Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-dk7s8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T19:52:29.462Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

COMPUTATION OF BUSINESS CYCLE MODELS: A COMPARISON OF NUMERICAL METHODS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 November 2008

Burkhard Heer  and
Alfred Maußner
Burkhard Heer
Affiliation:
Free University of Bolzano-Bozen and CESifo
Alfred Maußner*
Affiliation:
University of Augsburg
*
Address correspondence to: Alfred Maußner, Universität Augsburg, D-86159 Augsburg, Germany; e-mail: alfred.maussner@wiwi.uni-augsburg.de.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We compare the numerical methods that are most widely applied in the computation of the standard business cycle model with flexible labor. The numerical techniques imply economically insignificant differences with regard to business cycle summary statistics. Furthermore, these results are robust with regard to the choice of the functional form of the utility function and the model's parameterization. In addition, the extended path approach, albeit time-consuming, and the Galerkin projection are found to be the most accurate methods, given that we have not used function approximations beyond the second degree.

Keywords

Log-LinearizationPerturbation MethodsProjection MethodsExtended PathValue Function IterationParameterized ExpectationsGenetic Search

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Macroeconomic Dynamics , Volume 12 , Issue 5 , November 2008 , pp. 641 - 663
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Altonji, J. G. (1986) Intertemporal substitution in labor supply: Evidence from micro data, Journal of Political Economics 94, S117–S215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aruoba, S. B., Fernández-Villaverde, J., and Rubrio-Ramírez, J. F. (2006) Comparing solution methods for dynamic equilibrium economies, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 30, 2477–2508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanchard, O. J. and Kahn, Ch. M. (1980) The solution of linear difference models under rational expectations, Econometrica 48, 1305–1311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castañeda, A., Díaz-Giminénez, J., and Ríos-Rull, J.-V. (2003) Accounting for the U.S. earnings and wealth inequality, Journal of Political Economy 111, 818–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christiano, L. J. and Fisher, J. D. M. (2000) Algorithms for solving dynamic models with occasionally binding constraints, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 24, 1179–1232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Den Haan, W. J., and Marcet, A. (1994) Accuracy in simulations, Review of Economic Studies 61, 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domeij, D. and Floden, M. (2006) The labor supply elasticity and borrowing constraints: Why estimates are biased, Review of Economic Dynamics 9, 242–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duffy, J. and McNelis, P. D. (2001) Approximating and simulating the stochastic growth model: Parameterized expectations, neural networks, and the genetic algorithm, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 25, 1273–1303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenwood, J., Hercowitz, Z., and Huffman, G. W. (1988) Investment, capacity utilization, and the real business cycle, American Economic Review 78, 402–417.Google Scholar
Hansen, G. (1985) Indivisible labor and the business cycle, Journal of Monetary Economics 16, 309–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heer, B. and Maußner, A. (2005) Dynamic General Equilibrium Modelling: Computational Methods and Applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Heer, B. and Trede, M. (2003) Efficiency and distribution effects of a revenue-neutral income tax reform, Journal of Macroeconomics 25, 87–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judd, K. L. (1992) Projection methods for aggregate growth models, Journal of Economic Theory 58, 410–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judd, K. L. (1996) Approximation, perturbation, and projection methods in economic analysis. In Amman, H. M., Kendrick, D. A., and Rust, J. (eds.), Handbook of Computational Economics, vol. I, pp. 509–586. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Judd, K. L. (1998) Numerical Methods in Economics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Killingsworth, M. R. (1983) Labor Supply. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, R. G., Plosser, Ch. I., and Rebelo, S. (1988) Production, growth and business cycles I: The basic neoclassical model, Journal of Monetary Economics 21, 195–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, R. G. and Watson, M. W. (2002) System reduction and solution algorithms for singular linear difference systems under rational expectations, Computational Economics 20, 57–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kremer, J. (2001) Arbeitslosigkeit, Lohndifferenzierung und wirtschaftliche Entwicklung. Cologne: Josef Eul Verlag.Google Scholar
Ljungqvist, L. and Sargent, T. J. (2000) Recursive Macroeconomic Theory. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
MaCurdy, T. E. (1981) An empirical model of labor supply in a life-cycle setting, Journal of Political Economy 89, 1059–1085.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGrattan, E. R. (1999) Application of weighted residual methods to dynamic economic models. In Marimon, R. and Scott, A. (eds.), Computational Methods for the Study of Dynamic Economies, pp. 114–142. Oxford New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, M. (1996) An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Press, W. H., Teukolsky, S. A., Vetterling, W. T., and Flannery, B. P. (1992) Numerical Recipes in Fortran 77. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schmitt-Grohé, S. and Uribe, M. (2004) Solving dynamic general equilibrium models using a second-order approximation to the policy function, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 28, 755–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sefton, J. A. (2000) A solution method for consumption decisions in a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 24, 1097–1119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tauchen, G. (1986) Finite state markov-chain approximations to univariate and vector autoregressions, Economics Letters 20, 177–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J. B. and Uhlig, H. (1990) Solving nonlinear stochastic growth models: A comparison of alternative solution methods, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 8, 1–17.Google Scholar
Uhlig, H. (1999) A toolkit for analysing nonlinear dynamic stochastic models easily. In Marimon, Ramon and Scott, Andrew (eds.), Computational Methods for the Study of Dynamic Economies, pp. 30–61. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, J. C. and Wright, B. D. (1982) The economic role of commodity storage, Economic Journal 92, 596–614.Google Scholar
Wright, B. D. and Williams, J. C. (1984) The welfare effects of the introduction of storage, Quarterly Journal of Economics 99, 169–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, B. D. and Williams, J. C. (1991) Storage and Commodity Markets. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar