Endogenous Business Cycles, Cyclical Unemployment, and Endogenous Long-Run Growth

2004 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 559-581 ◽  
Author(s):  
LILIA MALIAR ◽  
SERGUEI MALIAR

This paper presents a computable general equilibrium model of endogenous (stochastic) growth and cycles that can account for two key features of the aggregate data: balanced growth in the long run and business cycles in the short run. The model is built on Schumpeter's idea that economic development is the consequence of the periodic arrival of innovations. There is growth because each subsequent innovation leads to a permanent improvement in the production technology. Cycles arise because innovations trigger a reallocation of resources between production and R&D. The quantitative implications of the calibrated version of our model are very similar to those of Kydland and Prescott's (1982) model. Moreover, under some parameterizations, our model can correct two shortcomings of RBC models: It can account for the persistence in output growth and the asymmetry of growth within the business cycle.


2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus M. Opp ◽  
Christine A. Parlour ◽  
Johan Walden

2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 519-538
Author(s):  
Marinko ŠKARE ◽  
Daniel TOMIĆ

Frequent reversals in business cycles pose the question whether country can achieve macroeconomic stability and/or economic growth by coordinating its economic policies. Thus, what is the role of economic policy within the short/long run in amplifying or dampening shocks? Business cycle – economic growth relationship is rather ambiguous and has, thus, attracted controversy. In this sense the (dis)belief that there indeed exists a relationship between the economic growth and business cycle, and their long-run convergence brings us to three important hypotheses that: (1) the evaluation of cycle-growth bond is inconclusive, (2) empirical testing of cycle synchronization is exaggerated and (3) the hypothesis of coupling/decoupling is ambiguous and can be misleading. Economic growth is a complex process and cannot be attributed to a single factor of observance hence this essay is just a tool of theoretical reasoning with firm grip on empirical circumstances that lead us to consider some issues that dwell the “growth economists” these days. Our study suggests a conclusion that discussions on the cycle-growth nexus are far from over, revealing us some remarkable confrontations within empirical domain.


2005 ◽  
Vol 115 (502) ◽  
pp. C161-C175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigar Hashimzade ◽  
Salvador Ortigueira

1997 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cecile Dangel ◽  
Alain Raybaut

Albert Aftalion is certainly one of the best known French economists of the first half of the twentieth century. The influence he exerted during his lifetime over the scientific community of his homeland was considerable, and he was promptly acknowledged abroad to be one of the leading theorists of the business cycle. While he is best known as one of the inventors of the acceleration principle (Haberler 1937), we will focus on Aftalion's endogenous explanation of non-monetary business cycles and, more specifically, on the theoretical framework supporting Les crises périodiques de surproduction. Though this work can be seen as a mere “(desperate) attempt” to reconcile the law of markets with general overproduction (Abraham-Frois 1987), we argue instead that Aftalion's failure to construct an equilibrium theory of aggregate overproduction can be traced back to his inadequate treatment of aggregate demand. According to him, long roundabout processes are what generate cyclical fluctuations within a setting in which commodities produced and brought to the market always find an outlet. In other words, the law of markets implies market clearing where declines in prices instead of involuntary stock-building occur in the event of a crisis. How demand behaves in such a setting requires careful specification, which is precisely what is lacking in Aftalion's model.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document