In the classical model, the equilibrium level of output is determined entirely by supply-side factors in the factor markets, specifically the labour market. The key components are:
The labour market clears at an equilibrium real wage and an equilibrium level of employment (\(l^*\)). This level of employment, via the production function, determines the unique full-employment level of output (\(y^* = f(k^*, l^*)\)). Because output is determined this way, the aggregate supply curve is vertical at \(y^*\).
Monetary neutrality is a core proposition of the classical model which states that a one-time change in the nominal money supply (\(M\)) affects only nominal variables, leaving all real variables unchanged.
Specifically, a doubling of the money supply will, in equilibrium, lead to a doubling of the price level (\(P\)) and the nominal wage (\(W\)). However, real variables such as output (\(y\)), employment (\(l\)), the real wage (\(W/P\)), and the real interest rate (\(r\)) will remain unaffected.
This occurs because the vertical aggregate supply curve dictates that output is fixed at its full-employment level, \(y^*\). An increase in \(M\) shifts the aggregate demand curve to the right, but the only effect is to raise the price level proportionally, restoring the real money supply (\(M/P\)) to its original level and leaving the real side of the economy untouched.
Real Business Cycle (RBC) models aim to explain business cycle fluctuations as the natural and efficient response of the economy to real shocks, primarily random shocks to technology (total factor productivity).
Key tenets and purposes include:
The Lucas misperceptions model is a flexible-price classical model where money can have short-run real effects due to asymmetric information. The core idea is the "islands" paradigm:
When this happens across all islands, aggregate output rises above its natural rate. Therefore, unexpected monetary policy has real effects. However, these effects are temporary. Once producers realize the aggregate price level has risen, they adjust their expectations and output returns to the natural rate. Anticipated monetary policy has no real effects.
The Lucas aggregate supply curve formalizes the key result of the misperceptions model. It states that aggregate output (\(y_t\)) deviates from its natural or full-employment level (\(y^*\)) only in response to unanticipated movements in the price level ("price surprises").
The equation is typically written as:
\( y_t = y^* + d(P_t - E_{t-1}[P_t]) \)
Where:
This equation implies that only the unexpected part of monetary policy can affect real output.
The labour demand curve in the classical model represents the profit-maximizing choices of firms. It is derived from the production function and shows the quantity of labour firms are willing to hire at any given real wage.
The key principles are:
Because the MPL is a decreasing function of the amount of labour employed, the labour demand curve, which is identical to the MPL curve, is downward-sloping. A lower real wage is required to induce firms to hire more labour.
The Policy Impotence Proposition, a central tenet of New Classical Macroeconomics, states that systematic, feedback-based monetary (or fiscal) policy has no effect on real variables like output and employment, even in the short run.
The argument combines the Lucas supply curve with the assumption of Rational Expectations:
The only way policy can affect real output is through random, unsystematic, and therefore surprising, actions, which cannot be used to stabilize the economy.
Kydland and Prescott (1990) document several statistical regularities or "stylized facts" about U.S. business cycles in the post-war period by analyzing the percentage deviations from trend of various macroeconomic aggregates. Key facts include:
These facts, particularly the countercyclical nature of prices, pose a significant challenge for monetary theories of the business cycle and provide a benchmark for RBC models to match.
A Cash-in-Advance (CIA) model, also known as a Clower constraint model, is a framework used to provide explicit microfoundations for the demand for money. It moves beyond simply putting money in the utility function.
The core feature is a constraint that requires certain goods to be purchased with cash. Agents must hold sufficient money balances before they go to the goods market. Typically, the constraint takes the form:
\( P_t C_t \le M_{t-1} \)
This means that nominal consumption spending in period \(t\) (\(P_t C_t\)) cannot exceed the money balances carried over from the previous period (\(M_{t-1}\)).
This setup creates a real demand for an otherwise useless asset (fiat money) because it is essential for facilitating transactions. CIA models are used to study the effects of inflation, which acts as a tax on cash balances and can distort consumption and labour supply decisions.
In a CIA model, monetary policy has real effects by influencing the effective price of consumption. The mechanism works as follows:
Thus, through the "inflation tax" mechanism, changes in monetary policy that affect inflation can have real effects on consumption, labour supply, and output.
Limited participation models are a class of classical models with flexible prices where money has real effects because not all agents can respond immediately to monetary policy actions.
The typical structure is:
Thus, money has real, short-run effects because its injection into the economy is not uniform but is channelled through a specific market, causing a temporary change in the real interest rate that affects investment decisions.
A propagation mechanism refers to the economic forces within a model that transmit and amplify initial shocks, causing their effects to persist over time and spread across different sectors of the economy.
In Real Business Cycle (RBC) theory, the economy's structure itself acts as the propagation mechanism. Even if the initial shocks (e.g., to technology) are random and uncorrelated over time, the model can generate output series that are serially correlated (persistent) and that move together with other series (comovement).
A key example is the input-output structure of production, as in Long and Plosser (1983). An unexpected positive technology shock in one sector (e.g., manufacturing) increases its output. Since manufactured goods are used as inputs in many other sectors (including manufacturing itself), this abundance of inputs raises productivity and output in those sectors in subsequent periods. This spreads the shock across the economy and makes its effects last longer than the initial impulse.
The time inconsistency problem, in the context of monetary policy, describes a situation where a government or central bank finds it optimal to announce a certain policy (e.g., zero inflation) to influence public expectations, but then has an incentive to renege on that policy once the public has acted on those expectations.
