Two Flaws in Business Cycle Dating

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence J. Christiano ◽  
Joshua Mark Davis
2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Glocker ◽  
Philipp Wegmueller

2011 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 246-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Travis J Berge ◽  
Óscar Jordá

The Business Cycle Dating Committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research provides a historical chronology of business cycle turning points. We investigate three central aspects of this chronology. How skillful is the Dating Committee when classifying economic activity into expansions and recessions? Which indices of economic conditions best capture the current but unobservable state of the business cycle? And which indicators best predict future turning points, and at what horizons? We answer each of these questions in detail using methods specifically designed to assess classification ability. In the process, we clarify several important features of the business cycle. (JEL C82, E32)


Author(s):  
Ľubica Štiblárová

This paper examines to which extent the results of multivariate principal component analysis based on a set of macroeconomic indicators used by one of the leading economic research organizations – the Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR), mimics traditional, univariate Bry and Boschan (1971) business cycle procedure. Using almost 20 years of observations, we estimate the euro area aggregate and the Czech business cycles by classical, as well as alternative multivariate method. Comparison of the euro area aggregate classical business cycle with that of the CEPR reveals minor discrepancies. The estimation of the Czech business cycle using principal component analysis suffers from volatile time series, potentially resulting from a smaller character of the economy. On the contrary, the estimate of the euro area aggregate business cycle reflects quite well Bry and Boschan (1971) procedure, showing rather lagging behavior.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document