Abstract:
Recent empirical work has suggested that in response to a positive technology shock, labour productivity rises more than output, while employment shows a persistent decline. This finding has raised doubts concerning the relevance of the RBC model as well as the quantitative significance of technology shocks as a source of aggregate fluctuations. We show that the inability of the RBC model to fit these stylized facts is an artifact of the closed economy assumption. In an open economy, the flexible price RBC model can match the negative conditional correlation between productivity and employment quite well, as long as trade elasticities fall short of unity and the degree of openness is sufficiently high. The computed variance-decompositions also suggest that there is no empirical inconsistency between matching this correlation and accepting that technology shocks are the main source of variation in output. Moreover, using a low trade elasticity value does not worsen performance along any other dimensions.
Downloads: (external link) http://www.cepr.org/pubs/dps/DP3680.asp (application/pdf)
CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
More papers in CEPR Discussion Papers from C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers Address: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 53--56 Great Sutton Street, London EC1V 0DG Series data maintained by ().
This site is part of RePEc
and all the data displayed here is part of the RePEc data set.
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to
contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .