IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

On the robust effects of technology shocks on hours worked and output

  • Fabio Canova
  • David López-Salido
  • Claudio Michelacci

We analyze the effects of neutral and investment-specific technology shocks on hours and output. Long cycles in hours are captured in a variety of ways. Hours robustly fall in response to neutral shocks and robustly increase in response to investment specific shocks. The percentage of the variance of hours (output) explained by neutral shocks is small (large); the opposite is true for investment specific shocks. ‘News shocks’ are uncorrelated with the estimated technology shocks.

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: https://econ-papers.upf.edu/papers/1013.pdf
File Function: Whole Paper
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra in its series Economics Working Papers with number 1013.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Nov 2006
Date of revision: Feb 2008
Handle: RePEc:upf:upfgen:1013
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.econ.upf.edu/

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. Giordani, Paolo, 2000. "An alternative explanation of the price puzzle," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 414, Stockholm School of Economics, revised 06 Dec 2000.
  2. Jesús Fernández-Villaverde & Juan F. Rubio-Ramírez & Thomas J. Sargent & Mark W. Watson, 2007. "ABCs (and Ds) of Understanding VARs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(3), pages 1021-1026, June.
  3. Harald Uhlig, 2004. "Do Technology Shocks Lead to a Fall in Total Hours Worked?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(2-3), pages 361-371, 04/05.
  4. Susanto Basu & John Fernald & Miles Kimball, 2004. "Are Technology Improvements Contractionary?," NBER Working Papers 10592, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Galí, Jordi & Rabanal, Pau, 2004. "Technology Shocks and Aggregate Fluctuations: How Well Does the RBC Model Fit Post-War US Data?," CEPR Discussion Papers 4522, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  6. Charles L. Evans, 1991. "Productivity shocks and real business cycles," Working Paper Series, Macroeconomic Issues 91-22, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
  7. Jon Faust & Eric M. Leeper, 1994. "When do long-run identifying restrictions give reliable results?," International Finance Discussion Papers 462, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  8. Christopher J. Erceg & Luca Guerrieri, 2004. "Can Long-Run Restrictions Identify Technology Shocks?," Computing in Economics and Finance 2004 3, Society for Computational Economics.
  9. Stefano Neri & Luca Dedola, 2004. "Are technology shocks contractionary? A Bayesian VAR analysis with priors on impulses responses," 2004 Meeting Papers 406, Society for Economic Dynamics.
  10. Jordi Galí & Mark Gertler & J. David López-Salido, 2005. "Markups, gaps and the welfare costs of business fluctuations," Economics Working Papers 836, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
  11. Jonas D. M. Fisher, 2002. "Technology shocks matter," Working Paper Series WP-02-14, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
  12. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Robert Vigfusson, 2003. "What Happens After a Technology Shock?," NBER Working Papers 9819, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  13. Paul Beaudry & Franck Portier, 2004. "Stock Prices, News and Economic Fluctuations," NBER Chapters, in: Enhancing Productivity (NBER-CEPR-TCER-Keio conference) National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  14. Neville Francis & Valerie A. Ramey, 2002. "Is the Technology-Driven Real Business Cycle Hypothesis Dead?," NBER Working Papers 8726, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  15. Comin, D. & Gertler, M., 2003. "Medium Term Business Cycles," Working Papers 03-05, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
  16. Fabio Canova & David López-Salido & Claudio Michelacci, 2007. "The labor market effects of technology shocks," Working Papers 0719, Banco de España;Working Papers Homepage.
  17. Greenwood, Jeremy & Yorukoglu, Mehmet, 1997. "1974," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 49-95, June.
    • Greenwood, J. & Yorukoglu, M., 1996. "1974," RCER Working Papers 429, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
  18. Jordi Gali, 2005. "Trends in Hours, Balanced Growth, and the Role of Technology in the Business Cycle," NBER Working Papers 11130, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  19. Ellen R. McGrattan, 2006. "Real business cycles," Staff Report 370, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  20. V. V. Chari & Patrick J. Kehoe & Ellen R. McGrattan, 2005. "A critique of structural VARs using real business cycle theory," Working Papers 631, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  21. Robert J. Vigfusson, 2004. "The delayed response to a technology shock: a flexible price explanation," International Finance Discussion Papers 810, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  22. Jordi Gali & Pau Rabanal, 2004. "Technology Shocks and Aggregate Fluctuations: How Well Does the RBS Model Fit Postwar U.S. Data?," NBER Working Papers 10636, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  23. Luca Dedola & Stefano Neri, 2006. "What does a technology shock do? A VAR analysis with model-based sign restrictions," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 607, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
  24. Valerie A. Ramey & Neville Francis, 2007. "Measures of Per Capita Hours and their Implications for the Technology-Hours Debate," 2007 Meeting Papers 314, Society for Economic Dynamics.
  25. Lutz Kilian, 1999. "Finite-Sample Properties of Percentile and Percentile-t Bootstrap Confidence Intervals for Impulse Responses," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(4), pages 652-660, November.
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:upf:upfgen:1013. 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: ()

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.