Some Intranational Evidence On Output-Inflation Trade-Offs
In a seminal paper, Lucas (1973) provided the theoretical relationship between aggregate demand and real output based on relative price confusion at the individual market level. Ball, Mankiw, and Romer (BMR, 1988) derive the same relation using a New Keynesian framework. Even though both theories predict a positive relationship between nominal shocks and cyclical movements in real output, they are distinguished by two notable differences. First, according to New Keynesian theory, nominal shocks have a smaller effect on real output for high inflation countries since prices are adjusted more frequently. Lucas' model has no implication for the level of inflation. Second, according to New Keynesian theory, a higher variance of relative prices, and hence an increase in uncertainty, will lead to a smaller effect of nominal shocks on real output since prices are set for shorter periods and adjusted more frequently. Lucas' model, however, makes the exact opposite prediction since a high variance of relative prices leads to more confusion in the market level equilibrium. By emphasizing the first implication of the New Keynesian theory, BMR obtain strong evidence supporting their model using international data. ; In this paper we concentrate on the second difference between the New Keynesian theory and Lucas' model which, we believe, distinguishes one from the other more clearly. We derive the individual market level equilibrium relationship as well as the aggregate level one for the Lucas model. We demonstrate, similarly to BMR, that both the Lucas model and New Keynesian models make similar predictions for the response between nominal and real variables, even at the disaggregate level. ; We estimate, using cross-sectional data for the U.S., the crucial parameters of the relationship between aggregate nominal demand shocks and real output. The data we use to estimate the market level model are nominal and real output, and inflation for 50 states plus the District of Columbia
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
Volume (Year): 3 (1999)
Issue (Month): 02 (June)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://journals.cambridge.org/jid_MDY
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:macdyn:v:3:y:1999:i:02:p:187-203_01. 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: (Keith Waters)
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.