IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uta/papers/2022_04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Growth, cycles, and residential investment

Author

Listed:
  • Marcio Santetti, Michalis Nikiforos, Rudiger von Arnim

Abstract

The empirical literature on neo-Goodwinian models of growth and distribution still lacks an explicit treatment of capital accumulation. Further, and across different theoretical approaches, residential investment is seen as a critical driver of the business cycle. This paper addresses these two issues. First, through four- and five-dimensional Structural Vector Autoregressive (SVAR) models, cyclical trajectories derived from impulse-response functions confirm profit-led demand and profit-squeeze distribution regimes, in accordance with the cyclical stylized facts in the vein of Goodwin (1967). Second, aggregate investment is then split into its residential and nonresidential categories. Results confirm that residential investment leads the cycle, whereas nonresidential investment lags it. Finally, this study argues that residential investment is, in reality, undertaken by corporations—and not households—, and can therefore not be seen as autonomous to the business cycle, demographics, and financial variables.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcio Santetti, Michalis Nikiforos, Rudiger von Arnim, 2022. "Growth, cycles, and residential investment," Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, University of Utah 2022_04, University of Utah, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:uta:papers:2022_04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economics.utah.edu/research/publications/2022_04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert A. Blecker, 2016. "Wage-led versus profit-led demand regimes: the long and the short of it," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 4(4), pages 373-390, October.
    2. Michalis Nikiforos & Marcio Santetti & Rudiger von Arnim, 2021. "The Sraffian Supermultiplier and Cycles: Theory and Empirics," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_993, Levy Economics Institute.
    3. Brett Fiebiger, 2018. "Semi-autonomous household expenditures as the causa causans of postwar US business cycles: the stability and instability of Luxemburg-type external markets [Cycles and trends in US net borrowing fl," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 42(1), pages 155-175.
    4. Morris A. Davis, 2010. "housing and the business cycle," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics,, Palgrave Macmillan.
    5. Christiano, Lawrence J. & Eichenbaum, Martin & Evans, Charles L., 1999. "Monetary policy shocks: What have we learned and to what end?," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 2, pages 65-148, Elsevier.
    6. Marc Lavoie, 2016. "Convergence Towards the Normal Rate of Capacity Utilization in Neo-Kaleckian Models: The Role of Non-Capacity Creating Autonomous Expenditures," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(1), pages 172-201, February.
    7. Guilherme Haluska & Julia Braga & Ricardo Summa, 2021. "Growth, investment share and the stability of the Sraffian Supermultiplier model in the U.S. economy (1985–2017)," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 345-364, May.
    8. Ivan Mendieta-Munoz & Codrina Rada & Marcio Santetti & Rudiger von Arnim, 2020. "The US labour share of income: What shocks matter?," Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, University of Utah 2020_02, University of Utah, Department of Economics.
    9. Raven Molloy & Christopher L. Smith & Abigail Wozniak, 2011. "Internal Migration in the United States," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(3), pages 173-196, Summer.
    10. David Kiefer & Codrina Rada, 2015. "Profit maximising goes global: the race to the bottom," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 39(5), pages 1333-1350.
    11. Bhaduri, Amit & Marglin, Stephen, 1990. "Unemployment and the Real Wage: The Economic Basis for Contesting Political Ideologies," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 14(4), pages 375-393, December.
    12. Ben Zipperer & Peter Skott, 2011. "Cyclical patterns of employment, utilization, and profitability," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 25-58.
    13. Michael Cauvel, 2019. "The neo-Goodwinian model reconsidered," Working Papers PKWP1915, Post Keynesian Economics Society (PKES).
    14. Rudiger von Arnim & Jose Barrales, 2015. "Demand-driven Goodwin cycles with Kaldorian and Kaleckian features," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 3(3), pages 351-373, July.
    15. 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.
    16. Michalis Nikiforos, 2018. "Some comments on the Sraffian Supermultiplier approach to growth and distribution," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(4), pages 659-675, October.
    17. Laura Carvalho & Armon Rezai, 2016. "Personal income inequality and aggregate demand," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 40(2), pages 491-505.
    18. Tavani Daniele & Zamparelli Luca, 2015. "Endogenous technical change, employment and distribution in the Goodwin model of the growth cycle," Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, De Gruyter, vol. 19(2), pages 209-216, April.
    19. James D. Hamilton, 2018. "Why You Should Never Use the Hodrick-Prescott Filter," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(5), pages 831-843, December.
    20. G. Donald Jud & Dan T. Winkler, 2002. "The Dynamics of Metropolitan Housing Prices," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 23(1/2), pages 29-46.
    21. Michalis Nikiforos, 2018. "Some Comments on the Sraffian Supermultiplier Approach to Growth and Distribution," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_907, Levy Economics Institute.
    22. Michael Cauvel, 2019. "The Neo-Goodwinian model, reconsidered," FMM Working Paper 47-2019, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
    23. Fabio Freitas & Franklin Serrano, 2015. "Growth Rate and Level Effects, the Stability of the Adjustment of Capacity to Demand and the Sraffian Supermultiplier," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(3), pages 258-281, July.
    24. Nelson H. Barbosa‐Filho & Lance Taylor, 2006. "Distributive And Demand Cycles In The Us Economy—A Structuralist Goodwin Model," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 389-411, July.
    25. Edward E. Leamer, 2015. "Housing Really Is the Business Cycle: What Survives the Lessons of 2008–09?," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 47(S1), pages 43-50, March.
    26. Zabel, Jeffrey E., 2012. "Migration, housing market, and labor market responses to employment shocks," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 267-284.