The typical story is as follows:
In the classical model, the price level (\(P\)) is determined by the interaction of aggregate supply (AS) and aggregate demand (AD), where the quantity theory of money plays a crucial role.
The mechanism is as follows:
Essentially, with output fixed at \(y^*\), the price level must adjust to ensure that the real money supply (\(M/P\)) is at the level required to clear the money market and generate aggregate demand equal to \(y^*\).
In New Classical models, a political business cycle can arise from the strategic interaction between a government that has private information about its "type" and a rational public.
The model, based on the time-inconsistency problem, works as follows:
This strategic behavior can lead to a cycle of low inflation early in a political term, followed by a period of higher or surprise inflation later on, generating fluctuations in output.
Investment is more volatile than consumption because rational, forward-looking agents prefer to smooth their consumption over time. This is a key prediction of both RBC theory and other modern macro models.
The logic is as follows:
As a result, investment expenditures fluctuate significantly to accommodate agents' desire for smooth consumption, making investment much more volatile than consumption, which is consistent with the "real facts" of business cycles.
The distinction lies in what part of the economy the shock originates from and what curves it affects in the standard AD-AS framework.
The key difference lies in how agents use information to form expectations about the future.
RE is a cornerstone of New Classical and RBC models, providing the foundation for the policy impotence proposition.
Nothing. In the classical model, an increase in the nominal money supply has no effect on the real wage or the level of employment.
The logic is as follows:
The "liquidity effect" refers to the fall in the nominal interest rate that occurs when the central bank increases the supply of liquidity (money or reserves) in the financial system.
In a limited participation model, this effect is crucial for generating real effects of monetary policy. The mechanism is:
Because prices do not adjust instantaneously, this fall in the nominal rate also translates into a temporary fall in the real interest rate, which then stimulates investment and output.
RBC models explain the procyclicality of employment primarily through the mechanism of intertemporal substitution of labour.
The argument is as follows:
Since the positive technology shock also causes output to rise, the resulting increase in employment is procyclical. The same logic works in reverse for a negative technology shock, causing employment and output to fall together.
The production function plays a direct and fundamental role in determining the level of output in the classical model. It represents the technological relationship between inputs and output.
Its role can be broken down into two parts:
In essence, the production function is the final link in the supply-side chain of causation that determines the economy's total output.
The classical aggregate supply curve is vertical because, in this model, the equilibrium level of output is independent of the nominal price level. Output is determined purely by real factors on the supply side of the economy.
The reasoning is as follows:
Since a change in the price level \(P\) leads to a proportional change in the nominal wage \(W\), leaving the real wage and thus employment and output unchanged, output \(y^*\) is supplied regardless of the price level. This relationship plots as a vertical line in (\(y, P\)) space.
In the multi-sector Real Business Cycle model of Long and Plosser (1983), comovement arises from two main features of the economic environment:
The combination of these production and preference structures causes an initial shock in one part of the economy to spread, leading to a generalized boom or bust.
The main criticism of the adaptive expectations hypothesis is that it can lead to systematic and predictable forecast errors, which is inconsistent with the idea of rational, optimizing agents.
Under adaptive expectations, people form expectations based only on past values of the variable. If the underlying process generating the variable changes, adaptive expectations will be slow to catch up, leading to a series of errors in the same direction.
For example, if an economy enters a period of consistently rising inflation, an agent using adaptive expectations will always be revising their forecast upwards based on past errors, but they will consistently underestimate the actual inflation rate in every period. A rational agent would recognize this pattern of under-prediction and adjust their forecasting method to eliminate the systematic error. The adaptive expectations scheme, by its mechanical nature, does not allow for this kind of learning.
A "stylized fact" of the business cycle is a broad, statistical regularity or pattern observed in macroeconomic data across many countries and time periods. These are not precise laws but rather general tendencies in how aggregate economic variables move over the cycle.
The practice of identifying these facts was pioneered by Burns and Mitchell (1946) and modernized by researchers like Kydland and Prescott (1990). The goal is to establish a set of empirical benchmarks that business cycle theories should be able to explain.
Examples of stylized facts for the post-war U.S. economy include:
In the pure classical model, an increase in government spending (\(g\)) has no effect on output or the price level. This is a result of 100% "crowding out".
The mechanism is as follows:
Since the AD curve's position depends on \(M/P\) and the IS curve, and the IS curve shifts but the intersection with the vertical AS curve remains at \(y^*\), there is no shift in the AD curve itself and thus no change in the price level \(P\).
Real Business Cycle (RBC) models use the neoclassical growth model as their foundation because it is the standard, established framework for understanding the long-run behavior of aggregate economies. By building on this foundation, RBC theory aims to provide a unified explanation for both long-run growth and short-run fluctuations.
Key reasons for this choice include:
The "inflation tax" in a cash-in-advance (CIA) model refers to the loss of purchasing power of money holdings due to inflation. It acts as a tax on activities that require the use of cash.
The mechanism is as follows:
Because the CIA constraint links consumption directly to money holdings, this inflation tax effectively raises the price of consumption relative to other activities like leisure, leading agents to substitute away from consumption. This distortion is a key channel for the real effects of monetary policy in CIA models.
These terms describe how the cyclical component of a macroeconomic variable moves in relation to the cyclical component of overall economic activity (usually measured by real GNP or GDP).
In the classical model, the real rate of interest (\(r\)) is determined by the equilibrium between the supply of and demand for loanable funds, which is equivalent to the equilibrium between real saving and real investment.
The mechanism is as follows:
Therefore, the real interest rate is determined by the "real" factors of productivity (which influences investment demand) and thrift (which influences saving supply).
