Matching Models Under Scrutiny : Understanding the Shimer Puzzle
Two papers have recently questioned the quantitative consistency of the search and matching models. Shimer (2005) has argued that a text-book matching model is unable to explain the cyclical variation of unemployment and vacancies in the U.S. economy. Costain and Reiter (2007) have found the existence of a trade-off in the modelâ€™s performance : any attempt to change the calibrated values in order to amend such business cycle inability would jeopardize the modelâ€™s predictions about the impact of unemployment benefits on the hazard rate. In surveying the literature originated in these findings, I distinguish three different avenues that have been followed to corret the model : change in wage formation, change in the calibration, changes in the model specification. The last approach seems to reach the best results both from a business cycle and from a microeconomic viewpoint.
|Date of creation:||01 Apr 2008|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Place Montesquieu 3, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve (Belgium)|
Fax: +32 10473945
Web page: http://www.uclouvain.be/econ
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ctl:louvec:2008009. 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: (Anne DAVISTER-LOGIST)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.