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 decompositions. Furthermore, the zero correlation restriction can be rejected for U.S. quarterly GDP, with the estimated correlation being -0.9.
Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page
whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be
available.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by University of Washington, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number
UWEC-2002-18-P.
Length: Date of creation: May 2003 Date of revision: Publication status: Published in Review of Economics and Statistics, Volume Handle: RePEc:udb:wpaper:uwec-2002-18-p
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Michael Goldblatt).
Related research
Keywords:
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.)