    27. Jonas D. M. Fisher, 2007. "Why Does Household Investment Lead Business Investment over the Business Cycle?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(1), pages 141-168.
    28. Olivier Allain, 2021. "A supermultiplier model of the natural rate of growth," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 612-634, July.
    29. Daniele Girardi & Riccardo Pariboni, 2016. "Long-run Effective Demand in the US Economy: An Empirical Test of the Sraffian Supermultiplier Model," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(4), pages 523-544, October.
    30. José A. Pérez-Montiel & Carles Manera Erbina, 2020. "Autonomous expenditures and induced investment: a panel test of the Sraffian supermultiplier model in European countries," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 8(2), pages 220-239, April.
    31. Skott, Peter, 1989. "Effective Demand, Class Struggle and Cyclical Growth," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 30(1), pages 231-247, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jose Barrales‐Ruiz & Ivan Mendieta‐Muñoz & Codrina Rada & Daniele Tavani & Rudiger von Arnim, 2022. "The distributive cycle: Evidence and current debates," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 468-503, April.
    2. Marcio Santetti, 2023. "A time-varying finance-led model for U.S. business cycles," Papers 2310.05153, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    3. Michalis Nikiforos & Marcio Santetti & Rudiger von Arnim, 2021. "The Sraffian Supermultiplier and Cycles: Theory and Empirics," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_993, Levy Economics Institute.
    4. Stamegna, Marco, 2022. "Induced innovation, the distributive cycle, and the changing pattern of labour productivity cyclicality: a SVAR analysis for the US economy," MPRA Paper 113855, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Jose Barrales-Ruiz, Ivan Mendieta-Muñoz, Codrina Rada, Daniele Tavani, Rudiger von Arnim, 2020. "The distributive cycle: Evidence and current debates," Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, University of Utah 2020_07, University of Utah, Department of Economics.
    6. Barbieri Góes, Maria Cristina & Deleidi, Matteo, 2022. "Output determination and autonomous demand multipliers: An empirical investigation for the US economy," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    7. José A. Pérez‐Montiel & Carles Manera, 2022. "Is autonomous demand really autonomous in the United States? An asymmetric frequency‐domain Granger causality approach," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 78-92, February.
    8. Eckhard Hein & Valeria Jimenez, 2022. "The macroeconomic implications of zero growth: a post-Keynesian approach," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 19(1), pages 41-60, April.
    9. Robert A Blecker & Michael Cauvel & Y K Kim, 2022. "Systems estimation of a structural model of distribution and demand in the US economy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 46(2), pages 391-420.
    10. Peter Skott & Júlio Fernando Costa Santos & José Luís da Costa Oreiro, 2022. "Supermultipliers, ‘endogenous autonomous demand’ and functional finance," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 220-244, February.
    11. Santiago José Gahn & Alejandro González, 2022. "On the empirical content of the convergence debate: Cross‐country evidence on growth and capacity utilisation," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 825-855, July.
    12. Di Bucchianico, Stefano, 2021. "Inequality, household debt, ageing and bubbles: A model of demand-side Secular Stagnation," IPE Working Papers 160/2021, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute for International Political Economy (IPE).
    13. Stephen Thompson, 2022. "“The total movement of this disorder is its order”: Investment and utilization dynamics in long‐run disequilibrium," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(2), pages 638-682, May.
    14. Codrina Rada, Marcio Santetti, Ansel Schiavone, Rudiger von Arnim, 2021. "Post-Keynesian vignettes on secular stagnation:From labor suppression to natural growth," Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, University of Utah 2021_05, University of Utah, Department of Economics.
    15. Guilherme Spinato Morlin & Nikolas Passos & Riccardo Pariboni, 2021. "Growth theory and the growth model perspective: Insights from the supermultiplier," Department of Economics University of Siena 869, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    16. Mariolis Theodore & Konstantakis Konstantinos N. & Michaelides Panayotis G. & Tsionas Efthymios G., 2019. "A non-linear Keynesian Goodwin-type endogenous model of the cycle: Bayesian evidence for the USA," Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, De Gruyter, vol. 23(1), pages 1-16, February.
    17. Rada, Codrina & Tavani, Daniele & von Arnim, Rudiger & Zamparelli, Luca, 2023. "Classical and Keynesian models of inequality and stagnation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 442-461.
    18. Araujo, Ricardo Azevedo & Dávila-Fernández, Marwil J. & Moreira, Helmar Nunes, 2019. "Some new insights on the empirics of Goodwin's growth-cycle model," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 42-54.
    19. Pedrosa, Ítalo & Brochier, Lídia & Freitas, Fabio, 2023. "Debt hierarchy: Autonomous demand composition, growth and indebtedness in a Supermultiplier model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    20. Allain, Olivier, 2022. "A supermultiplier model with two non-capacity-generating semi-autonomous demand components," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 91-103.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cyclical growth; Residential investment; Labor share of income. JEL Classification: E12; E22; E24; E25; E32;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • E12 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - Keynes; Keynesian; Post-Keynesian; Modern Monetary Theory
    • E22 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Investment; Capital; Intangible Capital; Capacity
    • E24 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Employment; Unemployment; Wages; Intergenerational Income Distribution; Aggregate Human Capital; Aggregate Labor Productivity
    • E25 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Aggregate Factor Income Distribution
    • E32 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles - - - Business Fluctuations; Cycles

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uta:papers:2022_04. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deuutus.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.