27
NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES REAL BUSINESS CYCLES: A NEW KEYNESIAN PERSPECTIVE N. Gregory Mankiw Working Paper No. 2882 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 March 1989 Professor of Economics, Harvard University, and Research Associate, National Bureau of Economic Research. This paper was prepared for the Journal of Economic Persyectives. I am grateful to Laurence Ball, Susanto Basu, Marianne Baxter, Mark Bils, Lawrence Katz, Deborah Mankiw, David Romer, Joseph Stiglitz, Lawrence Summers, Timothy Taylor, David Weil, and Michael Woodford, for helpful discussions and comments, and to the National Science Foundation for financial support. This paper is part of NBER's research programs in Economic Fluctuations and in Financial Markets and Monetary Economics. Any opinions expressed are those of the author not those of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES REAL BUSINESS CYCLES: A NEW … · 2020. 3. 20. · NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES REAL BUSINESS CYCLES: A NEW KEYNESIAN PERSPECTIVE N. Gregory Mankiw Working

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    2

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES

    REAL BUSINESS CYCLES: A NEW KEYNESIAN PERSPECTIVE

    N. Gregory Mankiw

    Working Paper No. 2882

    NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH1050 Massachusetts Avenue

    Cambridge, MA 02138March 1989

    Professor of Economics, Harvard University, and Research Associate, NationalBureau of Economic Research. This paper was prepared for the Journal ofEconomic Persyectives. I am grateful to Laurence Ball, Susanto Basu,Marianne Baxter, Mark Bils, Lawrence Katz, Deborah Mankiw, David Romer,Joseph Stiglitz, Lawrence Summers, Timothy Taylor, David Weil, and MichaelWoodford, for helpful discussions and comments, and to the National ScienceFoundation for financial support. This paper is part of NBER's researchprograms in Economic Fluctuations and in Financial Markets and MonetaryEconomics. Any opinions expressed are those of the author not those of theNational Bureau of Economic Research.

  • NBER Working Paper #2882March 1989

    REAL BUSINESS CYCLES: A NEW KEYNESIAN PERSPECTIVE

    ABSTRACT

    This paper is a critique of the latest new classical theory of

    economic fluctuations. According to this theory, the business cycle

    is the natural and efficient response of the economy to exogenous changes

    in the available production technology. This paper discusses several

    versions of this theory and argues that this line of research is unlikely

    to yield an empirically plausible explanation of observed economic

    fluctuations.

    N. Cregory MankiwNational Bureau of Economic Research1050 Massachusetts AvenueCambridge, MA 02138

  • the aftermath

    the Great Dep

    The debate over the source and propagati

    fluctuations rages as fiercely today as it di

    of Keynes's The Theory

    ression. Today, there

    ssical school es the

    actors, the a of re

    demand, and iency

    nesian schoo s that

    ons requires study

    rium, but als ating

    The cia

    economic

    supply and

    The Key

    fluctuati

    thought

    private

    equate

    markets.

    economic

    of general

    market fai

    Real

    classical

    on of economj

    d fifty years

    and in the mi

    are two schoo

    optimization

    lative prices

    of unfettered

    understand in

    ing the intri

    the possibil

    C

    ago in

    dst of

    is of

    of

    to

    g

    cacies

    ity of

    as then,

    emphas iz

    dj ustment

    the effic

    1 believe

    not just

    0 appreci

    scale.

    theory is the

    fluctuations.

    e qu

    lure

    bus

    view

    ii ib

    on a grand

    mess cycle

    of economic

    late

    It

    are large

    change.

    rationally

    The busine

    efficient

    product i o

    My

    in the rate of

    these fluctuations, i

    levels of labor supply

    according to this theo

    the ec

    random fluctuations

    n response to

    alter their

    ss cycle is,

    response of

    n technology.

    goal in this essay

    approach to the business cyc

    St incarnation of the

    assumes that there

    technological

    ndividuals

    and consumption.

    ry, the natural and

    onomy to changes in the available

    am not an advocate.

    is

    le

    In my view,

    to appraise this

    I should admit

    real business

    not provide an

    fluctuations

    empir

    Zoth

    ically plaus

    its reliance

    newly revived

    in advance that I

    cycle theory does

    of economic

    ogical

    ible expi

    on large

    1

    anat ion

    technol

  • disturbances as the primary source of economic fluctuations and

    its reliance on the intertemporal substitution of leisure to

    explain changes in employment are fundamental weaknesses.

    Moreover, to the extent that it trivializes the social cost of

    observed fluctuations, real business cycle theory is potentially

    dangerous. The danger is that those who advise policy-makers

    might attempt to use it to evaluate the effects of alternative

    macroeconomic policies or to conclude that macroeconomic policies

    are unnecessary.

    Wairasian Equilibrium and The Classical Dichotomy

    The typical undergraduate course in microeconomics begins

    with partial equilibrium analysis of individual markets. A

    market for a good is characterized by a downward sloping demand

    curve and an upward sloping supply curve. The price of the good

    is assumed to adjust until the quantity supplied equals the

    quantity demanded.

    The course then builds up to Wairasian general equilibrium.

    In this Wairasian equilibrium, prices adjust to equate supply and

    demand in every market simultaneously. The general equilibrium

    system determines the quantities of all goods and services sold

    and their relative prices. The most important theoretical

    result, after the existence of such a Wairasian equilibrium, is

    the "invisible hand" theorem: the equilibrium is Pareto

    efficient.

    Courses in microeconomics thus show how employment.

    2

  • g money in t

    tinkin 1956)

    ative prices,

    by the Ja1ras

    ce level, the nomi

    then determined by

    since nominal van

    arket is not very

    suggests that, fo

    The profe

    class ical

    librium,

    either

    Real variables, such as

    including the real inte

    jan system. Nominal

    nal wage, and the nom

    the equilibrium in t

    The

    money

    nd

    evel of

    employment,

    rest rate,

    production, and relative

    mention of the existence

    simplest way to append in

    demand function and an e

    depends on the level of

    prices are determined without any

    of money, the medium of exchange.

    oney to the model is to specify a

    xogenous morey supply. Money dema

    output and the price level. The 1

    output is already determined in the

    level, however, can adjust to equat

    Walrasian system.

    e supply and demand

    money market.

    Introduc in

    dichotomy. (Pa

    output, and tel

    are determined

    The price

    in the

    his way leads to the classical

    as

    rat

    Of

    the

    the

    mar

    the

    e,

    cou

    ec

    ke t

    pri

    are

    rse

    ney m

    onomy

    can be ignored

    var j

    inal

    he in

    t reallass ic

    uss ion

    ables

    impor

    r mos

    do

    tant

    t po

    ables

    inte

    oney

    var i

    al vi

    s, th

    not affec

    This c

    licy disc

    such

    rest

    market.

    ables

    ew of

    e money

    the

    equi

    must

    with

    ssor of macroeconomic

    dichotomy. Given th

    money is largely irre

    destroy this classical

    s must in some way deal with

    e assumptions of Walrasian

    levant. The macroeconomjst

    dichotomy or learn to live

    it

    Keynesian macroeconomics destroys the classical dichotomy by

    abandoning the assumption that wages and prices adjust instantly

    to clear markets. This approach is motivated by the observation

    3

  • chat many nominal wages are fixed by long-term labor contracts

    and many product prices remain unchanged for long periods of

    time. Once the inflexibility of wages and prices is admitted

    into a macroeconomic model, the classical dichotomy and the

    irrelevance of money quickly di

    of the early

    attempted to

    the fundamen

    sappear

    Much work in the new classical revolution of

    the l970s destroy the classical dichotomy without

    abandoning tal axiom of continuous market clearing.

    (Lucas 1972,1973) These models were based on the assumption that

    individuals have imperfect information regarding prices. These

    individuals therefore confuse movements in the overall price

    level (which under the classical dichotomy should not matter)

    with movements in relative prices (which should matter). An

    unanticipated decrease in the money supply leads individuals to

    infer that the relative prices of the goods they produce are

    temporarily low, which induces them to reduce the quantity

    supplied. TJhile the fascination with this sort of story was

    substantial in the l970s, it has attracted relatively few

    adherents in the 1980s. It is hard to believe that confusion

    about the price level is sufficiently great to generate the large

    changes in quantities observed over the business cycle.

    In contrast to both the Keynesian and the early new

    classical approaches to the business cycle, real business cycle

    theory embraces the classical dichotomy. It accepts the complete

    irrelevance of monetary policy,

    by almost all macroeconomists a

    thereby denying a tenet accepted

    decade ago. Nominal variables,

    4

  • such as the money supply and the price level, are assumed to have

    no role in explaining fluctuations in real variables, such as

    output and employment.

    Real business cycle theory thus pushes the Walrasian model

    farther than it has been pushed before. In evaluating whether it

    provides a successful explanation of recessions and booms, two

    questions naturally arise. First, why are there such large

    fluctuations in output and employment? And second, why do

    movements in nominal variables, such as the money supply, appear

    related to movements in real variables, such as output?

    Classical and Keynesian Views of Economic Fluctuations

    The only forces that can cause economic fluctuations,

    according to real business cycle theory, are those forces that

    change the Wairasian equilibrium. The Walrasian equilibrium is

    simply the set of quantities and relative prices that

    simultaneously equate supply and demand in all markets in the

    economy. To understand how real business cycle theory explains

    the business cycle, it is necessary to look into the fundamental

    forces that change the supplies and demands for various goods and

    services

    Many sorts of macroeconomic disturbances can in principle

    generate fluctuations in real business cycle models. For

    example, changes in the level of government purchases or in the

    investment tax credit alter the demand for goods and therefore

    affect the WaIrasian equilibrium. Changes in the relative price

    5

  • of oil alter the equilibrium allocation of labor amongalternative uses. Many of the macroeconomic disturbances that

    receive much attention among Keynesian macroeconomists will also

    have important effects in real business cycle models. There is,

    however, substantial disagreement between the two schools

    regarding the mechanisms through which these disturbances work.

