Why Are Beveridge-Nelson and Unobserved-Component Decompositions of GDP So Different?
Abstract
This paper reconciles two widely-used decompositions of GDP into trend and cycle that yield starkly different results. Beveridge-Nelson (BN) implies that a stochastic trend accounts for most of the variation in output, while Unobserved-Components (UC) implies cyclical variation is dominant. Which is correct has broad implications for the relative importance of real versus nominal shocks. We show the difference arises from the restriction imposed in UC that trend and cycle innovations are uncorrelated. When this restriction is relaxed, the UC decomposition is identical to the BN decomposition. Furthermore, the zero correlation restriction can be rejected for U.S. quarterly GDP, with the estimated correlation being –0.9.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.Bibliographic Info
Paper provided by University of Washington, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number UWEC-2002-01.Length:
Date of creation: Jan 2002
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in Review of Economics and Statistics, Volume LXXXV, No. 2. May, 2003
Handle: RePEc:udb:wpaper:uwec-2002-01
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Box 353330, Seattle, WA 98193-3330
Email:
Web page: http://www.econ.washington.edu/
More information through EDIRC
Related research
Keywords:Other versions of this item:
- James Morley & Charles Nelson & Eric Zivot, 2003. "Why are Beveridge-Nelson and Unobserved-component decompositions of GDP so Different?," Working Papers UWEC-2002-18-P, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
- James C. Morley & Charles Nelson & Eric Zivot, 2000. "Why Are Beveridge-Nelson and Unobserved-Component Decompositions of GDP So Different?," Working Papers 0013, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
- James C. Morley & Charles Nelson & Eric Zivot, 2000. "Why Are Beveridge-Nelson and Unobserved-Component Decompositions of GDP So Different?," Discussion Papers in Economics at the University of Washington 0013, Department of Economics at the University of Washington.
References
No references listed on IDEASYou can help add them by filling out this form.
Citations
Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.Cited by:
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.
Lists
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Statistics
Access and download statisticsCorrections
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:udb:wpaper:uwec-2002-01For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael Goldblatt).
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.

