Emerging market economies seeking to control inflation generally choose between two dominant monetary anchors: inflation targeting, in which the central bank publicly commits to a numerical inflation objective and steers interest rates toward it, and exchange-rate pegs, which fix or manage the currency against a major foreign currency and import stability indirectly. Neither is free. Research by Fraga, Goldfajn and Minela for the NBER found that emerging markets under inflation targeting face "more acute trade-offs" than developed economies—both output and inflation are more volatile, and inflation runs at higher levels—because of fragile institutions, imperfect credibility, and larger external shocks. Pegs, meanwhile, carry their own documented danger: Mexico's peso peg, which appeared "highly successful" from 1987 until December 1994, illustrates how abruptly an exchange-rate anchor can fail.

Introduction to Inflation Control in Emerging Markets

Controlling inflation in a developing economy is not simply a harder version of the same problem advanced economies face. The NBER analysis by Fraga, Goldfajn and Minela identifies a structural difference: emerging markets operate in a more volatile macroeconomic environment with weaker institutions and lower central bank credibility, which produces sharper trade-offs between price stability and everything else a central bank must protect—output, employment, and financial stability.

The practical stakes are visible in the numbers. In the emerging markets those researchers studied, deviations of inflation from central targets ran 81% higher than in developed economies, and deviations from the upper bounds of target ranges were 167% higher. The same framework that delivers discipline in London or Ottawa delivers something noisier in economies where shocks are larger and institutional anchors are thinner.

Since the late 1990s, most emerging market central banks have nonetheless converged on inflation targeting as their framework of choice, following the lead of developed countries, as Eswar Prasad and Ravi Kanbur noted in a 2010 Brookings commentary. The question for any given economy is not which strategy is superior in the abstract, but which set of risks its institutions and external position can actually absorb.