    Consider the case of a temporary increase in government

    purchases. Almost all macroeconomists agree that such a change

    causes an increase in output and employment, and the evidence,

    mainly from wartime experience, supports this prediction. Yet

    the explanations of this effect of government purchases differ

    greatly. (Cf. Barro 1987 and Dornbusch and Fischer 1987)

    Real business cycle theory emphasizes the intertemporal

    substitution of goods and leisure. It begins by pointing out

    that an increase in government purchases increases the demand for

    goods. To achieve equilibrium in the goods market, the real

    interest rate must rise, which reduces consumption and

    investment. The increase in the real interest rate also causes

    individuals to reallocate leisure across time. In particular, at

    a higher real interest rate, working today becomes relatively

    more attractive than working in the future; today's labor supply

    therefore increases. This increase in labor supply causes

    equilibrium employment and output to rise.

    While Keynesian theory also predicts an increase in the real

    interest rate in response to a temporary increase in government

    purchases, the effect of the real interest rate on labor supply

    6

  • market is charac

    • Inc

    theory

    oyment.

    Both real busi

    conclude that incre

    and employment

    imp 1 i cation s

    Wairasian mod

    observational

    with both the

    increase in

    in the amount of

    Keynesian theory, the

    state of excess

    y thus

    output

    minent

    emp oral

    rox ima te

    are consistent

    The Cen

    Wh

    princ ip

    mode

    The

    gen

    act

    bus

    dir

    fal

    tral

    ile

    le cause

    used on technologic

    of disturbances ar

    business cycle mode

    is that over

    sure move in

    into a reces

    economy goes

    al disturbances.

    e unlikely to

    Is that resemble

    the typical

    opposite

    sion, consumption

    into a boom,

    does not play a crucial role. Instead, the

    employment and output is due to a reduction

    labor unemployed or underutilized. In most

    labor

    supply

    cycle

    unemp I

    ontrast

    does not

    terized as

    the Wa].ras

    allow for

    of

    ian

    the

    ten in a

    approach of

    possibility

    real bus

    of invol

    mes s

    untary

    ness cycle theory and Keynesian theor

    ases in government purchases increase

    This example shows that some of the pro

    Keynesian models also come Out of intert

    Macroeconomists face a problem of app

    of

    els

    eq

    ci

    uivalen

    assical

    Ce: many ob

    and Keynes

    served phenomena

    ian paradigms.

    many sorts of macroeconomic disturbances

    economic fluctuations in real busine

    can

    ss c

    in

    ycle

    ls, most attention has foc

    reason is that other sorts

    erate fluctuations in real

    ual economic fluctuations.

    An obvious but important fact

    mess cycle, consumption and lei

    ections. When the economy goes

    Is and leisure rises. When the

    7

  • increase in government purchases,

    should fall. Many other changes

    a change due to a temporary inves

    cause consumption and leisure to

    Real business cycle theo

    recession find it rational to

    they demand at the same time

    they demand. The answer mu

    relative to goods, the real

    crucial implication of real

    real wage is procyclical.1

    If the production function w

    were the source of fluctuations,

    abor and

    roduction

    produce a

    real, wage

    and leisure

    goods, such as

    also should

    iduals in

    leisure

    of goods

    ure

    Hence

    C the

    cons

    is p

    cons

    s inc

    ump t

    0 tCfl

    urnp t

    e bo

    Lon

    tia

    ion

    th

    rises and leisur

    lly problematic f

    and leisure woul

    are normal goods.

    e falls. Explaining t

    or real business cycle

    d often be expected to

    In the example of a

    his p

    theo

    move

    t emp 0

    henome non

    ry:

    together.

    rary

    both consumpt

    in the demand

    tment tax cred

    move together.

    ion

    for

    it,

    ry must explain why mdiv

    increase the quantity of

    they decrease the quantity

    st be that the price of leis

    wage, falls in a recession.

    business cycle theory is tha

    a

    a

    generating a p

    in a recession

    ere unchanging and demand shocks

    real business cycle theory would

    rocyc I

    one

    have tro

    input is

    product

    unchang i

    labor wo

    procyci i

    uble

    low

    of 1

    ng p

    uld

    cal

    ical real wage. S

    would expect that

    ince labor

    the marginal

    thus the real wage should be high. With an

    function, diminishing marginal returns to

    countercyclical real wage, not the

    necessary to explain the fluctuations in

    'Alternatively, one could explain the observed patternwithout a procyclical real wage by positing that tastes forconsumption relative to leisure varyover time. Recessions arethen periods of "chronic laziness." As far as I know, no one hasseriously proposed this explanation of the business cycle.

