実物景気循環論とマクロ経済学のミクロ的基礎(市場経済における不均衡分析,総合研究)
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
This paper examines the fundamental thought of Real Business Cycle Theory by taking up the common properties of Real Business Cycle models. The aim of this paper is to show the core of structures in Real Business Cycle models, and to answer the controversy between Real Business Cycle school and Keynesian. Some excellent surveys have already been written by McCallum, Mankiw, Huh C. and Treham, Danthine and Donaldson, and Stadler. However, these surveys have given little attention to what leads us to the conspicuous characteristics and unique results of Real Business Cycle Theory. Therefore, this paper examines Real Business Cycle models in terms of Micro foundations of Macroeconomics, and shows that some common assumptions in Real Business Cycle Models are the essential properties for their conclusions. Real Business Cycle Theory has developed from Lucas's research program. The main purpose of Lucas's research program is the explanation of fluctuations in the competitive economy with rational agents. Although the economy works on the equilibrium growth path, exogenous shocks, especially technological shocks, cause cyclical movements of the economy. This is the central theme of Lucas's research program and Real Business Cycle Theory. The assumptions of Real Business Cycle Models can be classified into two main categories. First, the assumptions that give the properties of competitive equilibrium to the model. This idea comes from F.A. von Hayek. Secondly, the assumptions that simulate the economy with parameters estimated by real economic datum. This idea comes from W.C. Mitchell. This classification offers the key to an understanding of the controversy between Real Business Cycle school and Keynesian. The question then arises about whether the equilibrium model with dynamic characteristics can explain the real world's fluctuations This paper discusses this subject in terms of examining the structures of Real Business Cycle Models and of considering the criticism from Keynesian. The results lead to the following conclusion: one explanation for boom may be that Real Business Cycle theory is considerable, but Real Business Cycle theory leaves out of account many aspects of recession. The second point to notice is the main cause of business cycles. Opinions are divided among Real Business Cycle school and Keynesian. Examples of this are monetary aspects, markets' coordination and transaction costs. Real Business Cycle Models neglect all these points. Central to this issue is that the results of Real Business Cycle Models depend on the structure of the equilibrium model. Let me summarize the main points that have been made in this paper. (1) There are some doubts about the elasticity of intertemporal substitution of labor and the volume of exogenous technical shocks. (2) Recession cannot be regarded as a technological decline. (3) It is difficult to accept that unemployment is regarded as voluntary unemployment in recession. (4) There are some doubts about their view of neutrality of money and effects of monetary policy. (5) The assumption that movement of real GNP is treated as a random walk with drifts and the assumption of representative agent restrict the validity of models. (6) There is insufficient evidence to prove that their econometrics conclusions are accepted. It should be concluded, as has been mentioned above, that neither Real Business Cycle models nor their econometrics results will account for the real economic fluctuations.
- 日本大学の論文
- 1997-03-01
著者
関連論文
- 戦後日本経済の生産関数 : 製造業(1970年-1987年)(日本経済の戦後の技術進歩,総合研究)
- 内生的変動と期待の役割 : 実物景気循環モデルと期待形成(経済の進化と経済学,共同研究)
- 実物景気循環論とマクロ経済学のミクロ的基礎(市場経済における不均衡分析,総合研究)