A dominant explanation of price rigidity is the so-called "menu cost model" according to which small costs of changing prices may imply that firms keep nominal prices unchanged to nominal shocks which therefore have real effects. Crucial to this explanation is the assumption that price adjustment is costly while quantity adjustment is not. This paper analyses the role of costs of adjusting both prices and quantities, and it is found that the "small cost" argument used to support menu cost models does not hold. The predictions of menu cost models only hold if price adjustment costs are larger than quantity adjustment costs. Empirical evidence clearly indicates that the costs of adjusting quantities are non-trivial. Quantity adjustment costs also open for the possibility of non-market clearing.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by School of Economics and Management, University of Aarhus in its series Economics Working Papers with number
1999-6.
Find related papers by JEL classification: E32 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles - - - Business Fluctuations; Cycles
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)
Did you know? You can include your works in the database easily by uploading them on the Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MPRA) if you do not have access to an institutional RePEc archive.