Investment-Specific and Neutral News Shocks and Macroeconomic Fluctuations
|
|
- Claribel Horn
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Investment-Specific and Neutral News Shocks and Macroeconomic Fluctuations Luca Benati University of Bern Abstract I use structural VAR methods to explore the role played by news and nonnews shocks either investment-specific, or neutral in macroeconomic fluctuations, thus allowing these four disturbances to compete on equal grounds for the purpose of explaining the business cycle. Conceptually in line with the literature started by Beaudry and Portier (2006), news shocks almost uniformly dominate non-news disturbances. In line with Fisher (2006), investment-specific shocks play a more important role in macroeconomic fluctuations than neutral disturbances. Among the four disturbances I identify, the single most important one clearly appears to be the news investment-specific. Evidence suggest that this shock generates disinflationary booms, characterized by hump-shaped increases in hours, decreases in inflation, and increases in the ex post real rate. Keywords: Technology shocks; news shocks; structural VARs; unit roots. I wish to thank Franck Portier for helpful discussions, Lutz Kilian for extremely helpful suggestions on bootstrapping, and Eric Sims for comments. Usual disclaimers apply. Department of Economics, University of Bern, Schanzeneckstrasse 1, CH-3001 Bern, Switzerland. luca.benati@vwi.unibe.ch 1
2 1 Introduction Since Fisher (2006) and Beaudry and Portier (2006), several researchers have explored the relative importance of investment-specific versus neutral technology, and of news versus non-news shocks in macroeconomic fluctuations. As it currently stands, this literature suffers from two main limitations. First, with the single exception of Beaudry and Lucke (2010), no previous study within the structural VAR literature has considered both news and non-news shocks to both neutral and investment-specific technology, thus allowing these four disturbances to compete on equal grounds for the purpose of explaining macroeconomic fluctuations. 1 For example, Beaudry and Portier (2006), Barsky and Sims (2011), Barsky and Sims (2012), and Kurmann and Otrok (2013) consider news and non-news neutral shocks, but eschew investment-specific disturbances, whereas Fisher (2006) considers neutral and investment-specific disturbances, but he does not allow for the possibility that (some of them) may be anticipated. Beaudry and Lucke (2010, henceforth, BL) considers both neutral and investment-specific shocks, allowing for the possibility that both types of shocks may be anticipated, but without further disentangling the identified news shocks into neutral and investment-specific. 2 Further, as extensively discussed by Fisher (2010), BL s (2010) analysis suffers from a number of limitations, starting from their assumption that the data contain three common stochastic trends, when, in fact, economic theory suggests that the number of common trends should be one. Second, with a single exception (discussed below), no paper within the structural VAR literature has yet explored the role of news investment-specific shocksper se. This omission in the literature is quite hard to rationalize: if there is one type of technological disturbance which, based on strictly logical grounds, we should expect to be largely anticipated, this is indeed the investment-specific one. Casual evidence clearly suggests that the technological innovations embodied in new capital or consumer durables goods are, in many cases, well publicized in advance, 3 with the result that they can hardly be regarded as surprises, and belong instead most likely to the realm of news shocks. But if this is the case, then it is an open question to which extent previous analyses, by consistently focusing on surprise investmentspecific disturbances, have provided a correct picture of the role played by embodied technological change in macroeconomic fluctuations. 1 This point was stressed by Fisher (2010) in his comment on Beaudry and Lucke (2010), when he pointed out that Fisher (2006) does not consider news shocks and Beaudry and Portier (2006) do not consider investment-specific shocks. So it is natural to ask what happens when you consider both at the same time. 2 Indeed, their identifying assumption for news shocks is that they are orthogonal, on impact, to both total factor productivity and the relative price of investment. 3 The most extreme example of this is provided by the frenzy which, over the last several years, has consistently surrounded the widely anticipated launch of new Apple products. 2
3 1.1 This paper: methodology, motivation, and main results In this paper I use structural VAR methods in order to explore the relative importance of these four shocks (investment-specific news and non-news, and neutral news and non-news) in macroeconomic fluctuations, thus allowing them to compete on equal grounds for the purpose of explaining the business cycle. To the very best of my knowledge, this is the first paper to do so. The motivation for the present analysis is the same as Beaudry and Lucke s (2010), and it is a compelling one: if, among a set of four candidate technology and news shocks, a researcher only considers some of them, it is an entirely open question just how robust the results (s)he obtains should be regarded. As a matter of logic, the only way to eliminate this problem is to jointly consider all of the four shocks together. I estimate VARs for the relative price of investment (henceforth, RPI), total factor productivity (henceforth, TFP), and six other standard macroeconomic series, and I identify neutral (henceforth, N) and investment specific (henceforth, IS) shocks based on a slight modification of Uhlig s (2003, 2004) maximum fraction of forecast error variance methodology. I disentangle news and non-news disturbances based on the restriction that news shocks do not impact upon the relevant series (either TFP, or therpi)atzero. My main results can be summarized as follows: first, in line with Fisher (2006), IS shocks (either news, or non-news) play a more important role in macroeconomic fluctuations than N disturbances. For either inflation or the ex post real rate, in particular, they consistently explain (based on median estimates) about half of the forecast error variance (henceforth, FEV) at all horizons, whereas N shocks explain about per cent, and 15 per cent, respectively, of the corresponding FEVs of the two series. For hours, the fraction of FEV explained by IS shocks at horizons beyond 6 quarters is around 30 per cent, whereas the corresponding fraction explained by N shocks ranges between 3 and 13 per cent. Results are even stronger for consumption, with IS shocks explaining between 55 and 68 per cent of the FEV at either the business-cycle frequencies or longer horizons. Second, conceptually in line with the literature started by Beaudry and Portier (2006), news shocks almost uniformly dominate non-news disturbances. This is especially clear for consumption, stock prices, hours, inflation, and the ex post real rate, for which the differences between the fractions of FEV explained by the two types of disturbances is (based on median estimates) around 30 per cent or even more. Third, the single most important shock is the news investment-specific one. Evidence suggests that this disturbance generates a disinflationary boom, with a humpshaped increase in hours, a fall in inflation, and an increase in the ex post real rate. 1.2 Related literature To the very best of my knowledge, there are only two papers which are conceptually related to the present one. 3
4 BL (2010) explores the role played by surprise IS and N disturbances, and by news shocks (which can be either IS or N, and are not further disentangled), in macroeconomic fluctuations, based on cointegrated VARs for TFP, the RPI, hours, stock prices, and the Federal Funds rate. Their main finding is that [...] surprise changes in technology, whether it be of the disembodied or embodied nature, account for very little of fluctuations. In contrast, expected changes in technology appear to be an important force [...]. Although groundbreaking, BL s analysis suffers from a number of limitations. A first one the imposition of three cointegrating relationships upon the data when, in fact, theory suggests that there should be only one was already mentioned previously. As discussed by Fisher (2010, Section 2), however, several of their identifying restrictions might also be viewed with skepticism. For example, within the identification scheme BL labels as ID2, which combines long-run and short-run restrictions, N shocks are postulated to be the only shocks impacting TFP contemporaneously. This assumption, however, is problematic, because different from Fernald s purified TFP measure, the TFP series used by BL has not been cleansed in order to purge it from the spurious effects of unobserved input variation, with the result that any shock which affects the state of the business cycle (e.g., a monetary, or a preference shock) should be expected to impact upon it. By the same token, BL allow N shocks to have a long-run impact on IS technology, which, as pointed out by Fisher (2010), is in contrast with the standard assumption made in the literature that TFP and the RPI are driven by independent processes. After finishing the first draft of this paper, I was alerted to the the work of Zeev and Khan (2013), 4 which is similar to the present work along several dimensions. Ben Zeev and Khan (2013, henceforth, BZK) estimate a nine-variable VAR in (log) levels, and identify news and non-news IS shocks, and a single N shock (without further disentangling it into a news and a non-news component), based on Uhlig s (2003, 2004) maximum fraction of forecast error variance approach. A problematic aspect ofbzk sanalysisisthat,different from both Fisher (2006), and the present work, 5 they do not take the price of consumption to be the numeraire of the system, which implies that some of the key series entering their VAR the relative price of investment, output, investment, and consumption are not expressed in a common unit. This, in turn, logically implies that their results do not have a clearly-defined meaning, and a clearly-defined interpretation when seen from the perspective of DSGE models. Indeed, since within DSGE models consumption is routinely taken to be the numeraire of the system, for the results of structural VAR analyses to be able to meaningfully inform the construction of such models, they ought to follow the same data-normalization convention. 4 I wish to thank Eric Sims for alerting me to this paper. 5 See the appendix on the construction of the data. 4
