Macro Paper Warehouse
Published Classic [Journal of International Money and Finance] doi:10.1016/0261-5606(83)90011-6 Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 135-145

Intertemporal Price Speculation and the Optimal Current-Account Deficit

Maurice Obstfeld — Columbia University

📄 Summarized from the full manuscript · Human-reviewed for faithfulness before publication

In brief

When a country's export prices fall temporarily, does it borrow abroad purely to smooth consumption, or is something else going on? This 1983 paper shows there's a second motive: if a country's foreign debt is priced in the goods it imports, a temporary rise in import prices is expected to reverse, and that expected reversal quietly erodes the real value of existing debt. That gives households an extra incentive to borrow while import prices are high, on top of consumption-smoothing -- and it means well-being can briefly rise before dropping once import prices fall back. How much this matters depends on how risk-averse the borrowing country's households are.

What this paper finds — and why it matters

This 1983 Journal of International Money and Finance paper by Maurice Obstfeld (NBER Working Paper No. 1100) uses an infinite-horizon optimizing model of a small open economy to show that a temporary adverse terms-of-trade shock drives a current-account deficit through two distinct channels, not one. Part of the deficit reflects ordinary consumption-smoothing, the same motive that produces a deficit after a temporary fall in output. But because the model assumes the economy’s foreign debt is indexed to the price of the good it imports – a deliberate choice meant to capture industrializing economies with dollar-denominated debt facing dollar-priced imports – a terms-of-trade shock that is expected to reverse also changes the expected real value of that debt, which temporarily lowers the real interest rate relevant to households’ borrowing decisions and gives them an added, purely speculative reason to borrow while the terms of trade are poor. This speculative channel makes the response to a terms-of-trade shock qualitatively different from the response to an output shock: instantaneous utility, flat throughout an output-driven adjustment, instead follows a discontinuous path under a terms-of-trade shock, falling abruptly the moment the terms of trade recover, and – if the adverse episode is brief enough – rising above its pre-shock level right when the shock first hits. The size of the cumulative deficit run during the low-terms-of-trade episode depends on the consumer’s degree of risk aversion (more risk-averse households run smaller deficits), a dependence that is absent from the pure output-shock case.

Summary of a classic paper, AI-assisted and human-reviewed. See the linked original for the authoritative claims and full conditions.


Questions & answers

Q1. What does the paper’s model assume about preferences, borrowing, and the economy’s exposure to price risk?

The model is an infinite-horizon optimizing framework for a small open economy of identical, immortal households with constant-relative-risk-aversion preferences over an exportable good (x) and an importable good (m), who hold a single internationally traded bond with a fixed face value denominated in units of the importable good (Sec. I). The subjective discount rate is assumed equal to the constant world interest rate r, and the economy is a price-taker in both goods and in the capital market. The paper states plainly that “the only available asset is an internationally-traded bond which carries a fixed face value equal to one unit of the importable good” – foreign debt is denominated in the import good rather than in exports, a choice the paper justifies by appeal to industrializing economies with dollar-denominated debt facing dollar-priced imports.

Q2. How does the current account respond to a temporary fall in output, and why is this response independent of risk aversion?

A temporary decline in output triggers a current-account deficit that grows throughout the low-output period and returns to zero the moment output recovers, as households borrow to hold consumption and utility constant at their new, lower permanent-income level (Sec. II). Because the shock operates purely through the household’s intertemporal budget constraint and not through any relative price, “the induced external asset path is not dependent on the risk aversion parameter R characterizing the curvature of the utility function” – the economy smooths a flat path of lower utility by borrowing while income is low and repaying once it recovers.

Q3. What two distinct motives combine to produce a current-account deficit after a temporary terms-of-trade shock?

A temporary deterioration in the terms of trade also produces a current-account deficit, but the paper shows this deficit reflects both an ordinary desire to smooth consumption and an additional, purely speculative motive created by the import-indexed debt. Because the real value of existing debt (measured in the home consumption basket) is expected to fall once the terms of trade recover, “there is an incentive to shift consumption toward that period” while the terms of trade – and hence the effective real interest rate on debt – are temporarily unfavorable: households borrow not only to smooth away the temporary loss of real income but to exploit the anticipated capital loss on their own debt.

Q4. Why does instantaneous utility follow a discontinuous path under a terms-of-trade shock, unlike under an output shock?

Unlike the flat utility path induced by a pure output shock, a terms-of-trade shock produces a path of utility that is constant within each regime but drops discretely the instant the terms of trade revert to normal, because consumption is pinned to the (constant) shadow value of wealth within each regime, and the paper shows “only at time T, when the terms of trade revert to p from p prime, can consumption and utility change discretely” (Sec. III) – and proves this jump at T is strictly negative.

