Historical approaches Theories of the origin and causes of inflation have existed since at least the 16th century. Two competing theories, the
quantity theory of money and the
real bills doctrine, appeared in various guises during century-long debates on recommended central bank behaviour. In the 20th century,
Keynesian,
monetarist and
new classical (also known as
rational expectations) views on inflation dominated post-World War II
macroeconomics discussions, which were often heated intellectual debates, until some kind of synthesis of the various theories was reached by the end of the century.
Before 1936 The
price revolution from ca. 1550–1700 caused several thinkers to present what is now considered to be early formulations of the
quantity theory of money (QTM). Other contemporary authors attributed rising price levels to the debasement of national coinages. Later research has shown that also growing output of
Central European silver mines and an increase in the
velocity of money because of innovations in the payment technology, in particular the increased use of
bills of exchange, contributed to the price revolution. An alternative theory, the
real bills doctrine (RBD), originated in the 17th and 18th century, receiving its first authoritative exposition in
Adam Smith's
The Wealth of Nations. It asserts that banks should issue their money in exchange for short-term real bills of adequate value. As long as banks only issue a dollar in exchange for assets worth at least a dollar, the issuing bank's assets will naturally move in step with its issuance of money, and the money will hold its value. Should the bank fail to get or maintain assets of adequate value, then the bank's money will lose value, just as any financial security will lose value if its asset backing diminishes. The real bills doctrine (also known as the backing theory) thus asserts that inflation results when money outruns its issuer's assets. The quantity theory of money, in contrast, claims that inflation results when money outruns the economy's production of goods. During the 19th century, three different schools debated these questions: The
British Currency School upheld a quantity theory view, believing that the
Bank of England's issues of bank notes should vary one-for-one with the bank's gold reserves. In contrast to this, the
British Banking School followed the real bills doctrine, recommending that the bank's operations should be governed by the needs of trade: Banks should be able to issue currency against bills of trading, i.e. "real bills" that they buy from merchants. A third group, the Free Banking School, held that competitive private banks would not overissue, even though a monopolist central bank could be believed to do it. The debate between currency, or quantity theory, and banking schools during the 19th century prefigures current questions about the credibility of money in the present. In the 19th century, the banking schools had greater influence in policy in the United States and Great Britain, while the
currency schools had more influence "on the continent", that is in non-British countries, particularly in the
Latin Monetary Union and the
Scandinavian Monetary Union. During the Bullionist Controversy during the
Napoleonic Wars,
David Ricardo argued that the Bank of England had engaged in over-issue of bank notes, leading to commodity price increases. In the late 19th century, supporters of the quantity theory of money led by
Irving Fisher debated with supporters of
bimetallism. Later,
Knut Wicksell sought to explain price movements as the result of real shocks rather than movements in money supply, resounding statements from the real bills doctrine.
Keynes and the early Keynesians John Maynard Keynes in his 1936 main work
The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money emphasized that wages and prices were
sticky in the short run, but gradually responded to
aggregate demand shocks. These could arise from many different sources, e.g. autonomous movements in investment or fluctuations in private wealth or interest rates.He revived the
quantity theory of money by
Irving Fisher and others, making it into a central tenet of monetarist thinking, arguing that the most significant factor influencing inflation or deflation is how fast the
money supply grows or shrinks. The quantity theory of money, simply stated, says that any change in the amount of money in a system will change the price level. This theory begins with the
equation of exchange: :MV = PQ, where :M is the nominal quantity of money; :V is the
velocity of money in final expenditures; :P is the general price level; :Q is an index of the
real value of final expenditures. In this formula, the general price level is related to the level of real economic activity (
Q), the quantity of money (
M) and the velocity of money (
V). The formula itself is simply an uncontroversial
accounting identity because the velocity of money (
V) is defined residually from the equation to be the ratio of final nominal expenditure ( PQ ) to the quantity of money (
M).
Rational expectations theory In the early 1970s,
rational expectations theory led by economists like
Robert Lucas,
Thomas Sargent and
Robert Barro transformed macroeconomic thinking radically. They held that economic actors look rationally into the future when trying to maximize their well-being, and do not respond solely to immediate
opportunity costs and pressures. Also the
oil crises of the 1970s causing at the same time rising unemployment and rising inflation (i.e.
stagflation) led to a broad recognition by economists that
supply shocks could independently affect inflation. or simply the "new consensus" model. •
Demand shocks may both decrease and increase inflation. So-called
demand-pull inflation may be caused by increases in aggregate demand due to increased private and government spending, etc. Conversely, negative demand shocks may be caused by
contractionary economic policy. •
Supply shocks may also lead to both higher or lower inflation, depending on the character of the shock.
