This speech is being delivered in honor of Otmar Issing’s 90th birthday. Congratulations to Otmar Issing on reaching this remarkable milestone. Today, we celebrate your birthday here in Frankfurt, where your journey as a central banker began. Your advocacy for central bank independence has left a lasting impact on the Eurosystem, embedding this principle in its DNA. As the ECB’s first Chief Economist, you played a crucial role in designing a framework that balanced rules with flexibility, ensuring price stability without hindering growth. Your legacy extends beyond policy, as you have continued to shape international discussions through your writing, teaching, and leadership at the Center for Financial Studies. Despite attacks on central bank independence worldwide, the topic of this colloquium in your honor, «Achieving and maintaining central bank independence – why it matters,» remains highly relevant.
In this speech, I will focus on the evidence supporting the promise of central bank independence in keeping inflation low and stable. I will discuss the theoretical underpinnings of central bank independence, the empirical literature on its relationship with inflation, and new research analyzing the impact of recent attacks on the independence of the Federal Reserve.
The theoretical rationale for central bank independence emerged in response to the failures of central banks in controlling inflation during the 1970s energy crisis. Economists identified a vulnerability to political pressure as a structural shortcoming in the monetary framework. Central bank independence was proposed as a solution to protect monetary policy from politics. Empirical studies in the early 1990s supported the hypothesis that higher central bank independence is associated with lower average inflation and less inflation variability, without sacrificing economic growth.
This index serves as a reflection of the central bank’s legal framework and is therefore an indicator of legal independence. Cukierman, Webb, and Neyapti’s analysis, which includes emerging and developing economies, utilized a more refined measure of legal independence. They discovered that in advanced economies, higher independence correlates with lower and more stable inflation. However, this relationship was not found in emerging and developing countries. The authors argue that legal independence and actual independence are distinct, with both being essential for effective central banking. When a proxy for actual independence was used, in the form of the turnover rate of central bank governors, the negative relationship reemerged. This underscores the importance of actual independence backing legal independence for reducing and stabilizing inflation. These actions are then incorporated into their statistical model, allowing the authors to predict how markets will react to these disruptions over time.
The findings are remarkable. When pressure increases, Treasury yields decrease, indicating that markets anticipate looser monetary policy. However, equity prices do not rise as expected; instead, they drop and volatility rises. Additionally, gold prices surge, and the US dollar weakens significantly.
The authors interpret this as a reassessment of risk on two levels: firstly, within US markets, investors shift from equities to Treasuries, seeking safety domestically. Secondly, the weakening dollar and rising gold prices indicate investors moving away from US assets, seeking safety outside the United States.
Crucially, the study finds no evidence of an increase in inflation expectations. Market-based indicators actually decrease slightly, if at all. This suggests that investors are not only anticipating looser monetary policy but also expressing concerns about the integrity of US institutions and the potential wide-ranging consequences of a loss of integrity. In other words, worries about weaker US growth or increased uncertainty appear to outweigh fears of inflation.
The key takeaway is clear: when markets perceive political pressure as undermining the independence of the Fed, it triggers a flight from US assets and the dollar. This mechanism differs from those highlighted in earlier literature on Fed pressure during Trump’s initial term, indicating that recent attacks were more severe.
Nevertheless, it serves as a poignant reminder: attacks on central bank independence backfire.
In conclusion, recent events and the literature cited serve as a stark reminder: central bank independence is not self-sustaining and requires defenders. Stasavage (2003), Checks and Balances, Private Information, and the Credibility of Monetary Commitments, International Organization, Vol. 56(4), pp. 751–774; Acemoglu, D., S. Johnson, P. Querubin and J. Robinson (2008), When Does Policy Reform Work? The Case of Central Bank Independence, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Vol. 39(1), pp. 351–429 as well as Daunfeldt, S. and X. de Luna (2008), Central Bank Independence and Price Stability: Evidence from OECD-Countries, Oxford Economic Papers, Vol. 60(3), pp. 410–422.
Für eine frühe Bewertung entlang dieser Linien siehe Eijffinger, S. und J. de Haan (1996), The Political Economy of Central-Bank Independence, Princeton Studies in International Economics 19.
Siehe beispielsweise Berger, H., J. De Haan und S. Eijffinger (2001), Central bank independence: an update of theory and evidence, Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 15(1), pp. 3–40; Crowe, C. und E. Meade (2007), The Evolution of Central Bank Governance around the World, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 21(4), pp. 69–90 sowie Klomp, J. und J. de Haan (2010), Inflation And Central Bank Independence: A Meta‐Regression Analysis, Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 24(4), pp. 593–621. Für eine kritischere Darstellung der Literatur siehe Hayo, B. und C. Hefeker (2002), Reconsidering central bank independence, European Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 18(4), pp. 653–674.
