IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Stage-specific technology shocks and employment : Could we reconcile with the RBC models ?

  • Chahnez Boudaya


    (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

This paper analyses the response of labor input to technology shocks in an estimated two-stage production framework with both price and wage stickiness and stage-specific shocks to productivity. Our model features a vertical input-output structure with imperfect mobility of labors across stages. The estimation uses the maximum likelihood technique applied to the post-war US data. Our findings could easily match the standard RBC models predictions : A shock to productivity in the intermediate good production stage i) leads to an increase in both stage-specific labor and the aggregate labor and ii) explains a large proportion of the volatility of both the real GDP and the aggregate labor. Besides, regarding the output-labor correlation, the model does a very good job in matching the data.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by HAL in its series Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) with number halshs-00115791.

in new window

Date of creation: May 2006
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques 2006.43 - ISSN 1624-0340. 2006
Handle: RePEc:hal:cesptp:halshs-00115791
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server:
Contact details of provider: Web page:

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. Kydland, Finn E & Prescott, Edward C, 1982. "Time to Build and Aggregate Fluctuations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(6), pages 1345-70, November.
  2. Peter N. Ireland, 2001. "Endogenous Money or Sticky Prices?," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 499, Boston College Department of Economics.
  3. Cooley, T.F. & Hansen, G.D., 1988. "The Inflation Tax In A Real Business Cycle Model," Papers 88-05, Rochester, Business - General.
  4. Carlsson, M., 2000. "Measures of Technology and the Short-Run Responses to Technology Shocks - Is the RBC-Model Consistent with Swedish Manufacturing Data?," Papers 2000:20, Uppsala - Working Paper Series.
  5. John Shea, 1999. "What Do Technology Shocks Do?," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1998, volume 13, pages 275-322 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Yongsung Chang & Jay H. Hong, 2003. "On the employment effect of technology : evidence from U.S. manufacturing for 1958-1996," Working Paper 03-06, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond.
  7. Kevin X. D. Huang & Zheng Liu & Louis Phaneuf, 2000. "On the Transmission of Monetary Policy Shocks," Cahiers de recherche CREFE / CREFE Working Papers 112, CREFE, Université du Québec à Montréal, revised Sep 2001.
  8. Miles S. Kimball & John G. Fernald & Susanto Basu, 2006. "Are Technology Improvements Contractionary?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1418-1448, December.
  9. Blanchard, Olivier Jean & Kahn, Charles M, 1980. "The Solution of Linear Difference Models under Rational Expectations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(5), pages 1305-11, July.
  10. Marchetti, Domenico J. & Nucci, Francesco, 2005. "Price stickiness and the contractionary effect of technology shocks," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(5), pages 1137-1163, July.
  11. Julio J. Rotemberg, 1994. "Prices, Output and Hours: An Empirical Analysis Based on a Sticky Price Model," NBER Working Papers 4948, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Chahnez Boudaya, 2005. "The effects of technological innovations on employment : a new explanation," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques v05013, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
  13. Ireland, Peter N., 1997. "A small, structural, quarterly model for monetary policy evaluation," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 83-108, December.
  14. Calvo, Guillermo A., 1983. "Staggered prices in a utility-maximizing framework," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 383-398, September.
  15. Kiley, Michael T, 2002. "Partial Adjustment and Staggered Price Setting," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 34(2), pages 283-98, May.
  16. Kim, Jinill, 2000. "Constructing and estimating a realistic optimizing model of monetary policy," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 329-359, April.
  17. Robert G. King & Alexander L. Wolman, 1996. "Inflation targeting in a St. Louis model of the 21st century," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue May, pages 83-107.
  18. Galí, Jordi, 2002. "New Perspectives on Monetary Policy, Inflation and the Business Cycle," CEPR Discussion Papers 3210, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  19. Susanto Basu, 1994. "Intermediate Goods and Business Cycles: Implications for Productivity and Welfare," NBER Working Papers 4817, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  20. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Robert J. Vigfusson, 2003. "What happens after a technology shock?," International Finance Discussion Papers 768, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  21. Taylor, John B., 1993. "Discretion versus policy rules in practice," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 195-214, December.
  22. Hornstein, Andreas & Praschnik, Jack, 1997. "Intermediate inputs and sectoral comovement in the business cycle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 573-595, December.
  23. Bergin, Paul R. & Feenstra, Robert C., 2000. "Staggered price setting, translog preferences, and endogenous persistence," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 657-680, June.
  24. Huang, Kevin X. D. & Liu, Zheng, 2001. "Production chains and general equilibrium aggregate dynamics," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 437-462, October.
  25. Griffin, Peter, 1992. "The Impact of Affirmative Action on Labor Demand: A Test of Some Implications of the Le Chatelier Principle," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 74(2), pages 251-60, May.
  26. Ireland, Peter N, 2000. "Interest Rates, Inflation, and Federal Reserve Policy since 1980," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 32(3), pages 417-34, August.
  27. repec:hal:journl:halshs-00193600 is not listed on IDEAS
  28. Susanto Basu, 1998. "Technology and business cycles; how well do standard models explain the facts?," Conference Series ; [Proceedings], Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, vol. 42(Jun), pages 207-269.
  29. Long, John B, Jr & Plosser, Charles I, 1983. "Real Business Cycles," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(1), pages 39-69, February.
  30. Jermann, Urban J., 1998. "Asset pricing in production economies," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 257-275, April.
  31. Blanchard, Olivier Jean & Kiyotaki, Nobuhiro, 1987. "Monopolistic Competition and the Effects of Aggregate Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(4), pages 647-66, September.
  32. Ali Dib & Louis Phaneuf, 2001. "An Econometric U.S. Business Cycle Model with Nominal and Real Rigidities," Cahiers de recherche CREFE / CREFE Working Papers 137, CREFE, Université du Québec à Montréal.
  33. Steve Ambler & Alain Guay & Louis Phaneuf, 2003. "Labor Market Imperfections and the Dynamics of Postwar Business Cycles," Cahiers de recherche 0319, CIRPEE.
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:hal:cesptp:halshs-00115791. 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: (CCSD)

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.