    8

  • ure.

    ycle

    tua t

    theorists

    ions in the

    there

    rate

    fore

    of

    assume that

    technological

    there

    change

    and leis

    usiness c

    tial fluc

    ion, th

    The

    In

    reduce

    real bus

    5 as a c

    uations

    and the

    of emplo

    Attempts

    e available production

    marginal product of

    response to the low

    consumption and inc

    mess cycle theory

    hanging Walrasian e

    are efficient. Civ

    technological p055

    yment, output, and

    by the government

    market, such as policies

    technology is relatively

    labor and thus the real

    return to working,

    rease leisure.

    describes economic

    quilibrium, it implies that

    en the tastes of

    ibilities facing society,

    consumption

    Real b

    are substan

    In a recess

    unfavorable

    wage are low

    individuals

    Since

    fluc tuat ion

    these fluct

    individuals

    the levels

    improved.

    the private

    best are me

    "invisible h

    Of all

    optimalicy

    It seems un

    recession t

    explains th

    coordinatjo

    ffective and

    consumption

    to alter the

    to stabilize

    by iat worst can do harm

    cannot be

    allocations of

    employment, at

    mpeding the

    and

    the

    of e

    deni

    han

    N

    implicatconomic f

    able that

    in the bo

    ions of real business

    luctuations is perhaps

    the level of welfare

    om that preceded it.

    cycle theory, the

    the most shocking.

    is lower in a

    Keynesian theory

    e in economic

    adjust

    tion in welfare by a failur

    use wages and prices do not

    e reduc

    n: beca

    taneously to

    from trade go

    ss cycle theo

    welfare is 1

    ins tan

    gains

    bus me

    reason

    equate supply and demand in all markets, s

    unrealized in a recession. In contrast,

    ry allows no unrealized gains from trade.

    ower in a recessiqn is, according to these

    9

    ome

    real

    The

  • theories, that the technological capabilities of society have

    declined.

    Advocates

    convincing ske

    sudden changes

    that the accum

    cycle theorists

    run fluctuation

    Edward Pr

    the importance

    changes in tot

    economy- - the p

    inputs, where

    shares. This

    technological

    substantial El

    suggests a pot

    disturbances

    Figure

    the percent

    are for the

    services

    ical Di

    real business

    s that the ec

    technology.

    ion of knowle

    must

    5 in

    escot

    of te

    al fac

    ercent

    the di

    Solo w

    progre

    uc tuat

    ential

    s turbance s

    cycle

    on o my

    It isdge a

    uaLLy

    ness

    short

    direct evidence on

    He examines

    nited States

    e percent change in

    ed by their factor

    the rate of

    are

    g which

    The Evidence on Technolo

    of

    pticin

    ulat

    theories have trouble

    is subject to such large

    a more standard presumpt

    nd the concurrent increas

    the economy's techno

    over time. Yet to m

    and

    ion

    e in

    logical opportunities take place grad

    imic observed fluctuations, real busi

    ub Stanti a 1maithe

    t (Ichno

    tor

    ntain

    produ

    986)

    logic

    produ

    that there are sction function.has offered some

    al disturbances.ctivity for the U

    in Out

    inputsI" sho

    putare

    uld

    less th

    we ight

    measure

    change

    ffe rent

    res idua

    ss. Pre

    ions in

    ly impor

    as a source of

    1 presents my ca

    change in output

    private economy

    Like Prescott, I

    scott points out that there

    the Solow residual, a findin

    tant role for technological

    business cycle fluctuations.

    iculation of the Solow residual and

    yearly since 1948. (Both variables

    less agriculture and housing

    find substantial fluctuations in

    10

  • year.

    Figure 1.

    cyclical. In

    productivity a

    of the change

    recessions are

    The Solow

    regarding exoge

    standard explan

    labor hoarding

    Productivity ap

    also shows

    every

    lso fe

    fn the

    perio

    res id

    nous

    ation

    and o

    pears

    r input

    earl

    that

    lid measure

    then

    2A related explanation of the procyclical behavior of the

    Solow residual has recently been proposed by Hall (1987): Hallpoints Out that if price exceeds marginal cost because ofimperfect competition, then the measured Solow residual willappear procyclical even if the true production technology isunchanging. Alternatively, the Solow residual could reflectendogenous changes in technology due to demand shocks: suchendogeneity might arise if, for example, learning-by-doing isimportant.

