IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jeicoo/v18y2023i4d10.1007_s11403-023-00390-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multiplicity and not necessarily heterogeneity: implications for the long-run degree of capacity utilization

Author

Listed:
  • Lorenzo Domenico

    (Catholic University of the Sacred Heart)

Abstract

The paper discusses the implications of disaggregation within the post-Keynesian debate on the long-run convergence of the degree of capacity utilization toward the normal one. The debate is related to the emergence of Harrodian instability inside multiplier–accelerator models and has been characterized by two “opposite” positions: the supermultiplier (SM) and the neo-Kaleckian approaches. These approaches solve the instability issue differently, but both share the postulate that an equilibrium position is such only if the desired state of firms is realized. In the long run, the economy converges toward a fully adjusted position where the realized degree of capacity utilization is equal to the normal/desired one. In this paper, we develop an Agent Based—Stock Flow Consistent version of the SM model showing that once multiplier–accelerator mechanisms are explicitly reproduced in a multi-firm economy, the accumulation process can be stable without requiring any convergence between the actual and normal rate. Conversely, the modeled economy displays two emergent properties: the fluctuations of the business cycle arise endogenously, and the long-run aggregate degree of capacity utilization persistently fluctuates around a level lower than the normal one. To this extent, the quasi-steady state corresponds to a situation where the desired state of agents is not realized and single elements are not in equilibrium, but the aggregate is. Finally, we compare outcomes produced from the model according to different scenarios on firms' heterogeneity and network symmetries.

Suggested Citation

  • Lorenzo Domenico, 2023. "Multiplicity and not necessarily heterogeneity: implications for the long-run degree of capacity utilization," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 18(4), pages 835-877, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jeicoo:v:18:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s11403-023-00390-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11403-023-00390-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11403-023-00390-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11403-023-00390-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Daniele Girardi & Riccardo Pariboni, 2019. "Normal utilization as the adjusting variable in Neo‐Kaleckian growth models: A critique," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 341-358, May.
    2. Marc Lavoie & Gabriel Rodriguez & Mario Seccareccia, 2004. "Similitudes and Discrepancies in Post-Keynesian and Marxist Theories of Investment: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 127-149.
    3. Michalis Nikiforos, 2013. "The (Normal) Rate of Capacity Utilization at the Firm Level," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 513-538, July.
    4. Dosi, G. & Pereira, M.C. & Roventini, A. & Virgillito, M.E., 2019. "What if supply-side policies are not enough? The perverse interaction of flexibility and austerity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 360-388.
    5. Jacob Grazzini & Matteo Richiardi & Lisa Sella, 2012. "Indirect estimation of agent-based models.An application to a simple diffusion model," LABORatorio R. Revelli Working Papers Series 118, LABORatorio R. Revelli, Centre for Employment Studies.
    6. Botta, Alberto & Caverzasi, Eugenio & Russo, Alberto & Gallegati, Mauro & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 2021. "Inequality and finance in a rent economy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 998-1029.
    7. Caiani, Alessandro & Russo, Alberto & Gallegati, Mauro, 2020. "Are Higher Wages Good For Business? An Assessment Under Alternative Innovation And Investment Scenarios," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(1), pages 191-230, January.
    8. Peter Skott, 2012. "Theoretical And Empirical Shortcomings Of The Kaleckian Investment Function," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 109-138, February.
    9. Enrico Sergio Levrero, 2013. "Marx on Absolute and Relative Wages and the Modern Theory of Distribution," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 91-116, January.
    10. Bassi, Federico & Lang, Dany, 2016. "Investment hysteresis and potential output: A post-Keynesian–Kaleckian agent-based approach," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 52(PA), pages 35-49.
    11. Michalis Nikiforos, 2016. "On the ‘utilisation controversy’: a theoretical and empirical discussion of the Kaleckian model of growth and distribution," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 40(2), pages 437-467.
    12. Caiani, Alessandro & Godin, Antoine & Caverzasi, Eugenio & Gallegati, Mauro & Kinsella, Stephen & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 2016. "Agent based-stock flow consistent macroeconomics: Towards a benchmark model," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 375-408.
    13. Stock, James H. & Watson, Mark W., 1999. "Business cycle fluctuations in us macroeconomic time series," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 3-64, Elsevier.
    14. Passarella, Marco, 2012. "A simplified stock-flow consistent dynamic model of the systemic financial fragility in the ‘New Capitalism’," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(3), pages 570-582.
    15. 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.
    16. Alessandro Caiani & Alberto Russo & Mauro Gallegati, 2019. "Does inequality hamper innovation and growth? An AB-SFC analysis," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 177-228, March.
    17. Sergio Cesaratto, 2015. "Neo-Kaleckian and Sraffian Controversies on the Theory of Accumulation," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(2), pages 154-182, April.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Mark Setterfield & Joana David Avritzer, 2020. "Hysteresis in the normal rate of capacity utilization: A behavioral explanation," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(4), pages 898-919, November.
    21. Grazzini, Jakob & Richiardi, Matteo, 2015. "Estimation of ergodic agent-based models by simulated minimum distance," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 148-165.
    22. Eckhard Hein & Marc Lavoie & Till van Treeck, 2012. "Harrodian Instability And The ‘Normal Rate’ Of Capacity Utilization In Kaleckian Models Of Distribution And Growth—A Survey," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 139-169, February.
    23. 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.
    24. Peter Skott, 2017. "Autonomous Demand and the Harrodian Criticisms of the Kaleckian Model," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(1), pages 185-193, February.
    25. Teglio, Andrea, 2020. "On the typicality of the representative agent," MPRA Paper 105407, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    26. Di Bucchianico, Stefano, 2020. "Discussing Secular Stagnation: A case for freeing good ideas from theoretical constraints?," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 288-297.
    27. Matteo Deleidi & Mariana Mazzucato, 2019. "Putting Austerity to Bed: Technical Progress, Aggregate Demand and the Supermultiplier," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 315-335, July.
    28. Sergio Cesaratto & Stefano di Bucchianico, 2020. "Endogenous money and the theory of long-period effective demand," Bulletin of Political Economy, Bulletin of Political Economy, vol. 14(1), pages 1-38, June.
    29. Assenza, Tiziana & Delli Gatti, Domenico & Grazzini, Jakob, 2015. "Emergent dynamics of a macroeconomic agent based model with capital and credit," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 5-28.
    30. Anwar Shaikh, 2009. "Economic Policy In A Growth Context: A Classical Synthesis Of Keynes And Harrod," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 455-494, July.
    31. Gilli, M. & Winker, P., 2003. "A global optimization heuristic for estimating agent based models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 299-312, March.
    32. Dutt, Amitava Krishna, 1984. "Stagnation, Income Distribution and Monopoly Power," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 8(1), pages 25-40, March.
    33. 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).
    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. Lorenzo Di Domenico, 2023. "The Paradox of Profits in an AB-SFC Model," Bulletin of Political Economy, Bulletin of Political Economy, vol. 17(1), pages 47-90, June.

