A Note on the Stability Properties of Goodwin's Predator-Prey Model
AbstractGoodwin's Predator-Prey model is structurally unstable. In its pure form, the model has an equilibrium that is neither stable nor unstable. Ploeg showed that relaxing the hypothesis of fixed proportion technology would stabilize the equilibrium. On the other hand, Goodwin showed that the equilibrium becomes unstable when endogenous productivity growth is considered. This paper studies the consequences of considering both effects, and concludes that the stabilizing effect of a flexible technology is much stronger than the destabilizing effect of endogenizing labor productivity.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by NIPE - Universidade do Minho in its series NIPE Working Papers with number 5/2007.
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Núcleo de Investigação em Políticas Económicas, Escola de Economia e Gestão, Universidade do Minho, P-4710-057 Braga, Portugal
Phone: +351-253604510 ext 5532
Web page: http://www3.eeg.uminho.pt/economia/nipe/versao_inglesa/index_uk.htm
More information through EDIRC
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- E13 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - Neoclassical
- E20 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - General (includes Measurement and Data)
- E30 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles - - - General (includes Measurement and Data)
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
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.:
- Harvie, David, 2000. "Testing Goodwin: Growth Cycles in Ten OECD Countries," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(3), pages 349-76, May.
- Desai, Meghnad & Henry, Brian & Mosley, Alexander & Pemberton, Malcolm, 2006. "A clarification of the Goodwin model of the growth cycle," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 30(12), pages 2661-2670, December.
- Berndt, Ernst R, 1976. "Reconciling Alternative Estimates of the Elasticity of Substitution," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 58(1), pages 59-68, February.
- Veneziani, Roberto & Mohun, Simon, 2006. "Structural stability and Goodwin's growth cycle," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 437-451, December.
- Shapiro, Carl & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1984. "Equilibrium Unemployment as a Worker Discipline Device," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(3), pages 433-44, June.
- N. J. Moura Jr & Marcelo B. Ribeiro, 2013. "Testing the Goodwin growth-cycle macroeconomic dynamics in Brazil," Papers 1301.1090, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2013.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Maria João Thompson).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.