Siehe beispielsweise Crowe, C. und E. Meade (2008), Central bank independence and transparency: Evolution and effectiveness, European Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 24, pp. 763–777; Brumm (2011), Inflation and central bank independence: Two-way causality?, Economics Letters, Vol. 111, pp. 220–222 sowie Agur, I. (2021), Central bank independence and low inflation: who leads the dance?, Applied Economics Letters, Vol. 28(6), pp. 477–481. Crowe und Meade (2008) verwenden Instrumentenvariablenschätzungen und finden robuste Beweise dafür, dass eine größere Unabhängigkeit der Zentralbank mit einer niedrigeren Inflation verbunden ist. Brumm (2011) zeigt, dass Inflation und Unabhängigkeit der Zentralbank endogen bestimmt sind, aber die negative Korrelation zwischen den beiden bleibt robust. Agur (2021) stellt fest, dass für fortgeschrittene Volkswirtschaften eine Reform der Unabhängigkeit der Zentralbank signifikant zu einer Desinflation führt, während in die entgegengesetzte Richtung keine Granger-Kausalität besteht.
Für eine Studie, die ausdrücklich eine Parameterheterogenität zwischen Ländern zulässt, siehe Klomp, J. und J. de Haan (2010), Central bank independence and inflation revisited, Public Choice, Vol.144, pp. 445–457. Sie finden heraus, dass die Unabhängigkeit der Zentralbank nur in einer Minderheit der mehr als 100 Länder in ihrer Stichprobe einen signifikanten Effekt hat. Zu den Arbeiten, die ihre Stichproben zwischen fortgeschrittenen und Entwicklungsländern aufteilen, gehören Kokoszczyński, R. und J. Mackiewicz-Łyziak (2019), Central bank independence and inflation – Old story told anew, International Journal of Finance and Economics, Vol. 25(1), pp. 72–79 und Lim (2021), The limits of central bank independence for inflation performance, Public Choice, Vol. 186, pp. 309–335. Während Kokoszczyński und Mackiewicz-Łyziak (2019) nur eine signifikante Beziehung zwischen der Unabhängigkeit der Zentralbank und der Inflation für Entwicklungsländer finden, kommt Lim (2021) zu dem gegenteiligen Ergebnis und findet es nur für fortgeschrittene Volkswirtschaften.
Siehe Ioannidou, V., S. Kokas, T. Lambert und A. Michaelides (2025), (In)dependent central banks, Verfügbar unter SSRN: Ioannidou, Vasso und Kokas, Sotirios und Lambert, Thomas und Michaelides, Alexander, (In)dependent Central Banks (31. Oktober 2022). Verfügbar unter SSRN:
Issing, O. (2006), Central Bank Independence – Economic and Political Dimensions, National Institute Economic Review, Vol. 196, pp. 73–74.
Siehe Frankovic, I und S. Karau (2026), Political Pressure on the Fed – Is This Time Different?, Mimeo.
Für Beweise aus Trumps erster Amtszeit siehe Bianchi, F., R. Gómez-Cram, T. Kind und H. Kung (2023), Threats to central bank independence: High-frequency identification with twitter, Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol. 135(C), pp. 37–54. Für einen allgemeineren Bericht über den Einfluss politischen Drucks auf die Federal Reserve siehe Drechsel, T. (2025), Political Pressure on the Fed, zur Veröffentlichung in der Review of Economic Studies angenommen. The theme of this tribute colloquium is highly appropriate: Central bank independence – why it matters. In my address, I will examine the question of whether independence truly leads to low and stable inflation in three steps.
Firstly, I will outline the theoretical basis for central bank independence. The failure of central banks to control inflation in the 1970s was attributed to their susceptibility to political influence. The solution was to shield monetary policy from politics through independence, a principle established by the Deutsche Bundesbank since 1957.
Secondly, I will review the early and recent empirical studies on the link between central bank independence and inflation. Researchers found that higher independence is associated with lower and more stable inflation in advanced economies, but not necessarily in emerging or developing countries.
Lastly, I will present new research from the Bundesbank that examines the impact of recent challenges to the independence of the Federal Reserve. This analysis will shed light on the importance of maintaining central bank independence to achieve the goal of low and stable inflation. The main issue they focused on is endogeneity, an econometric problem that can impact estimates of the effect of central bank independence on inflation. For instance, inflation outcomes and central bank independence may be influenced by an unobserved factor, such as a societal preference for low inflation. This can create the appearance that independence causes lower inflation when other factors are also at play. Adam Posen, a critic in the mid-1990s, argued that central bank independence is not a random choice by politicians but rather a reflection of the opposition to high inflation by financial market participants. This implies that both independence and low inflation may stem from the same underlying factor – a societal preference for price stability.
