kiel Institute for the World Economy.

    Guntram joined Bruegel from the European Commission, where he worked on the macroeconomics of the euro area and the reform of euro area governance. Prior to joining the Commission, he worked in the research department at the Bundesbank, which he joined after completing his PhD in economics at the University of Bonn. He also worked as an external adviser to the International Monetary Fund. He is fluent in German, English, and French. His work is regularly published and cited in leading media. 

Related content