The natural rate of output, also known as potential output or full-employment output (denoted \(y^*\)), is the level of aggregate output produced when the economy's labour market is in equilibrium.
It is the level of output that would be "ground out by the Walrasian system" (in Friedman's words), meaning it's the level of production that occurs when wages and prices are fully flexible and expectations are correct. It is determined by the economy's:
In the classical and New Classical models, actual output can deviate from the natural rate only temporarily, due to factors like misperceptions or informational frictions. In the long run, the economy always returns to \(y^*\).
The "representative agent" is a modeling device used to simplify the analysis of a complex economy. It assumes that the economy is populated by a large number of identical individuals (households and firms).
The key advantage is that the aggregate behavior of the economy can be analyzed by studying the optimization problem of a single, representative individual (like Robinson Crusoe). The choices made by this single agent for consumption, investment, and work effort are taken to represent the per-capita equilibrium outcomes of a competitive market economy with many agents.
This simplification is justified by theorems in general equilibrium theory which show that, under certain conditions (e.g., no externalities), a competitive equilibrium is Pareto optimal. The allocation chosen by a central planner maximizing the utility of a representative agent will coincide with the competitive equilibrium allocation. This allows researchers to solve a much simpler planner's problem to find the competitive equilibrium outcomes.
In the Lucas misperceptions model, the size of the output response to a price surprise, represented by the parameter \(d\) in the Lucas supply curve \(y_t = y^* + d(P_t - E_{t-1}[P_t])\), is determined by the relative variability of aggregate versus relative shocks.
The logic is as follows:
Thus, the slope of the Lucas supply curve is not a fixed structural parameter but depends on the characteristics of the monetary policy regime.
The neutrality of money is the proposition that a one-time change in the stock of money has no effect on real economic variables, such as real output, employment, the real wage, or the real interest rate. It asserts that money only affects nominal variables, like the price level and the nominal wage rate, which are expected to change proportionally to the change in the money stock.
This is a key feature of the long-run in most macroeconomic models and a feature of the short-run in the pure classical model. The idea is that if the amount of money in an economy doubles, rational agents will eventually realize that all prices and nominal incomes will also double, leaving their real purchasing power and relative prices unchanged. With no change in real incentives, there is no reason for them to alter their real decisions about consumption, investment, or work effort.
Both are key stylized facts of business cycles, but they describe different aspects of economic fluctuations.
RBC models, for example, seek to explain both phenomena through propagation mechanisms that transmit shocks through time (persistence) and across sectors (comovement).
In a Real Business Cycle (RBC) model, the real wage is procyclical because the same shocks that drive the cycle also drive the real wage. The primary driver is a technology shock.
The mechanism is as follows:
Because the real wage moves in the same direction as output, it is procyclical. This aligns with the empirical findings of Kydland and Prescott (1990) when labour input is properly measured.
The labour supply curve in the classical model represents the choices of households regarding how much time to allocate to work versus leisure. It shows the total quantity of labour households are willing to supply at any given real wage.
The curve is typically upward-sloping, based on the following principles:
The classical model typically assumes the substitution effect dominates the income effect, resulting in an upward-sloping labour supply curve where a higher real wage elicits a greater quantity of labour supplied.
"Intertemporal substitution of leisure" (or labour) is the idea that rational individuals will adjust their allocation of time between work and leisure across different periods in response to changes in the relative price of leisure over time, which is the real wage.
The core concept is that people will choose to work more (take less leisure) in periods when the real wage is temporarily high, and take more leisure (work less) in periods when the real wage is temporarily low.
This is a key mechanism in Real Business Cycle theory for explaining why employment fluctuates. A temporary positive technology shock raises the current real wage, making it a good time to "make hay while the sun shines." People work harder today and plan to take more vacations in the future when wages are expected to return to normal. This willingness to substitute leisure over time makes the labour supply more elastic in response to temporary wage changes, leading to larger fluctuations in employment over the business cycle.
An increase in the labour supply in the classical model will lead to a higher level of output and a lower equilibrium real wage.
The mechanism works through the labour market:
Graphically, this corresponds to a rightward shift of the vertical aggregate supply curve. For a given aggregate demand curve, this would also lead to a lower price level.
In Real Business Cycle (RBC) theory, a "technology shock" (or productivity shock) is a random, exogenous change in the economy's ability to transform inputs (capital and labour) into output. It represents any factor that shifts the production function.
These shocks are the primary "impulse" or driving force behind business cycles in RBC models. They are typically modeled as random fluctuations in the total factor productivity (TFP) parameter of the aggregate production function, \(Y_t = \theta_t F(K_t, N_t)\), where \(\theta_t\) is the technology/productivity shock.
Examples of what a technology shock might represent in the real world include:
A positive shock (\(\theta_t\) increases) leads to a boom, while a negative shock (\(\theta_t\) decreases) leads to a recession.
Kydland and Prescott (1990) found that the price level is countercyclical, meaning it tends to be below its trend during economic booms and above its trend during recessions. This finding is a key challenge to monetary theories of the business cycle but is consistent with a simple RBC framework.
In an RBC model driven by technology shocks, the logic is as follows:
Since output and prices move in opposite directions in response to the primary shocks driving the cycle, the price level is countercyclical. This contrasts with demand-driven theories, where a positive AD shock would cause both output and prices to rise, implying a procyclical price level.
The marginal product of labour (MPL) is the additional amount of output produced when one more unit of labour is employed, holding all other inputs (like the capital stock) constant.
