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

What Does A Technology Shock Do? A VAR Analysis with Model-based Sign Restrictions

  • Dedola, Luca
  • Neri, Stefano

This Paper estimates the effects of technology shocks in VAR models of the United States, Japan and Germany, identified imposing restrictions on the sign of impulse responses. These restrictions are motivated with priors on the parameters of a class of DSGE models with both real and nominal frictions. Estimated technology shocks lead to substantial and persistent increases in labour productivity, real wages, consumption, investment and output. In contrast with most results in the VAR literature, hours worked are much more likely to increase, displaying a hump-shaped pattern. These results are shown to stem primarily from the identification strategy proposed in the Paper, which substitutes theoretical restrictions for the atheoretical assumptions on the time series properties of the data, that are the hallmark of long-run restrictions.

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.cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=4537
Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org

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.

Paper provided by C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 4537.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Sep 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:4537
Contact details of provider: Postal: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ.
Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820

Order Information: Email:


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. Jesus Fernandez-Villaverde & Juan F. Rubio-Ramirez, 2004. "Estimating Dynamic Equilibrium Economies: Linear versus Nonlinear Likelihood," PIER Working Paper Archive 04-005, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
  2. Marvin J. Barth III & Valerie A. Ramey, 2000. "The Cost Channel of Monetary Transmission," NBER Working Papers 7675, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Dedola, Luca & Neri, Stefano, 2007. "What does a technology shock do? A VAR analysis with model-based sign restrictions," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 512-549, March.
  4. John Shea, 1998. "What Do Technology Shocks Do?," NBER Working Papers 6632, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Ben S. Bernanke & Ilian Mihov, 1998. "Measuring Monetary Policy," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 113(3), pages 869-902, August.
  6. Peersman, Gert & Straub, Roland, 2004. "Technology shocks and robust sign restrictions in a euro area SVAR," Working Paper Series 0373, European Central Bank.
  7. Timothy Cogley & Thomas Sargent, . "Drifts and Volatilities: Monetary Policies and Outcomes in the Post WWII US," Working Papers 2133503, Department of Economics, W. P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University.
  8. Michael Dotsey, 1999. "The importance of systematic monetary policy for economic activity," Economic Quarterly, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, issue Sum, pages 41-60.
  9. Thomas Lubik & Frank Schorfheide, 2002. "Testing for Indeterminacy:An Application to U.S. Monetary Policy," Economics Working Paper Archive 480, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics, revised Jun 2003.
  10. Jordi Gali & Pau Rabanal, 2004. "Technology Shocks and Aggregate Fluctuations: How Well Does the RBS Model Fit Postwar U.S. Data?," NBER Working Papers 10636, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  11. Marianne Baxter & Robert G. King, 1999. "Measuring Business Cycles: Approximate Band-Pass Filters For Economic Time Series," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(4), pages 575-593, November.
  12. Greenwood, J. & Hercowitz, Z. & Krusell, P., 1998. "The Role of Investment-Specific Technological Change in the Business Cycle," RCER Working Papers 449, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
  13. Susanto Basu & John Fernald & Miles Kimball, 1998. "Are technology improvements contractionary?," International Finance Discussion Papers 625, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  14. Cooley, Thomas F. & Dwyer, Mark, 1998. "Business cycle analysis without much theory A look at structural VARs," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 83(1-2), pages 57-88.
  15. 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.
  16. Jonas Fisher, 2004. "Technology Shocks Matter," Econometric Society 2004 North American Winter Meetings 14, Econometric Society.
  17. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Robert Vigfusson, 2004. "The Response of Hours to a Technology Shock: Evidence Based on Direct Measures of Technology," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(2-3), pages 381-395, 04/05.
  18. Kydland, Finn E & Prescott, Edward C, 1982. "Time to Build and Aggregate Fluctuations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(6), pages 1345-70, November.
  19. Mark Bils & Peter J. Klenow, 2004. "Some Evidence on the Importance of Sticky Prices," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(5), pages 947-985, October.
  20. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Charles Evans, 2001. "Nominal rigidities and the dynamic effects of a shock to monetary policy," Working Paper 0107, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
