收入冲击、偏好冲击与中国经济波动——基于DSGE方法的数值分析

文章基于包含消费习惯与借贷约束的RBC模型，尝试将收入冲击与偏好冲击纳入到该模型中，并采用随机动态一般均衡（DSGE）方法解释中国经济波动。研究发现：（1）模型能够解释实际产出、消费、投资与资本波动的92.6%、77.8%、84.5%、87.6%。（2）收入冲击与偏好冲击对我国实际产出、投资、就业和资本的影响均有明显的持续性，而对消费的影响均表现为短期性。（3）收入冲击对消费的影响较小，而对就业有较大影响；消费偏好冲击对两者的影响与收入冲击恰恰相反。     

我国宏观经济时间序列的结构突变与宏观经济运行态势分析

院文章基于双变量结构突变模型,利用Andrews 检验统计量和Bai 子样本过程以及Hansen 异方差固定回归元自举法对我国主要宏观经济变量之间关系的稳定性进行了检验.研究发现,自20 世纪90 年代以来,在金融危机、体制改革等外部冲击和内部冲击的双重作用和影响下,我国主要宏观经济指标,例如消费、投资和政府支出等与国内生产总值之间的关系均发生了不同程度的结构突变,这意味着我国经济周期波动态势也出现了转变.     

市场化水平与中国经济波动的平稳化——基于扩展的RBC模型分析

中国市场化改革由增量改革时期进入全面改革时期;同时,经济波动由"高位波动"向"波幅收窄"的平稳化趋势转变。本文建立包含金融加速器机制和市场化因素的RBC模型,数值模拟显示市场化水平越低下,金融加速器机制放大和传播外生冲击的效果越明显,市场化程度的提高减轻了政府对企业干预和金融加速器的放大效果,能够较好解释经济波动的阶段性变化。其政策含义为市场化有助于增强经济稳定性,抑制经济波动。     

中国产业结构分布与经济波动

本文在阿西莫格鲁（Acemoglu）关于产业结构分布与经济波动关系研究的基础上,引入劳动力占比,实证分析了中国产业结构分布与经济波动之间的关系。基于中国投入产出表的数据,设定多种产业规模指标反映中国不同产业的关联度差异,既验证中国产业结构的不对称性,也探讨了产业层面潜在的波动形成源。通过Nadaraya-Watson 非参数估计回归,发现产业规模不对称时,产业部门的波动确实会导致宏观经济波动。由于高阶关联关系的存在,波动会有一定的持续性,对宏观经济的影响较大,产业波动可以解释9％的宏观波动原因。     

媒体信息、预期冲击与经济周期波动——基于中文财经类报刊数据

新闻媒体作为公众信息的主要来源，对公众预期具有不可忽视的作用，进而可能对宏观经济波动产生影响。本文首先使用潜在狄利克雷分配模型，将中文财经类报刊文本数据转化为新闻主题关注度，并依据新闻主题关注度构建新闻指数作为公众预期的测度，然后结合消费、产出等关键宏观经济变量，利用结构VAR模型考察预期冲击和噪声冲击对经济周期波动的影响。研究发现，新闻指数对消费、产出等关键宏观经济变量具有明显的领先关系；从新闻指数中识别的预期冲击会对实际经济变量产生永久性的影响，而噪声冲击的影响会逐渐衰减，最终回到冲击前的水平。本文的研究验证了预期管理在宏观经济调控中的重要性，并为文本数据在宏观经济研究中的应用提供了新视角。     

资源型区域产业结构演进与经济增长和波动的关系研究——以山西省为例

基于VAR模型的格兰杰因果关系检验、广义脉冲响应函数及方差分解技术对山西省1952—2012年间宏观经济波动和各产业波动的内在动态关系进行了实证分析,结果表明:一、二、三产业波动均为山西省经济波动的格兰杰原因;三次产业各自的波动变量冲击对其自身和另外两个产业以及GDP的影响都具有收敛性和周期性,说明山西省经济系统本身具有自动调整的机制;第三产业的波动在很大程度上引发了宏观经济的波动,同时第二、三产业波动与整个宏观经济波动具有很大的一致性和同步性。说明山西省应该通过加大农业投资、优化第二产业内部结构、提高第三产业比重等途径确保三次产业的协调发展。     