Mathematically, if the production function is \(y = f(k, l)\), the MPL is the partial derivative of the production function with respect to labour:
\( MPL = \frac{\partial y}{\partial l} = f_l(k, l) \)
A standard assumption in classical and neoclassical models is that the MPL is positive but diminishing. It is positive because adding more labour increases output (\(f_l > 0\)). It is diminishing because as more and more labour is added to a fixed amount of capital, each additional worker has less capital to work with, so their contribution to output becomes progressively smaller (\(f_{ll} < 0\)).
In a competitive market, the MPL curve is the firm's (and the economy's) demand curve for labour, as firms hire workers until the real wage equals the MPL.
A model can generate persistence (positive serial correlation) from independent, random shocks through its internal propagation mechanisms. The shocks are the "impulses," and the economic structure determines how they are propagated over time.
In RBC models, two key mechanisms create persistence:
This is analogous to Slutsky's (1937) finding that summing up random causes can generate cyclical patterns, or Frisch's (1933) analogy of hitting a rocking horse: the impulse is the hit, but the horse's structure causes it to rock back and forth for some time.
The real wage is the payment to labour measured in units of goods and services, rather than in units of money. It represents the purchasing power of the nominal wage.
It is calculated by dividing the nominal wage (\(W\)), which is measured in monetary units (e.g., pounds per hour), by the aggregate price level (\(P\)), which is measured in monetary units per unit of goods (e.g., pounds per basket of goods):
Real Wage = \( \frac{W}{P} \)
The real wage is a crucial variable in the classical model because it is what matters for the decisions of both households and firms.
In the classical model, perfect flexibility of \(W\) and \(P\) ensures the real wage always adjusts to clear the labour market.
The IS curve represents equilibrium in the goods market. In the context of the full classical model, its primary role is to determine the equilibrium real interest rate, given the level of full-employment output.
The IS curve is defined by the goods market equilibrium condition: \( y = C(y-\tau) + I(r) + g \). It shows the combinations of the real interest rate (\(r\)) and income (\(y\)) that are consistent with equilibrium.
In the classical model:
Essentially, with output fixed by the supply side, the real interest rate adjusts to ensure that desired saving (\(S = y^* - C - g\)) equals desired investment (\(I\)).
The LM curve represents equilibrium in the money market, where real money supply equals real money demand: \(M/P = L(y, r)\). In the full classical model, its primary role is to determine the equilibrium price level.
The mechanism is as follows:
Thus, the LM curve pins down the nominal price level in the economy.
Long and Plosser (1983) assume a 100% depreciation rate (i.e., that all commodities are perishable and last only one period) primarily for analytical tractability. This assumption greatly simplifies the model and allows them to derive an exact, closed-form solution for the equilibrium quantities and prices.
Without this assumption, the capital stock would become a more complex state variable, as it would consist of a mix of capital goods of different ages and productivities. The optimization problem would become much harder to solve analytically, typically requiring numerical approximation methods.
While unrealistic, the 100% depreciation assumption allows them to focus clearly on the propagation of shocks through the input-output structure of the economy, which is the central mechanism they wish to highlight. It demonstrates how persistence and comovement can arise even without durable capital goods and the accelerator principle.
The dichotomy of the classical model refers to the complete separation between the determination of real variables and nominal variables.
This separation is a direct consequence of the neutrality of money. Because changes in the money supply do not affect the real sector, the real variables can be solved for first, independently of the money supply. Then, the price level can be solved for in the second step. This two-step process is the classical dichotomy.
The "Solow residual" is a measure of total factor productivity (TFP) growth, often used as an empirical proxy for technology shocks in Real Business Cycle models.
It is derived from a growth accounting framework. Given a production function \(Y = \theta F(K, N)\), the growth rate of output can be decomposed into the contributions from the growth of inputs (capital and labour) and the growth of productivity (\(\theta\)). The Solow residual is the portion of output growth that cannot be explained by the growth in measured inputs.
Specifically, for a Cobb-Douglas production function, the growth rate of the residual is calculated as:
\( \Delta \log(\theta_t) = \Delta \log(Y_t) - (1-\alpha)\Delta \log(K_t) - \alpha \Delta \log(N_t) \)
where \(\alpha\) is labour's share of income. The residual \(\Delta \log(\theta_t)\) captures any factor that shifts the production function, including technological progress, changes in regulations, or measurement errors.
The primary conclusion of Long and Plosser (1983) is that a multi-sector neoclassical growth model, with no money and no frictions, can generate output series that exhibit key features of observed business cycles—namely, persistence (positive serial correlation) and comovement (positive cross-sector correlation)—when subjected to independent random productivity shocks in each sector.
They demonstrate that the economy's "capitalistic" production structure, where the outputs of some sectors are the inputs for others, acts as a powerful propagation mechanism. This mechanism transforms and amplifies serially uncorrelated shocks into serially correlated output movements. Their work shows that what we call "business cycles" can be interpreted as the natural, efficient equilibrium response of the economy to real disturbances, without any need to appeal to monetary shocks, market failures, or irrationality.
A permanent increase in the level of technology (a positive productivity shock) has significant real effects in the classical model.
In summary, a technology improvement leads to higher real wages, employment, and output, and a lower price level.
In the Lucas misperceptions model, prices have a crucial but imperfect informational role. Agents operate in an environment of incomplete information and must use the prices they observe to make inferences about the state of the economy.
Specifically, a producer on a single "island" observes the price of their own good, \(P_i\), but not the aggregate price level, \(P\). The price \(P_i\) contains information about both real (relative) shocks and nominal (aggregate) shocks. The producer's problem is to extract the "signal" about the real shock from the "noise" of the aggregate shock.
A rational producer uses their knowledge of the relative variances of these two types of shocks to make the best possible inference. The price \(P_i\) is an imperfect signal of the underlying real demand for their good. When they misinterpret a general price increase as a relative price increase, they are making an error based on this imperfect information, which leads to the short-run non-neutrality of money.
Business cycles are described as "efficient" in Real Business Cycle (RBC) models because they represent the optimal, Pareto-efficient response of the economy to the available production possibilities.
The models are built on the assumptions of:
Given these assumptions, the First Fundamental Theorem of Welfare Economics applies: the competitive equilibrium is Pareto optimal. Therefore, the observed fluctuations in output, consumption, and employment are not "failures" or undesirable deviations from a smooth trend. Instead, they are the best possible response that rational agents can make to the real shocks (e.g., to technology) that hit the economy. Any attempt by a central planner or government to alter these fluctuations (e.g., to smooth out a recession) would, in the context of the model, only make agents worse off.
The real-balance effect (or Pigou effect) describes how changes in the price level can affect aggregate demand through their impact on the real value of wealth.
The mechanism is as follows:
This effect provides another reason (in addition to the interest rate effect via the LM curve) why the aggregate demand curve is downward-sloping. In the context of the IS-LM model, the real-balance effect can be modeled as a rightward shift of the IS curve when the price level falls.
The primary difference lies in the assumption about the flexibility of the nominal wage (\(W\)).
This difference in wage assumptions is the source of the different shapes of the aggregate supply curve: vertical in the classical model and upward-sloping (or horizontal in extreme cases) in the Keynesian model.
The marginal propensity to consume (MPC) is the fraction of an additional unit of disposable income that a household chooses to spend on consumption.
Mathematically, if the consumption function is \(c = C(y_d)\), where \(y_d\) is disposable income, then the MPC is the derivative of the consumption function:
\( MPC = C'(y_d) = \frac{dc}{dy_d} \)
A standard assumption in macroeconomics is that the MPC is positive but less than one (\(0 < MPC < 1\)).
The MPC is a key parameter in the Keynesian multiplier process.
"Crowding out" is the reduction in private investment (and sometimes consumption) that occurs as a result of an increase in government spending.
In the classical model, crowding out is 100%. The mechanism is:
In this case, public spending completely displaces, or "crowds out," private spending, with no net effect on total output.
A steady state is a long-run equilibrium path in a growth model where key economic variables grow at constant rates. It is a state of balanced growth.
In the neoclassical growth model (without population growth or technological change), the steady state is characterized by:
If the economy starts with a capital stock below its steady-state level, it will experience a period of transition with positive net investment and growth in per-capita output until it converges to the steady state. In models with technological progress, the steady state is a path where per-capita variables grow at the constant rate of technological progress.
The difference lies in what they measure the return to saving in.
The relationship between them is given by the Fisher equation:
\( r \approx R - \pi^e \)
where \(\pi^e\) is the expected rate of inflation. The real interest rate is approximately the nominal interest rate minus the expected rate of inflation. It is the real interest rate that is relevant for saving and investment decisions, as rational agents care about their real purchasing power, not the nominal amount of money they have.
The Lucas Critique (Lucas, 1976) is a fundamental criticism of the large-scale macroeconometric models popular in the 1960s and 1970s. It argues that it is naive to try to predict the effects of a change in economic policy entirely on the basis of relationships observed in historical data, especially in the form of simple behavioral equations.
The core idea is that the "structural" parameters of these models (e.g., the marginal propensity to consume) are not truly structural. They are themselves the result of optimal decisions made by rational agents based on their expectations of government policy. If the policy changes, agents' expectations will change, their optimal decision rules will change, and thus the parameters of the behavioral equations will change.
Therefore, a model used for policy evaluation must be based on truly deep structural parameters—those governing preferences and technology—which are invariant to changes in policy.
A permanent increase in productivity sets in motion a series of transitory dynamics as the economy moves to a new, higher steady-state growth path.
Thus, even a permanent shock generates temporary "business cycle" like fluctuations as the economy optimally adjusts its capital stock and work effort to the new technological reality. These fluctuations are an integral part of the growth process.
The "hours puzzle" refers to a quantitative discrepancy between the predictions of simple Real Business Cycle (RBC) models and the actual data regarding the volatility of hours worked versus the volatility of real wages.
The puzzle is that the model cannot simultaneously generate highly volatile hours and only moderately volatile real wages, as seen in the data. Much research in the RBC literature (e.g., using indivisible labour, household production) is aimed at resolving this puzzle.
The Fisher Effect (or Fisher Hypothesis) describes the relationship between nominal interest rates, real interest rates, and inflation. It states that the nominal interest rate will adjust one-for-one with the expected inflation rate, leaving the real interest rate unaffected.
The relationship is defined by the Fisher equation:
\( R = r + \pi^e \)
Where R is the nominal interest rate, r is the real interest rate, and \(\pi^e\) is the expected inflation rate.
The underlying theory is that the real interest rate is determined by real factors (productivity and thrift). If expected inflation rises by 1 percentage point, lenders will demand and borrowers will agree to a 1 percentage point higher nominal interest rate to compensate for the erosion of purchasing power, leaving the real return r unchanged. This implies that monetary policy, which can influence inflation, has no long-run effect on the real interest rate.
While both concepts refer to a benchmark level of output/unemployment, they have different normative implications due to their different microfoundations.