5 The paper is organized as follows. Sections 2 and 3 discuss in detail the key features of the reduced-form VARs used herein, and of my approach to the identification of the four structural disturbances, respectively. Section 4 discusses the evidence. Section 5 concludes. 2 The Reduced-Form VARs TheVARsusedintheanalysisthatfollowsfeaturethelogarithmsoftheRPIand TFP; inflation; the real ex post 3-month Treasury bill rate; 6 and the logarithms of hours worked, real GDP, real consumption, and real stock prices, all of them expressed in per capita terms (appendix A contains a detailed description of the series, and of the data sources). Following Fisher (2006), the price of consumption (i.e, the chainweighted deflator for non-durables and services) is taken to be the numeraire of the system, so that the relative price of investment, and consumption, GDP, and real stock prices per capita, are all expressed in a common unit. As I previously pointed out, this is key because otherwise it is as if the VAR had been estimated based on apples and oranges, with the consequence that the results it produces do not have any clearly-defined meaning. The sample period is 1948Q2-2006Q4. Both the beginning and the end of the sample are dictated by the sample period for which SGU s RPI seriesisavailable. 7 All of the VARs feature 4 lags, and are estimated in (log) levels via OLS. The key reason for estimating the models in (log) levels, rather than in (log) differences, is that, as extensively discussed by Hamilton (1994), 8 the specification in levels is robust to the presence of cointegration of unknown form among the VAR s endogenous variables, and is therefore going to produce consistent estimates of all the objects of interest (IRFs, fractions of forecast error variance,...) without any need to take a specific stand on the number of cointegrating relationship. On the other hand, this is not the case for the specification in differences, whose inference s reliability crucially hinges on the researcher imposing the correct number of cointegrating vectors in the VECM representation (as discussed in the introduction, this was one of Fisher s (2010) key criticisms to Beaudry and Lucke (2010)). 6 I consider the 3-month Treasury bill rate, rather than the FED Funds rate, because the latter is only available since July Ending the sample period in 2006Q4 is not really a problem, because in any case, in line with Justiniano, Primiceri, and Tambalotti (2011), I would have excluded the period of the financial crisis (which has been characterized by the zero lower bound becoming binding for the first time) in order to avoid my results being distorted. So in the end, even if I had had a longer RPI series, I would have used just a few more quarters. 8 See also the discussion in Barsky and Sims (2011). 5
6 3 Identification 3.1 The standard Uhlig (2003, 2004) methodology All of my evidence is based on the maximum fraction of forecast error variance approach to identification pioneered by Uhlig (2003) and Uhlig (2004). Specifically, given the VAR(p) model = , [ 0 ]=Ω (1) with the moving-average representation =[ (1)] 1 0 +[ ( )] 1 ( ), where ( ) 1,and ( ) , identification boils down to finding a mapping between the reduced-form forecast errors, the, and the structural shocks, the, such that = 0,with = Ω. Uhlig s approach is based on the notion of finding the first columns of 0,with (where is the number of variables in the VAR), which identify the orthogonal shocks explaining the maximum fraction of the forecast error variance of a variable in either over some forecast horizon (e.g., between 6 and 32 quarters, which is the horizon traditionally associated with business-cycle frequency fluctuations), or at some specific horizon, say, 10 years ahead. In turn, since, given a matrix 0 such that 0( 0) 0 = Ω, and an orthonornal matrix such that 0 =, thematrix 0 = 0 also satisfies = Ω, the search for 0 boils down for a given starting matrix 0 satisfying 0( 0) 0 = Ω (e.g., the Cholesky factor of Ω) to finding an appropriate orthonormal matrix. Given the -step-ahead forecast error for the -th variable in, " 1 # X + + = (2) where is a selector vector with zeros everywhere and a 1 in the -th position, Uhlig (2003) shows that the orthogonal shocks explaining the maximum fraction of the forecast error variance of at horizon are associated with the first eigenvectors of the matrix X = ( 0) 0 ( 0 0 ) 0 (3) =0 Figure 1 shows the results produced by this methodology for two possible alternative orderings of the identified shocks. In the first two columns I start by identifying the N shocks as the two disturbances which explains the maximum fraction of the forecast error variance (henceforth, FEV) of log TFP at the 10 years-ahead horizon. I then rotate them in such a way that the news N shock does not impact upon TFP at zero. Then, conditional on having identified the N shocks, I identify the IS shocks as the two further disturbances explaining the maximum fraction of the FEV of log RPI at the same horizon, and I rotate them in such a way that the news IS shock 6 =0
7 does not impact upon the RPI at zero. 9 In the last two columns I instead do the opposite, by first identifying the IS shocks, and then, conditional on this, identifying the N shocks. The figure reports the fractions of FEV of TFP and the RPI at horizons up to 10 years ahead explained by the two identified types of shocks, IS and N, with one- and two-standard deviations bootstrapped confidence bands. I do not report results for the other series in the VAR because, for the present purposes, they are irrelevant. Following Barsky and Sims (2011), I bootstrap the VAR in levels, which is justified based on the results reported in Inoue and Kilian (2002). 10 Finally, whereas in the entire paper I perform a bootstrap-based bias-correction of impulse-response functions (henceforth, IRFs) as in Kilian (1998), as for the fractions of FEV, both here and in the rest of the paper I do not perform any bias correction, so that the thick black lines shown in the figure 1 are just the simple estimates The problem of imperfect separation between IS and N shocks The results reported in Figure 1 highlight a key problem of the standard Uhlig methodology within the present context. As the first two columns show, when N shocks are identified first, they also end up jointly explaining a comparatively large fraction of the FEV of the RPI. Further, when the ordering of the shocks is inverted, so that IS shocks are identified first, although results clearly improve, they are still far from being satisfactory. In particular, at the 10-year horizon, the 95th percentile of the bootstrapped distribution of the fraction of FEV of TFP explained by IS shocks is around 45 per cent, whereas the median of the distribution is equal to 20 per cent. Overall, these results show that, within the present context, the standard Uhlig (2003, 2004) methodology does not succeed at separating the two types of shocks in a fully satisfactory manner. Therefore, in what follows I will work with the modified version of the Uhlig procedure I describe in the next sub-section. 9 I also tried two alternative horizons, 15 and 20 years, and results were qualitatively the same. 10 Although Inoue and Kilian (2002) only dealt with univariate processes, as confirmed to me by Lutz Kilian via [t]he extension of our Econometrica paper to the multivariate case is immediate [...]. 11 The reason for this is the following. In a previous version of the paper I performed indeed a biascorrection for the fractions of FEV, with the result that, in some cases, some of the bootstrapped confidence bands ended up being either above 1 or below 0 for some horizon. Because of this, I then performed the bias-corrections based on the logit transformations of the relevant objects, and then I took the inverse-logit transformations of the resulting quantities. Although this approach, by construction, delivers bias-corrected fractions of FEV, and confidence bands, which are bounded between 0 and 1, it suffers form the drawback that, in some cases, the extent of the bias-correction turned out to be extremely (and, in my view, implausibly) large, due to the extreme non-linearity of the logit transformation for values quite close to either 0 or 1. Since neither of the two approaches appeared to be problem-free, in the end I simply decided to perform no bias correction, and to just showthesimpleestimates. 7
8 3.2 A modified Uhlig-type methodology Since the problem documented in Figure 1 is imperfect separation between N and IS shocks, I identify N shocks based on the restriction that they maximize the difference between the fraction of explained long-horizon FEV of TFP, and the corresponding fraction of explained long-horizon FEV of the RPI. The rationale for this is that we want N shocks to explain as much as possible of the long-horizon variation of TFP, and as little as possible of the corresponding long-horizon variation of the RPI. Maximizing the difference between the former and the latter achieves this objective. By the same token, I identify IS shocks symmetrically, by maximizing the difference between the explained fractions of long-horizon FEV of the RPI and of TFP. Different from the standard Uhlig methodology, this modified version cannot be formulated as a straightforward eigenvalue-eigenvector problem (as least, I was not able to formulate it in this way), and requires instead numerical optimization methods. Specifically, for a given starting structural impact matrix 0 satisfying 0( 0) 0 = Ω, Idefine the orthonormal matrix as the product of all of the available rotation matrices ( ), where2 is the dimension of the square submatrix along the diagonal of ( ) containing the sin( ) and cos( ) functions. For example, if were equal to 4 there would be three rotation matrices with = 2: 1 ( 1 )= sin( 1 ) cos( 1 ) 0 0 -cos( 1 ) sin( 1 ) ( 3 )= 2( 2 )= sin( 3 ) cos( 3 ) 0 0 -cos( 3 ) sin( 3 ) sin( 2 ) cos( 2 ) 0 0 -cos( 2 ) sin( 2 ) (4) By the same token, there would be two rotation matrices with =3,andonewith = 4, for a total of six. In our case, with = 8, the overall number of available rotation matrices is 28, and is defined as = Y =2 +1 Y =1 ( ) (5) Then, e.g., when identifiying N shocks, I maximize the difference between the fractions of explained FEV of TFP and the RPI numerically, by searching, over the parameter space, for those specific values of the rotation angles (that is, the s) which maximize the criterion function. Although obviously not as fast as the standard Uhlig methodology (which, being based on the eigenvalue-eigenvector decomposition, is performed essentially in zero time ) numerical optimization is quite fast, and identifying the first 8
