IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

What do `residuals' from first-order conditions reveal about DGE models?

  • Johri, Alok
  • Letendre, Marc-Andre

The first-order condition (FOC) associated with labour in many dynamic general equilibrium models involves only current period variables. Residuals constructed from this FOC are inconsistent with aggregate US data in that they are very large and highly persistent. The persistence suggests that models which introduce dynamic terms in the labour FOC may be more consistent with the data. Three such models (one with learning by doing, one with habit formation, and one with labour adjustment costs) confirm that they can reduce the persistence in the residuals making the models more consistent with the joint dynamics of consumption, output and hours.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

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.

File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V85-4MCWM9K-1/2/95ebeb5170f7be376dbe22c543153ddc
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control.

Volume (Year): 31 (2007)
Issue (Month): 8 (August)
Pages: 2744-2773

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:dyncon:v:31:y:2007:i:8:p:2744-2773
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jedc

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

as in new window
  1. Jordi Galí & Mark Gertler & J. David López-Salido, 2005. "Markups, gaps and the welfare costs of business fluctuations," Economics Working Papers 836, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
  2. Andrew B. Abel, . "Asset Prices Under Habit Formation and Catching Up With the Jones," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 01-90, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
  3. Cochrane, John H. & Campbell, John, 1999. "By Force of Habit: A Consumption-Based Explanation of Aggregate Stock Market Behavior," Scholarly Articles 3119444, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  4. Russell Cooper & Jonathan L. Willis, 2004. "A Comment on the Economics of Labor Adjustment: Mind the Gap," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1223-1237, September.
  5. Richard Rogerson, 2010. "Indivisible Labor, Lotteries and Equilibrium," Levine's Working Paper Archive 250, David K. Levine.
  6. Lawrence J. Christiano & Wouter J. Den Haan, 1995. "Small Sample Properties of GMM for Business Cycle Analysis," NBER Technical Working Papers 0177, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. repec:dgr:kubcen:199554 is not listed on IDEAS
  8. Yongsung Chang & Joao Gomes & Frank Schorfheide, 2002. "Learning by Doing as a Propagation Mechanism," Macroeconomics 0204002, EconWPA.
  9. Hansen, Gary D., 1985. "Indivisible labor and the business cycle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 309-327, November.
  10. Robert G. King & Sergio T. Rebelo, 2000. "Resuscitating Real Business Cycles," RCER Working Papers 467, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
  11. Francis X. Diebold & Lee E. Ohanian & Jeremy Berkowitz, 1998. "Dynamic equilibrium economies: a framework for comparing models and data," Staff Report 243, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  12. Joseph G. Altonji & Lewis M. Segal, 1994. "Small Sample Bias in GMM Estimation of Covariance Structures," NBER Technical Working Papers 0156, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  13. Kocherlakota, Narayana R., 1990. "On tests of representative consumer asset pricing models," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 285-304, October.
  14. Andrews, Donald W K & Monahan, J Christopher, 1992. "An Improved Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 953-66, July.
  15. Timothy Cogley & James M. Nason, 1993. "Output dynamics in real business cycle models," Working Papers in Applied Economic Theory 93-10, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
  16. Cooper, Russell & Johri, Alok, 2002. "Learning-by-doing and aggregate fluctuations," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(8), pages 1539-1566, November.
  17. Robert E. Hall, 1997. "Macroeconomic Fluctuations and the Allocation of Time," NBER Working Papers 5933, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  18. Constantinides, George M, 1990. "Habit Formation: A Resolution of the Equity Premium Puzzle," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(3), pages 519-43, June.
  19. Donald W.K. Andrews, 1997. "Consistent Moment Selection Procedures for Generalized Method of Moments Estimation," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1146R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  20. Mark W. Watson, 1991. "Measures of Fit for Calibrated Models," NBER Technical Working Papers 0102, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  21. Chow, Gregory C. & Kwan, Yum K., 1998. "How the basic RBC model fails to explain US time series," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 301-318, April.