A "trigger strategy" is a type of punishment strategy used in repeated games that can sometimes support a cooperative outcome (like zero inflation) as an equilibrium.
In the context of the monetary policy time-inconsistency game, a trigger strategy employed by the public would be:
"I will expect zero inflation in the next period as long as the central bank has never created inflation in the past. However, if the central bank ever creates a surprise inflation (i.e., 'pulls the trigger'), I will revert to expecting high inflation forever after."
Faced with this strategy, a rational central bank must weigh the one-time gain from creating a surprise inflation today against the permanent loss of being in a bad, high-inflation equilibrium in all future periods. If the central bank is sufficiently patient (i.e., has a low discount rate), the future losses will outweigh the present gain, and it will choose to cooperate by maintaining zero inflation. This can make the optimal, low-inflation outcome a credible, time-consistent equilibrium.
The "Lucas island" paradigm is a metaphorical framework developed by Robert Lucas to model an economy with imperfect information, providing the foundation for his misperceptions theory.
The key features of the paradigm are:
This setup forces producers to engage in a "signal extraction problem." When the price on their island changes, they must infer whether it is a local change (to which they should respond by adjusting output) or a global change (to which they should not). This potential for confusion between relative and absolute price changes is what allows unexpected monetary shocks to have real effects.
The difference lies in the source and nature of the cyclical fluctuations.
The assumption of constant returns to scale (CRS) in production is crucial in the Long and Plosser (1983) model for several reasons:
Without CRS, solving the model would be significantly more complex and would likely require numerical approximation methods rather than a direct analytical solution.
The Lucas Critique is a fundamental argument that traditional macroeconometric models cannot be used to evaluate the effects of policy changes because the model's parameters are not truly structural and will change along with the policy.
The connection to the Policy Impotence Proposition (PIP) is very close:
In essence, the PIP is a specific application of the Lucas Critique to systematic demand-management policy. The critique explains that the "stable" relationships policy-makers might try to exploit are not stable at all, but are functions of expectations, which in turn are functions of the policy itself.
The distinction lies in whether unemployment is a voluntary choice or a result of market failure.
In the vector autoregression \(y_{t+1} = Ay_t + k + \eta_{t+1}\) from Long and Plosser (1983), the matrix \(A\) is the input-output matrix expressed in terms of cost shares.
Each element \(a_{ij}\) of the matrix \(A\) represents the elasticity of output in sector \(i\) with respect to the input of the commodity from sector \(j\). Under their assumptions of Cobb-Douglas technology and constant returns to scale, this elasticity is equal to the equilibrium share of input \(j\) in the total cost of producing output \(i\).
This matrix is the heart of the model's propagation mechanism. It explicitly maps out how the outputs of various sectors (the elements of \(y_t\)) are used as inputs to produce the next period's outputs (the elements of \(y_{t+1}\)). It is through the off-diagonal elements of \(A\) that shocks are transmitted from one sector to another, creating comovement.
The law of iterated expectations (also known as the tower property) states that the expectation of a conditional expectation of a random variable is simply the unconditional expectation of that variable. More formally, for random variables X and Y:
\( E[E(X|Y)] = E[X] \)
In the context of rational expectations models, it means that today's forecast of a forecast you will make tomorrow (with more information) is just today's forecast of the ultimate outcome.
For example, \( E_t[E_{t+1}(P_{t+2})] = E_t(P_{t+2}) \). You cannot predict how you will update your forecast in the future.
This law is crucial for solving rational expectations models using the forward-looking substitution method. It allows modelers to take expectations of future expectations, simplifying complex dynamic equations and enabling them to express the current value of a variable as a function of expectations about future fundamental factors, not future expectations themselves.
Distortionary taxes (e.g., taxes on labour or capital income) can amplify fluctuations in an RBC model by affecting the after-tax returns to work and investment, thereby strengthening the response to shocks.
Consider a positive technology shock in a model with a balanced budget and a tax on output:
By making after-tax returns more sensitive to underlying shocks, distortionary taxes can increase the volatility of hours and investment, helping some RBC models better match the empirical facts.
A Cobb-Douglas production function is a specific functional form that relates inputs to output. It is widely used in macroeconomics for its analytical tractability and because it fits aggregate data reasonably well. The general form is:
\( Y = \theta K^{\alpha} N^{1-\alpha} \)
Where:
Key properties include:
The Lucas Critique (Lucas, 1976) is a fundamental criticism of the large-scale macroeconometric models popular in the 1960s and 1970s. It argues that it is naive to try to predict the effects of a change in economic policy entirely on the basis of relationships observed in historical data, especially in the form of simple behavioral equations.
The core idea is that the "structural" parameters of these models (e.g., the marginal propensity to consume) are not truly structural. They are themselves the result of optimal decisions made by rational agents based on their expectations of government policy. If the policy changes, agents' expectations will change, their optimal decision rules will change, and thus the parameters of the behavioral equations will change.
Therefore, a model used for policy evaluation must be based on truly deep structural parameters—those governing preferences and technology—which are invariant to changes in policy.
A "trigger strategy" is a type of punishment strategy used in repeated games that can sometimes support a cooperative outcome (like zero inflation) as an equilibrium.
In the context of the monetary policy time-inconsistency game, a trigger strategy employed by the public would be:
"I will expect zero inflation in the next period as long as the central bank has never created inflation in the past. However, if the central bank ever creates a surprise inflation (i.e., 'pulls the trigger'), I will revert to expecting high inflation forever after."
