Abstract:
The Cowles Commission approach is reviewed and compared to the approaches of real business cycle (RBC) theorists and new Keynesian economists. It is argued that RBC models are not tested in a serious enough way and that the new Keynesian literature is not empirical enough for testing even to be a serious possibility. Macroeconomics seems to be moving away from its traditional empirical basis, which is sad. This paper argues for returning to the path that was abandoned by most macroeconomists around 1970, namely the specification and testing of structural macroeconometric models.
Downloads: (external link) http://www.nber.org/papers/w3990.pdf (application/pdf)
Access to the full text is generally limited to series subscribers, however if the top level domain of the client browser is in a developing country or transition economy free access is provided. More information about subscriptions and free access is available at http://www.nber.org/wwphelp.html.
More papers in NBER Working Papers from National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc Address: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A. Contact information at EDIRC. 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 .