9 ordered shock in the system took, on average, less than 10 seconds. 12 Optimization was performed via MATLAB s routine fminsearch.m, for random initial conditions. Since identification of the shocks is here based on numerical optimization of a criterion function, rather than on a matrix decomposition, the reader may have an obvious question: How strong is identification? Is the criterion function unimodal, bimodal, or what?. In order to address this question, I performed the following Monte Carlo experiment. Conditional on the OLS estimate of the covariance matrix of the VAR s innovations, I performed the numerical optimization 1,000 times with random initial conditions, each time identifying the four shocks I discuss in the next sub-section (specifically: news and non-news N, and news and non-news IS). For each of the 1,000 numerical optimizations I have performed, the algorithm always converged to the same solution (up to machine precision). This clearly illustrates that identification here is as robust as it can possibly be. Finally, the strongest piece of evidence in favor of the reliability of this numerical optimization-based methodology is that when I used it just to perform a check in order to identify the single shock which explains the maximum fraction of the horizon- forecast error variance of either TFP or the RPI, the solution I got was, up to machine precision, identical to the one produced by the standard Uhlig methodology. Let s now turn to the results. 4 Evidence I order the RPI and TFP first and second, respectively, I estimate the VAR, and I proceed to identify four shocks news and non-news IS, and news and non-news N as follows. First, I identify the news-is shock based on the restrictions that (i) it maximizes the difference between the explained fractions of FEV of the RPI and TFP at the 10-year horizon, and (ii) ithasazeroimpactontherpiat =0. Second, conditional on having identified the news-is shock, I identify the nonnews-is shock based on the only restriction that it maximizes the difference between the explained fractions of FEV of the RPI and TFP (for the sake of simplicity, from now on I drop the qualification at the 10-year horizon ). Third, conditional on having identified the two IS shocks, I identify the news- N shock based on the restrictions that (i) it maximizes the difference between the explained fractions of FEV of TFP and the RPI, and (ii) ithasazeroimpacton TFP at =0. Fourth, conditional on the previously identified three shocks, I identify the nonnews-n shock based on the only restriction that it it maximizes the difference between 12 When, conditional on having identified previous shocks in the system, you move to identifying subsequent ones, computing time for these subsequent optimization problems decreases dramatically, because they are associated with smaller sub-systems, and therefore a smaller number of angles s upon which optimization is performed. 9
10 the explained fractions of FEV of TFP and the RPI. Figures 2-8 shows the results. Specifically, Figure 2 reports the fractions of individual series FEVs explained by each of the four types of shocks (IS, N, news and non-news), together with the one and two-standard deviations bootstrapped confidence bands; Figure 3 reports the same objects, but this time for each of the four individual identified shocks; and Figure 4 reports bias-corrected IRFs to each of the four identified shocks, together with one and two-standard deviations bootstrapped confidence bands. Bias-correction of the IRFs and computation of the confidence bands has been implemented as in Kilian (1998). On the other hand, as previously pointed out, as for the fractions of FEV shown in Figures 2-3 I do not perform any bias correction. The vertical bars reported in Figures 2-3, corresponding to 6 and 32 quarters, mark the boundaries of the business-cycle frequency band. 13 IRFs have been normalized in such a way that the median 10-year ahead impact of either IS shock on the log RPI is equal to -1, whereas the corresponding median impact of either N shock on TFP is equal to 1. Finally, Figures 5-8 show results from counterfactual simulations for four key periods (the 1950s, the Great Inflation episode, the New Economy of the second half of the 1990s, and the years leading up to the financial crisis) in which identified shocks have been killed off one at a time. 4.1 Separation between the IS and N shocks A comparison between the results shown in the last two columns of Figure 1, and those reported in the four panels in the left uppermost corner of Figure 2 shows how, within the present context, the modified Uhlig procedure I am using herein is significantly more successful at separating IS and N shocks than the standard Uhlig procedure. In either case, the two types of shocks explain close to 100 per cent of the long-horizon FEV of the own series (TFP for N shocks, and the RPI for IS shocks), whereas they explain close to zero per cent of the long-horizon FEV of the other series. Let s now turn to discussing the results in detail. 4.2 The role played by the different types of shocks IS versus N shocks Theresultsreportedinthefirst two rows of Figure 2 address the issue of the relative importance of IS versus N shocks in macroeconomic fluctuations, which was originally put forward by Fisher (2006). Overall, evidence is qualitatively, although not quantitatively, in line with Fisher s, with the fractions of business-cycle (henceforth, BC) frequency FEVs of individual non-technology series explained by IS shocks being most of the time greater than the corresponding fractions due to N shocks. This 13 This is the standard convention in the literature, see e.g. Baxter and King (1999) and Christiano and Fitzgerald (2003). 10
11 is especially clear for the three non-technology series which entered Fisher s (2006) VAR hours, inflation, and the interest rate 14 for which IS shocks clearly dominate N shocks. Specifically, for either inflation or the ex post real rate IS disturbances consistently explain (based on median estimates) about half of the FEV at all horizons, whereas N shocks explain about per cent, and 15 per cent, respectively, of the corresponding FEVs of the two series. As for hours, the fraction of FEV explained by IS shocks at horizons beyond 6 quarters is around 30 per cent, whereas the corresponding fraction explained by N shocks ranges between 3 and 13 per cent. Results are even stronger for consumption, with IS shocks explaining between 55 and 68 per cent of the FEV at either the business-cycle frequencies or longer horizons. For GDP results are comparatively less strong, with IS disturbances explaining between 30 and 50 per cent of the FEV at horizons beyond one year and a half, whereas N shocks explain between 20 and 37 per cent. Finally, stock prices is the only series for which N shocks dominate IS shocks, with the fraction of FEV explained by the former declining from 75 per cent on impact to 46 per cent at the 10-year horizon, whereas the fraction explained by the latter rise from about 6 per cent on impact, to a maximum of 31 per cent at the 10 year horizon News versus non-news shocks A comparison between the results reported in the last two rows of Figure 2 shows how, with only two exceptions, news shocks uniformly dominate non-news disturbances across the board, explaining significantly larger fractions of the FEV at almost all horizons. This is especially apparent for consumption, stock prices, hours, inflation, and the ex post real rate, for which the differences between the fractions of FEV explained by the two types of disturbances is (based on median estimates) in the ballpark of 30 per cent or even more. As for the RPI, the fraction of FEV explained by news shocks starts close to zero, but it rises quite rapidly with the forecast horizon, surpassing (based on median estimates) the corresponding fraction explained by nonnews disturbances at the 4-years ahead horizon. At the 10-years ahead horizon, the two types of disturbances explain 62.5 and 36 per cent of the FEV of the RPI, respectively. The only two series for which news shocks are not clearly dominant are GDP and TFP. As for GDP, at horizons beyond one year and a half neither of the two types of disturbances dominates the other, and they both explain fractions of FEV between 30 and 40 per cent. As for TFP, on the other hand, news shocks play a minor role, with a fraction of explained FEV rising to a maximum of 24 per cent at the 10-year horizon, whereas the corresponding fraction explained by non-news shocks decreases monotonically with the forecast horizon, but it is still equal to 73 per cent at the 10-year horizon. Let s now dig deeper, looking at the role played by individual structural shocks. 14 To be precise, Fisher s VAR featured a nominal interest rate, rather than an ex post real interest rate, so that for this variable results are not exactly comparable. 11
12 4.3 The role of individual shocks The following findings emerge from Figure 3. The IS news shock appears to be the single most important one among the four disturbances identified herein. This is especially clear for consumption, hours, inflation, the ex post real rate, and the RPI, whereas for GDP the importance of IS news shocks is comparable to that of non-news N disturbances. On the other hand, IS non-news shocks play a uniformly negligible role for all series with the single exception of the RPI. By the same token, news N shocks play a uniformly negligible role for all series with the single exception of stock prices, for which they explain (based on median estimates) between 40 and 60 per cent of the FEV at horizons beyond one years and a half. Finally, non-news N shocks play a dominant role for TFP; a negligible one for the RPI, stock prices, hours, inflation, and the real rate; and and non-negligible roles for consumption and GDP, explaining around percent of the FEV of the two series at horizons beyond 3 years. Let s now turn to the response of the economy to either of the four identified structural disturbances. 4.4 How do individual shocks impact upon the economy? As expected, either of the two identified IS shocks has a statistically significant longhorizon impact upon the RPI (which, as previously pointed out, has been normalized in such a way that the median of the 10-year ahead impact is equal to -1), and a statistically insignificant impact on TFP at all horizons. By the same token, either of the two identified N shocks has a statistically significant long-horizon impact upon TFP (which has been normalized so that its median long-horizon impact on TFP is equal to 1), and a statistically insignificant impact on the RPI at all horizons. News IS shocks have a positive and statistically significant long horizon impact on consumption, GDP, and stock prices, and an insignificant impact on hours and the ex post real rate. Contrary to what one would have expected, IS shocks are also estimated to have a negative and statistically significant impact on inflation. This, together with the analogous negative long-horizon impact on inflation of nonnews IS shocks represents the only manifestly problematic feature of the set of IRFs plotted in Figure 4. Turning to the impact of IS news shocks at =0, it is positive and statistically significant for consumption and the real rate, whereas it is negative and again strongly statistically significant for inflation. As for hours, although the impact at zero is not significant, the response going forward becomes positive and strongly statistically significant, with an overall broadly hump-shaped pattern. The first row of Figure 4 therefore suggests that, in response to a positive news IS shock, the economy experiences a disinflationary boom, with an increase in hours, a fall in inflation, and a less than one-for-one change in the nominal interest rate, which causes an increase in the ex post real rate. Conceptually in line with the analyses 12
