Two studies which make for one central banking story on my blog.
Reserve Bank of New Zealand, in a paper on the impact of disasters on inflation:
There is a marked heterogeneity in the impact between advanced economies, where the impact is negligible, and developing economies, where the impact can last for several years.
There are also differences in the impact by type of disasters, particularly when considering inflation sub-indices.
Storms increase food price inflation in the near term, although the effect dissipates within a year. Floods also typically have a short-run impact on inflation. Earthquakes reduce CPI inflation excluding food, housing and energy.
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, in a study devoted to answering the question of how inflation is affected by fiscal policy:
Across the board, we found almost no effect of government spending on inflation. For example, in our benchmark specification, we found that a 10 percent increase in government spending led to an 8 basis point decline in inflation. Moreover, the effect is not statistically different from zero.
Does our finding, by itself, imply that countercyclical government spending is ineffective at boosting output? Not necessarily. Our paper simply demonstrates that the inflation channel of government spending is not an empirically important way that this spending might affect the economy.
A unifying theme of both studies is that the impact on inflation tends to be lower or shorter-lived than one might intuitively expect.