Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate in Economics, Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

3 Associate Professor of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

 Balance of payments shocks can impact economies in varying degrees depending on their structural characteristics, often leading to the formation of business cycles. These cycles cause key macroeconomic variables, such as output, inflation, and exchange rates, to deviate from their long-term trends. The exchange rate policy and regime play a critical role in determining how these shocks propagate and generate business cycles. This research employs a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) model to evaluate the effects of different balance of payments shocks—including oil exports, non-oil exports, and terms of trade shocks—on major macroeconomic variables in Iran under various exchange rate regimes (ERRs). Using welfare loss criteria and impulse-response functions, the findings indicate that a fixed real ERR results in the least welfare losses under different balance of payments shocks. Additionally, a managed floating ERR performs better than a floating ERR, whereas a fixed nominal ERR incurs the greatest welfare losses. The results also suggest that minimal central bank intervention minimizes the recessionary impact of negative shocks in the short run, although it leads to higher inflationary effects.
Introduction
Generally, due to the impact of balance of payments shocks in creating business cycles, the existence of equilibrium in the balance of payments is considered one of the important indicators of macroeconomic stability. One significant channels through which these shocks affect business cycles is the real exchange rate channel, and thus, the exchange rate policy is crucial. Also, in Iran as an oil-dependent economy, due to the role of oil revenues in the government's general budget, industrial production relies on foreign currency income from oil exports to import intermediate and capital goods. Therefore, examining foreign exchange rate policies is particularly important. The primary purpose of this study is to evaluate the role of foreign exchange rate policies in transferring balance of payments shocks to aggregate output and business cycles. For this purpose, a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model (DSGE) is used to evaluate and compare the effects of balance of payments shocks (including oil export shock, non-oil export shock, and the term of trade shock) on macroeconomic variables and especially in creating business cycles in different Exchange Rate Regims (ERRs).
Methods and Material
The main framework of the DSGE model in this study is taken from the studies of Adolfson et al. (2007), Gekain and Kulikov (2009), Balke and Brown (2018) and Tavaklian and Jalali Naini (2016), which are based on the topic and questions of the research and has expanded according to the structure of Iran's economy. Based on this, the model includes the household sector, producer sector, labor market, government sector, central bank, as well as trade sector including export, import, and balance of payments account components. Also, before simulating different shocks, the calibration method will be used to calibrate the model parameters as suggested by Chen et al. (2012) and Angelopoulos et al. (2010). The time series of all macroeconomic variables were extracted from economic databases such as the Central Bank of Iran and the Statistical Center of Iran, with their average calculated as steady-state parameters. Finally, examining and comparing the moments of the actual data of the Iranian economy with the moments obtained from the introduced model, indicates the relative success of the model in the Iranian economy.
Results and Discussion
In the framework of different ERRs, the effects of negative shocks (equal to 10% on oil exports, non-oil exports and the term of trade) have been investigated and the results are compared based on the welfare loss function in Table (1). Generally, the welfare loss function is the weighted sum of output, inflation and real exchange rate variances that indicates the weighted sum of instability in important macroeconomic variables due to temporary negative shock, which is calculated for the entire period from short-term to long-term. Therefore, the question is, in which of the ERRs, the vulnerability of the macroeconomic is less against negative shocks? The important findings are as follows:

The prioritization of ERRs with the aim of reducing the effects of negative shocks, is the same in all three negative shocks of oil, non-oil exports and the term of trade. The welfare loss resulting from shocks is the highest in the fixed ERR and the lowest in the fixed real ERR. After the fixed ERR, the floating and the managed floating ERRs have more welfare losses, respectively.
In the short-run, as compared to the floating ERR, a negative shock with the deterioration of the balance of payments, leads to less inflation but more recession in the fixed ERR. However, in the whole period, the loss of the fixed ERR is more than the floating one.
In the short-run, as compared to the floating ERR, the negative shock in the managed ERR with the deterioration of the balance of payments, leads to less inflation and recession. In the whole period, the welfare loss of the managed ERR is less than the floating ERR.
In the short-run, a negative shock in a fixed real ERR, compared to a managed floating ERR, leads to more inflation and less recession. However, in the whole period, the loss of the fixed real ERR is less.
If the level of intervention of the central bank in the foreign exchange market is classified from the highest to the lowest, we will have the fixed, the managed floating, the fixed real exchange rate, and the floating ERRs, respectively. The results of the model show with the lowest central bank's intervention, the recessionary effect of the negative shock is lower, but the inflationary effect is greater in the short-run.
Due to the dependence of the trade structure and government budget on oil revenues in Iran's economy on the one hand, as well as the ownership and supply of foreign currency resulting from oil exports by the government and other assumptions of the research model, fixed and floating exchange rate policy rules are not recommended. Rather, the fixed real exchange rate and managed floating ERRs have relatively fewer losses, respectively. Although one of the essentials of the successful implementation of the managed floating ERR against negative shock, is the possibility of sufficient foreign exchange reserves of the central bank to intervene in the foreign exchange market to eliminate short-run fluctuations.
In all ERRs, the negative shock of oil export has the largest welfare loss compared to other impulses.

Table 1 Comparing the Welfare Losses of the Impulse Response Functions of Shocks in Different Exchange Rate Systems




Shock


ERRs


Variance


Welfare Losses




Output


Inflation


Real Exchange Rate




Oil-export


Fixed


0.3893


0.0316


1.19


0.5234




Floating


0.0119


0.116


1.21


0.4028




MF


0.0414


0.0075


0.184


0.0740




FR


0.0144


0.0054


0


0.0162




Non-Oil-Export


Fixed


0.0058


0.0007


0.0156


0.0072




Floating


0.0002


0.0004


0.1016


0.0037




MF


0.0014


0.0003


0.0051


0.0022




FR


0.0006


0.0005


0


0.0007




Term of Trade


Fixed


0.0066


0.0007


0.0719


0.0082




Floating


0.0002


0.0004


0.0107


0.0034




MF


0.0018


0.0004


0.0067


0.0028




FR


0.0009


0.0006


0


0.0010




*MF and FR refer to Managed Floating and Fixed Real Exchange Rate Regime, respectively.
Source: Research Findings
Conclusion
Based on the results, the oil export shock has the greatest impact on the welfare loss, making it a high priority to create a stable trend in income from oil export. Policymakers should prevent the occurrence of a strong shock in the amount of injected foreign currency, in order to create stability in the production process. This can be done with the currency stabilization fund within the framework of the National Wealth Fund. Oil shocks can also affect the exchange rate, so it is necessary to control the oil shocks to prevent the exchange rate fluctuations. It should also be noted that non-oil export shock causes business cycles and welfare losses. Therefore, the policymakers should pay attention to the diversification of production and exports. Stabilization of foreign exchange income from oil and non-oil exports on the one hand, and the expansion of domestic production on the other hand, leads to the reduction of welfare losses caused by various shocks in the balance of payments.