    11

    1 factor

    tivity femeasured tota

    factor produc

    3.4 percent.

    the economy'

    aggregate pr

    productivity. For

    11 by 3.5 percent,

    example,

    while in

    in 1982

    1984 it

    total

    rose by

    One might interpret these numbers as showing

    s ability to convert inputs into outputs--the

    oduction function--varies substantially from year

    that measured productivity is highly

    total factor

    to

    year in which output fell,11. If the Solow residual is a va

    available production technology,

    ds of technological regress.

    ual need not be interpreted as evidence

    technological disturbances, however. The

    of cyclical productivity is that it reflects

    ther "off the production function" behavior.

    to fall in a recession because firms keep

    unnece

    labore

    wi thou

    A

    ssary andrs begint a largen examina

    unde

    to pu

    incr

    tion

    rutili

    t Out

    ease jof the

    zed labor. In

    greater effort;

    n measured labo

    data from the

    a boom the hoarded

    output increases

    support this standard explanation of

    2

    y 1940s appears to

    the cyclical behavior of

  • productivity. The increase in output associated with the World

    War II build-up

    Yet from 1939

    average of 7.

    productivity

    1950.) One m

    economic boom

    rather than de

    that the Solow

    of changes in

    Once the

    year changes

    longer any di

    disturbances.

    fluctuations,

    disturbances.

    available tech

    real business

    An advoca

    economic model

    formal evidenc

    plausibility t

    disturbances. R

    widespread atten

    however, no disc

    demand-driven

    1 factor produc

    By contrast, th

    since then is 5

    inding as showin

    fact driven by s

    e appealing inter

    good measure over

    nological abilities.

    rejected as a measure of year-to-

    the

    ump t

    phenomenon.

    tivity grew

    e most

    .2 percent

    g that the

    upply shoc

    pretation

    short hor

    an

    n

    ks

    is

    izons

    is most plausibly a

    944 measured tota

    cent per year.

    rown in any year

    interpret this f

    he l940s was in

    shocks. A mor

    idual is not a

    economy's tech

    w residual is

    e available production technol

    evidence for substantial techn

    to generate fluctuations that

    bu mess cycle models require

    ex stence of large fluctuatio

    y s a crucial but unjustifie

    eory.

    to 1

    6 per

    has g

    ight

    of t

    mand

    res

    the

    Solo

    in th

    rec t

    Yet

    real

    The

    no lo

    cyci

    te 0

    s of

    e

    0

    ogy, there is no

    ological

    mimic observed

    such

    ns in

    d ass ion of

    S

    1.

    g i

    e th

    f re

    ten

    Yet

    the as

    ecessi

    tion from

    ussion of

    al business

    rely on ass

    more casual

    sumption of

    ons are

    that

    no

    cycle theory might respond

    umptions for which there is

    evidence also does not give

    subs tantial technological

    events; they receiveimportant

    policy-maker

    declines in

    s and the medi

    the available

    If society suffered some important

    12

    a. Th

    techno

    ere is,

    logy.

    adverse technological shock,

  • we would be aware of it. My own reading of the newspaper,

    Whether changes in energy prices affect the Solow residualcomputed from GNP depends on a variety of issues involving theconstruction of index numbers like CNP. See Bruno and Sachs(1985, P. 43) for a discussion.

    4Hamilton (1983) finds oil price changes are also associatedwith the pre-OPEC recessions. Yet these prices changes are muchtoo small to explain plausibly such large declines inproductivity.

    13

    however, does not lead

    exogenous deteriorati

    The OPEC

    when the econo

    easily identif

    that the econo

    1974 and 1979,

    recessions in

    Solow residual

    changes in the

    find events wi

    ene

    my

    i ab

    my

    as

    the

    S.

    ag

    th

    me to associate most recessions with some

    on in the economy's productive capabilities.

    price changes of the l970s illustrate that

    riences large real shocks, these shocks are

    nd much discussed. Figure 1 indeed shows

    rienced large negative Solow residuals in

    might have expected.3 Yet the five other

    t-war period also exhibit large negative

    explain these Solow residuals as adverse

    r gy

    expe

    le a

    exp e

    one

    pos

    To

    gre

    the

    gate production

    economic signi

    The apparent absence of

    function, one

    ficance of the

    such events is

    recessions cannot be easily attributed to

    would need to

    OPEC price

    evidence thatincreases

    these

    4shocks

    Labor Suoolv and Intertemooral

    Real business cycle theori

    employment are fully voluntary.

    economy always finds itself on

    the typical business cycle, emp

    exogenous real

    Substitution

    sts assume that fluctuations in

    In other words, they assume the

    the labor supply curve. Yet over

    loyment varies substantially while

  • pattern, rea

    very willing

    significanti

    response to

    response to

    It is u

    to interternp

    supply typic

    substitute 1

    inter tempo r aassume, then

    wage should

    Individuals

    work hard to

    individual 1

    the real

    (Altonj i

    time.