Q5. Under what condition can instantaneous utility actually rise when the adverse terms-of-trade shock first hits?

The paper shows that for a sufficiently short-lived terms-of-trade deterioration, instantaneous utility can rise at the very moment the shock is revealed, even though the shock lowers lifetime welfare overall, because the initial jump in utility depends on an income effect (negative) and a price/speculative effect (positive), and the paper proves the shadow-value variation driving the income effect vanishes as the shock’s duration shrinks, concluding “there are time periods T sufficiently short that the derivative is positive” – so for short enough shocks the positive speculative effect dominates.

Q6. How does the household’s degree of risk aversion affect the size of the current-account deficit run during a terms-of-trade shock, and why?

The cumulative deficit run while the terms of trade are poor is smaller the more risk-averse the household is. The paper’s own interpretation is that “as the measure of risk aversion R increases, the smoothing motive becomes more important relative to the speculative motive and the cumulative current-account deficit run while the terms of trade are poor declines” (Sec. III) – greater curvature of the utility function makes it costlier, in welfare terms, to shift consumption toward the low-terms-of-trade period purely to exploit the anticipated capital loss on debt.

Q7. Why is the assumption that debt is indexed to the import good (rather than the export good) central to the results, and what would change if it were reversed?

The entire speculative channel depends on foreign debt being denominated in the good the country imports; the paper is explicit that reversing this assumption would reverse the sign of the effect. “If bonds were indexed instead to exports, an expected future terms-of-trade improvement would raise rather than lower the perceived cost of borrowing abroad during a spell of low export prices; and this rise in the relevant real interest rate would reinforce rather than oppose the income effect” (Sec. III) – so the speculative motive would push the current account in the same direction as the income effect rather than against it. The paper defends import-indexation as the more realistic assumption for economies with dollar-denominated debt and dollar-priced imports.

Q8. How does this paper’s contribution relate to Dornbusch (1983), and to the author’s own earlier work with Svensson and Razin (1983)?

The paper credits Dornbusch (1983) with an identical central point – that the interest rate relevant to consumption decisions is the cost of borrowing expressed in the home consumption basket – but notes that “Dornbusch does not study the impact of terms-of-trade disturbances” and that the analytical techniques used here differ, allowing the economy’s equilibrium to be expressed “in closed form as a function of the expected future paths of the relevant exogenous variables” (Introduction). The paper also distinguishes itself from the author’s own prior work (Obstfeld 1980, 1982) and from Svensson and Razin (1983), which analyze permanent, unanticipated relative-price shocks in a model where subjective time preference drives saving; this paper instead assumes constant time preference equal to the world interest rate and focuses on transitory shocks.

Q9. What limitation does the paper note regarding the perfect-foresight, partial-equilibrium nature of the exercise?

The paper acknowledges its assumption of perfect foresight is a significant restriction: introducing a second, export-indexed bond into a fully specified two-country equilibrium implies a no-arbitrage relation that “severely restricts the possible terms-of-trade paths that can be analyzed,” ruling out the kind of anticipated, discrete terms-of-trade shift the paper studies (Sec. III). A fully satisfactory treatment of the two-country, general-equilibrium case, the paper notes, “requires an explicitly stochastic model of the type explored by Lucas (1982).”

Key terms in this paper

Definitions below follow the paper's own usage.

Import-indexed external debt
the paper's assumption that the economy's single traded bond carries "a fixed face value equal to one unit of the importable good," so the real value of outstanding foreign debt, measured in the home consumption basket, moves inversely with the terms of trade -- the feature that creates the speculative borrowing motive the paper studies.
Intertemporal price speculation
the paper's term for the additional borrowing motive, beyond ordinary consumption-smoothing, created when an anticipated future improvement in the terms of trade is expected to lower the real value of import-indexed debt, giving households an incentive "to shift consumption toward" the period in which the terms of trade -- and the effective real interest rate on their debt -- are temporarily unfavorable.
Consistent (time-invariant) shadow value of wealth
the paper's device for solving the household's optimization recursively -- absent new unanticipated shocks, the shadow value of wealth computed at any later date must equal the value computed initially, so it changes only in response to events "that were not anticipated at time t=0," pinning down the closed-form consumption and current-account paths used throughout the paper.
How this summary was made. Bibliographic fields are pulled from Crossref and OpenAlex and are not model-generated. The summary was drafted from the open-access manuscript , checked by a claim-grounding and calibration review pass, and approved before publishing. Found an error or a misrepresentation? Flag it here — corrections are welcome, especially from the authors.