What (Really) Accounts for the Fall in Hours After a Technology Shock?
The paper asks how state of the art DSGE models that account for the conditional response of hours following a positive neutral technology shock compare in a marginal likelihood race. To that end we construct and estimate several competing small-scale DSGE models that extend the standard real business cycle model. In particular, we identify from the literature six different hypotheses that generate the empirically observed decline in worked hours after a positive technology shock. These models alternatively exhibit (i) sticky prices; (ii) firm entry and exit with time to build; (iii) habit in consumption and costly adjustment of investment; (iv) persistence in the permanent technology shocks; (v) labor market friction with procyclical hiring costs; and (vi) Leontief production function with labor-saving technology shocks. In terms of model posterior probabilities, impulse responses, and autocorrelations, the model favored is the one that exhibits habit formation in consumption and investment adjustment costs. A robustness test shows that the sticky price model becomes as competitive as the habit formation and costly adjustment of investment model when sticky wages are included.
|Date of creation:||01 Aug 2012|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (202) 623-7000
Fax: (202) 623-4661
Web page: http://www.imf.org/external/pubind.htm
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/pubs/ord_info.htm|
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.:
- Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Robert Vigfusson, 2003.
"What Happens After a Technology Shock?,"
NBER Working Papers
9819, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Federico S. Mandelman & Francesco Zanetti, 2008.
"Technology shocks, employment, and labor market frictions,"
2008-10, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
- Mandelman, Federico S & Zanetti, Francesco, 2010. "Technology shocks, employment and labour market frictions," Bank of England working papers 390, Bank of England.
- Ambler, Steve & Guay, Alain & Phaneuf, Louis, 2012. "Endogenous business cycle propagation and the persistence problem: The role of labor-market frictions," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 47-62.
- Timothy Cogley & James M. Nason, 1993.
"Output dynamics in real business cycle models,"
Working Papers in Applied Economic Theory
93-10, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
- Chetty, Nadarajan, 2012.
"Bounds on Elasticities With Optimization Frictions: A Synthesis of Micro and Macro Evidence on Labor Supply,"
9748524, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Raj Chetty, 2012. "Bounds on Elasticities With Optimization Frictions: A Synthesis of Micro and Macro Evidence on Labor Supply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(3), pages 969-1018, 05.
- Raj Chetty, 2009. "Bounds on Elasticities with Optimization Frictions: A Synthesis of Micro and Macro Evidence on Labor Supply," NBER Working Papers 15616, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:imf:imfwpa:12/211. 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: (Jim Beardow)or (Hassan Zaidi)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.