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

How much structure in empirical models?

  • Fabio Canova

This chapter highlights the problems that structural methods and SVAR approaches have when estimating DSGE models and examining their ability to capture important features of the data. We show that structural methods are subject to severe identification problems due, in large part, to the nature of DSGE models. The problems can be patched up in a number of ways but solved only if DSGEs are completely reparametrized or respecified. The potential misspecification of the structural relationships give Bayesian methods an hedge over classical ones in structural estimation. SVAR approaches may face invertibility problems but simple diagnostics can help to detect and remedy these problems. A pragmatic empirical approach ought to use the flexibility of SVARs against potential misspecification of the structural relationships but must firmly tie SVARs to the class of DSGE models which could have have generated 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: https://econ-papers.upf.edu/papers/1054.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 1054.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Oct 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:upf:upfgen:1054
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. James M. Nason & Gregor W. Smith, 2005. "Identifying the New Keynesian Phillips curve," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2005-01, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
  2. Blanchard, Olivier Jean & Quah, Danny, 1989. "The Dynamic Effects of Aggregate Demand and Supply Disturbances," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(4), pages 655-73, September.
  3. Stock, James H & Wright, Jonathan H & Yogo, Motohiro, 2002. "A Survey of Weak Instruments and Weak Identification in Generalized Method of Moments," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(4), pages 518-29, October.
  4. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Charles L. Evans, 2001. "Nominal rigidities and the dynamic effects of a shock to monetary policy," Working Paper Series WP-01-08, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
  5. Ma, Adrian, 2002. "GMM estimation of the new Phillips curve," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 411-417, August.
  6. Dedola, Luca & Neri, Stefano, 2006. "What does a technology shock do? A VAR analysis with model-based sign restrictions," Working Paper Series 0705, European Central Bank.
  7. Rosen, Adam M., 2008. "Confidence sets for partially identified parameters that satisfy a finite number of moment inequalities," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 146(1), pages 107-117, September.
  8. Braun, Phillip A. & Mittnik, Stefan, 1993. "Misspecifications in vector autoregressions and their effects on impulse responses and variance decompositions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 319-341, October.
  9. Sims, Christopher A, 1980. "Macroeconomics and Reality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(1), pages 1-48, January.
  10. Sungbae An & Frank Schorfheide, 2006. "Bayesian analysis of DSGE models," Working Papers 06-5, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
  11. Roger E. A. Farmer & Andreas Beyer, 2004. "On the Indeterminacy of New Keynesian Economics," 2004 Meeting Papers 187, Society for Economic Dynamics.
  12. Boivin, J. & Giannoni, M., 2007. "DSGE Models in a Data-Rich Environment," Working papers 162, Banque de France.
  13. Fabio Canova & Luca Gambetti, 2010. "Do Expectations Matter? The Great Moderation Revisited," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 183-205, July.
  14. Marco Del Negro & Frank Schorfheide, 2008. "Monetary policy analysis with potentially misspecified models," Staff Reports 321, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
  15. Jean Boivin & Marc P. Giannoni, 2003. "Has Monetary Policy Become More Effective?," NBER Working Papers 9459, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  16. Fabio Canova & Luca Sala, 2005. "Back to square one: Identification issues in DSGE models," Economics Working Papers 927, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Sep 2006.
  17. Frank Schorfheide, 2000. "Loss function-based evaluation of DSGE models," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(6), pages 645-670.
  18. 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.
  19. Jesús Fernández-Villaverde & Juan F. Rubio-Ramírez, 2007. "How Structural Are Structural Parameters?," NBER Working Papers 13166, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  20. Thomas Lubik & Frank Schorfheide, 2002. "Testing for Indeterminacy:An Application to U.S. Monetary Policy," Economics Working Paper Archive 480, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics, revised Jun 2003.
  21. Faust, Jon & Leeper, Eric M, 1997. "When Do Long-Run Identifying Restrictions Give Reliable Results?," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 15(3), pages 345-53, July.
  22. In Choi & Peter C.B. Phillips, 1989. "Asymptotic and Finite Sample Distribution Theory for IV Estimators and Tests in Partially Identified Structural Equations," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 929, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  23. Del Negro, Marco & Schorfheide, Frank & Smets, Frank & Wouters, Rafael, 2007. "On the Fit of New Keynesian Models," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 25, pages 123-143, April.
  24. V. V. Chari & Patrick J. Kehoe & Ellen R. McGrattan, 2006. "Business cycle accounting," Staff Report 328, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  25. Marco Del Negro & Frank Schorfheide, 2005. "Policy Predictions if the Model Does Not Fit," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 3(2-3), pages 434-443, 04/05.
  26. Marco Del Negro & Frank Schorfheide, 2004. "Priors from General Equilibrium Models for VARS," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 45(2), pages 643-673, 05.
  27. Peter N. Ireland, 2004. "Technology Shocks in the New Keynesian Model," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(4), pages 923-936, November.
  28. Ellen R. McGrattan, 2006. "Real business cycles," Staff Report 370, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  29. 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.
  30. 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.
  31. Canova, Fabio, 1995. "Sensitivity Analysis and Model Evaluation in Simulated Dynamic General Equilibrium Economies," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 36(2), pages 477-501, May.
  32. James H. Stock & Jonathan Wright, 2000. "GMM with Weak Identification," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1055-1096, September.
  33. Christopher A. Sims, 1986. "Are forecasting models usable for policy analysis?," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, issue Win, pages 2-16.
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:1054. 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.