Keywords

اصغری، مجتبی، حقیقت، علی، نونژاد، مسعود و زارع، هاشم (1398). پویایی­های نرخ ارز در ایران با استفاده از مدل­های تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی (DSGE). مدلسازی اقتصادی، 13(46)، 171-192.
تقوی، مهدی و محمدی، مرتضی(1390). بررسی عولمل مؤثر بر نرخ ارز و تراز پرداخت‌ها در اقتصاد ایران (یک رهیافت پولی). فصلنامه  علمی پژوهشی اقتصاد مقداری، (8) 1،  51-72.
توکلیان، حسین و افضلی ابرقویی، وجیهه (1395). مقایسه عملکرد اقتصاد کلان در رژیم­های مختلف ارزی (با رویکرد DSGE). پژوهشنامه اقتصادی، 16(61)، 81-125.
توکلیان، حسین و جلالی نائینی، سید احمدرضا (1396). سیاست­گذاری پولی و ارزی صلاحدیدی بهینه در یک الگوی تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی برآورد شده برای اقتصاد ایران. پژوهش­های اقتصادی ایران، 22(70)، 33-98.
صلوی­تبار، شیرین و جلالی نائینی، سیداحمدرضا (1393). ارزیابی رژیم­های مختلف ارزی در یک اقتصاد باز کوچک. فصلنامه برنامه­ریزی و بودجه، 19(2) ، 3-24.
طهماسبی، بهمن، جعفری­صمیمی، احمد و فرجادی، غلامعلی (1393). بررسی اثر صادرات غیرنفتی بر نرخ ارز حقیقی در ایران. فصلنامه اقتصاد مالی، (26)8، 76-53.
فرخوی، مسعود (1392). بررسی نظام­های ارزی ایران، پایان­نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشکده اقتصاد دانشگاه تهران
مروت، حبیب، فریدزاد، علی (1394). نقش انتظارات در شکل گیری نوسانات نرخ ارز. پژوهش‌های اقتصادی ایران، 20(64)، 115-89.
منظور، داوود و تقی­پور، انوشیروان (1394). تنظیم یک مدل تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی (DSGE) برای اقتصاد باز کوچک صادرکننده نفت: مورد مطالعه: ایران. فصلنامه پژوهش­ها و سیاست‌های  اقتصادی، 23(75)، 7-44.
نونژاد، مسعود و روشن­قیاس، مهدی(1391). اثر رابطه مبادله و تلاطم آن بر رشد اقتصادی. فصلنامه پژوهش­های اقتصادی (رویکرد اسلامی-ایرانی)، 46، 200-1.
یاوری، کاظم، ولی­بیگی، حسن، ابراهمی، ایلناز و سحابی، بهرام (1397). تحلیل اثر سیاست­های تجاری و ارزی در ایران در چارچوب مدل تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی. سیاست­گذاری اقتصادی، 10(19)، 53-88 .
ReferencesAdolfson, M., Stefan, L., Jesper, L., & Mattias, V. (2007). Bayesian Estimation of an Open Economy DSGE Model with Incomplete Pass–through. Journal of International Economics, 72, 481–511.
Angelopoulos, K., Dimeli, S., Philippopoulos, A., & Vassilatos, V. (2010). Rent seeking competition from state coffers in Greece: A calibrated DSGE model,120.
Asghari, M., Haghighat, A., Nonejad, M., & Zare, H. (2019). The Study of Exchange Rate Dynamics in Iran by Using Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) Models. Economic Modeling, 13(46), 171-192. [In Persian]
Balke, N. S., & Brown, S. P. (2018). Oil supply shocks and the US economy: An estimated DSGE model. Energy Policy, 116, 357-372.
Brown, S. & Yucel, M. (2002). Energy Prices and Aggregate Economic Activity: An Interpretative Survey. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 42, 193-208.
Calderon, C., & Schmidt-Hebbel, K. (2008). Choosing an exchange rate regime. Central Bank of Chile working paper, 494.
Calvo, G.A. (1983). Staggered prices in a utility-maximizing framework. Journal of Monetary Economics, 12(3), 983-998.
Chen, Q., Funke, M., & Paetz, M. (2012). Market and non-market monetary policy tools in a calibrated DSGE model for mainland China.
Delavari, M., Mohammadali, H., Naderi, E., & Gandali Alikhani, N. (2011). The sources of Iran's Business Cycles. MPRA Paper 46756, University Library of Munich, Germany.
Dixit, A. K., & Stiglitz, J. E. (1977), Monopolistic competition and optimum product diversity. The American Economic Review, 67(3), 297-308.
Farkhovi, M. (2012). Analysis of Iran's Currency Systems. Master's Thesis, Faculty of Economics, University of Tehran. [In Persian]
Filis, G., Degiannakis, S., & Floros, C.H. (2011). Dynamic correlation between Stock Market and Oil Prices: The Case of Oil-Importing and Oil-Exporting Countries. International Review of Financial Analysis, 20, 152-164.
Gelain, P. & Kulikov, D. (2009). An Estimated Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium Model for Estonia”, Eesti Pank Bank of Estonia, Working Paper Series.
