IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fip/fedker/y2009iqivp5-42nv.94no.4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is the Great Moderation over? an empirical analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Todd E. Clark

Abstract

The economy of the United States was markedly less volatile in the past two to three decades than in prior periods. The nation enjoyed long economic expansions in each of the last three decades, interrupted by recessions in 1990-91 and 2001 that were mild by historical standards. While it has proven difficult to conclusively pinpoint the causes of the reduced volatility, candidates include structural changes in the economy, better monetary policy, and smaller shocks (good luck). Many economists and policymakers came to view lower volatility--the Great Moderation--as likely to be permanent. ; More recently, the severity of the recession that started in late 2007 has led some observers to conclude the Great Moderation is over. The recession produced declines in economic activity steeper than in the sharp recessions of the 1950s, 1970s, and early 1980s. ; However, the occurrence of a sharp recession does not necessarily mean variability has returned to pre-Great Moderation levels or that the Great Moderation is over. For example, the recession may have produced a more modest rise in volatility that could be temporary. Whether any rise in volatility is more likely temporary than permanent will depend on the cause of the rise in volatility. An increase in volatility due to structural changes in the economy or monetary policy might be permanent. But an increase in volatility driven by larger shocks might prove temporary. ; Clark conducts a detailed statistical analysis of the putative rise in volatility and its sources to assess whether the Great Moderation is over. He concludes that, over time, macroeconomic volatility will likely undergo occasional shifts between high and low levels, with low volatility the norm.

Suggested Citation

  • Todd E. Clark, 2009. "Is the Great Moderation over? an empirical analysis," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, vol. 94(Q IV), pages 5-42.
  • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedker:y:2009:i:qiv:p:5-42:n:v.94no.4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.kansascityfed.org/PUBLICAT/ECONREV/pdf/09q4Clark.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Domenico Giannone & Michele Lenza & Lucrezia Reichlin, 2008. "Explaining The Great Moderation: It Is Not The Shocks," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 6(2-3), pages 621-633, 04-05.
    2. Christiano, Lawrence J & Eichenbaum, Martin & Evans, Charles, 1996. "The Effects of Monetary Policy Shocks: Evidence from the Flow of Funds," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(1), pages 16-34, February.
    3. James D. Hamilton, 2009. "Causes and Consequences of the Oil Shock of 2007-08," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 40(1 (Spring), pages 215-283.
    4. Stephen G Cecchetti & Alfonso Flores-Lagunes & Stefan Krause, 2005. "Assessing the Sources of Changes in the Volatility of Real Growth," RBA Annual Conference Volume (Discontinued), in: Christopher Kent & David Norman (ed.),The Changing Nature of the Business Cycle, Reserve Bank of Australia.
    5. Dynan, Karen E. & Elmendorf, Douglas W. & Sichel, Daniel E., 2006. "Can financial innovation help to explain the reduced volatility of economic activity?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 123-150, January.
    6. Thomas A. Lubik & Frank Schorfheide, 2004. "Testing for Indeterminacy: An Application to U.S. Monetary Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(1), pages 190-217, March.
    7. Fabio Canova, 2009. "What Explains The Great Moderation in the U.S.? A Structural Analysis," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 7(4), pages 697-721, June.
    8. James H. Stock & Mark W. Watson, 2003. "Has the Business Cycle Changed and Why?," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2002, Volume 17, pages 159-230, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Lutz Kilian, 2008. "The Economic Effects of Energy Price Shocks," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 46(4), pages 871-909, December.
    10. Giorgio E. Primiceri, 2005. "Time Varying Structural Vector Autoregressions and Monetary Policy," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 72(3), pages 821-852.
    11. Margaret M. McConnell & Gabriel Perez-Quiros, 2000. "Output fluctuations in the United States: what has changed since the early 1980s?," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue Mar.
    12. repec:fip:fedgsq:y:2008:x:72 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Giorgio Canarella & WenShwo Fang & Stephen M. Miller & Stephen K. Pollard, 2008. "Is the Great Moderation Ending? UK and US Evidence," Working Papers 0801, University of Nevada, Las Vegas , Department of Economics.
    14. John B. Taylor, 2009. "The Financial Crisis and the Policy Responses: An Empirical Analysis of What Went Wrong," NBER Working Papers 14631, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Ben S. Bernanke, 2008. "Current economic and financial conditions: a speech at the National Association for Business Economics 50th Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C., October 7, 2008," Speech 424, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    16. Stephan Danninger & Irina Tytell & Ravi Balakrishnan & Selim Elekdag, 2009. "The Transmission of Financial Stress from Advanced to Emerging Economies," IMF Working Papers 09/133, International Monetary Fund.
    17. Mattias Villani, 2009. "Steady-state priors for vector autoregressions," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 630-650.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    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:fip:fedker:y:2009:i:qiv:p:5-42:n:v.94no.4. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/frbkcus.html .

    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.