    1 business cycito reallocate

    y reduce the qu

    small temporary

    small decreases

    nlikely, howeve

    oral relative p

    ally finds that

    eisure over tim

    lly

    in

    wor

    fac

    day

    ab or

    upply - -

    ightly.e model

    leisure

    anti ty

    reduc t

    in the

    r, that

    rices.

    the w

    e is s

    and the real

    s observed

    individuals

    Individuals

    ey supply in

    real wage or in

    metric

    ess of

    If lei

    us mes s

    increa

    n the future.

    their real wage

    future. Yet studies of

    Personal experience

    to judge the behavioral re

    models rely. One key beh

    labor supplied reacts subs

    Jithout such intertemporal

    and introspec

    sponses on wh

    avioral respo

    tantially to

    substitution

    14

    tion provide ano

    ich real busines

    nse is that quan

    the real interes

    real business

    ther way

    s cycle

    tity of

    t rate.

    cycle

    the determinants of labor s

    interest rate- -vary only sl

    the real wage

    To mimic thi

    s require that

    over time.

    of 1ãboTth

    ions in the

    be

    must

    real interes

    individuals

    t rateare so

    evidenc

    individ

    sure we

    cycle

    ses in

    responsive

    e on labor

    uals to

    re highly

    theorists

    their real

    substitutable, as

    dividuals facing e

    k little today and

    ing expected decre

    and enjoy leisure

    supply over time

    Econo

    ill ingn

    light.

    real

    xp e C te

    much

    ases i

    in th

    find

    change

    duals

    b

    d

    i

    n

    e

    t

    5

    do

    lo

    wage

    1985

    should

    lead

    Ball

    to only

    1985)

    small

    Indivi

    real wage changes by substantially real

    hat expe

    in hour

    not re

    cating

    cted changes in

    s worked.

    spond to expected

    leisure over

  • models are unable to explain how a temporary increase in

    output

    em pla

    t cons

    0 acce

    laymen

    ends on

    at labo

    ation I

    i tutab i

    and employment.

    usible. The real

    ideration when md

    Pt new employment.

    and students that

    the price of app

    r supply depends

    draw from this o

    lity of leisure i

    Yet

    imte

    ivid

    Jh

    the

    les, it is

    on the

    bservation

    s very

    government purchases increases

    behavioral response does not se

    rate is simply not a significan

    decide to leave their jobs or t

    economists can easily convince

    quantity of apples demanded dep

    much harder to convince them th

    real interest rate. The implic

    is that the intertemporal subst

    such a

    rest

    ual s

    ile

    likely- far too weak to get real business cycle models

    Cycle Th

    bus imes s

    duct ion

    eories

    cycle

    with Mul

    theories

    to work

    cussing so

    tiole Se

    I have

    c tots

    been dis

    Real Business

    The real

    far treat pro

    This abstractio

    business cycle

    Some real

    technologies of

    changes in techn

    highlight the in

    to the different

    as if it takes place in a single industry.

    is not characteristicn, however,

    theories

    business cycle the

    different sectors

    ology. (Long and

    teractions among

    sectors are inde

    of all real

    ze changes in

    economy-wide

    These model

    Even if the

    outputs of th

    an adverse s

    ones emphasi

    rather than

    Plosser 1983)

    the sectors.

    pendent, the

    For example,different

    to one 5

    economy;

    sectors move together.

    ector reduces the

    these individual

    the

    5

    shocks

    e

    hock

    for

    wealth of the individuals in the

    s respond by reducing their demand

    15

  • all goods. An observer would see an aggregate business cycle,

    even without a single aggregate shock.

    To get these real business cycle models to work, however,

    the number of independent sectoral shocks cannot be too great.

    If there were many independent sectoral shocks and labor were

    mobile between sectors, then the law of large numbers would

    guarantee that these shocks and their effect on the aggregate

    economy would average out to zero. To get an aggregate business

    cycle, these models therefore require that there be only a few

    sectors and that these sectors be subject to large technological

    disturbances. These models are therefore similar to the single-

    sector theories and suffer from the same weaknesses: the absence

    of any direct evidence for such large technological disturbances

    and the implausibility of strong intertemporal substitutability

    of leisure.

    A second type of sectoral shock theory emphasizes the costly

    adjustment of labor among sectors. (Lilien 1982) These models,

    which depart more from the Walrasian paradigm, assume that when a

    worker moves from one sector to another, a period of unemployment

    is required, perhaps for job search. In this case, independent

    shocks across many sectors do not offset each other. Recessions

    are, according to these theories, periods of more sectoral shocks

    and thus greater intersectoral. adjustment.

    This type of real business cycle theory may appear more

    plausible than those relying on substantial aggregate

    productivity shocks and intertemporal substitution. It is

    16

  • Money and Prices over the Business Cycle

    Before real business cycle theory

    debate in the early 1980s, almost all

    agree on one conclusion: money matters.

    discussions of business cycles (Friedman

    more formal econometric work (Barro 1977)

    Reserve as an important source of macroeconomic disturbances.