Hossain, A. (2009). Structural Change in the Export Demand Function for Indonesia: Estimation, Analysis and Policy Implications. Journal of Policy Modeling, 31, 260-271.
Kemme, D., & Kokeyni, K. (2016). Exchange Rate Regimes and Welfare Losses from Foreign Crises: The Impact of the US Financial Crisis on Mexico. Review of International Economics, 25(1), 132-147.
Kodongo, O & Ojah, K (2013). Real exchange rates, trade balance and capital flows in Africa. Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, 66(C), 22-46.
Krugman, P. & Obstfeld, M. (2003). International Economics: Theory and Policy. Sixth Edition.
Lin, Y. (2021). Business cycle fluctuations in Taiwan: A Bayesian DSGE analysis. Journal of Macroeconomics,70.
Manzoor, D., & Taghipour A. (2016). A dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model for an oil exporting and small open economy: the case of Iran. Qjerp, 23 (75): 7-44 [In Persian]
Maravalle, A. (2013). Oil shocks and the US terms of trade: gauging the role of the trade channel. Taylor & Francis Journals, 20(2), 152-156.
Melvin, M., & Norrbin, S.C., (2013). The Balance of Payments, International Money and Finance. Eighth Edition.
Morovat, H., & Faridzad, A. (2015). The Role of Expectations in Exchange Rate Fluctuations. Iranian Journal of Economic Research, 20(64), 89-115.
Mundell, R. (2012). U.S. and China in the World Economy: The Balance of Payments and the Balance of Power. journal of Policy Modeling, 34, 525-528.
Nakhli, R., Rafat, M., Bakhshi Dastjerdi, R., & Rafei, M. (2020). A DSGE Analysis of the Effects of Economic Sanctions: Evidence from the Central Bank of Iran. Iranian Journal of Economic Studies, 9(1), 35-70.
Nonejad, M., & Roshan Ghiyas, M. (2012). The effect of terms of trade and its volatility on economic growth in Iran. Economics Research, 12(46), 183-200. [In Persian]
Palma, A. & Portugal, M. (2014). Preferences of the Central Bank of Brazil under the inflation targeting regime: Estimation using a DSGE model for a small open economy. Journal of Policy Modeling, 36(5), 824-839.
Rapetti, M., Skott, P., & Arslan, R. (2011). The real exchange rate and economic growth: are developing countries different? Working Paper.
Salas, J., Kirchner, M., & Tranamil-Vidal, R. (2021). Search frictions and the business cycle in a small open economy DSGE model. Review of Economic Dynamics, 39, 258-279.
Salavitabar, Sh. & Jalali-Naini A. (2014). The evaluation of different exchange rate regimes in a small open Economy. JPBUD. 19(2), 3-24. [In Persian]
Sangaré, I. (2016). External shocks and exchange rate regimes in Southeast Asia: A DSGE analysis. Economic Modelling, 58, 365-382.
Taghavi, M., & Mohammadi, M. (2011). Reliability Tests of Monetary Approach to Exchange Rate and Balance of Payments in Iranian Economics. Quarterly Journal of Quantitative Economics, 8(1), 51-72. [In Persian]
Tahmasbi, B., Jafari Samimi, A. & Farjadi, GH. (2014). The Impact of Non-oil Exports on Real Exchange Rate in Iran. Journal of Financial Economics (Financial Economics and Development), 8(26), 53-75. [In Persian]
Tavakolian, H., & Afzali Abarquyi, V. (2016). Macroeconomic Performance in Different Exchange Rate Regimes: An Estimated DSGE Approach. Economics Research, 16(61). [In Persian]
Tavakolian, H., & Ghiaie, H. (2019). Optimal inflation targeting in a dualexchange rate oil economy (No. 2019-09). THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
Tavakolian, H., & Jalali Naeeni, A. (2017). Optimal and Discretionary Monetary and Exchange Policies in Iran: A DSGE Approach. Iranian Journal of Economic Research, 22(70), 33-98. [In Persian]
Yavari, K., Valibeigi, H., Ebrahimi, I., & Sahabi, B. (2018). Analyzing Trade and Exchange Rate polices in Iran Using a DSGE Model. The Journal of Economic Policy, 10(19), 53-88. [In Persian]
Yousif, F., & Musa, A. (2018). The Determinants Factors of Balance of Payments: An Investigation from Sudan through the Period 1980-2016. Edelweiss Appli Sci Tech 2, 41-45.