Lumpy Investment in Dynamic General Equilibrium

Department of Economics Yale University
SSRN Electronic Journal 01/2007; DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.910564
Source: RePEc


Microeconomic lumpiness matters for macroeconomics. According to our DSGE model, it is responsible for 92 percent of the smoothing in the investment response to aggregate shocks, and it introduces important nonlinearities and history dependance in business cycles and policy sensitivity. General equilibrium forces are responsible for the remaining 8 percent of smoothing and attenuate, but do not eliminate, aggregate nonlinearities. Not only is the lumpy model better micro-founded than the frictionless model, it also represents an improvement in terms of its ability to match conventional RBC moments, since it raises the volatility of consumption and employment to the levels observed in US data. The model also has distinct implications for the economy's response to large shocks and policy interventions. We illustrate these mechanisms by simulating the dynamics of an investment overhang episode. Our main methodological contribution is to develop a calibration procedure that combines data at different levels of aggregation (sectoral and aggregate)

3 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We study a novel channel through which policy may control economic dynamics. When frictions generate strategic complementarity and agents cannot observe how shocks impact others in the economy, self-ful…lling waves of "optimism" and "pessimism" arise, where transitions are driven by occasional large revisions on expectations. Policy may improve coordination by aecting the size of shocks needed to trigger those revisions, with also an eect on how much agents (including the government) learn every period. Speci…cally, we study the optimal taxation problem in an economy with real cycles driven by these forces. We show that a tax scheme exploiting this mechanism is optimal, with signi…cant welfare improvement. On the onset of an expansion there is no need to ensure the good standing of expectations via policy, and on the onset of a recession the government has no power to improve expectations. Thus, policy should abstract from dynamic considerations. However, with time, a sequence of gradual tax cuts should be implemented to extend the aggregate optimism, while deep and short-lived tax cuts are optimal to break the pessimism. This role for policy may also be relevant in other applications, such as incentives to investment or technology innovation, monetary policy and the mitigation of speculative attacks.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Smoothness in aggregate capital accumulation is a necessary condition for New-Keynesian (NK) models to imply a quantitatively relevant monetary transmission mechanism (see, e.g., [Woodford, 2005. Firm-specific capital and the new Keynesian Phillips curve. International Journal of Central Banking 2, 1–46]). Can that aggregate smoothness be entertained in the context of an NK model featuring lumpy plant-level investment? Our answer is yes. Imperfect competition in goods markets and/or sticky prices are identified as economic mechanisms which render lumpy investment relevant in general equilibrium.
    Journal of Monetary Economics 09/2007; 54(54):23-36. DOI:10.1016/j.jmoneco.2007.06.016 · 1.89 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We estimate a model of homogeneous capital investment with two installation possibilities - replacement and expansion using observations at the establishment level. We find that regime switches identified by "ad hoc" measures of lumpy investment do not adequately distinguish expansionary from replacement activities. In fact, during periods of expansion, firms spend just as much on replacement capital. Also, using the common 20% rule would not assign a spike to almost 65% of all observations that include expansionary investment in this dataset. Finally, replacement although less responsive to fundamentals than expansions cannot be regarded as an autonomous part of investment. Copyright (c) Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the Department of Economics, University of Oxford, 2010.
    Oxford Bulletin of Economics &amp Statistics 06/2010; 72(3):263-281. DOI:10.1111/j.1468-0084.2009.00577.x · 1.37 Impact Factor