    While there was controversy as to whether systematic monetary

    policy could stabilize the economy, it was universally accepted

    that bad monetary policy could be destabilizing.

    17

    perhaps easier to imagine that recessions are characterized b

    unusually great need for intersectoral reallocation than by s

    sort of major technological regress that makes leisure unusua

    attractive. Yet the available evidence appears not to suppor

    this intersectoral story. If workers were unemployed volunta

    y an

    ome

    1 ly

    t

    r i ly

    in recess

    sectors

    with high

    opposite

    levels of

    Moreover,

    measured

    procyclic

    theory is

    economic

    ions because

    we would expe

    job vacancy.

    pattern: high

    help wanted

    in contrast

    mobility of w

    al. (Murphy

    also unable

    fluctuations

    they were moving to new jobs in other

    Ct to find high unemployment coinciding

    Yet observed fluctuations have just the

    unemployment rates coincide with low

    advertising. (Abraham and Katz 1986)

    to the prediction of this theory, the

    orkers between sectors is strongly

    and Topel 1987) This real business cycle

    to be plausibly reconciled with observed

    nomic

    d to

    entered the macroeco

    macroeconomists seeme

    Both historical

    and Schwartz 1963)

    pointed to the Fe

    and

    deral

  • it is ironic that real business cycle theory arose in the

    wake of Paul Voicker's disinflation. Many economists view this

    recent experience as clear confirmation of -the potency of

    monetary policy. Voicker announced he was going to slow the rate

    of money growth to achieve a lower rate of inflation; the rate of

    money growth in fact slowed down; and one of the deepest post-war

    recessions followed, as did an eventual reduction in the rate of

    inflation. This set of events is easy to explain within the

    context of Keynesian theory with its emphasis on the gradual

    adjustment of wages and prices. It is less easy to explain

    within the context of real business cycle theory.5

    Robert King and Charles Plosset (1984) explain the

    historical association between money and output by arguing that

    the money supply endogenously responds to fluctuations in output.

    Standard measures of the money supply such as Ml are mostly

    inside money, that is, money created by the banking system. King

    and Plosser suggest that the transactions services of inside

    money should be viewed as simply the "output" of one sector of

    the economy, the banking sector. Just as one should expect the

    outputs of different sectors to move together within a multi-

    sector real business cycle model, one should expect the output of

    the banking sector to move with the outputs of other sectors. An

    increase in productivity in any sector will tend to increase the

    The recent disinflation is not unusual. Romer and Romer(1989) show that output typically falls after the Fed makes anexplicit decision to reduce inflation, which they interpret asevidence against real business cycle theory.

    18

  • While the story of K

    procyclical behavior of money,

    behavior of prices. It is a

    absence of identifiable real

    changes, inflation tends to r

    This famous Phillips curve co

    the macroeconomic debate of t

    empirical motivation for the

    1970s. (Friedman 1968, Lucas

    and Plosser generates procycli

    transactions services, these f

    associated with fluctuations i

    fluctuations in prices. The

    been left without an explanat

    theorists6

    it cannot explain the pro

    documented fact that,

    s such as the OPEC oil

    n booms and fall in re

    tion played a central

    60s, and it was the pr

    new classica

    Yet since

    money through the demand

    luctuations in money will be

    n real balances not with

    short-run Phillips curve

    ion by real business cycle

    6Indeed, as King and Plosser point out, their model makes

    the counterfactual prediction that the price level should becountercyclical: since the demand for real outside money probablyrises in a boom, and it is the outside money stock that pins downthe price level, equilibrium in the market for outside moneyrequires that the price level fall in a boom.

    19

    demand for transactions services; the banking system responds by

    creating more inside money. Hence, the procyclical behavior of

    standard monetary aggregates cannot necessarily be interpreted as

    evidence that changes in outside money caused by the monetary

    authority have real effects.

    ing and Plosser can explain the

    wel

    sho

    ise

    rre

    he

    ea

    1

    1

    I-

    La

    19

    ny972

    cal

    cyclical

    in the

    price

    ce S S ions

    role in

    ima ry

    1 theories

    the model o

    in the

    f King

    for

    has thus

  • The Tradeoff between Internal, and External Consistency

    A good theory has two characteristics: internal consistency

    and external consistency. An internally consistent theory is one

    that is parsimonious; it invokes no ad hoc or peculiar axioms.

    An externally consistent theory is one that fits the facts; it

    makes empirically refutable predictions that are not refuted.

    All scientists, including economists, strive for theories that

    are both internally and externally consistent. Yet like all

    optimizing agents, scientists face tradeoffs. One theory may be

    more "beautiful," while another may be easier to reconcile with

    observation.

