The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Wage Bargaining, Central Bank Independence, and the Real Effects of Money
Abstract
The effects of financial capital mobility on monetary policy autonomy are relatively well understood, but the importance of particular monetary regimes in distinct national-institutional settings is not. This article is a theoretical and empirical exploration of the effects of monetary policy regimes on unemployment in different national wage-bargaining settings. Based on a rational expectations, two-stage game of the interaction between the wage behavior of labor unions and the monetary policies of governments, I argue that monetary policies have real (employment) effects in all but the most decentralized bargaining systems. Specifically, in intermediately centralized bargaining systems a credible government commitment to a nonaccommodating monetary policy rule will deter militant wage behavior with salutary effects on unemployment. In highly centralized systems, by contrast, restrictive monetary policies will clash with unions' pursuit of wage-distributive goals and produce inferior employment performance. Only in highly fragmented bargaining systems is money “neutral” in the sense that employment performance is unaffected by monetary regimes. The model has clear consequences for the optimal design of central banks and collective bargaining arrangements and suggests new ways to study institutional change (hereunder the causal effect of increasingly globalized capital markets). The argument is supported by pooled time-series data for fifteen OECD countries over a twenty-one-year period.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
What To Do (and Not to Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data
Beck, N., & Katz, J. N. (1995) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/2082979 · Cited by 6,840
The Optimal Degree of Commitment to an Intermediate Monetary Target
Rogoff, K. (1985) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/1885679 · Cited by 3,688
Political Parties and Macroeconomic Policy
Hibbs, D. A. (1977) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055400269712 · Cited by 3,368
Cited by
The New Politics of the Welfare State
(2001) · doi:10.1093/0198297564.001.0001 · Cited by 3,228
Social Protection and the Formation of Skills: A Reinterpretation of the Welfare State
Estevez‐Abe, M., Iversen, T., & Soskice, D. (2001) · Varieties of Capitalism · doi:10.1093/0199247757.003.0004 · Cited by 1,568
Self-citationHall, P. A., & Gingerich, D. W. (2009) · British Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1017/s0007123409000672 · Cited by 1,113
T IME-S ERIES–C ROSS-S ECTION D ATA: What Have We Learned in the Past Few Years?
Beck, N. (2001) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.4.1.271 · Cited by 916
The Causes of Welfare State Expansion: Deindustrialization or Globalization?
Iversen, T., & Cusack, T. R. (2000) · World Politics · doi:10.1017/s0043887100016567 · Cited by 892
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Iversen, T.
- Venue
- International Organization
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1998
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 469-504
- ISSN
- 0020-8183 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-5088
- OpenAlex
- W2162365694
- Cited by
- 305
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 87.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Wage Bargaining, Central Bank Independence, and the Real Effects of Money. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/002081898550635
- The paper
- Iversen, T. (1998). Wage Bargaining, Central Bank Independence, and the Real Effects of Money. International Organization. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081898550635
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.