    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. Lorenzo Di Domenico, 2021. "Multiplicity and not necessarily heterogeneity: implications for the long-run degree of capacity utilization," Working Papers PKWP2116, Post Keynesian Economics Society (PKES).
    2. 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.
    3. Pariboni, Riccardo & Girardi, Daniele, 2018. "A(nother) Note on the Inconsistency of Neo-Kaleckian Growth Models," Centro Sraffa Working Papers CSWP31, Centro di Ricerche e Documentazione "Piero Sraffa".
    4. Daniele Girardi & Riccardo Pariboni, 2019. "Normal utilization as the adjusting variable in Neo‐Kaleckian growth models: A critique," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 341-358, May.
    5. Eckhard Hein, 2019. "Harrodian instability in Kaleckian models and Steindlian solutions," FMM Working Paper 46-2019, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
    6. Gahn, Santiago José, 2021. "On the adjustment of capacity utilisation to aggregate demand: Revisiting an old Sraffian critique to the Neo-Kaleckian model," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 325-360.
    7. Eckhard Hein & Ryan Woodgate, 2021. "Stability issues in Kaleckian models driven by autonomous demand growth—Harrodian instability and debt dynamics," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 388-404, May.
    8. Guilherme Spinato Morlin & Nikolas Passos & Riccardo Pariboni, 2024. "Growth Theory and the Growth Model Perspective: Insights from the Supermultiplier," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(3), pages 1130-1155, July.
    9. Mark Setterfield & Joana David Avritzer, 2020. "Hysteresis in the normal rate of capacity utilization: A behavioral explanation," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(4), pages 898-919, November.
    10. 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.
    11. Ettore Gallo & Maria Cristina Barbieri Góes, 2023. "Investment, autonomous demand and long-run capacity utilization: an empirical test for the Euro Area," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 40(1), pages 225-255, April.
    12. Daniele Girardi & Riccardo Pariboni, 2020. "Autonomous demand and the investment share," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 8(3), pages 428-453, July.
    13. 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).
    14. Peter Skott, 2019. "Autonomous demand, Harrodian instability and the supply side," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 233-246, May.
    15. Michaelis Nikiforos, 2018. "Distribution-led growth through methodological lenses," FMM Working Paper 24-2018, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
    16. 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).
    17. Christian Schoder, 2012. "Effective demand, exogenous normal utilization and endogenous capacity in the long run. Evidence from a CVAR analysis for the US," IMK Working Paper 103-2012, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
    18. 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.
    19. Bassi, Federico & Bauermann, Tom & Lang, Dany & Setterfield, Mark, 2022. "Is capacity utilization variable in the long run? An agent-based sectoral approach to modeling hysteresis in the normal rate of capacity utilization," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 196-212.
    20. Christian Schoder, 2014. "Effective Demand, Exogenous Normal Utilization and Endogenous Capacity in the Long Run: Evidence from a Cointegrated Vector Autoregression Analysis for the USA," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(2), pages 298-320, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Out-of-equilibrium; Capacity utilization; Business cycle; Agent-based modeling; Stock-flow consistent models;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B50 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - General
    • E03 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General - - - Behavioral Macroeconomics
    • 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
    • E32 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles - - - Business Fluctuations; Cycles

    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:spr:jeicoo:v:18:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s11403-023-00390-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.