IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iae/iaewps/wp1999n13.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Dissecting the Cycle

Author

Listed:
  • Don Harding

    (Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne)

  • Adrian Pagan

    (The Australian National University and The University of Melbourne)

Abstract

Macroeconomics has a long tradition of inspecting and interpreting patterns in graphs of aggregate data. However, the move towards more precise quantification of macroeconomic phenomena has seen academics shift away from a study of turning points, which are a natural and obvious way of summarizing business cycles, towards measures of co-movement in detrended series. This shift arise from several developments, but an important one was the belief among academics that Burns and Mitchell's methods lacked the statistical basis and, hence, the precision required in modern macroeconomics. We adopt the older perspective that business cycles are to be defined in terms of the turning points in the level of economic activity. We show that such turning points can be associated with a well defined sequence of outcomes and can therefore be precisely analyzed. In turn this enables us to explore how various parametric models of aggregate output generate a cycle through the interaction of trend movements in activity with the volatility and serial correlation in growth rates. One of the strongest points in the rhetoric of modern business cycle theory is that trend and cycles should not be divorced. Consequently, any definition of the business cycle in terms of the co-movement of detrended data has to find the task of integration a difficult one. In contrast, we show that a return to the older tradition of studying the classical cycle in the level of economic activity produces a natural interpretation of the origin of the cycle in terms of the interaction of trend and the second moments of growth rates. This seems a critical advantage for the approach taken in this paper. An important issue that has also been debated in the literature is whether non-linear models are required to make a business cycle. Using the techniques developed in this paper we dissect the cycle of a number of countries and find little evidence that non-linearities, of the type investigated in the literature, are important in accounting for the broad features of the average cycle.

Suggested Citation

  • Don Harding & Adrian Pagan, 1999. "Dissecting the Cycle," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp1999n13, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
  • Handle: RePEc:iae:iaewps:wp1999n13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/downloads/working_paper_series/wp1999n13.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lawrence J. Christiano & Terry J. Fitzgerald, 1998. "The business cycle: it's still a puzzle," Economic Perspectives, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, issue Q IV, pages 56-83.
    2. Cogley, Timothy & Nason, James M, 1995. "Output Dynamics in Real-Business-Cycle Models," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 492-511, June.
    3. Canova, Fabio, 1998. "Detrending and business cycle facts: A user's guide," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 533-540, May.
    4. Canova, Fabio, 1998. "Detrending and business cycle facts," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 475-512, May.
    5. Simkins, Scott P., 1994. "Do real business cycle models really exhibit business cycle behavior?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 381-404, April.
    6. Lucas, Robert E, Jr, 1980. "Methods and Problems in Business Cycle Theory," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 12(4), pages 696-715, November.
    7. Pagan, Adrian, 1997. "Policy, Theory, and the Cycle," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 19-33, Autumn.
    8. Diebold, Francis X & Rudebusch, Glenn D, 1996. "Measuring Business Cycles: A Modern Perspective," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(1), pages 67-77, February.
    9. Hess, Gregory D & Iwata, Shigeru, 1997. "Measuring and Comparing Business-Cycle Features," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 15(4), pages 432-444, October.
    10. Kim, Kunhong & Buckle, R A & Hall, V B, 1994. "Key Features of New Zealand Business Cycles," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 70(208), pages 56-73, March.
    11. Canova, Fabio, 1994. "Detrending and turning points," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 614-623, April.
    12. Durland, J Michael & McCurdy, Thomas H, 1994. "Duration-Dependent Transitions in a Markov Model of U.S. GNP Growth," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 12(3), pages 279-288, July.
    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. Wecker, William E, 1979. "Predicting the Turning Points of a Time Series," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(1), pages 35-50, January.
    15. Canova, Fabio, 1999. "Does Detrending Matter for the Determination of the Reference Cycle and the Selection of Turning Points?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(452), pages 126-150, January.
    16. King, Robert G. & Plosser, Charles I., 1994. "Real business cycles and the test of the Adelmans," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 405-438, April.
    17. Don Harding & Adrian Pagan, 1999. "Knowing the Cycle," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp1999n12, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    18. Finn E. Kydland & Edward C. Prescott, 1990. "Business cycles: real facts and a monetary myth," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, issue Spr, pages 3-18.
    19. James H. Stock & Mark W. Watson, 1988. "A Probability Model of The Coincident Economic Indicators," NBER Working Papers 2772, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    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:iae:iaewps:wp1999n13. 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: (Sheri Carnegie). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/mimelau.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.