Refine
Document Type
- Working Paper (4) (remove)
Language
- English (4) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4) (remove)
Keywords
- business cycle (4) (remove)
A common practice in empirical macroeconomics is to examine alternative recursive orderings of the variables in structural vector autogressive (VAR) models. When the implied impulse responses look similar, the estimates are considered trustworthy. When they do not, the estimates are used to bound the true response without directly addressing the identification challenge. A leading example of this practice is the literature on the effects of uncertainty shocks on economic activity. We prove by counterexample that this practice is invalid in general, whether the data generating process is a structural VAR model or a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model.
We assemble a data set of more than eight million German Twitter posts related to the war in Ukraine. Based on state-of-the-art methods of text analysis, we construct a daily index of uncertainty about the war as perceived by German Twitter. The approach also allows us to separate this index into uncertainty about sanctions against Russia, energy policy and other dimensions. We then estimate a VAR model with daily financial and macroeconomic data and identify an exogenous uncertainty shock. The increase in uncertainty has strong effects on financial markets and causes a significant decline in economic activity as well as an increase in expected inflation. We find the effects of uncertainty to be particularly strong in the first months of the war.
In this paper, I introduce lumpy micro-level capital adjustment into a sticky information general equilibrium model. Lumpy adjustment arises because of inattentiveness in capital investment decisions instead of the more common assumption of non-convex adjustment costs. The model features inattentiveness as the only source of stickiness. I find that the model with lumpy investment yields business cycle dynamics which differ substantially from those of an otherwise identical model with frictionless investment and are much more consistent with the empirical evidence. These results therefore strengthen the case in favour of the relevance of microeconomic investment lumpiness for the business cycle.
We selectively survey, unify and extend the literature on realized volatility of financial asset returns. Rather than focusing exclusively on characterizing the properties of realized volatility, we progress by examining economically interesting functions of realized volatility, namely realized betas for equity portfolios, relating them both to their underlying realized variance and covariance parts and to underlying macroeconomic fundamentals.