13 of Greenwood, Hercowitz, and their co-authors, 15 a plausible interpretation of the positive impact on hours of news IS shocks is that, in the presence of anticipation about a technological improvement embodied in capital goods which will come on the market at some future date, firms have an incentive to accelerate the depreciation of existing capital goods, and will therefore increase their utilization rate. In turn, given a plausible extent of complementarity between capital and hours worked, this will automatically translate into an analogous increase in hours worked. The IRFs shown in the second row highlight how, in response to IS non-news disturbances, none of the variables in the VAR experiences any statistically significant change on impact, and in most cases the response is insignificant even at most horizons after impact. This is especially clear for consumption, GDP, and hours. The obvious explanation for the comparatively large extent of uncertainty characterizing the response of the economy to IS non-news shocks (which is at the root of the lack of statistical significance) is that, as discussed in the previous section, these shocks explain negligible fractions of the FEV of all series with the single exception of the RPI. As a result, since all series other than the RPI contain very little information about these shocks, it is not surprising that the responses to them are very imprecisely estimated. The same problem plagues most IRFs to either of the two N shocks. Since, as discussed in the previous section, these two shocks also explain, most of the time, little to nothing of the variance of most series, it is once again to be expected that IRFs to these disturbances be imprecisely estimated. This is indeed what the last two rows of Figure 4 show, with IRFs being, in most cases, not significantly different from zero at most horizons. These results contrast sharply with those of Barsky and Sims (2011), who, based on VARs featuring the same TFP series used herein, but no RPI series, identified negative responses of hours, GDP, investment, and inflation to news N shocks. Figure 3 provides a simple explanation for the contrast between my results and those produced by Barsky and Sims (2011). Within the present framework which, it is important to stress, encompasses Barsky and Sims setup in terms of both the series entering the VAR, and the identification strategy the news N shock is compelled to compete on equal grounds not only with non-news N shocks (as in Barsky and Sims (2011)), but also with either news or non-news IS shocks. As the results in Figure 3 show, under these circumstances the news N shock clearly emerges as a loser from this competition, which is instead won, hands down, by the news IS shock. Within Barsky and Sims VAR, on the other hand, not only IS shocks and not identified, but no information about them is in fact contained in the VAR, because the RPI is not among the variables entering the model. As a result, their approach mechanically allocates the FEV of all the series in the VAR to shocks other than IS. For the reason discussed in the Introduction (the obvious lack of a level playing field in the competion for the allocation of the variance among the various possible 15 See Greenwood, Hercowitz, and Huffmann (1988), Greenwood, Hercowitz, and Huffmann (1997), and Greenwood, Hercowitz, and Krusell (2000). 13
14 shocks) Barsky and Sims approach therefore necessarily provides an incomplete and possibly distorted picture of the role played by news and non-news IS and N shocks in macroeconomic fluctuations. Further, as my results show, the extent of the distortion is also not negligible, for the simple reason that, based on my results, Barsky and Sims (2011) are igoring the single most important shock out there. So my own reading of the evidence is that, since my framework encompasses the one used by Barsky and Sims (2011) in terms of both data and identification startegy, my results should be regarded as more reliable than theirs. Let s now turn to examining how individual disturbances account for specific episodes of post-wwii U.S. economic history. 4.5 How do individual disturbances account for specific episodes? The 1950s Figure 5 shows results from counterfactual simulations for the period 1950Q1-1959Q4, in which I have re-run history based on the historical conditions prevailing up to the end of 1949 (that is: based on the values taken by the VAR s endogenous variables as of 1949Q4), and by killing off one identified shock at a time. Overall, neither of the four sets of simulations produces results which stand out in any particular way. For consumption, e.g., either of the four counterfactual paths is remarkably close to the actual historical path, and in three cases out of four it is essentially indistinguishable from it. For TFP, only killling off non-news N shocks makes a material difference, with the counterfactual path being systematically lower than the actual path until 1956, and being instead above it after that, and very much so towards the end of the decade. Such an alternative counterfactual path for TFP maps into a corresponding alternative path for GDP: as the fourth panel in the last row shows, the evolution of counterfactual GDP mimics that of TFP, being below actual GDP until the mid- 1950s, and above it after that. The same holds, to a slightly lesser extent, for stock prices and hours. Killing off news N shocks makes essentially no difference for either series, with the single notable exception of stock prices, for which the counterfactual path would have been mostly higher until the mid-1950s, and somehow lower at the end of the decade. The material difference news N shocks make in the case of stock prices is logically to be expected in the light of the results reported in Figure 3, in which we saw that these shocks are the only ones to play an important role for this variable. Eliminating non-news IS shocks only makes a material difference for the RPI (although the difference between the counterfactual and actual paths is never statistically significant at the 10 per cent level), whereas it makes essentially no difference for either of the other series. Finally, eliminating news IS shocks makes some difference, although not an especially large one, for several series such as GDP, hours, inflation, and the ex post rate. 14
15 Overall, however, counterfactuals for the 1950s do not produce especially striking or interesting results The Great Inflation Figure 6 shows results from analogous counterfactual simulations for the period 1965Q1-1979Q3, in which I have re-run history based on the historical conditions prevailing as of 1964Q4fs. Two main findings emerge from the series of counterfactuals. First, among the shocks identified herein, the only one which is estimated to have played an important role in U.S. macroeconomic dynamics between the mid-1960s and the end of the 1970s is the IS news one. Indeed, whereas killing off either of other three shocks generates counterfactual paths for the endogenous variables which are virtually indistinguishable, and not significantly different, from the actual series (the only obvious exception to this is the news N shock for stock prices), eliminating the IS news shocks makes a material difference for consumption, GDP, hours, and the ex post real rate, which would all have been lower until the early 1970s. As for inflation, the counterfactual path is somehow higher than the actual one between 1965 and 1967, and it is lower between 1973 and In both cases, however, the differences are not large. Second, with the just-mentioned, partial exception of the news IS shock, none of the identified shocks appears to have played an important role for the evolution of inflation during those years. This is consistent with the widespread notion that the main underlying cause of the Great Inflation of the 1970s was a series of policy mistakes which, through sins of either omission or commission, ultimately led to an excessively loose monetary policy stance The Volcker disinflation As for the Volcker disinflation, counterfactual simulations 17 clearly suggest that, unsurprisingly, neither of the four disturbances identified herein played any significant role in that episode. This is reassuring because, as stressed by King and Watson (1994), we should be highly suspicious of identified supply-side shocks which are estimated to have played an important role within this episode. Since these results are uniformly negative, for reasons of space I do not report them, but they are available upon request. 16 See e.g. Clarida, Gali, and Gertler (2000), Barsky and Kilian (2001), and, for an overview, Benati and Goodhart (2011). 17 I start the counterfactuals for the Volcker disinflation at 1979Q4. 15
16 4.5.4 The New Economy boom of the second half of the 1990s Results for the second half of the 1990s 18 are broadly in line with the evidence for the Great Inflation period, with news N shocks only making a material difference for stock prices (which would have been consistently lower), and news IS shocks emerging, once again, as the the only disturbances which would have made some difference for most series. Killing off these shocks would indeed have produced slightly lower paths for consumption, GDP, hours, and the ex post real rate, and a slightly higher path for hours. In no case, however, the difference is statistically significant at conventional levels The years leading up to the financial crisis The counterfactuals we have seen up until now do not point towards truly significant differences produced by killing off any of the four identified shocks. Things change significantly,however,whenwemovetotheyearsleadinguptothefinancial crisis. 19 As the second and fourth rows of Figure 8 show, killing off either non-news IS or non-news N shocks would still have produced insignificantly different counterfactual paths for either series, and news N shocks would once again have made a material difference only for stock prices, and only for the very first years of the counterfactual. Killing off news N shocks, on the other hand, would have produced significantly lower counterfactual paths for the RPI and inflation, and significantly higher paths for consumption, GDP, stock prices, hours, and the ex post real rate. This suggests that, during the 2000s, IS news shocks overall contribution to growth was in fact negative, and originates from the deceleration in the rate of decrease of the RPI during those years see panel (1,1) of Figure 8 which, within the present fixedcoefficients framework, is automatically interpreted in terms of a series of adverse shocks. 5 Conclusions In this paper I have used structural VAR methods to explore the role played by news and non-news shocks either investment-specific, or neutral in macroeconomic fluctuations, thus allowing these four disturbances to compete on equal grounds for the purpose of explaining the business cycle. In line with Fisher (2006), investmentspecific shocks (either news, or non-news) are estimated to have played a more important role in macroeconomic fluctuations than neutral disturbances. Conceptually in line with the literature started by Beaudry and Portier (2006), on the other hand, 18 I start counterfactuals simulations for the New Economy period at 1995Q1. 19 I start these counterfactuals immediately after the end of the dotcom recession, that is, in 2002Q1. 16
