Abstract
We use Structural Vector Autoregressions to study the impact of technology improvements on hours worked in the major seven countries. While previous studies estimate the response of labor input to permanent shocks to country-level labor productivity, we consider the response of labor input to aggregate-level labor productivity. Since labor productivities do cointegrate in the G7, the estimated responses should look very similar. They do not: for each country but Germany, the responses estimated using G7 labor productivity sizeably exceed those estimated using country-level labor productivity. These results also hold in larger SVAR models.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Our results are similar to those obtained by Galí (2005).
A large number of papers, including Stock and Watson (2005), Canova et al. (2007) and Kose et al. (2008), establish the large contribution of world shocks to aggregate fluctuations. Moreover, Rabanal et al. (2008) have shown that Total Factor Productivity (TFP) cointegrates among major industrialized countries and thus favored the relevance of a world permanent technology shocks.
In Dupaigne and Fève (2009), we estimate and simulate a two-country DSGE model with a permanent world technology shock and stationary country-specific technology and preference shocks. We obtain that country-level SVAR models lead to biased estimation of the true permanent technology shock. We also show that an aggregate measure of labor productivity reduces the bias when it is used instead of domestic ones in SVARs with long run restriction. See also Collard and Dellas (2007) for an open economy setup about the effect of permanent technology shocks on employment.
At the quarterly frequency, only employment data are available on this sample. Our results hold on quarterly employment data (see Dupaigne and Fève 2009).
Endogenous growth models are obvious examples of setups in which non-technology shocks (here, any shock) have long-run effects on labor productivity. Alternatively, Uhlig (2004) emphasizes permanent changes in the capital tax rate or changing attitude towards the workplace.
Hours worked and population numbers are simply the sums of country-level data. To compute aggregate GDP, national accounts data are converted to US dollars using 1995 GDP purchasing power parities (PPPs) for constant price data and current PPPs for data in current prices.
Country-level point estimates are weighted according to the share of each country in total population because we consider per capita productivity and hours worked.
We also perform cointegration tests without any prefiltering of the data and find very similar results. With the latter procedure, we include an intercept in the cointegration equation but none in the VAR.
The country-level labor productivities used in these cointegration tests are expressed in units of local currency at constant price (basically, in units of local good). Hence, they might not be comparable from one country to the other in the short-run. To investigate this issue, we redo the cointegration tests using purchasing power parity (PPP) adjusted labor productivities. The results are identical. Throughout the rest of the paper, we have checked the sensitivity of our results to PPP-adjustment. They remain unchanged.
Due to data availability, their international TFP measures are obtained from the labor input only.
Given the size of our sample, we cannot estimate the 31 parameters of a two lag VAR including both productivity differentials and labor inputs for all countries.
References
Baxter M, Crucini M (1993) Explaining saving investment correlation. Am Econ Rev 83:416–435
Blanchard OJ, Quah D (1989) The dynamic effects of aggregate supply and demand disturbances. Am Econ Rev 79(4):655–673
Canova F, Ciccarelli M, Ortega E (2007) Similarities and convergence in G-7 Cycles. J Monet Econ 54(3):850–878
Chari VV, Kehoe PJ, McGrattan E (2008) Are structural VARs with long-run restrictions useful in developing business cycle theory? J Monet Econ 55(8):1337–1352
Christiano LJ, Eichenbaum M, Vigfusson RJ (2004) The response of hours to a technology shock: evidence based on direct measures of technology. Journal of the European Economic Association 2(2–3):381–395
Collard F, Dellas H (2007) Technology shocks and employment. Econ J 117(523):1436–1459
Dupaigne M, Fève P (2009) Technology shocks around the world. Rev Econ Dyn 12:592–607
Dupaigne M, Fève P, Matheron J (2007) Avoiding pitfalls in using structural VARs to estimate economic models. Rev Econ Dyn 10(2):238–255
Erceg C, Guerrieri L, Gust C (2005) Can long-run restrictions identify technology shocks? Journal of the European Economic Association 3(6):1237–1278
Francis NR, Ramey VA (2005) Is the technology-driven Real Business Cycle hypothesis dead? Shocks and aggregate fluctuations revisited. J Monet Econ 52(8):1379–1399
Galí J (1999) Technology, employment and the business cycle: do technology shocks explain aggregate fluctuations? Am Econ Rev 89(1):249–271
Galí J (2005) Trends in hours, balanced growth, and the role of technology in the business cycle. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review 87(4):459–486
Galí J, Rabanal P (2004) Technology shocks and aggregate fluctuations: how well does the RBC model fit postwar US data? In: Gertler M, Rogoff K (eds) NBER macroeconomics annual, pp 225–288
Kose A, Otrok C, Whiteman CH (2008) Understanding the evolution of world business cycles. J Int Econ 75(1):110–130
Rabanal P, Rubio-Ramírez J, Tuesta V (2008) Cointegrated TFP processes and international business cycles. Working Paper, La Caixa
Stock JH, Watson MW (2005) Understanding changes in international business cycle dynamics. Journal of the European Economic Association 3(5):968–1006
Uhlig H (2004) Do technology shocks lead to a fall in total hours worked? Journal of the European Economic Association 2(2–3):361–371
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The views expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Banque de France.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dupaigne, M., Fève, P. Hours Worked and Permanent Technology Shocks in Open Economies. Open Econ Rev 21, 69–86 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11079-009-9159-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11079-009-9159-z