  22. Andrews, Donald W K, 1991. "Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 817-58, May.
  23. Martin Boileau & Michel Normandin, 1997. "Aggregate Employment, Real Business Cycles, and Superior Information," Cahiers de recherche CREFE / CREFE Working Papers 55, CREFE, Université du Québec à Montréal.
  24. Parkin, M., 1988. "A Method For Determining Whether Parameters In Aggregative Models Are Structural," UWO Department of Economics Working Papers 8803, University of Western Ontario, Department of Economics.
  25. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum, 1990. "Current real business cycle theories and aggregate labor market fluctuations," Working Paper Series, Macroeconomic Issues 90, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
  26. Craig Burnside & Martin Eichenbaum, 1994. "Factor Hoarding and the Propagation of Business Cycles Shocks," NBER Working Papers 4675, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  27. Dean R. Hyslop & Guido W. Imbens, 2000. "Bias from Classical and Other Forms of Measurement Error," NBER Technical Working Papers 0257, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  28. Sumru Altug, 1986. "Time to build and aggregate fluctuations: some new evidence," Working Papers 277, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  29. John Y. Campbell & John Cochrane, 1999. "Force of Habit: A Consumption-Based Explanation of Aggregate Stock Market Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(2), pages 205-251, April.
  30. Russell Cooper & Alok Johri, 1996. "Dynamic Complementarities: A Quantitative Analysis," NBER Working Papers 5691, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  31. Wen, Yi, 1998. "Can a real business cycle model pass the Watson test?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 185-203, June.
  32. Gary D. Hansen & Randall Wright, 1992. "The labor market in real business cycle theory," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, issue Spr, pages 2-12.
  33. McGrattan, Ellen R & Rogerson, Richard & Wright, Randall, 1997. "An Equilibrium Model of the Business Cycle with Household Production and Fiscal Policy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 38(2), pages 267-90, May.
  34. Michele Boldrin & Lawrence J. Christiano & Jonas D. M. Fisher, 2000. "Habit persistence, asset returns and the business cycle," Staff Report 280, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  35. Martin Lettau & Harald Uhlig, 2000. "Can Habit Formation be Reconciled with Business Cycle Facts?," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 3(1), pages 79-99, January.
  36. Burnside, Craig & Eichenbaum, Martin & Rebelo, Sergio, 1993. "Labor Hoarding and the Business Cycle," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(2), pages 245-73, April.
  37. Smith, David C., 1999. "Finite sample properties of tests of the Epstein-Zin asset pricing model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 113-148, November.
  38. N. Gregory Mankiw & Julio J. Rotemberg & Lawrence H. Summers, 1982. "Intertemporal Substitution in Macroeconomics," NBER Working Papers 0898, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  39. Eichenbaum, Martin S & Hansen, Lars Peter & Singleton, Kenneth J, 1988. "A Time Series Analysis of Representative Agent Models of Consumption and Leisure Choice under Uncertainty," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 103(1), pages 51-78, February.
  40. David N. DeJong & Beth F. Ingram & Charles H. Whiteman, 2000. "Keynesian impulses versus Solow residuals: identifying sources of business cycle fluctuations," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(3), pages 311-329.
  41. Russell Cooper & Jonathan L. Willis, 2004. "A Comment on the Economics of Labor Adjustment: Mind the Gap: Rejoinder," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1245-1247, September.
  42. Hansen, Lars Peter & Singleton, Kenneth J, 1982. "Generalized Instrumental Variables Estimation of Nonlinear Rational Expectations Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1269-86, September.
  43. Gregory, Allan W & Smith, Gregor W, 1991. "Calibration as Testing: Inference in Simulated Macroeconomic Models," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 9(3), pages 297-303, July.
  44. Frank Schorfheide, 2000. "Loss function-based evaluation of DSGE models," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(6), pages 645-670.
  45. Ricardo J. Caballero & Eduardo M.R.A. Engel, 2004. "A Comment on the Economics of Labor Adjustment: Mind the Gap: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1238-1244, September.
  46. Hansen, Lars Peter & Heaton, John & Yaron, Amir, 1996. "Finite-Sample Properties of Some Alternative GMM Estimators," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 14(3), pages 262-80, July.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:dyncon:v:31:y:2007:i:8:p:2744-2773. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.