17 my results suggest that news shocks almost uniformly dominate non-news disturbances. The single most important shock clearly appears to have been the news investment-specific one. My results suggest that this disturbance generates disinflationary booms, characterized by hump-shaped increases in hours, decreases in inflation, and increases in the ex post real rate. 17
18 References Barsky, R., and E. Sims (2011): News Shocks and Business Cycles, Journal of Monetary Economics, 58(3), (2012): Information, Animal Spirits, and the Meaning of Innovations in Consumer Confidence, American Economic Review, 102(4), Barsky, R. B., and L. Kilian (2001): Do We Really Know That Oil Caused the Great Stagflation? A Monetary Alternative, NBER Macroeconomics Annual, 16, Baxter, M., and R. King (1999): Approximate Band-Pass Filters for Economic Time Series: Theory and Applications, Review of Economics and Statistics, 81(4), Beaudry, P., and B. Lucke (2010): Letting Different Views About Business Cycles Compete, In: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2009, 24, Beaudry, P., and F. Portier (2006): Stock Prices, News, and Economic Fluctuations, American Economic Review, 96(4), Benati, L. (2013): Business-Cycle Shocks, University of Bern, mimeo. Benati, L., and C. Goodhart (2011): Monetary Policy Regimes and Economic Performance: The Historical Record, , in B. Friedman, B., and Woodford, M. (eds.), Handbook of Monetary Economics, Volume 3, North Holland. Blanchard, O. J., and D. Quah (1989): The Dynamic Effects of Aggregate Demand and Supply Disturbances American Economic Review, 79(4), Christiano, L., and T. Fitzgerald (2003): The Band-Pass Filter, International Economic Review, 44(2), Clarida, R., J. Gali, and M. Gertler (2000): Monetary Policy Rules and Macroeconomic Stability: Evidence and Some Theory, Quarterly Journal of Economics, CXV(1), Fisher, J. D. (2006): The Dynamic Effects of Neutral and Investment-Specifc Technology Shocks, Journal of Political Economy, 114, (2010): Discussion of: Letting Different Views About Business Cycles Compete, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2009, 24. Gali, J. (1999): Technology, Employment, and the Business Cycle: Do Technology Shocks Explain Aggregate Fluctuations?, American Economic Review, 89(1),
19 Greenwood, J., Z. Hercowitz, and G. W. Huffmann (1988): Investment, Capacity Utilization and the Business Cycle, American Economic Review, 73(3), (1997): Long-Run Implications of Investment-Specific Technical Change, American Economic Review, 87(3), Greenwood, J., Z. Hercowitz, and P. Krusell (2000): The Role of Investment-Specific Technological Change in the Business Cycle, European Economic Review, 44, Hamilton, J. (1994): Time Series Analysis. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press. Inoue, A., and L. Kilian (2002): Bootstrapping Autoregressive Processes with Possible Unit Roots, Econometrica, 70(1), Justiniano, A., G. Primiceri, and A. Tambalotti (2011): Investment Shocks and the Relative Price of Investment, Review of Economic Dynamics, 14(1), Kilian, L. (1998): Small-Sample Confidence Intervals for Impulse-Response Functions, Review of Economics and Statistics, pp King, R., and M. Watson (1994): The Post-War U.S. Phillips Curve: A Revisionist Econometric History, Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, 41, Kurmann, A., and C. Otrok (2013): News Shocks and the Slope of the Term Structure of Interest Rates, American Economic Review. Kydland, F. E., and E. C. Prescott (1982): Time To Build and Aggregate Fluctuations, Econometrica, 50, Liu, Z., D. F. Waggoner, and T. Zha (2011): Sources of Macroeconomic Fl uctuations: A Regime-Switching DSGE Approach, Quantitative Economics, 2(2), Prescott, E. (1986): Response to a Skeptic, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Quarterly Review, Fall1986. Schmitt-Grohé, S., and M. Uribe (2011): Business Cycles with a Common Trend in Neutral and Investment-Specific Productivity, Review of Economic Dynamics, 14, Uhlig, H. (2003): What Drives GNP?, Unpublished manuscript, Euro Area Business Cycle Network. 19
20 (2004): Do Technology Shocks Lead to a Fall in Total Hours Worked?, Journal of the European Economic Association, 2(2-3), Zeev, N. B., and H. Khan (2013): Investment-Specific NewsShocksandU.S. Business Cycles, European University Institute, mimeo. 20
21 A The Data The quarterly seasonally adjusted series for the RPI is from Schmitt-Grohé and Uribe (2011). The sample period is 1948Q1-2006Q4. The TFP series has been computed based on the quarterly seasonally adjusted series for the log-difference of purified TFP produced by John Fernald which is widely regarded as the best available measure of neutral technology and found at the San Francisco FED s website. Specifically, the series for the logarithm of TFP has been computed as the cumulative sum of Fernald s series for the log-difference of purified TFP. A quarterly seasonally adjusted series for the consumption deflator has been computed by chain-weighting the deflators for non-durables and services consumption based on the data found in Tables 1.1.6, 1.1.6B, 1.1.6C, and 1.1.6D of the National Income and Product Accounts. Inflation has been computed as the log-difference of the consumption deflator. By the same token, a quarterly seasonally adjusted series for real consumption of non-durables and services has been computed by chainweighting the respective series for real chain-weighted consumption of non-durables, and of services, respectively, based on the data found in the same tables. A monthly series for the 3-Month Treasury bill rate (TB3MS) is from the St. Louis FED s website, and it has been converted to the quarterly frequency by taking averages within the quarter. The series is quoted at a non-annualized rate in order to make its scale exactly comparable to that of inflation. 20 The real ex post 3-Month Treasury bill rate has been computed as the difference between the thus rescaled 3-Month Treasury bill rate series and inflation. A monthly series for the civilian noninstitutional population (CNP16OV) is from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and it has been converted to the quarterly frequency by taking averages within the quarter. A quarterly seasonally adjusted series for hours of all persons in the nonfarm business sector (HOANBS) is from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. A monthly series for the nominal Standard & Poor s composite index is from Robert Shiller s website, and it has been converted to the quarterly frequency by taking averages within the quarter. Real stock prices have been computed by deflating the nominal Standard & Poor s composite index by the consumption deflator. Finally, quarterly seasonally adjusted series for real GDP in chained 2005 dollars (GDPC96) and for the chained GDP deflator (GDPCTPI) are from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. As discussed in the text, the price of consumption is taken to be the numeraire of the system, and real GDP is therefore multiplied by the GDP deflator, and then divided by the consumption deflator (the resulting series is near-numerically identical 20 So, to be clear, defining the original 3-month Treasury bill rate series as with its scale such that, e.g., a ten per cent rate is represented as 10.0 the rescaled series is computed as =(1+ /100)
22 to the one obtained by simply deflating nominal GDP by the consumption deflator). Finally, hours worked, real GDP, real consumption, and real stock prices are all expressed in per capita terms by dividing them by population. 22
23 Figure 1 Results based on the standard Uhlig methodology: fractions of forecast error variance explained by neutral and investment-specific shocks, with one- and two-standard deviations bootstrapped confidence bands 22
24 Figure 2 Fractions of forecast error variance explained by individual shocks, by type of shock, with one- and two-standard deviations bootstrapped confidence bands (based on the modified Uhlig methodology ) 23
25 Figure 3 Fractions of forecast error variance explained by individual shocks, with one- and two-standard deviations bootstrapped confidence bands (based on the modified Uhlig methodology ) 24
26 Figure 4 Impulse-response functions to structural shocks, with one- and two-standard deviations bootstrapped confidence bands 25
27 Figure 5 Counterfactuals for the 1950s obtained by killing off individual structural shocks, with one- and two-standard deviations bootstrapped confidence bands (based on the modified Uhlig methodology ) 26
28 Figure 6 Counterfactuals for the Great Inflation episode obtained by killing off individual structural shocks, with one- and two-standard deviations bootstrapped confidence bands (based on the modified Uhlig methodology ) 27
29 Figure 7 Counterfactuals for the New Economy period, obtained by killing off individual structural shocks, with one- and two-standard deviations bootstrapped confidence bands (based on the modified Uhlig methodology ) 28
30 Figure 8 Counterfactuals for the period leading up to the financial crisis, obtained by killing off individual structural shocks, with one- and two-standard deviations bootstrapped confidence bands (based on the modified Uhlig methodology ) 29
Are Predictable Improvements in TFP Contractionary or Expansionary: Implications from Sectoral TFP? *
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas Globalization and Monetary Policy Institute Working Paper No. http://www.dallasfed.org/assets/documents/institute/wpapers//.pdf Are Predictable Improvements in TFP Contractionary
More informationCONFIDENCE AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY: THE CASE OF PORTUGAL*
CONFIDENCE AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY: THE CASE OF PORTUGAL* Caterina Mendicino** Maria Teresa Punzi*** 39 Articles Abstract The idea that aggregate economic activity might be driven in part by confidence and
More informationA Reply to Roberto Perotti s "Expectations and Fiscal Policy: An Empirical Investigation"
A Reply to Roberto Perotti s "Expectations and Fiscal Policy: An Empirical Investigation" Valerie A. Ramey University of California, San Diego and NBER June 30, 2011 Abstract This brief note challenges
More informationNews Shocks and the Term Structure of Interest Rates: Reply Online Appendix
News Shocks and the Term Structure of Interest Rates: Reply Online Appendix André Kurmann Drexel University Christopher Otrok University of Missouri Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis March 14, 2017 This
More informationHow do stock prices respond to fundamental shocks?