外部冲击对中国经济波动的影响——基于BSVAR模型的实证研究

本文基于BSAVR模型研究了外部冲击对于中国经济波动的影响,同时研究了中国经济波动可能对国际经济运行的影响。实证研究表明,内部冲击是中国经济波动的主要原因,外部冲击居于次要地位,外部冲击对于中国经济增速的影响要大于对价格水平的影响。中国经济波动对于国际经济运行也产生一定影响,其中中国经济增速的冲击影响要大干价格冲击影响,中国经济增速和价格波动对于国际油价的影响都较大。     

不同碳配额分配方式的中国经济波动效应研究

研究目标:探究历史法、基准线法、历史基准线混合法三种碳配额分配方式下引起中国经济波动的主要外生冲击及其影响中国经济波动的机制。研究方法:基于中国碳排放权交易市场特征,构建一个包含碳排放权交易的动态随机一般均衡(DSGE)模型。研究发现:(1)历史法下,中国经济波动更容易受到政策冲击的影响。基准线法与历史基准线混合法下,中国经济波动更容易受到碳排放企业技术冲击与生态企业技术冲击的影响;(2)历史法、基准线法、历史基准线混合法不改变碳排放企业技术冲击与生态企业技术冲击对中国经济波动的影响;(3)基准线法下的社会福利损失小于历史法和历史基准线混合法两种情形,随着企业的初始碳配额增加,通胀率波动与总产出波动持续增加,社会福利损失扩大,且这种情况在历史法下更明显。研究创新:将历史法、基准线法、历史基准线混合法三种碳配额分配方式植入DSGE模型,比较三种碳配额分配方式对中国经济波动的影响。研究价值:本文的分析对于中国宏观经济与碳排放权交易市场的平稳运行提供理论参考。     

国有股权能缓解宏观经济波动的冲击吗?——基于微观企业投资视角的研究

从微观企业投资的视角,研究宏观经济受到冲击时国有股权的作用。研究发现,受到经济波动冲击时,上市公司资本投资规模下降;组间系数差异检验发现,宏观经济波动冲击对国有股权组的影响显著小于无国有股权组;将国有股权样本按国有股权比例分组后发现,只有在比例较低组投资规模显著下降,而在比例较高的两组不显著,说明国有股权能够稳定企业资本投资。进一步研究发现,国有股权通过担保和政府补助获得经济波动期间的投资稳定性。     

成本推动冲击和中国经济波动

本文立足近年来国内经济频繁波动的现实背景,通过构建一个包含成本推动冲击、消费偏好冲击、技术冲击以及货币政策冲击的DSGE模型,运用脉冲响应分析、方差分解等方法对中国经济波动的外生冲击因素进行考察。研究发现：产出波动是由多种冲击共同推动,其中成本推动冲击贡献最大;通货膨胀波动主要是由成本推动冲击和货币政策冲击引致,消费偏好冲击和技术冲击的影响有限。进一步地,反事实模拟分析也证实了这一结论。这也揭示出近年来中国经济高速增长依附高昂成本,且经济增长方式是粗放式的典型化事实。     

EQUILIBRIUM BUSINESS CYCLES: THEORY AND EVIDENCE

ABSTRACT. This paper surveys equilibrium business cycles (EBC) theory, which has dominated the business cycle literature since the mid 1970s. It focuses primarily on the real business cycle (RBC) literature the origin of which is traced to the monetary equilibrium business cycle (MBC) model developed by Lucas (1975). RBC and MBC models are themselves related to a wider class of linear stochastic business cycle models which, following Frisch (1933), view the cycle as the result of the propagation, by the economic system, of a series of random shocks. The MBC approach highlighted the importance of monetary shocks but its failure to adequately explain observed fluctuations provided the impetus to the development of the RBC approach, which emphasises the importance of real shocks. This paper also appraises the empirical support for the RBC approach and finds it less than compelling. Given the failure of Keynesian, and equilibrium linear stochastic business cycle models to fully explain economic fluctuations, the Frischian approach to business cycle modelling is called into question. Developments to existing models, which may help to clarify our understanding of business cycle behaviour, are discussed with a view to setting out a research agenda for the 1990s and beyond.     

