IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/moneco/v56y2009i4p560-569.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What do technology shocks tell us about the New Keynesian paradigm?

Author

Listed:
  • Dupor, Bill
  • Han, Jing
  • Tsai, Yi-Chan

Abstract

Researchers have used unanticipated changes to monetary policy to identify preference and technology parameters of macroeconomic models. This paper uses changes in technology to identify the same set of parameters. Estimates based on technology shocks differ substantially from those based on monetary policy shocks. In the post-World War II United States, a positive technology shock reduces inflation and increases hours worked, significantly and rapidly in both cases. Relative to policy shock identification, technology shock identification implies: (i) long duration durability in preferences instead of short duration habit, (ii) built-in inflation inertia disappears and price flexibility increases. In response to technological improvement, consumption durability increases hours worked because households temporarily increase labor supply to accumulate durables towards a new, higher steady state level. Limited nominal rigidities allow inflation to fall because firms are able to immediately cut prices when households' labor supply increases. Finally, we consider alternative data constructions and econometric specifications; we find that (i) and/or (ii) hold in nearly every case.

Suggested Citation

  • Dupor, Bill & Han, Jing & Tsai, Yi-Chan, 2009. "What do technology shocks tell us about the New Keynesian paradigm?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 560-569, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:moneco:v:56:y:2009:i:4:p:560-569
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304-3932(09)00047-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Robert Vigfusson, 2006. "Alternative Procedures for Estimating Vector Autoregressions Identified with Long-Run Restrictions," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(2-3), pages 475-483, 04-05.
    2. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Mirko Wiederholt, 2015. "Business Cycle Dynamics under Rational Inattention," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 82(4), pages 1502-1532.
    3. N. Gregory Mankiw & Ricardo Reis, 2002. "Sticky Information versus Sticky Prices: A Proposal to Replace the New Keynesian Phillips Curve," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 117(4), pages 1295-1328.
    4. Paciello, Luigi, 2007. "The Response of Prices to Technology and Monetary Policy Shocks under Rational Inattention," MPRA Paper 5763, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Nason, James M & Cogley, Timothy, 1994. "Testing the Implications of Long-Run Neutrality for Monetary Business Cycle Models," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(S), pages 37-70, Suppl. De.
    6. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Charles L. Evans, 2005. "Nominal Rigidities and the Dynamic Effects of a Shock to Monetary Policy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(1), pages 1-45, February.
    7. Jordi Gali, 1999. "Technology, Employment, and the Business Cycle: Do Technology Shocks Explain Aggregate Fluctuations?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 249-271, March.
    8. Christopher J. Erceg & Luca Guerrieri & Christopher Gust, 2005. "Can Long-Run Restrictions Identify Technology Shocks?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 3(6), pages 1237-1278, December.
    9. Fabio Canova & David Lopez-Salido & Claudio Michelacci, 2010. "The effects of technology shocks on hours and output: a robustness analysis," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(5), pages 755-773.
    10. Rochelle M. Edge & Thomas Laubach & John C. Williams, 2003. "The responses of wages and prices to technology shocks," Working Paper Series 2003-21, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
    11. Francis, Neville & Ramey, Valerie A., 2005. "Is the technology-driven real business cycle hypothesis dead? Shocks and aggregate fluctuations revisited," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(8), pages 1379-1399, November.
    12. Gali, Jordi & Gertler, Mark, 1999. "Inflation dynamics: A structural econometric analysis," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 195-222, October.
    13. Jean Boivin & Marc P. Giannoni, 2006. "Has Monetary Policy Become More Effective?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(3), pages 445-462, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Takashi Kano & James M. Nason, 2014. "Business Cycle Implications of Internal Consumption Habit for New Keynesian Models," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 46(2-3), pages 519-544, March.
    2. Gubler, Matthias & Hertweck, Matthias S., 2013. "Commodity price shocks and the business cycle: Structural evidence for the U.S," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 324-352.