Cost-push inflation is caused by a drop in aggregate supply (potential output). This may be due to natural disasters, war or increased prices of inputs. For example, a sudden decrease in the supply of oil, leading to increased oil prices, can cause cost-push inflation. Producers for whom oil is a part of their costs could then pass this on to consumers in the form of increased prices. •
Inflation expectations play a major role in forming actual inflation. High inflation can prompt employees to demand rapid wage increases to keep up with consumer prices. In this way, rising wages in turn can help fuel inflation as firms pass these higher labor costs on to their customers as higher prices, leading to a feedback loop. In the case of collective bargaining, wage growth may be set as a function of inflationary expectations, which will be higher when inflation is high. This can cause a
wage-price spiral. In a sense, inflation begets further inflationary expectations, which beget further
(built-in) inflation.
immigration and
climate change have been cited as significant drivers of inflation in the 21st century.
Climate change Through its influence on food production and supply chains, climate change has been found to contribute to inflation, a phenomenon that is increasingly being referred to as "climateflation". The phrase, which was first used by Isabel Schnabel of the European Central Bank, refers to price rises that are directly caused by climate-related disruptions such intense heat, droughts, and floods that have an impact on agricultural productivity. One noteworthy instance happened in 2022–2023. Researchers calculated that climate-driven heat increases in Europe—averaging 1.25°C above baseline, with peaks of up to 5.7°C in some regions—contributed to an increase in European food prices of about 0.7%, which in turn added about 0.3% to overall inflation. This impact exacerbated inflationary pressures already present as a result of the COVID-19 rebound and the shock to oil prices that followed Russia's invasion of Ukraine. According to the same study, warming predicted by 2035 could increase these effects by 30–50%.
2021–2023 inflation surge Most countries experienced the
2021–2023 inflation surge, peaking in 2022 and declining in 2023. The causes are believed to be a mixture of demand and supply shocks, whereas inflation expectations generally remained anchored. Possible causes on the
demand side include
expansionary fiscal and monetary policy after the
COVID-19 pandemic, whereas
supply shocks include the
2021–2023 global supply chain crisis caused by the
COVID-19 lockdowns Shortly after initial energy price shocks caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine had subsided, oil companies found that supply chain constrictions, already exacerbated by the ongoing global pandemic, supported price inelasticity, i.e., they began lowering prices to match the
price of oil when it fell much more slowly than they had increased their prices when costs rose. The
quantity theory of money has long been popular with
libertarian-conservative critics of the
Federal Reserve. During the COVID pandemic and its immediate aftermath, the M2 money supply increased at the fastest rate in decades, leading some to link the growth to the 2021-2023 inflation surge. Fed chairman
Jerome Powell said in December 2021 that the once-strong link between the money supply and inflation "ended about 40 years ago," due to financial innovations and deregulation. Previous Fed chairs
Ben Bernanke and
Alan Greenspan, had previously concurred with this position. The broadest measure of
money supply, M2, increased about 45% from 2010 through 2015, far faster than GDP growth, yet the inflation rate declined during that period — the opposite of what monetarism would have predicted. A lower
velocity of money than was historically the case was also cited for a diminished effect of growth in the money supply on inflation. Surveys of economists conducted by the
University of Chicago Booth School of Business in November 2021 and January 2022 showed that more economists agreed than disagreed (with many expressing uncertainty) that while contributing to rising prices in the United States, the global supply chain crisis would not contribute to a higher long-term inflation rate above the Federal Reserve's
inflation target and was not the main driver of the inflation surge, but that the combined effect of the stimulative fiscal and monetary policies being implemented in the United States posed a risk of prolonged higher inflation.
Heterodox views Additionally, there are theories about inflation accepted by economists outside of the
mainstream. The
Austrian School stresses that inflation is not uniform over all assets, goods, and services. Inflation depends on differences in markets and on where newly created money and credit enter the economy.
Ludwig von Mises said that inflation should refer to an increase in the quantity of money, that is not offset by a corresponding increase in the need for money, and that price inflation will necessarily follow, always leaving a poorer nation.
Government debt Government debt obligates the government to increase taxes, reduce spending or the government may resort to inflationary finance of the deficit. Another direction which translates
government debt to inflation is the motivation of governments to erode nominal debts by increasing inflation. As a result, elevated debt heightens the risk of inflationary pressures in both the short and long run by boosting
aggregate demand, shaping inflation expectations, crowding out private investment, and raising concerns about
fiscal dominance. It was found that in the short run, a permanent 1 percent of
GDP increase in the primary deficit leads, after five years, to inflationary pressures equivalent to a $300–$1,250 loss in household purchasing power per household (in 2024 dollars). ==Effects of inflation==