Finance Research Letters 1 (2004) 90 99 www.elsevier.com/locate/frl How do stock prices respond to fundamental? Mathias Binswanger University of Applied Sciences of Northwestern Switzerland, Riggenbachstr
More informationLiquidity Matters: Money Non-Redundancy in the Euro Area Business Cycle
Liquidity Matters: Money Non-Redundancy in the Euro Area Business Cycle Antonio Conti January 21, 2010 Abstract While New Keynesian models label money redundant in shaping business cycle, monetary aggregates
More informationUCD CENTRE FOR ECONOMIC RESEARCH WORKING PAPER SERIES
UCD CENTRE FOR ECONOMIC RESEARCH WORKING PAPER SERIES 2006 Measuring the NAIRU A Structural VAR Approach Vincent Hogan and Hongmei Zhao, University College Dublin WP06/17 November 2006 UCD SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS
More informationNotes on Estimating the Closed Form of the Hybrid New Phillips Curve
Notes on Estimating the Closed Form of the Hybrid New Phillips Curve Jordi Galí, Mark Gertler and J. David López-Salido Preliminary draft, June 2001 Abstract Galí and Gertler (1999) developed a hybrid
More informationEconomic Policy Uncertainty and the Great Recession
Economic Policy Uncertainty and the Great Recession Luca Benati University of Bern Abstract I use Bayesian time-varying parameters structural VARs with stochastic volatility, and two alternative identification
More informationONLINE APPENDIX TO TFP, NEWS, AND SENTIMENTS: THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSMISSION OF BUSINESS CYCLES
ONLINE APPENDIX TO TFP, NEWS, AND SENTIMENTS: THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSMISSION OF BUSINESS CYCLES Andrei A. Levchenko University of Michigan Nitya Pandalai-Nayar University of Texas at Austin E-mail: alev@umich.edu
More informationComment. The New Keynesian Model and Excess Inflation Volatility
Comment Martín Uribe, Columbia University and NBER This paper represents the latest installment in a highly influential series of papers in which Paul Beaudry and Franck Portier shed light on the empirics
More informationOnline Appendix: Asymmetric Effects of Exogenous Tax Changes
Online Appendix: Asymmetric Effects of Exogenous Tax Changes Syed M. Hussain Samreen Malik May 9,. Online Appendix.. Anticipated versus Unanticipated Tax changes Comparing our estimates with the estimates
More informationflow-based borrowing constraints and macroeconomic fluctuations
flow-based borrowing constraints and macroeconomic fluctuations Thomas Drechsel (LSE) Annual Congress of the EEA University of Cologne 27 August 2018 in a nutshell I What do the dynamics of firm borrowing
More informationDiscussion of The Role of Expectations in Inflation Dynamics
Discussion of The Role of Expectations in Inflation Dynamics James H. Stock Department of Economics, Harvard University and the NBER 1. Introduction Rational expectations are at the heart of the dynamic
More informationWhy Are Recessions Associated With Financial Crises Different?
Why Are Recessions Associated With Financial Crises Different? Luca Benati University of Bern Abstract We use Bayesian time-varying parameters structural VARs with stochastic volatility to investigate
More informationA New VAR-Based Approach to Identifying News Shocks
A New VAR-Based Approach to Identifying News Shocks Nadav Ben Zeev European University Institute January, 3 Abstract The basic identifying assumption underlying news driven models is that technology is
More informationNews and Monetary Shocks at a High Frequency: A Simple Approach
WP/14/167 News and Monetary Shocks at a High Frequency: A Simple Approach Troy Matheson and Emil Stavrev 2014 International Monetary Fund WP/14/167 IMF Working Paper Research Department News and Monetary
More informationDiscussion of Trend Inflation in Advanced Economies
Discussion of Trend Inflation in Advanced Economies James Morley University of New South Wales 1. Introduction Garnier, Mertens, and Nelson (this issue, GMN hereafter) conduct model-based trend/cycle decomposition
More informationOUTPUT SPILLOVERS FROM FISCAL POLICY
OUTPUT SPILLOVERS FROM FISCAL POLICY Alan J. Auerbach and Yuriy Gorodnichenko University of California, Berkeley January 2013 In this paper, we estimate the cross-country spillover effects of government
More informationDoes Commodity Price Index predict Canadian Inflation?
2011 年 2 月第十四卷一期 Vol. 14, No. 1, February 2011 Does Commodity Price Index predict Canadian Inflation? Tao Chen http://cmr.ba.ouhk.edu.hk Web Journal of Chinese Management Review Vol. 14 No 1 1 Does Commodity
More informationMonetary policy transmission in Switzerland: Headline inflation and asset prices
Monetary policy transmission in Switzerland: Headline inflation and asset prices Master s Thesis Supervisor Prof. Dr. Kjell G. Nyborg Chair Corporate Finance University of Zurich Department of Banking
More informationThe relationship between output and unemployment in France and United Kingdom
The relationship between output and unemployment in France and United Kingdom Gaétan Stephan 1 University of Rennes 1, CREM April 2012 (Preliminary draft) Abstract We model the relation between output
More informationMASTER. Comment. Martín Uribe, Columbia University and NBER
Comment Martín Uribe, Columbia University and NBER 2011 by the National Bureau of Economic Research. All rights reserved. 978-0-226-00214-9/2011/2011-0503$10.00 This paper studies the effects of time-
More informationThe Stock Market Crash Really Did Cause the Great Recession
The Stock Market Crash Really Did Cause the Great Recession Roger E.A. Farmer Department of Economics, UCLA 23 Bunche Hall Box 91 Los Angeles CA 9009-1 rfarmer@econ.ucla.edu Phone: +1 3 2 Fax: +1 3 2 92
More informationHow does an increase in government purchases affect the economy?
How does an increase in government purchases affect the economy? Martin Eichenbaum and Jonas D. M. Fisher Introduction and summary A classic question facing macroeconomists is: How does an increase in
More informationAsian Economic and Financial Review SOURCES OF EXCHANGE RATE FLUCTUATION IN VIETNAM: AN APPLICATION OF THE SVAR MODEL
Asian Economic and Financial Review ISSN(e): 2222-6737/ISSN(p): 2305-2147 journal homepage: http://www.aessweb.com/journals/5002 SOURCES OF EXCHANGE RATE FLUCTUATION IN VIETNAM: AN APPLICATION OF THE SVAR
More informationRevisionist History: How Data Revisions Distort Economic Policy Research
Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Quarterly Review Vol., No., Fall 998, pp. 3 Revisionist History: How Data Revisions Distort Economic Policy Research David E. Runkle Research Officer Research Department
More informationWhat Can We Learn about News Shocks from the Late 1990 s and Early 2000 s Boom-Bust Period?
What Can We Learn about News Shocks from the Late 99 s and Early s Boom-Bust Period? Nadav Ben Zeev European University Institute May 7, 3 Abstract The boom-bust period of 997-3 is commonly viewed as an
More informationHow do Macroeconomic Shocks affect Expectations? Lessons from Survey Data
How do Macroeconomic Shocks affect Expectations? Lessons from Survey Data Martin Geiger Johann Scharler Preliminary Version March 6 Abstract We study the revision of macroeconomic expectations due to aggregate
More informationCOLUMBIA UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS. Professor Frederic S. Mishkin Fall 1999 Uris Hall 619 Extension:
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS Professor Frederic S. Mishkin Fall 1999 Uris Hall 619 Extension: 4-3488 E-mail: fsm3@columbia.edu Money and Financial Markets B9353 EMPIRICAL METHODS IN
More informationCredit Shocks and the U.S. Business Cycle. Is This Time Different? Raju Huidrom University of Virginia. Midwest Macro Conference
Credit Shocks and the U.S. Business Cycle: Is This Time Different? Raju Huidrom University of Virginia May 31, 214 Midwest Macro Conference Raju Huidrom Credit Shocks and the U.S. Business Cycle Background
More informationAn EM-Algorithm for Maximum-Likelihood Estimation of Mixed Frequency VARs
An EM-Algorithm for Maximum-Likelihood Estimation of Mixed Frequency VARs Jürgen Antony, Pforzheim Business School and Torben Klarl, Augsburg University EEA 2016, Geneva Introduction frequent problem in
More informationTHE EFFECTS OF FISCAL POLICY ON EMERGING ECONOMIES. A TVP-VAR APPROACH
South-Eastern Europe Journal of Economics 1 (2015) 75-84 THE EFFECTS OF FISCAL POLICY ON EMERGING ECONOMIES. A TVP-VAR APPROACH IOANA BOICIUC * Bucharest University of Economics, Romania Abstract This
More informationSentiments in SVARs. November 1, Abstract
Sentiments in SVARs Patrick Fève Alain Guay November 1, 17 Abstract This paper investigates the contribution of sentiments shocks to US fluctuations in a Structural VAR setup with restrictions at various
More informationThis PDF is a selection from a published volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research
This PDF is a selection from a published volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: Europe and the Euro Volume Author/Editor: Alberto Alesina and Francesco Giavazzi, editors Volume
More informationPRIVATE AND GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT: A STUDY OF THREE OECD COUNTRIES. MEHDI S. MONADJEMI AND HYEONSEUNG HUH* University of New South Wales
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC JOURNAL 93 Volume 12, Number 2, Summer 1998 PRIVATE AND GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT: A STUDY OF THREE OECD COUNTRIES MEHDI S. MONADJEMI AND HYEONSEUNG HUH* University of New South Wales
More informationLabor Market Dynamics: A Time-Varying Analysis*
OXFORD BULLETIN OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS, 35 949 doi: 1.1111/obes.1296 Labor Market Dynamics: A Time-Varying Analysis* Haroon Mumtaz, Francesco Zanetti Queen Mary University,Mile End Road, London, E1
More informationWhat can we Learn about News Shocks from the Late 1990s and Early 2000s Boom-Bust Period?