Faced with this strategy, a rational central bank must weigh the one-time gain from creating a surprise inflation today against the permanent loss of being in a bad, high-inflation equilibrium in all future periods. If the central bank is sufficiently patient (i.e., has a low discount rate), the future losses will outweigh the present gain, and it will choose to cooperate by maintaining zero inflation. This can make the optimal, low-inflation outcome a credible, time-consistent equilibrium.
The "hours puzzle" refers to a quantitative discrepancy between the predictions of simple Real Business Cycle (RBC) models and the actual data regarding the volatility of hours worked versus the volatility of real wages.
The puzzle is that the model cannot simultaneously generate highly volatile hours and only moderately volatile real wages, as seen in the data. Much research in the RBC literature (e.g., using indivisible labour, household production) is aimed at resolving this puzzle.
The Fisher Effect (or Fisher Hypothesis) describes the relationship between nominal interest rates, real interest rates, and inflation. It states that the nominal interest rate will adjust one-for-one with the expected inflation rate, leaving the real interest rate unaffected.
The relationship is defined by the Fisher equation:
\( R = r + \pi^e \)
Where R is the nominal interest rate, r is the real interest rate, and \(\pi^e\) is the expected inflation rate.
The underlying theory is that the real interest rate is determined by real factors (productivity and thrift). If expected inflation rises by 1 percentage point, lenders will demand and borrowers will agree to a 1 percentage point higher nominal interest rate to compensate for the erosion of purchasing power, leaving the real return r unchanged. This implies that monetary policy, which can influence inflation, has no long-run effect on the real interest rate.
While both concepts refer to a benchmark level of output/unemployment, they have different normative implications due to their different microfoundations.
The "Solow residual" is a measure of total factor productivity (TFP) growth, often used as an empirical proxy for technology shocks in Real Business Cycle models.
It is derived from a growth accounting framework. Given a production function \(Y = \theta F(K, N)\), the growth rate of output can be decomposed into the contributions from the growth of inputs (capital and labour) and the growth of productivity (\(\theta\)). The Solow residual is the portion of output growth that cannot be explained by the growth in measured inputs.
Specifically, for a Cobb-Douglas production function, the growth rate of the residual is calculated as:
\( \Delta \log(\theta_t) = \Delta \log(Y_t) - (1-\alpha)\Delta \log(K_t) - \alpha \Delta \log(N_t) \)
where \(\alpha\) is labour's share of income. The residual \(\Delta \log(\theta_t)\) captures any factor that shifts the production function, including technological progress, changes in regulations, or measurement errors.
A Cobb-Douglas production function is a specific functional form that relates inputs to output. It is widely used in macroeconomics for its analytical tractability and because it fits aggregate data reasonably well. The general form is:
\( Y = \theta K^{\alpha} N^{1-\alpha} \)
Where:
Key properties include:
The real-balance effect (or Pigou effect) describes how changes in the price level can affect aggregate demand through their impact on the real value of wealth.
The mechanism is as follows:
This effect provides another reason (in addition to the interest rate effect via the LM curve) why the aggregate demand curve is downward-sloping. In the context of the IS-LM model, the real-balance effect can be modeled as a rightward shift of the IS curve when the price level falls.
The primary difference lies in the assumption about the flexibility of the nominal wage (\(W\)).
This difference in wage assumptions is the source of the different shapes of the aggregate supply curve: vertical in the classical model and upward-sloping (or horizontal in extreme cases) in the Keynesian model.
The marginal propensity to consume (MPC) is the fraction of an additional unit of disposable income that a household chooses to spend on consumption.
Mathematically, if the consumption function is \(c = C(y_d)\), where \(y_d\) is disposable income, then the MPC is the derivative of the consumption function:
\( MPC = C'(y_d) = \frac{dc}{dy_d} \)
A standard assumption in macroeconomics is that the MPC is positive but less than one (\(0 < MPC < 1\)).
The MPC is a key parameter in the Keynesian multiplier process.
"Crowding out" is the reduction in private investment (and sometimes consumption) that occurs as a result of an increase in government spending.
In the classical model, crowding out is 100%. The mechanism is:
In this case, public spending completely displaces, or "crowds out," private spending, with no net effect on total output.
A steady state is a long-run equilibrium path in a growth model where key economic variables grow at constant rates. It is a state of balanced growth.
In the neoclassical growth model (without population growth or technological change), the steady state is characterized by:
If the economy starts with a capital stock below its steady-state level, it will experience a period of transition with positive net investment and growth in per-capita output until it converges to the steady state. In models with technological progress, the steady state is a path where per-capita variables grow at the constant rate of technological progress.
The difference lies in what they measure the return to saving in.
The relationship between them is given by the Fisher equation:
\( r \approx R - \pi^e \)
where \(\pi^e\) is the expected rate of inflation. The real interest rate is approximately the nominal interest rate minus the expected rate of inflation. It is the real interest rate that is relevant for saving and investment decisions, as rational agents care about their real purchasing power, not the nominal amount of money they have.
The main takeaway is that many commonly held beliefs about business cycles, particularly regarding the role of money and prices, are not supported by post-war U.S. data. The paper presents a systematic documentation of business cycle "facts" that serve as a benchmark for theories.
Key findings that challenge traditional (monetary) views of business cycles include:
The paper argues that these "real facts" are more consistent with a Real Business Cycle perspective, where technology shocks drive fluctuations, than with monetary or other demand-side theories. It shifted the focus of business cycle research towards matching these quantitative, empirical regularities.