Fiscal news and macroeconomic volatility

This paper analyzes the contribution of anticipated capital and labor tax shocks to business cycle volatility in an estimated New Keynesian business cycle model. While fiscal policy accounts for about 15% of output variance at business cycle frequencies, this mostly derives from anticipated government spending shocks. Tax shocks, both anticipated and unanticipated, contribute little to the fluctuations of real variables. However, anticipated capital tax shocks do explain a sizable part of inflation fluctuations, accounting for up to 12% of its variance. In line with earlier studies, news shocks in total account for about 50% of output variance. Further decomposing this news effect, we find permanent total factor productivity news shocks to be most important. When looking at the federal level instead of total government, the importance of anticipated tax and spending shocks significantly increases, suggesting that fiscal policy at the subnational level typically counteracts the effects of federal fiscal policy shocks.     

By force of demand: Explaining cyclical fluctuations of international trade and government spending

This paper explores the role of demand shocks, as an alternative to productivity shocks, in driving both domestic and international business cycles within the international real business cycle (IRBC) framework. In addition to those well-documented domestic business cycle fluctuations (e.g., the volatility and cyclicality of output, consumption, investment, labor hours, and labor productivity) and international business cycle properties (e.g., the countercyclical net export and the comovement puzzle), this paper focuses on two additional stylized facts in the industrialized countries: the procyclical trade openness (the GDP fraction of trade volume) and the countercyclical government size (the GDP fraction of government spending). Using a parsimonious dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model, we show that the model׳s predictions under productivity shocks are not consistent with these facts. Instead, a demand-shock-driven model replicates the above facts while matching other domestic and international business cycle properties. An estimated version of the model confirms the quantitatively important impacts of demand shocks.     

Consumer misperceptions,uncertain fundamentals,and the business cycle

This paper estimates the importance of shocks to consumer misperceptions “noise shocks” for U.S. business cycle fluctuations. I embed imperfect information as in Lorenzoni (2009) into a Smets and Wouters (2007)-type DSGE model. Agents only observe aggregate productivity and a signal about the permanent component contaminated with noise. Based on this information agents form beliefs about the temporary and the permanent component of productivity. Shocks to the signal (noise shocks) trigger aggregate fluctuations unrelated to changes in productivity. Bayesian estimation shows that noise shocks explain up to 14 percent of output and up to 25 percent of consumption fluctuations. Nominal rigidities and the specification of the monetary policy rule are crucial for the importance of noise shocks. These features help to resolve conflicting results in the previous literature.     

NONLINEAR BUSINESS CYCLE MODELLING

Abstract. Literature which employs nonlinearities to explain economic fluctuations, commonly called business cycles, is surveyed. Relaxation of the linearity assumption significantly increases the range of possible dynamic solution paths and introduces the possibility that business cycles are endogenously determined. The dominant post-war modelling strategy has been the Frisch (1933) (and Slutsky, 1937) inspired one of developing essentially (log) linear economic models which produce damped cycles (or monotonic damping) to propagate the energy provided by repeated random (or autocorrelated) shocks. The cycle is exogenously driven, since it would die out in the absence of shocks. Deterministic (nonstochastic) nonlinear models can produce a wide range of endogenous fluctuations, including: stable limit cycles; growth cycles; and chaotic output, which have the appearance of random fluctuations. Further, the same model can produce qualitatively different outputs according to starting and parameter values. If the possibility of shocks to parameters is admitted, then behaviour can change abruptly following shocks. Evidence on the existence of nonlinearities and chaos in macroeconomic time series is assessed and alternative approaches to modelling dynamic economic development, related to the work of Keynes, Marx, Schumpeter and Shackle, are discussed. Their ideas have not proved readily amenable to mathematical modelling, but attempts to encapsulate some of them are reviewed.     

Sentiment and the U.S. business cycle

Psychological factors are commonly believed to play a role on cyclical economic fluctuations, but they are typically omitted from state-of-the-art macroeconomic models.This paper introduces “sentiment” in a medium-scale DSGE model of the U.S. economy and tests the empirical contribution of sentiment shocks to business cycle fluctuations.The assumption of rational expectations is relaxed. The paper exploits, instead, observed data on expectations in the estimation. The observed expectations are assumed to be formed from a near-rational learning model. Agents are endowed with a perceived law of motion that resembles the model solution under rational expectations, but they lack knowledge about the solution’s reduced-form coefficients. They attempt to learn those coefficients over time using available time series at each point in the sample and updating their beliefs through constant-gain learning. In each period, however, they may form expectations that fall above or below those implied by the learning model. These deviations capture excesses of optimism and pessimism, which can be quite persistent and which are defined as sentiment in the model. Different sentiment shocks are identified in the empirical analysis: waves of undue optimism and pessimism may refer to expected future consumption, future investment, or future inflationary pressures.The results show that exogenous variations in sentiment are responsible for a sizable (above forty percent) portion of historical U.S. business cycle fluctuations. Sentiment shocks related to investment decisions, which evoke Keynes’ animal spirits, play the largest role. When the model is estimated imposing the rational expectations hypothesis, instead, the role of structural investment-specific and neutral technology shocks significantly expands to capture the omitted contribution of sentiment.     

Financial intermediation and real estate prices impact on business cycles: A Bayesian analysis

How do financial intermediation and real estate prices impinge on the business cycle? I develop a two-sector stochastic general equilibrium model with financial intermediation and real estate collateral to assess the impact of financial conditions and land prices on aggregate fluctuations. I estimate the model with Bayesian methods using a novel data set that includes U.S. macro and financial variables during the period 1975–2010. The results from the estimated model show that financial conditions have a sizable effect on the variability of investment spending, while productivity shocks are the main source of consumption fluctuations. Specifically, on the macro side, (1) financial shocks explain about three quarters of investment spending variability and one third of the variance in hours worked. On the financial side, (2) financial shocks explain most of the variability in land prices, credit spread, and aggregate net worth of the financial sector. The model also accounts for observed unconditional moments of macro and financial variables. Our quantitative results are suggestive of the impact of diverse sources of financial instability, and as such relevant for macro prudential policy analysis.     

Selecting structural innovations in DSGE models

Dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) models are typically estimated assuming the existence of certain structural shocks that drive macroeconomic fluctuations. We analyze the consequences of estimating shocks that are “nonexistent” and propose a method to select the economic shocks driving macroeconomic uncertainty. Forcing these nonexisting shocks in estimation produces a downward bias in the estimated internal persistence of the model. We show how these distortions can be reduced by using priors for standard deviations whose support includes zero. The method allows us to accurately select shocks and estimate model parameters with high precision. We revisit the empirical evidence on an industry standard medium‐scale DSGE model and find that government and price markup shocks are innovations that do not generate statistically significant dynamics.     

PERMANENT AND TRANSITORY SHOCKS,AND THE UK BUSINESS CYCLE

In this paper the business cycle properties of UK data are investigated using a VAR technique. A Real Business Cycle (RBC) model is formulated. The model includes both permanent and transitory shocks to technology. The business cycle properties of the data and the model are investigated by deriving the expected changes over various forecast horizons from a VAR model. It is found, contrary to evidence in Rotemberg and Woodford (1996), that the model can account for many features of the data and that temporary shocks are pertinent in order to explain the business cycle moments. The main difference between theory and data is present in hours worked. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Macroeconomic shocks and fluctuations in African economies

We estimate a monetary DSGE model to examine the role of macroeconomic shocks in generating fluctuations in ten African countries. The model is estimated with the Bayesian technique using twelve macroeconomic variables. The findings indicate that both the internal and external shocks significantly influence output fluctuations in African economies. Over a four quarter horizon, internal shocks are dominant and over eight to sixteen quarter horizons, external shocks are dominant. Among the external shocks, external debt, exchange rate, foreign interest rate and commodity price shocks account for a large part of output variations in African economies. Money supply and productivity shocks are the most important internal shocks contributing to output fluctuations in African countries.