Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Do Technology Shocks Drive Hours Up or Down?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Barbara Rossi
  • Elena Pesavento

Abstract

This paper analyzes the robustness of the estimate of a positive productivity shock on hours to the presence of a possible unit root in hours. Estimations in levels or in first differences provide opposite conclusions. We rely on an agnostic procedure in which the researcher does not have to choose between a specification in levels or in first differences. The method uses alternative approximations based on local-to-unity asymptotic theory and allows the lead-time of the impulse response function to be a fixed fraction of the sample size. These devices provide better approximations in small samples and give confidence bands that have better coverage properties at medium and long horizons than existing methods. We find that a positive productivity shock has a negative effect on hours, as in Francis and Ramey (2001), but the effect is much more short-lived, and disappears after two quarters. The effect becomes positive at business cycle frequencies, as in Christiano et al. (2003)

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
File URL: http://repec.org/esNASM04/up.22408.1074020661.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Econometric Society in its series Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings with number 96.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 11 Aug 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ecm:nasm04:96

Contact details of provider:
Phone: 1 212 998 3820
Fax: 1 212 995 4487
Email:
Web page: http://www.econometricsociety.org/pastmeetings.asp
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Technology shocks; persistence; impulse response functions; Real Business Cycle.;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
as in new window
  1. Barbara Rossi & Elena Pesavento, 2006. "Small-sample confidence intervals for multivariate impulse response functions at long horizons," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(8), pages 1135-1155.
  2. Serena Ng & Pierre Perron, 1997. "Lag Length Selection and the Construction of Unit Root Tests with Good Size and Power," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 369, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 01 Sep 2000.
  3. Elliott, Graham & Jansson, Michael, 2002. "Testing for Unit Roots with Stationary Covariates," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt4v35s2gv, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
  4. Graham Elliott & Michael Jansson & Elena Pesavento, 2003. "Optimal Power For Testing Potential Cointegrating Vectors with Known Parameters for Nonstationarity," Emory Economics 0303, Department of Economics, Emory University (Atlanta).
  5. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Robert Vigfusson, 2003. "What Happens After a Technology Shock?," NBER Working Papers 9819, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Graham Elliott & Thomas J. Rothenberg & James H. Stock, 1992. "Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root," NBER Technical Working Papers 0130, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. Jordi Gali, 1999. "Technology, Employment, and the Business Cycle: Do Technology Shocks Explain Aggregate Fluctuations?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 249-271, March.
  8. Elliott, Graham & Stock, James H., 2001. "Confidence intervals for autoregressive coefficients near one," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 103(1-2), pages 155-181, July.
  9. Kilian, Lutz & Chang, Pao-Li, 2000. "How accurate are confidence intervals for impulse responses in large VAR models?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 299-307, December.
  10. Neville Francis & Valerie A. Ramey, 2002. "Is the Technology-Driven Real Business Cycle Hypothesis Dead?," NBER Working Papers 8726, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Luis Alberiko Gil-Alana & Antonio Moreno, . "Technology Shocks and Hours Worked: A Fractional Integration Perspective," Faculty Working Papers 03/06, School of Economics and Business Administration, University of Navarra.
  2. Cantore, Cristiano & León-Ledesma, Miguel A. & McAdam, Peter & Willman, Alpo, 2010. "Shocking stuff: technology, hours, and factor substitution," Working Paper Series 1278, European Central Bank.
  3. Ghent, Andra, 2006. "Comparing Models of Macroeconomic Fluctuations: How Big Are the Differences?," MPRA Paper 180, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  4. Patrick Fève & Alain Guay, 2010. "Identification of Technology Shocks in Structural Vars," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(549), pages 1284-1318, December.
  5. Neville Francis & Michael T. Owyang & Jennifer E. Roush, 2005. "A flexible finite-horizon identification of technology shocks," International Finance Discussion Papers 832, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  6. Neville Francis & Michael T. Owyang & Jennifer E. Roush & Riccardo DiCecio, 2010. "A flexible finite-horizon alternative to long-run restrictions with an application to technology shock," Working Papers 2005-024, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecm:nasm04:96. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.