The Shimer puzzle and the correct identification of productivity shocks
Shimer (2005a) claims that the Mortensen-Pissarides search model of unemployment lacks an ampiflication mechanism because it cannot generate the observed business cycle fluctuations in unemployment given labor productivity shocks of plausible magnitude. This paper argues that part of the problem lies with the correct identification of productivity shocks. Because of the endogeneity of measured labor productivity, filtering out the trend component as in Shimer (2005a) may not correctly identify the shocks driving unemployment. Using a New- Keynesian framework with search unemployment, this paper estimates that close to 50% of the Shimer puzzle is due to the misidentification of productivity shocks. In addition, I show that extending the search model with an aggregate demand side remarkably improves the ability of the standard search model to match the moments of key labor market variables.
|Date of creation:||Aug 2007|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +44 (020) 7405 7686
Web page: http://www.lse.ac.uk/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Mortensen, Dale T & Pissarides, Christopher A, 1994.
"Job Creation and Job Destruction in the Theory of Unemployment,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 397-415, July.
- Dale T. Mortensen & Christopher A. Pissarides, 1993. "Job Creation and Job Destruction in the Theory of Unemployment," CEP Discussion Papers dp0110, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
- Robert Shimer, 2005. "The Cyclical Behavior of Equilibrium Unemployment and Vacancies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 25-49, March.
- Robert E. Hall, 2005. "Employment Fluctuations with Equilibrium Wage Stickiness," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 50-65, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:19691. 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: (LSERO Manager)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.