Description
Résumé: Dans cette étude, l'auteur présente les résultats empiriques qu'il obtient de l'examen du comportement qu'affichent différentes variables économiques, notamment le salaire réel, après un choc technologique. Il reprend le modèle bivarié de Galí (1999) et compare les sentiers de réponse dynamique et les corrélations conditionnelles obtenus aux résultats provenant d'un modèle vectoriel à correction d'erreurs identifié à l'aide de la procédure de King, Plosser, Stock et Watson (1991). L'auteur utilise la méthode « bootstrap après bootstrap » de Kilian (1998) dans le calcul des intervalles de confiance. Ses résultats empiriques donnent à penser que les modèles de cycle réel ne peuvent être invalidés sur la base de leurs prédictions conditionnelles du marché du travail en faveur de celles d'autres modèles.
Abstract: The author presents empirical evidence that he has obtained from an analysis of the response of different economic variables, including the real wage rate, to a technology shock. He replicates Galí's (1999) bivariate model and compares dynamic impulse responses and conditional correlations with evidence provided by the vector-error-correction model that was identified using the King, Plosser, Stock, and Watson (1991) procedure. To calculate confidence intervals, the author uses Kilian's (1998) bootstrap-after-bootstrap method. The empirical evidence suggests that it is not possible to reject a procyclical real wage in response to a technology shock. Therefore, real-business-cycle models cannot be rejected based on their conditional predictions of the labour-market dynamics in favour of other types of models.
Abstract: The author presents empirical evidence that he has obtained from an analysis of the response of different economic variables, including the real wage rate, to a technology shock. He replicates Galí's (1999) bivariate model and compares dynamic impulse responses and conditional correlations with evidence provided by the vector-error-correction model that was identified using the King, Plosser, Stock, and Watson (1991) procedure. To calculate confidence intervals, the author uses Kilian's (1998) bootstrap-after-bootstrap method. The empirical evidence suggests that it is not possible to reject a procyclical real wage in response to a technology shock. Therefore, real-business-cycle models cannot be rejected based on their conditional predictions of the labour-market dynamics in favour of other types of models.