What can we Learn about News Shocks from the Late 99s and Early 2s Boom-Bust Period? Nadav Ben Zeev European University Institute August 22, 23 Abstract The boom-bust period of 997-23 is commonly viewed
More informationWeb Appendix. Are the effects of monetary policy shocks big or small? Olivier Coibion
Web Appendix Are the effects of monetary policy shocks big or small? Olivier Coibion Appendix 1: Description of the Model-Averaging Procedure This section describes the model-averaging procedure used in
More informationVolume 38, Issue 1. The dynamic effects of aggregate supply and demand shocks in the Mexican economy
Volume 38, Issue 1 The dynamic effects of aggregate supply and demand shocks in the Mexican economy Ivan Mendieta-Muñoz Department of Economics, University of Utah Abstract This paper studies if the supply
More informationMárcio G. P. Garcia PUC-Rio Brazil Visiting Scholar, Sloan School, MIT and NBER. This paper aims at quantitatively evaluating two questions:
Discussion of Unconventional Monetary Policy and the Great Recession: Estimating the Macroeconomic Effects of a Spread Compression at the Zero Lower Bound Márcio G. P. Garcia PUC-Rio Brazil Visiting Scholar,
More informationMood Swings and Business Cycles: Evidence from Sign Restrictions
Mood Swings and Business Cycles: Evidence from Sign Restrictions Deokwoo Nam 1 Jian Wang 2 1 Hanyang University 2 Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen) October 216 Introduction What drives business
More informationDo mood swings drive business cycles and is it rational?
Do mood swings drive business cycles and is it rational? Paul Beaudry University of British Columbia Jian Wang Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas Deokwoo Nam Hanyang University June, Abstract We provide evidence
More informationMood Swings and Business Cycles: Evidence from Sign Restrictions
Mood Swings and Business Cycles: Evidence from Sign Restrictions Deokwoo Nam Hanyang University Jian Wang Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen) July 4, 26 Abstract This paper provides new evidence
More informationUsing Exogenous Changes in Government Spending to estimate Fiscal Multiplier for Canada: Do we get more than we bargain for?
Using Exogenous Changes in Government Spending to estimate Fiscal Multiplier for Canada: Do we get more than we bargain for? Syed M. Hussain Lin Liu August 5, 26 Abstract In this paper, we estimate the
More informationGMM for Discrete Choice Models: A Capital Accumulation Application
GMM for Discrete Choice Models: A Capital Accumulation Application Russell Cooper, John Haltiwanger and Jonathan Willis January 2005 Abstract This paper studies capital adjustment costs. Our goal here
More informationJournal of Central Banking Theory and Practice, 2017, 1, pp Received: 6 August 2016; accepted: 10 October 2016
BOOK REVIEW: Monetary Policy, Inflation, and the Business Cycle: An Introduction to the New Keynesian... 167 UDK: 338.23:336.74 DOI: 10.1515/jcbtp-2017-0009 Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice,
More informationMeasuring How Fiscal Shocks Affect Durable Spending in Recessions and Expansions
Measuring How Fiscal Shocks Affect Durable Spending in Recessions and Expansions By DAVID BERGER AND JOSEPH VAVRA How big are government spending multipliers? A recent litererature has argued that while
More information1 Introduction. Term Paper: The Hall and Taylor Model in Duali 1. Yumin Li 5/8/2012
Term Paper: The Hall and Taylor Model in Duali 1 Yumin Li 5/8/2012 1 Introduction In macroeconomics and policy making arena, it is extremely important to have the ability to manipulate a set of control
More informationTowards Technology-News- Driven Business Cycles
SVERIGES RIKSBANK 360 WORKING PAPER SERIES Towards Technology-News- Driven Business Cycles Paola Di Casola and Spyridon Sichlimiris November 2018 WORKING PAPERS ARE OBTAINABLE FROM www.riksbank.se/en/research
More informationWhat caused the early millennium slowdown? Evidence based on vector autoregressions
Working Paper no. 7 What caused the early millennium slowdown? Evidence based on vector autoregressions Gert Peersman September 5 Bank of England What caused the early millennium slowdown? Evidence based
More informationOnline Appendixes to Missing Disinflation and Missing Inflation: A VAR Perspective
Online Appendixes to Missing Disinflation and Missing Inflation: A VAR Perspective Elena Bobeica and Marek Jarociński European Central Bank Author e-mails: elena.bobeica@ecb.int and marek.jarocinski@ecb.int.
More informationThe Effects of Japanese Monetary Policy Shocks on Exchange Rates: A Structural Vector Error Correction Model Approach
MONETARY AND ECONOMIC STUDIES/FEBRUARY 2003 The Effects of Japanese Monetary Policy Shocks on Exchange Rates: A Structural Vector Error Correction Model Approach Kyungho Jang and Masao Ogaki This paper
More informationMonetary Policy Objectives During the Crisis: An Overview of Selected Southeast European Countries
Monetary Policy Objectives During the Crisis: An Overview of Selected Southeast European Countries 35 UDK: 338.23:336.74(4-12) DOI: 10.1515/jcbtp-2015-0003 Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice,
More informationGlobal and National Macroeconometric Modelling: A Long-run Structural Approach Overview on Macroeconometric Modelling Yongcheol Shin Leeds University
Global and National Macroeconometric Modelling: A Long-run Structural Approach Overview on Macroeconometric Modelling Yongcheol Shin Leeds University Business School Seminars at University of Cape Town
More informationMonetary and Fiscal Policy Switching with Time-Varying Volatilities
Monetary and Fiscal Policy Switching with Time-Varying Volatilities Libo Xu and Apostolos Serletis Department of Economics University of Calgary Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4 Forthcoming in: Economics Letters
More informationIs the Exchange Rate a Shock Absorber or Source of Shocks? New Empirical Evidence
Is the Exchange Rate a Shock Absorber or Source of Shocks? New Empirical Evidence Katie Farrant Bank of England katie.farrant@bankofengland.co.uk Gert Peersman Ghent University gert.peersman@ugent.be December
More informationThe Effect of Recessions on Fiscal and Monetary Policy
The Effect of Recessions on Fiscal and Monetary Policy By Dean Croushore and Alex Nikolsko-Rzhevskyy September 25, 2017 In this paper, we extend the results of Ball and Croushore (2003), who show that
More information5. STRUCTURAL VAR: APPLICATIONS
5. STRUCTURAL VAR: APPLICATIONS 1 1 Monetary Policy Shocks (Christiano Eichenbaum and Evans, 1998) Monetary policy shocks is the unexpected part of the equation for the monetary policy instrument (S t
More informationConditional versus Unconditional Utility as Welfare Criterion: Two Examples
Conditional versus Unconditional Utility as Welfare Criterion: Two Examples Jinill Kim, Korea University Sunghyun Kim, Sungkyunkwan University March 015 Abstract This paper provides two illustrative examples
More informationData Dependence and U.S. Monetary Policy. Remarks by. Richard H. Clarida. Vice Chairman. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
For release on delivery 8:30 a.m. EST November 27, 2018 Data Dependence and U.S. Monetary Policy Remarks by Richard H. Clarida Vice Chairman Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System at The Clearing
More informationMarket Risk Analysis Volume II. Practical Financial Econometrics
Market Risk Analysis Volume II Practical Financial Econometrics Carol Alexander John Wiley & Sons, Ltd List of Figures List of Tables List of Examples Foreword Preface to Volume II xiii xvii xx xxii xxvi
More informationEC910 Econometrics B. Exchange Rate Pass-Through and Inflation Dynamics in. the United Kingdom: VAR analysis of Exchange Rate.
EC910 Econometrics B Exchange Rate Pass-Through and Inflation Dynamics in the United Kingdom: VAR analysis of Exchange Rate Pass-Through 0910249 Department of Economics The University of Warwick Abstract
More informationTHE POLICY RULE MIX: A MACROECONOMIC POLICY EVALUATION. John B. Taylor Stanford University
THE POLICY RULE MIX: A MACROECONOMIC POLICY EVALUATION by John B. Taylor Stanford University October 1997 This draft was prepared for the Robert A. Mundell Festschrift Conference, organized by Guillermo
More informationWhat Can We Learn about News Shocks from the late 1990s and early 2000s Boom-Bust Period?