The "Lucas island" paradigm is a metaphorical framework developed by Robert Lucas to model an economy with imperfect information, providing the foundation for his misperceptions theory.
The key features of the paradigm are:
This setup forces producers to engage in a "signal extraction problem." When the price on their island changes, they must infer whether it is a local change (to which they should respond by adjusting output) or a global change (to which they should not). This potential for confusion between relative and absolute price changes is what allows unexpected monetary shocks to have real effects.
The distinction lies in whether unemployment is a voluntary choice or a result of market failure.
In the vector autoregression \(y_{t+1} = Ay_t + k + \eta_{t+1}\) from Long and Plosser (1983), the matrix \(A\) is the input-output matrix expressed in terms of cost shares.
Each element \(a_{ij}\) of the matrix \(A\) represents the elasticity of output in sector \(i\) with respect to the input of the commodity from sector \(j\). Under their assumptions of Cobb-Douglas technology and constant returns to scale, this elasticity is equal to the equilibrium share of input \(j\) in the total cost of producing output \(i\).
This matrix is the heart of the model's propagation mechanism. It explicitly maps out how the outputs of various sectors (the elements of \(y_t\)) are used as inputs to produce the next period's outputs (the elements of \(y_{t+1}\)). It is through the off-diagonal elements of \(A\) that shocks are transmitted from one sector to another, creating comovement.
The law of iterated expectations (also known as the tower property) states that the expectation of a conditional expectation of a random variable is simply the unconditional expectation of that variable. More formally, for random variables X and Y:
\( E[E(X|Y)] = E[X] \)
In the context of rational expectations models, it means that today's forecast of a forecast you will make tomorrow (with more information) is just today's forecast of the ultimate outcome.
For example, \( E_t[E_{t+1}(P_{t+2})] = E_t(P_{t+2}) \). You cannot predict how you will update your forecast in the future.
This law is crucial for solving rational expectations models using the forward-looking substitution method. It allows modelers to take expectations of future expectations, simplifying complex dynamic equations and enabling them to express the current value of a variable as a function of expectations about future fundamental factors, not future expectations themselves.
Distortionary taxes (e.g., taxes on labour or capital income) can amplify fluctuations in an RBC model by affecting the after-tax returns to work and investment, thereby strengthening the response to shocks.
Consider a positive technology shock in a model with a balanced budget and a tax on output:
By making after-tax returns more sensitive to underlying shocks, distortionary taxes can increase the volatility of hours and investment, helping some RBC models better match the empirical facts.
The main takeaway is that many commonly held beliefs about business cycles, particularly regarding the role of money and prices, are not supported by post-war U.S. data. The paper presents a systematic documentation of business cycle "facts" that serve as a benchmark for theories.
Key findings that challenge traditional (monetary) views of business cycles include:
The paper argues that these "real facts" are more consistent with a Real Business Cycle perspective, where technology shocks drive fluctuations, than with monetary or other demand-side theories. It shifted the focus of business cycle research towards matching these quantitative, empirical regularities.
The "Lucas island" paradigm is a metaphorical framework developed by Robert Lucas to model an economy with imperfect information, providing the foundation for his misperceptions theory.
The key features of the paradigm are:
This setup forces producers to engage in a "signal extraction problem." When the price on their island changes, they must infer whether it is a local change (to which they should respond by adjusting output) or a global change (to which they should not). This potential for confusion between relative and absolute price changes is what allows unexpected monetary shocks to have real effects.
The distinction lies in whether unemployment is a voluntary choice or a result of market failure.
In the vector autoregression \(y_{t+1} = Ay_t + k + \eta_{t+1}\) from Long and Plosser (1983), the matrix \(A\) is the input-output matrix expressed in terms of cost shares.
Each element \(a_{ij}\) of the matrix \(A\) represents the elasticity of output in sector \(i\) with respect to the input of the commodity from sector \(j\). Under their assumptions of Cobb-Douglas technology and constant returns to scale, this elasticity is equal to the equilibrium share of input \(j\) in the total cost of producing output \(i\).
This matrix is the heart of the model's propagation mechanism. It explicitly maps out how the outputs of various sectors (the elements of \(y_t\)) are used as inputs to produce the next period's outputs (the elements of \(y_{t+1}\)). It is through the off-diagonal elements of \(A\) that shocks are transmitted from one sector to another, creating comovement.
The law of iterated expectations (also known as the tower property) states that the expectation of a conditional expectation of a random variable is simply the unconditional expectation of that variable. More formally, for random variables X and Y:
\( E[E(X|Y)] = E[X] \)
In the context of rational expectations models, it means that today's forecast of a forecast you will make tomorrow (with more information) is just today's forecast of the ultimate outcome.
For example, \( E_t[E_{t+1}(P_{t+2})] = E_t(P_{t+2}) \). You cannot predict how you will update your forecast in the future.
This law is crucial for solving rational expectations models using the forward-looking substitution method. It allows modelers to take expectations of future expectations, simplifying complex dynamic equations and enabling them to express the current value of a variable as a function of expectations about future fundamental factors, not future expectations themselves.
The main takeaway is that many commonly held beliefs about business cycles, particularly regarding the role of money and prices, are not supported by post-war U.S. data. The paper presents a systematic documentation of business cycle "facts" that serve as a benchmark for theories.
Key findings that challenge traditional (monetary) views of business cycles include:
The paper argues that these "real facts" are more consistent with a Real Business Cycle perspective, where technology shocks drive fluctuations, than with monetary or other demand-side theories. It shifted the focus of business cycle research towards matching these quantitative, empirical regularities.