Lively discussions after publication of the interest rate path There have been lively discussions on both occasions when the Riksbank has published an interest rate path. It is good that our forecasts and assessments are discussed. The fact that the Riksbank gives its view of the interest rate over a longer time span encourages this – the longer the time perspective, the greater the scope for differences in assessments. But the discussion that has arisen has often not taken this direction; instead it has focussed on market agents having been taken by surprise by the Riksbank. This is, of course, not the desired effect. The Riksbank aims to be predictable and from this aspect the experiences so far of publishing our own interest rate forecast have been not only positive. My view is that we are at the beginning of a joint learning process. It is unusual for the Riksbank to communicate its own interest rate path and it is unusual for market agents to relate to it. This is something that both parties will become better at as our experience in this field increases. We can also make some comparisons with when the Riksbank began to publish its inflation forecast. When the forecast was changed this sometimes led to a debate. BIS Review 111/2007  3  But after a time, everyone became used to the idea that the inflation path would be revised, and it will probably be the same case with the interest rate path.
So despite the market analysts’ own interest rate expectations being in line with the Riksbank’s published interest rate path for the coming six months and higher further ahead, they were surprised by the Riksbank’s upward revision of the interest rate path. One might ask why market agents’ expectations of the Riksbank’s interest rate path differed from their own forecasts for the repo rate. One interpretation is that they believed they had weighed together information on inflationary pressures in the economy in a different way than the Riksbank. This is nothing strange in itself. Assessing economic developments is not an exact science and different forecasters may very well draw different conclusions regarding the underlying inflationary pressure in the economy. But what surprises me, if this is the  4  BIS Review 111/2007  correct interpretation, is that the market nevertheless reacted so strongly to the assessment we made in June. Another interpretation might be that some analysts thought the Riksbank’s assessment of inflation prospects and interest rate development did not differ significantly from their own assessments, but that the Riksbank did not want to revise the interest rate forecast made in February by that much, for reasons of prestige. I do not know whether this could have been part of the explanation, but I believe and hope that it was not. We Executive Board members have always been careful to point out that the interest rate path we publish is a forecast, and like other forecasts is reconsidered each time we make a decision.