This study examines how maturity mismatches in banks’ balance sheets shape the transmission of monetary policy to credit supply. Linking supervisory data on approximately 1,800 euro area banks to loan-level credit records, we show that the role of maturity mismatches is highly ‘shock-specific’, settling a long-standing debate in the literature. Mismatches amplify the effects of unconventional but not conventional monetary policies. Banks with larger maturity gaps reduce lending more sharply following monetary policy surprises regarding quantitative tightening (QT) because valuation losses on long-term assets negatively affect their net worth, causing tighter leverage constraints. A New Keynesian DSGE model with endogenous maturity choices explains this asymmetry: banks with high maturity mismatches are more exposed to long-duration losses that compress net worth and amplify real effects. In contrast, standard policy rate shocks, which mainly affect short-term rates, generate little heterogeneity in lending responses.

This study investigates how credit supply shocks impact firm-level investment in the Euro area using the novel AnaCredit database. Using the methodology developed by (Amiti and Weinstein, 2018), we decompose loan growth rates into bank-specific, firm-specific, industry-specific, and common shocks. Our findings show that idiosyncratic bank supply shocks significantly affect firm-level investment, particularly among firms with a high dependence on bank loans. Furthermore, these granular bank-specific shocks explain most of the aggregate loan dynamics. We also find that the effects of bank shocks vary depending on firm characteristics, such as firm size, loan portfolio composition, and reliance on external financing. These results underscore the critical role banks play in shaping investment dynamics, especially under varying economic conditions.

This paper studies the heterogeneous effects of carbon policy shocks on firm investment, using approximately 2.7 million firm-year observations for nonfinancial corporations in Germany, France, Italy, and Spain from 2000 to 2018, sourced from the ORBIS database. To identify exogenous policy changes, we use the high-frequency carbon policy shocks developed by Känzig (2021). We then estimate the dynamic effects of these shocks using panel local projections (Jordá (2005); Cloyne et al. (2018)). Our findings reveal that investment adjusts both contemporaneously and heterogeneously. Notably, younger, smaller, and more highly leveraged firms show the most significant reduction in investment, both on impact and over the following two years. By contrast, average responses are similar across broad sectors, a finding consistent with inter-sectoral input-output linkages that diffuse carbon-induced cost changes throughout the production network. However, within the manufacturing sector, non-durable goods industries respond more strongly than durable goods industries. These results map the short-run distribution of adjustment costs from carbon pricing and can guide the design of complementary policies for vulnerable firms.

This paper estimates a New Keynesian DSGE model for the Euro Area and the Turkish economy using Bayesian estimation techniques and seven macroeconomic time series. The setting of the model features a number of nominal and real frictions and seven structural shocks are introduced. An analysis of the response of the two economies to these types of shocks is provided in a comparative fashion along with a study of the driving forces of the main macroeconomic dynamics through shock decomposition, with a focus on output and consumption.

This study examines the effect of structural transformation on labor productivity growth in the manufacturing industry in Turkey for the period of 1981-2000. Structural transformation is defined as movement of the factor inputs of the sector from sectors which have relatively low productivity to the sectors which have relatively high labor productivity. The conventional shiftshare analysis has been used in the purpose of showing the effect of structural transformation on rise of labor productivity of manufacturing sector. The empirical results do not support the structural bonus hypothesis. The empirical findings show that, structural transformation is not important in explaining rise of labor productivity for the period of 1981-2000. Moreover, the structural transformation seems to be burden rise of labor productivity rather than a bonus in during 1981-2000.