In conclusion, central bank independence is crucial for price stability, as emphasized in the literature. The theoretical case for central bank independence still holds, and recent empirical work confirms that greater independence is associated with lower inflation, although the effect is nuanced. The literature identifies three conditions for central bank independence to ensure price stability: legal independence, actual independence, and broad societal support. Despite recent threats to central bank independence, the importance of maintaining stability culture and political support for central bank independence remains paramount. In other words, concerns about weaker US growth or higher uncertainty appear to be more significant than fears of inflation.
The key point is clear: when markets perceive that political pressure is eroding the Fed’s independence, there is a rush to move away from US assets and the dollar. This differs from the mechanisms highlighted in previous literature on Fed pressure during Trump’s first term, indicating that these recent attacks were more severe.
Nevertheless, this serves as a stark reminder: attacks on central bank independence have negative consequences.
In summary, recent events and the literature cited serve as a reminder that central bank independence is not guaranteed. It requires individuals willing to defend it.
In conclusion, Otmar Issing is one of those individuals. He has been a prominent figure in the central banking world for over 60 years, shaping monetary policy in the euro area and advocating for central bank independence. His contributions to the field are numerous and his commitment unwavering.
As Goethe once said, «A vigorous youth promises a happy old age.» Here’s to many more years of happiness for Otmar Issing: ad multos annos! Herr und Frau, Willkommen zu diesem Kolloquium zu Ehren des 90. Geburtstages von Otmar Issing!
Lieber Otmar Issing, herzlichen Glückwunsch zu diesem bemerkenswerten Meilenstein. Heute ist ein schöner Tag, um Ihren Geburtstag hier in Frankfurt zu feiern. Wir freuen uns, Sie zurück bei der Bundesbank zu begrüßen, dem Ort, an dem Ihre Reise als Zentralbanker begann. Auch wenn wir uns gerade nicht genau in der Wilhelm-Epstein-Straße befinden.
Als Sie 1990 zur Bundesbank kamen, brachten Sie einen scharfen Verstand und einen festen Glauben mit: Zentralbanken sollten unabhängig sein. Sie haben nicht nur für dieses Prinzip plädiert. Sie haben es im DNA des Eurosystems verankert.
Als erster Chefökonom der EZB spielten Sie eine Schlüsselrolle bei der Gestaltung eines Rahmens, der Regeln mit Flexibilität ausbalancierte, um Preisstabilität ohne Wachstumseinbußen zu gewährleisten. Sie haben die Tradition der Unabhängigkeit der Bundesbank übernommen und sie zu Europas gemacht.
Aber Ihr Vermächtnis geht über die Politik hinaus. Nach Ihrer aktiven Karriere als Zentralbanker haben Sie weiterhin internationale Diskussionen geprägt – durch Ihr Schreiben, Ihr Lehren und Ihr Engagement am Center for Financial Studies. Sie sind nie vor den schwierigen Fragen zurückgeschreckt – und haben immer strenge Antworten gefordert.
In den letzten zehn Jahren haben Sie immer wieder davor gewarnt, Zentralbanken mit zu vielen Aufgaben und Verpflichtungen zu überlasten. Sie sahen die Gefahr, dass dies letztendlich ihre Unabhängigkeit untergraben und ihre Fähigkeit beeinträchtigen könnte, ihren Auftrag der Preisstabilität zu erfüllen.
Heute sehen wir Angriffe auf die Unabhängigkeit von Zentralbanken auf der ganzen Welt – von Jakarta über Istanbul bis Caracas und Washington. Daher könnte das Thema dieses Kolloquiums zu Ihren Ehren nicht passender sein: Die Erreichung und Aufrechterhaltung der Unabhängigkeit von Zentralbanken – warum es wichtig ist.
Um unsere Diskussion zu fundieren, wird sich meine Rede auf eine grundlegende Frage konzentrieren: Welche Beweise haben wir dafür, dass Unabhängigkeit ihr Versprechen hält, die Inflation niedrig und stabil zu halten? Ich werde in drei Schritten vorgehen:
Erstens werde ich kurz die theoretische Begründung für die Unabhängigkeit der Zentralbanken hervorheben.
Zweitens werde ich die frühere und aktuelle empirische Literatur zur Beziehung zwischen Zentralbankunabhängigkeit und Inflation diskutieren.
Drittens werde ich neue Forschungsergebnisse der Bundesbank vorstellen, die die Auswirkungen der jüngsten Angriffe auf die Unabhängigkeit der Federal Reserve analysieren.