  21. Clarida, R. & Gali, J. & Gertler, M., 1998. "Monetary Policy Rules and Macroeconomic Stability: Evidence and some Theory," Working Papers 98-01, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
  22. 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.
  23. James H. Stock & Mark W. Watson, 2002. "Has the Business Cycle Changed and Why?," NBER Working Papers 9127, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  24. King, Robert G. & Rebelo, Sergio T., 1999. "Resuscitating real business cycles," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 14, pages 927-1007 Elsevier.
  25. Uhlig, Harald, 2005. "What are the effects of monetary policy on output? Results from an agnostic identification procedure," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 381-419, March.
  26. Jones, John Bailey, 2002. "Has fiscal policy helped stabilize the postwar U.S. economy?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 709-746, May.
  27. Christopher A. Sims & Tao Zha, 2004. "Were there regime switches in U.S. monetary policy?," Working Paper 2004-14, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
  28. Ellen McGrattan & V. V. Chari & Patrick Kehoe, 2005. "Are Structural VARs Useful Guides for Developing Business Cycle Theories?," 2005 Meeting Papers 664, Society for Economic Dynamics.
  29. Christopher Erceg & Luca Guerrieri & Christopher Gust, 2004. "Can long-run restrictions identify technology shocks?," International Finance Discussion Papers 792, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  30. Canova, Fabio, 2002. "Validating Monetary DSGE Models through VARs," CEPR Discussion Papers 3442, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  31. Phillips, P C B, 1991. "To Criticize the Critics: An Objective Bayesian Analysis of Stochastic Trends," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(4), pages 333-64, Oct.-Dec..
  32. Koop, Gary & Steel, Mark F J, 1991. "To Criticize the Critics: An Objective Bayesian Analysis of Stochastic Trends: A Comment," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(4), pages 365-70, Oct.-Dec..
  33. 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.
  34. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Robert Vigfusson, 2003. "What Happens After a Technology Shock?," NBER Working Papers 9819, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  35. V. V. Chari & Patrick J. Kehoe & Ellen R. McGrattan, 2007. "Are structural VARs with long-run restrictions useful in developing business cycle theory?," Staff Report 364, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  36. Greenwood, Jeremy & Hercowitz, Zvi & Huffman, Gregory W, 1988. "Investment, Capacity Utilization, and the Real Business Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(3), pages 402-17, June.
  37. Kydland, Finn E., 1984. "Labor-force heterogeneity and the business cycle," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 173-208, January.
  38. Jon Faust, 1998. "The robustness of identified VAR conclusions about money," International Finance Discussion Papers 610, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  39. Robert J. Vigfusson, 2004. "The delayed response to a technology shock: a flexible price explanation," International Finance Discussion Papers 810, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  40. Poirier, Dale J, 1991. "To Criticize the Critics: An Objective Bayesian Analysis of Stochastic Trends: A Comment," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(4), pages 381-86, Oct.-Dec..
  41. Galí, Jordi & Rabanal, Pau, 2004. "Technology Shocks and Aggregate Fluctuations: How Well Does the RBC Model Fit Post-War US Data?," CEPR Discussion Papers 4522, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  42. Finn E. Kydland, 1993. "Business cycles and aggregate labor-market fluctuations," Working Paper 9312, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
  43. Leamer, Edward E, 1991. "To Criticize the Critics: An Objective Bayesian Analysis of Stochastic Trends: Comment," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(4), pages 371-73, Oct.-Dec..
  44. Jonas D. M. Fisher, 2006. "The Dynamic Effects of Neutral and Investment-Specific Technology Shocks," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(3), pages 413-451, June.
  45. Fabio Canova & Gianni De Nicolo, 2000. "Monetary disturbances matter for business fluctuations in the G-7," International Finance Discussion Papers 660, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  46. Julio J. Rotemberg, 2003. "Stochastic Technical Progress, Smooth Trends, and Nearly Distinct Business Cycles," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1543-1559, December.
  47. Harald Uhlig, 2004. "Do Technology Shocks Lead to a Fall in Total Hours Worked?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(2-3), pages 361-371, 04/05.
  48. Ellen R. McGrattan, 2004. "Comment on Gali and Rabanal's "Technology shocks and aggregate fluctuations: how well does the RBC model fit postwar U.S. data?"," Staff Report 338, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
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:cpr:ceprdp:4537. 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: ()

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.