    3. Guerron-Quintana, Pablo & Inoue, Atsushi & Kilian, Lutz, 2017. "Impulse response matching estimators for DSGE models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 196(1), pages 144-155.
    4. Danthine, Jean-Pierre & Kurmann, André, 2010. "The business cycle implications of reciprocity in labor relations," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(7), pages 837-850, October.
    5. Hall, Alastair R. & Inoue, Atsushi & Nason, James M. & Rossi, Barbara, 2012. "Information criteria for impulse response function matching estimation of DSGE models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 170(2), pages 499-518.
    6. Slobodyan, Sergey & Wouters, Raf, 2012. "Learning in an estimated medium-scale DSGE model," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 26-46.
    7. repec:eee:ecmode:v:70:y:2018:i:c:p:511-524 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Jouchi Nakajima & Nao Sudo & Takayuki Tsuruga, 2010. "How Well Do the Sticky Price Models Explain the Disaggregated Price Responses to Aggregate Technology and Monetary Policy Shocks?," Discussion papers e-10-007, Graduate School of Economics Project Center, Kyoto University.
    9. Poghosyan, Karen & Boldea, Otilia, 2013. "Structural versus matching estimation: Transmission mechanisms in Armenia," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 136-148.
    10. Luigi Paciello, 2012. "Monetary Policy and Price Responsiveness to Aggregate Shocks under Rational Inattention," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 44(7), pages 1375-1399, October.
    11. Olivier Coibion & Yuriy Gorodnichenko, 2011. "Strategic Interaction among Heterogeneous Price-Setters in an Estimated DSGE Model," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(3), pages 920-940, August.
    12. Olivier Coibion & Yuriy Gorodnichenko, 2012. "What Can Survey Forecasts Tell Us about Information Rigidities?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 120(1), pages 116-159.
    13. Julia K. Thomas & Aubhik Khan, 2008. "(S,s) inventories, state-dependent prices and the propagation of nominal shocks," 2008 Meeting Papers 947, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    14. Pedro Garcia Duarte, 2012. "Not Going Away? Microfoundations in the Making of a New Consensus in Macroeconomics," Chapters,in: Microfoundations Reconsidered, chapter 6 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Christopher Malikane & Tshepo Mokoka, 2014. "The new Keynesian Phillips curve: endogeneity and misspecification," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(25), pages 3082-3089, September.
    16. Christiano, Lawrence & Trabandt, Mathias & Walentin, Karl, 2010. "Involuntary unemployment and the business cycle," Working Paper Series 1202, European Central Bank.
    17. Poghosyan, K., 2012. "Structural and reduced-form modeling and forecasting with application to Armenia," Other publications TiSEM ad1a24c3-15e6-4f04-b338-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. Christiano, Lawrence J. & Trabandt, Mathias & Walentin, Karl, 2010. "DSGE Models for Monetary Policy Analysis," Handbook of Monetary Economics,in: Benjamin M. Friedman & Michael Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Monetary Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 7, pages 285-367 Elsevier.
    19. Ricardo Reis, 2009. "Optimal Monetary Policy Rules in an Estimated Sticky-Information Model," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 1-28, July.
    20. Luigi Paciello, 2011. "Does Inflation Adjust Faster to Aggregate Technology Shocks than to Monetary Policy Shocks?," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(8), pages 1663-1684, December.
    21. Carrillo, Julio A., 2012. "How well does sticky information explain the dynamics of inflation, output, and real wages?," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 830-850.
    22. Chen, Nan-Kuang & Cheng, Han-Liang & Mao, Ching-Sheng, 2012. "House price, mortgage premium, and business fluctuations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 1388-1398.
    23. Paciello, Luigi, 2009. "Monetary Policy Activism and Price Responsiveness to Aggregate Shocks under Rational Inattention," MPRA Paper 16407, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    24. Francisco Blasques & Artem Duplinskiy, 2015. "Penalized Indirect Inference," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 15-009/III, Tinbergen Institute.
    25. Francisco RUGE-MURCIA, 2014. "Indirect Inference Estimation of Nonlinear Dynamic General Equilibrium Models : With an Application to Asset Pricing under Skewness Risk," Cahiers de recherche 15-2014, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.

    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:eee:moneco:v:56:y:2009:i:4:p:560-569. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505566 .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.