### Zentralbankunabhängigkeit und Inflation: theoretische Grundlagen
Lassen Sie mich mit der theoretischen Begründung für die Unabhängigkeit der Zentralbanken beginnen. Warum sind viele Zentralbanken während der Energiekrise der 1970er Jahre so spektakulär gescheitert, die Inflation zu kontrollieren?
Ökonomen identifizierten einen strukturellen Mangel im geldpolitischen Rahmen: Zentralbanken waren zu anfällig für politischen Druck. Die Lösung: Schützen Sie die Geldpolitik vor Politik – durch die Unabhängigkeit der Zentralbanken.
In Deutschland, – wie diejenigen, die mit der Deutschen Bundesbank vertraut sind, trocken feststellen würden – ist dies «seit August 1957 etablierte Praxis». At that time, this principle was not widely accepted. The main papers supporting the idea that central bank independence could reduce inflation were not initially written with this specific goal in mind. In 1977, Kydland and Prescott identified a flaw in discretionary policy known as time inconsistency. Policymakers often face a dilemma where a plan that seems optimal today may not be optimal tomorrow due to the temptation to deviate from the initial plan. This leads private actors to adjust their behavior accordingly, resulting in a worse outcome for policymakers. Barro and Gordon applied this insight to monetary policy in 1983, identifying the classic inflation bias. They argued that central banks can prevent this bias by constraining their discretion through rules or reputation.
Rogoff proposed delegating monetary policy to an inflation-averse central banker in 1985 to address time inconsistency. The solution to the inflation bias was to insulate monetary policy from short-term political pressure by establishing an independent central bank focused on delivering low and stable inflation. These ideas were abstract but quickly became influential in the debate, with the Bundesbank serving as a successful example of an independent central bank.
In the early 1990s, economists tested the hypothesis that central bank independence reduces inflation empirically. Alesina and Summers found that higher central bank independence is associated with lower average inflation and less inflation variability across OECD countries. Cukierman, Webb, and Neyapti extended this analysis to include emerging and developing economies, finding similar results for advanced economies. However, they found that legal independence must be supported by actual independence for central banking to be effective.
The literature has evolved since the 1990s to address endogeneity and heterogeneity in the relationship between central bank independence and inflation. Researchers have moved beyond simple correlations to more rigorous tests of causality, considering factors like societal preferences for low inflation that may influence both independence and inflation outcomes. Adam Posen highlighted the importance of broad societal support for a central bank’s mandate for price stability, emphasizing the need for backing from politicians, financial markets, and the public. Central bank independence is a key factor for maintaining low and stable inflation, but it is not the sole factor. Otmar Issing highlighted in 1993 that while central bank independence is necessary for price stability, it is not sufficient on its own. Further research has shown that political institutions and constraints also play a role in shaping the impact of central bank independence on inflation. While the simple notion of making the central bank independent to achieve low and stable inflation is incomplete, the core finding remains that central bank independence contributes to reducing inflation. Despite variations across countries due to differences in institutions, politics, and economic structures, the overall consensus is that central bank independence is essential for price stability. Recent studies have shown that legal independence, actual independence, and broad societal support are crucial for central bank independence to effectively maintain price stability. However, recent threats to central bank independence, such as political pressure on central banks, can have negative effects on financial markets and undermine the integrity of institutions. It is clear that central bank independence is not self-sustaining and requires ongoing support and protection.Otmar Issing has been a vocal advocate for central bank independence and has played a significant role in shaping the central banking landscape. His dedication to this cause serves as a reminder of the importance of preserving central bank independence in maintaining economic stability. For 16 years, Otmar Issing played a significant role in shaping monetary policy in Germany and the euro area. He has received numerous prestigious awards over the years, too many to list here. Otmar Issing is cosmopolitan and well-read, having studied classical philology 72 years ago. As Goethe said in «Hermann and Dorothea,» «A vigorous youth promises a happy old age.» On that note, I wish Otmar many more happy years to come: ad multos annos! Central bank independence has a significant effect in only a minority of the countries studied. Papers by Kokoszczyński and Mackiewicz-Łyziak (2019) and Lim (2021) examine the relationship between central bank independence and inflation in both advanced and developing economies. While Kokoszczyński and Mackiewicz-Łyziak (2019) find a significant relationship only in developing economies, Lim (2021) finds it only in advanced economies. Other research by Ioannidou et al. (2025), Issing (2006), Frankovic and Karau (2026), Bianchi et al. (2023), and Drechsel (2025) also discuss the impact of central bank independence and political pressure on central banks. Can you please rewrite this sentence?
QUELLEN
