In this paper, we empirically explore the output-volatility reducing impact of automatic stabilizers and look in detail at their policy implications for selected EMU member states comprising Austria, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain for the period 1995–2017. Overall, the results suggest that automatic stabilizers deliver a statistically significant, but fairly weak, counter-effect on output volatility in the short run. More specifically, output-volatility responses to automatic stabilizers by a reduction between −0.012 and −0.097 percentage points depending on the proxy measure used for automatic stabilizers. However, the automatic stabilizing impact from taxes and government spending is statistically insignificant in the long run. The results point to two main policy implications: i) automatic stabilizers are an important fiscal mechanism just for the short-run output stabilization, but their output-volatility offsetting role and power are largely subject to proxy measures used for automatic stabilizers; ii) no matter what proxy measures are used, automatic stabilizers largely produce a weak stabilizing performance in dampening short-term output volatility. So, from a macroeconomic policy standpoint, it can be safely claimed that automatic stabilizers can just be an integral part of discretionary fiscal policy rather than being an alternative to it.

在本文中，我们实证探讨了自动稳定器降低产出波动的影响，并详细研究了它们对选定的欧洲货币联盟成员国的政策影响，包括奥地利、芬兰、法国、德国、爱尔兰、意大利、荷兰、葡萄牙和西班牙1995-2017 年期间。总体而言，结果表明，自动稳定器在短期内对产出波动产生了统计上显着但相当微弱的反作用。更具体地说，输出波动率对自动稳定器的响应降低了 -0.012 到 -0.097 个百分点，具体取决于用于自动稳定器的代理测量。然而，从长远来看，税收和政府支出的自动稳定影响在统计上是微不足道的。结果表明了两个主要的政策含义：i) 自动稳定器是仅用于稳定短期产出的重要财政机制，但其抵消产出波动的作用和力量在很大程度上取决于自动稳定器所使用的代理措施；ii) 无论使用何种代理措施，自动稳定器在抑制短期产出波动方面都在很大程度上产生了微弱的稳定性能。因此，从宏观经济政策的角度来看，可以肯定地说，自动稳定器只是可自由支配的财政政策的一个组成部分，而不是替代它。在抑制短期产出波动方面，自动稳定器在很大程度上产生了微弱的稳定性能。因此，从宏观经济政策的角度来看，可以肯定地说，自动稳定器只是可自由支配的财政政策的一个组成部分，而不是替代它。在抑制短期产出波动方面，自动稳定器在很大程度上产生了微弱的稳定性能。因此，从宏观经济政策的角度来看，可以肯定地说，自动稳定器只是可自由支配的财政政策的一个组成部分，而不是替代它。