MWP 23/25 Max Weber Programme What Can We Learn about News Shocks from the late 99s and early 2s Boom-Bust Period? Author Nadav Ben Author Zeev and Author Author European University Institute Max Weber
More informationNot-for-Publication Appendix to:
Not-for-Publication Appendix to: What Is the Importance of Monetary and Fiscal Shocks in Explaining US Macroeconomic Fluctuations? Barbara Rossi Duke University Sarah Zubairy Bank of Canada Email: brossi@econ.duke.edu
More informationIntroductory Econometrics for Finance
Introductory Econometrics for Finance SECOND EDITION Chris Brooks The ICMA Centre, University of Reading CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS List of figures List of tables List of boxes List of screenshots Preface
More informationUnraveling News: Reconciling Conflicting Evidence
Unraveling News: Reconciling Conflicting Evidence Maria Bolboaca and Sarah Fischer Working Paper 9.2 This discussion paper series represents research work-in-progress and is distributed with the intention
More informationThe Limits of Monetary Policy Under Imperfect Knowledge
The Limits of Monetary Policy Under Imperfect Knowledge Stefano Eusepi y Marc Giannoni z Bruce Preston x February 15, 2014 JEL Classi cations: E32, D83, D84 Keywords: Optimal Monetary Policy, Expectations
More informationON THE LONG-TERM MACROECONOMIC EFFECTS OF SOCIAL SPENDING IN THE UNITED STATES (*) Alfredo Marvão Pereira The College of William and Mary
ON THE LONG-TERM MACROECONOMIC EFFECTS OF SOCIAL SPENDING IN THE UNITED STATES (*) Alfredo Marvão Pereira The College of William and Mary Jorge M. Andraz Faculdade de Economia, Universidade do Algarve,
More informationDISCUSSION OF NON-INFLATIONARY DEMAND DRIVEN BUSINESS CYCLES, BY BEAUDRY AND PORTIER. 1. Introduction
DISCUSSION OF NON-INFLATIONARY DEMAND DRIVEN BUSINESS CYCLES, BY BEAUDRY AND PORTIER GIORGIO E. PRIMICERI 1. Introduction The paper by Beaudry and Portier (BP) is motivated by two stylized facts concerning
More informationWORKING PAPER SERIES TECHNOLOGY SHOCKS AND ROBUST SIGN RESTRICTIONS IN A EURO AREA SVAR NO. 373 / JULY by Gert Peersman and Roland Straub
WORKING PAPER SERIES NO. 373 / JULY 2004 TECHNOLOGY SHOCKS AND ROBUST SIGN RESTRICTIONS IN A EURO AREA SVAR by Gert Peersman and Roland Straub WORKING PAPER SERIES NO. 373 / JULY 2004 TECHNOLOGY SHOCKS
More informationThe source of real and nominal exchange rate fluctuations in Thailand: Real shock or nominal shock
MPRA Munich Personal RePEc Archive The source of real and nominal exchange rate fluctuations in Thailand: Real shock or nominal shock Binh Le Thanh International University of Japan 15. August 2015 Online
More informationEstimating Macroeconomic Models of Financial Crises: An Endogenous Regime-Switching Approach
Estimating Macroeconomic Models of Financial Crises: An Endogenous Regime-Switching Approach Gianluca Benigno 1 Andrew Foerster 2 Christopher Otrok 3 Alessandro Rebucci 4 1 London School of Economics and
More informationMonetary Policy and Medium-Term Fiscal Planning
Doug Hostland Department of Finance Working Paper * 2001-20 * The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not reflect those of the Department of Finance. A previous version of this
More informationECON : Topics in Monetary Economics
ECON 882-11: Topics in Monetary Economics Department of Economics Duke University Fall 2015 Instructor: Kyle Jurado E-mail: kyle.jurado@duke.edu Lectures: M/W 1:25pm-2:40pm Classroom: Perkins 065 (classroom
More informationLOW FREQUENCY MOVEMENTS IN STOCK PRICES: A STATE SPACE DECOMPOSITION REVISED MAY 2001, FORTHCOMING REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS
LOW FREQUENCY MOVEMENTS IN STOCK PRICES: A STATE SPACE DECOMPOSITION REVISED MAY 2001, FORTHCOMING REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS Nathan S. Balke Mark E. Wohar Research Department Working Paper 0001
More informationOnline Appendix (Not intended for Publication): Federal Reserve Credibility and the Term Structure of Interest Rates
Online Appendix Not intended for Publication): Federal Reserve Credibility and the Term Structure of Interest Rates Aeimit Lakdawala Michigan State University Shu Wu University of Kansas August 2017 1
More informationMonetary Fiscal Policy Interactions under Implementable Monetary Policy Rules
WILLIAM A. BRANCH TROY DAVIG BRUCE MCGOUGH Monetary Fiscal Policy Interactions under Implementable Monetary Policy Rules This paper examines the implications of forward- and backward-looking monetary policy
More informationOutput gap uncertainty: Does it matter for the Taylor rule? *
RBNZ: Monetary Policy under uncertainty workshop Output gap uncertainty: Does it matter for the Taylor rule? * Frank Smets, Bank for International Settlements This paper analyses the effect of measurement
More informationWorkshop on resilience
Workshop on resilience Paris 14 June 2007 SVAR analysis of short-term resilience: A summary of the methodological issues and the results for the US and Germany Alain de Serres OECD Economics Department
More informationAre the effects of monetary policy shocks big or small? *
Are the effects of monetary policy shocks big or small? * Olivier Coibion College of William and Mary College of William and Mary Department of Economics Working Paper Number 9 Current Version: April 211
More informationTechnology, Employment, and the Business Cycle: Do Technology Shocks Explain Aggregate Fluctuations? Comment
Technology, Employment, and the Business Cycle: Do Technology Shocks Explain Aggregate Fluctuations? Comment Yi Wen Department of Economics Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 yw57@cornell.edu Abstract
More informationExchange Rates and Uncovered Interest Differentials: The Role of Permanent Monetary Shocks. Stephanie Schmitt-Grohé and Martín Uribe
Exchange Rates and Uncovered Interest Differentials: The Role of Permanent Monetary Shocks Stephanie Schmitt-Grohé and Martín Uribe Columbia University December 1, 218 Motivation Existing empirical work
More informationCFA Level II - LOS Changes
CFA Level II - LOS Changes 2018-2019 Topic LOS Level II - 2018 (465 LOS) LOS Level II - 2019 (471 LOS) Compared Ethics 1.1.a describe the six components of the Code of Ethics and the seven Standards of
More informationMONEY AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY: SOME INTERNATIONAL EVIDENCE. Abstract
MONEY AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY: SOME INTERNATIONAL EVIDENCE Mehdi S. Monadjemi * School of Economics University of New South Wales Sydney 252 Australia email: m.monadjemi@unsw.edu.au Hyeon-seung Huh Melbourne
More informationRegional Business Cycles In the United States
Regional Business Cycles In the United States By Gary L. Shelley Peer Reviewed Dr. Gary L. Shelley (shelley@etsu.edu) is an Associate Professor of Economics, Department of Economics and Finance, East Tennessee
More informationMonetary Policy Analysis. Bennett T. McCallum* Carnegie Mellon University. and. National Bureau of Economic Research.
Monetary Policy Analysis Bennett T. McCallum* Carnegie Mellon University and National Bureau of Economic Research October 10, 2001 *This paper was prepared for the NBER Reporter The past several years
More informationEconomics Letters 108 (2010) Contents lists available at ScienceDirect. Economics Letters. journal homepage:
Economics Letters 108 (2010) 167 171 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Economics Letters journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet Is there a financial accelerator in US banking? Evidence
More informationInflation Persistence and Relative Contracting
[Forthcoming, American Economic Review] Inflation Persistence and Relative Contracting by Steinar Holden Department of Economics University of Oslo Box 1095 Blindern, 0317 Oslo, Norway email: steinar.holden@econ.uio.no
More informationThe Effects of Fiscal Policy: Evidence from Italy
The Effects of Fiscal Policy: Evidence from Italy T. Ferraresi Irpet INFORUM 2016 Onasbrück August 29th - September 2nd Tommaso Ferraresi (Irpet) Fiscal policy in Italy INFORUM 2016 1 / 17 Motivations
More informationThe Time-Varying Effects of Monetary Aggregates on Inflation and Unemployment
経営情報学論集第 23 号 2017.3 The Time-Varying Effects of Monetary Aggregates on Inflation and Unemployment An Application of the Bayesian Vector Autoregression with Time-Varying Parameters and Stochastic Volatility
More informationPractical Issues in Monetary Policy Targeting
2 Practical Issues in Monetary Policy Targeting by Stephen G Cecchetti Stephen G Cecchetti is a professor of economics at Ohio State University and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic
More informationMonetary Policy Shock Analysis Using Structural Vector Autoregression
Monetary Policy Shock Analysis Using Structural Vector Autoregression (Digital Signal Processing Project Report) Rushil Agarwal (72018) Ishaan Arora (72350) Abstract A wide variety of theoretical and empirical
More informationAnalysis of DSGE Models. Lawrence Christiano
Specification, Estimation and Analysis of DSGE Models Lawrence Christiano Overview A consensus model has emerged as a device for forecasting, analysis, and as a platform for additional analysis of financial
More informationSolving dynamic portfolio choice problems by recursing on optimized portfolio weights or on the value function?
DOI 0.007/s064-006-9073-z ORIGINAL PAPER Solving dynamic portfolio choice problems by recursing on optimized portfolio weights or on the value function? Jules H. van Binsbergen Michael W. Brandt Received:
More informationMoney, Interest Rates and Output Revisited. Joseph H. Haslag. and. Xue Li 1
Money, Interest Rates and Output Revisited Joseph H. Haslag and Xue Li Abstract: There is a long tradition in economic research that studies the relationship between money, interest rates and output. In
More informationAre Intrinsic Inflation Persistence Models Structural in the Sense of Lucas (1976)?
Are Intrinsic Inflation Persistence Models Structural in the Sense of Lucas (1976)? Luca Benati, European Central Bank National Bank of Belgium November 19, 2008 This talk is based on 2 papers: Investigating
More informationM.I.T. LIBRARIES - DEWEY
M.I.T. LIBRARIES - DEWEY Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from Boston Library Consortium Member Libraries http://www.archive.org/details/consumptionrecesooblan working paper department
More informationQuantity versus Price Rationing of Credit: An Empirical Test
Int. J. Financ. Stud. 213, 1, 45 53; doi:1.339/ijfs1345 Article OPEN ACCESS International Journal of Financial Studies ISSN 2227-772 www.mdpi.com/journal/ijfs Quantity versus Price Rationing of Credit:
More information