IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Disinflation and the NAIRU in a New-Keynesian New-Growth Model

  • Rannenberg, Ansgar

Unemployment in the big continental European economies like France and Germany has been substantially increasing since the mid 1970s. So far it has been difficult to empirically explain the increase in unemployment in these countries via changes in supposedly employment unfriendly institutions like the generosity and duration of unemployment benefits. At the same time, there is some evidence produced by Ball (1996, 1999) saying that tight monetary policy during the disinflations of the 1980s caused a subsequent increase in the NAIRU, and that there is a relationship between the increase in the NAIRU and the size of the disinflation during that period across advanced OECD economies. There is also mounting evidence suggesting a role of the slowdown in productivity growth, e.g. Nickell et al. (2005), IMF (2003), Blanchard and Wolfers (2000). This paper introduces endogenous growth into an otherwise standard New Keynesian model with capital accumulation and unemployment. We subject the model to a cost push shock lasting for 1 quarter, in order to mimic a scenario akin to the one faced by central banks at the end of the 1970s. Monetary policy implements a disinflation by following a standard interest feedback rule calibrated to an estimate of a Bundesbank reaction function. About 40 quarters after the shock has vanished, unemployment is still about 1.7 percentage points above its steady state, while annual productivity growth has decreased. Over a similar horizon, a higher weight on the output gap increases employment (i.e. reduces the fall in employment below its steady state). Thus the model generates an increase in unemployment following a disinflation without relying on a change to labour market structure. We are also able to coarsely reproduce cross country differences in unemployment. A higher disinflation generated by a larger cost push shock causes a stronger persistent increase in unemployment, the correlation noted by Ball. For a given cost push shock, a policy rule estimated for the Bundesbank produces stronger persistent increase in unemployment than a policy rule estimated for the Federal Reserve. Testable differences in real wage rigidity between continental Europe and the United States, namely the presence of the labour share in the wage setting function for Europe with a negative coefficient but it's absence in the U.S. also imply different unemployment outcomes following a cost push shock: If the real wage does not depend on the labour share, the persistent increase in unemployment is about one percentage point smaller than in it's presence. To the extent that the wage setting structure is due to labour market rigidities, "Shocks and Institutions" jointly determine the unemployment outcome, as suggested by Blanchard and Wolfers (2000). We also perform a comparison of the second moments of key variables of the model with German data for a period ranging from 1970 to 1990. We find that it matches the data better than a model without endogenous growth but with otherwise identical features. This is particularly true for the persistence in employment as measured by first and higher order autocorrelation coefficients.

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: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/9346/1/MPRA_paper_9346.pdf
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 9346.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 08 Jun 2008
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:9346
Contact details of provider: Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
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.:

as in new window
  1. Jondeau, Eric & Le Bihan, Herve, 2005. "Testing for the New Keynesian Phillips Curve. Additional international evidence," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 521-550, May.
  2. Juillard, Michel, 1996. "Dynare : a program for the resolution and simulation of dynamic models with forward variables through the use of a relaxation algorithm," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Couverture Orange) 9602, CEPREMAP.
  3. Jean-Pierre DANTHINE & André KURMANN, 2002. "Fair Wages in a New Keynesian Model of the Business Cycle," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'Econométrie et d'Economie politique (DEEP) 02.10, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, DEEP.
  4. Belot, Michèle & van Ours, Jan C, 2000. "Does the Recent Success of some OECD Countries in Lowering their Unemployment Rates lie in the Clever Design of their Labour Market Reforms?," CEPR Discussion Papers 2492, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  5. Olivier J. Blanchard & Lawrence H. Summers, 1986. "Hysteresis and the European Unemployment Problem," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1986, Volume 1, pages 15-90 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Olivier Jean Blanchard & Lawrence Katz, 1999. "Wage Dynamics: Reconciling Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 6924, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. Laurence Ball, 1999. "Aggregate demand and Long-Run Unemployment," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 30(2), pages 189-252.
  8. Hahn, Frank, 1990. "On Inflation," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(4), pages 15-25, Winter.
  9. Blanchard, Olivier & Wolfers, Justin, 2000. "The Role of Shocks and Institutions in the Rise of European Unemployment: The Aggregate Evidence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(462), pages C1-33, March.
  10. Laurence Ball, 1996. "Disinflation and the NAIRU," NBER Working Papers 5520, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  11. Daniele Checchi & Claudio Lucifora, 2002. "Unions and labour market institutions in Europe," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 17(35), pages 361-408, October.
  12. Laurence Ball & Robert Moffitt, 2001. "Productivity Growth and the Phillips Curve," Economics Working Paper Archive 450, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics.
  13. Guy Meredith & Bankim Chadha & Paul R. Masson, 1991. "Models of Inflation and the Costs of Disinflation," IMF Working Papers 91/97, International Monetary Fund.
  14. Nolan, Charles & Thoenissen, Christoph, 2008. "Labour markets and firm-specific capital in New Keynesian general equilibrium models," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 817-843, September.
  15. Jean-Paul Fitoussi & David Jestaz & Edmund S Phelps & Gylfi Zoega, 2000. "Roots of the Recent Recoveries: Labor Reforms or Private Sector Forces?," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/5571, Sciences Po.
  16. Ljungqvist, Lars & Sargent, Thomas J., 1997. "The European Unemployment Dilemma," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 178, Stockholm School of Economics.
  17. Orphanides, Athanasios & Solow, Robert M., 1990. "Money, inflation and growth," Handbook of Monetary Economics, in: B. M. Friedman & F. H. Hahn (ed.), Handbook of Monetary Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 223-261 Elsevier.
  18. Pissarides, Christopher & Vallanti, Giovanna, 2005. "The Impact of TFP Growth on Steady-State Unemployment," CEPR Discussion Papers 5002, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  19. Bruno Tissot & Les Skoczylas, 2005. "Revisiting recent productivity developments across OECD countries," BIS Working Papers 182, Bank for International Settlements.
  20. Jordi Galí & Mark Gertler, 1998. "Inflation dynamics: A structural econometric analysis," Economics Working Papers 341, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
  21. Andrew Glyn, 2003. "Labor Market Institutions and Unemployment: A Critical Assessment of the Cross-Country Evidence," Economics Series Working Papers 168, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  22. Smets, Frank & Wouters, Raf, 2002. "An estimated stochastic dynamic general equilibrium model of the euro area," Working Paper Series 0171, European Central Bank.
  23. Dani Rodrik, 1996. "Why Do More Open Economies Have Bigger Governments?," NBER Working Papers 5537, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  24. Ljungqvist, Lars & Sargent, Thomas J., 2007. "Understanding European unemployment with matching and search-island models," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(8), pages 2139-2179, November.
  25. Jordi Gali, 2002. "New Perspectives on Monetary Policy, Inflation, and the Business Cycle," NBER Working Papers 8767, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  26. Richard Clarida & Jordi Gali & Mark Gertler, 1998. "Monetary policy rules in practice," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue Mar.
  27. Julio J. Rotemberg & Michael Woodford, 1999. "The Cyclical Behavior of Prices and Costs," NBER Working Papers 6909, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  28. C�cile Denis & Kieran Mc Morrow & Werner R�ger, 2002. "Production function approach to calculating potential growth and output gaps - estimates for the EU Member States and the US," European Economy - Economic Papers 176, Directorate General Economic and Monetary Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
  29. Bewley, Truman F., 1998. "Why not cut pay?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 459-490, May.
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:pra:mprapa:9346. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)

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.