    The choice between alternative theories of the business

    cycle--in particular, between real business cycle theory and new

    Keynesian theory- - is partly a choice between internal and

    external consistency. Real business cycle theory extends the

    Wairasian paradigm, the most widely understood and taught model

    in economics, and provides a unified explanation for economic

    growth and economic fluctuations. New Keynesian theory, in its

    attempt to mimic the world more accurately, relies on nominal

    rigidities that are observed but only little understood. Indeed,

    new Keynesians sometimes suggest that to understand the business

    cycle, it may be necessary to reject the axiom of rational,

    optimizing individuals, an act which for economists would be the

    ultimate abandonment of internal consistency.

    The tension between these two goals of science will

    undoubtedly continue. Each school of macroeconomic thought will

    20

  • highlight its strengths while trying to improve on its

    weaknesses. My own forecast is that real business cycle

    advocates will not manage to produce convincing evidence that

    there are substantial shocks to technology and that leisure is

    highly substitutable over time. Without such evidence, their

    theories will be judged as not persuasive. New Keynesians,

    however, have made substantial progress in recent years toward

    providing rigorous microeconomic foundations, the absence of

    which was the fatal flaw of the Keynesian consensus of the l960s.

    Jhile real business cycle theory has served the important

    function of stimulating and provoking the scientific debate, it

    will, I predict, ultimately be discarded as an explanation of

    observed fluctuations.

    21

  • References

    Abraham, Katharine G

    Unemployment: Sec

    Journal of Politi

    Altonji, Joseph G.,

    Supply: Evidence

    Economy, June 198

    Ball, Laurence,

    Labor Supply

    115.

    • and Lawrence F. Katz, "Cyclical

    toral Shifts or Aggregate Disturbances?"

    cal Economy, June 1986, jj, 507-522.

    "Intertemporal Substitution in Labor

    from Micro Data," Journal of Political

    6, Part 2, 2. Sl76-S2l5.

    Substitution and Constraints on

    Panel Data," manuscript, M.I.T.,

    Barro, Robert J

    Bruno, Michael,

    Staf].ption,

    Dornbusch, Rudiger,

    ley, 1987.

    f Worldwide

    "Inter temporal

    Evidence from

    1985

    Barro

    the

    Robert J

    United S

    • ,"Unanticipated Mon

    tates," American Ec

    ey Growth and UnempL

    pnomic Review. 1977,

    oyme rtt in101-

    Macroeconomics, New York: Wi

    and Jeffrey Sachs, Economics o

    Cambridge, MA: Harvard Unive

    and Stanley Fischer, Mac

    rsity Press,

    roeconomics,

    1985.

    New

    York: McGraw-Hill, 1987.

    Friedman, Milton, "The Role of Monetary Policy." American

    Economic Review, 1968, , 1-17.

    Friedman, Milton, and Anna Schwartz, A Monetary History of the

    United States, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press,

    1963.

    Hall, Robert E. , "Market Structure and Macroeconomic

    Fluctuations," Byookjngs Papers on Economic Activity,

    1987:1, 285-322.

    22

  • Hamilton, James D., "Oil and the Macroeconomy since World

    War II," Journal of Political Economy, April 1983, 2.1,

    228-248.

    King, Robert G., and Charles I. Plosser, "Money, Credit, and

    Prices in a Real Business Cycle," American Economic Review,

    June 1984, j, 363-380.

    Lilien, David M., "Sectoral Shifts and Cyclical Unemployment,"

    Journal of Political Economy, August 1982, Q., 777-793.

    Long, John B. Jr., and Charles I. Plosser, "Real Business

    Cycles," Journal of Political Economy, February 1983, jJ,,

    39-69.

    Lucas, Robert E. Jr., "Expectations and the Neutrality of Money,

    Journal of Economjc Theory, 1972, , 103-124.

    Lucas, Robert E. Jr., "International Evidence on Output-Inflatjc

    Tradeoffs," American Economic Review, 1973, 326-334.

    Murphy, Kevin M. , and Robert H. Topel, "The Evolution of

    Unemployment in the United States: 1968-1985,"

    NBER Macroeconomics Annual, 1987.

    Patinkin, Don, Money. Interest, and Prices: An Interation of

    Monetary and Value Theory, Evanston, I1l.:Row, Peterson, 1956

    Prescott, Edward, "Theory Ahead of Business Cycle Measurement,"

    CarneEie-Rochester Conference on Public Policy, Autumn 1986,

    21, 11-44.

    Rotner, Christina, and David Romer, "Does Monetary Policy

    Matter: A New Test in the Spirit of Friedman and Schwartz,"

    NBER Macroeconomics Annual, 1989, forthcoming.

    23

  • PE

    RC

    EN

    T

    PE

    R

    YE

    AR

    0

    P1

    I I

    0 r%) - - co o

    Lfl

    c-f) 0

    I- 0

    xl P

    1 (1

    cr,

    (0 N

    ) (0

    0

    0 -1

    -D

    -1 C

    -) xl

    0 -1