Skip to main content

A dynamical model for real economy and finance

Abstract

We have studied a discrete time dynamical model with four variables and delays, describing the interaction between a three-sector real economy and a financial market with four assets. Investors and financial intermediaries have heterogeneous beliefs. We show that complexity related to the evolution of state variables emerges and we investigate interdependence among economic fluctuations and assets volatility. By means of stability analysis we have found that real economy influences the existence of equilibrium prices in financial markets and that risky asset prices as well as capital per capita reach zero only when the elasticity of substitution between capital and labour is low enough. Bifurcation analysis shows that an increase of bond return would decrease the price of all the assets, conversely when the bond return decreases fluctuations and complex dynamics may arise. Due to the complexity of the model, computational tools are used to investigate long run dynamics, thus showing that for sufficiently high values of the interest rate bifurcations with repetitive structure emerge. In addition, we show how the total number of shares in each sector influences its price volatility. Finally, when fluctuations appear, economic policy intended to increase employment could stabilise the model only in sufficiently developed economies.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Notes

  1. Parametrisation discussed in appendix.

References

  1. Agliari, A., Naimzada, A., Pecora, N.: Boom-bust dynamics in a stock market participation model with heterogeneous traders. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 91, 458–468 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jedc.2018.04.007

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Arteta, C., Kose, M.A., Stocker, M., Taskin, T.: Implications of negative interest rate policies: an early assessment. Pac. Econ. Rev. 23(1), 8–26 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0106.12249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Baker, H., Farrelly, G.: Dividend achievers: a behavioral perspective. Akron Bus. Econ. Rev. 19(79–92), 1997 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bischi, G., Lamantia, F., Radi, D.: Evolutionary oligopoly games with heterogeneous adaptive players. In: Corchón, L.C., Marini, M. (eds.) Handbook of Game Theory and Industrial Organization, vol. I, pp. 343–371. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK (2018)

  5. Böhm, V., Kikuchi, T., Vachadze, G.: Asset pricing and productivity growth: the role of consumption scenarios. Comput. Econ. 32, 163–181 (2008)

    MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Brianzoni, S., Mammana, C., Michetti, E.: Nonlinear dynamics in a business-cycle model with logistic population growth. Chaos Solitons Fractals 40, 717–730 (2009)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Brianzoni, S., Mammana, C., Michetti, E.: Local and global dynamics in a neoclassical growth model with nonconcave production function and nonconstant population growth rate. J. SIAM Appl. Math. 75(1), 61–74 (2015)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brock, W.A., Hommes, C.: Heterogeneous beliefs and routes to chaos in a simple asset-pricing model. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 3, 167 (1998)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Broihanne, M.H., Merli, M., Roger, P.: Overconfidence, risk perception and the risk-taking behavior of finance professionals. Financ. Res. Lett. 11(2), 64–73 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chow, S.N., Hale, J.K.: Methods of Bifurcation Theory. Springer, New York (2012)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Cochrane, J.H. (ed.): Financial Markets and the Real Economy, International Library of Critical Writings in Financial Economics, vol. 18. Edward Elgar (2006)

  12. Grassetti, F., Mammana, C., Michetti, E.: On the effect of labour productivity on growth: endogenous fluctuations and complex dynamics. Discret. Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2018, 1–9 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6831508

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Grassetti, F., Mammana, C., Michetti, E.: Substitutability between production factors and growth. an analysis using ves production functions. Chaos Solitons Fractals 113, 53–62 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2018.04.012

  14. Grosshans, D., Zeisberger, S.: All’s well that ends well? on the importance of how returns are achieved. J. Bank. Finance 87, 397–410 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Inada, K.: On a two-sector model of economic growth: comments and a generalization. Rev. Econ. Stud. 30, 119–127 (1963)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Karagiannis, G., Palivos, T., Papageorgiou, C.: Variable elasticity of substitution and economic growth. In: Diebolt C. and Kyrtsou C. (eds) New Trends in Macroeconomics, pp. 21–37 (2005)

  17. Klump, R., de La Grandville, O.: Economic growth and the elasticity of substitution: two theorems and some suggestions. Am. Econ. Rev. 90(1), 282–291 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Knoblach, M.: Stöckl: What determines the elasticity of substitution between capital and labor? a literature review. J. Econ. Surv. 34, 847–875 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Krugman, P.: Trade, accumulation, and uneven development. J. Dev. Econ. 8, 149–161 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kubicek, M., Marek, M.: Computational Methods in Bifurcation Theory and Dissipative Structures. Springer-Verlag, New York (2012)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Lin, F.L., Yang, S.Y., Marsh, T., Chen, Y.: Stock and bond return relations and stock market uncertainty: evidence from wavelet analysis. Int. Rev. Econ. Finance 55, 285–294 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2017.07.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Malmendier, U., Nagel, S.: Depression babies: Do macroeconomic experiences affect risk taking? Quart. J. Econ. 126(1), 373–416 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Novak, S., Mosionek-Schweda, M., Kwiatkowski, J., Mrzyglod, U.: Greedy state? the effect of the government shareholder on the dividend payout ratio and smoothing levels. Int. J. Contemp. Manag. 16(4), 119–143 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  24. OECD: Measuring Capital-OECD Manual, 2nd edn. OECD Publishing, Paris (2009). https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264068476

  25. Sato, R., Hoffman, R.F.: Production functions with variable elasticity of factor substitution: some analysis and testing. Rev. Econ. Stat. 50(4), 453–460 (1968)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Thompson, J., Stewart, H.B.: Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos. Wiley, Chichester (2002)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Tramontana, F., Westerhoff, F., Gardini, L.: A simple financial market model with chartists and fundamentalists: market entry levels and discontinuities. Math. Comput. Simul. 108, 16–40 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2013.06.002

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wenzelburger, J.: Learning to predict rationally when beliefs are heterogeneous. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 28, 2075–2104 (2004)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. Grassetti.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The authors are thankful to the two anonymous Referees and the Associate Editor for their valuable comments and suggestions that improved the manuscript.

Appendices

Proofs of Propositions

Proof of Proposition 1

The fourth equation in system U, given by (18), is verified for \(k=0\). When capital is equal to zero it has \(\pi ^{(n)}=0\), \(\forall n\in \{1,2,3\}\) in the equations of prices (first equation of system T given by (17)). Therefore \(E_0=\left( 0,0,0,0\right) \) is a solution for system (18) for all parameter values and hence it is a fixed point for map T.

Proof of Proposition 2

The first three equations in system (18), i.e. those related to prices, are linear w.r.t. \(p^{(n)}\), therefore, when a positive fixed point \(k^*\) for capital exists, each price in equilibrium is given by

$$\begin{aligned} {p^{(n)}}^*=\frac{\left( u-x^{(n)}_mr^{(1)}r^{(2)}\right) L{\pi ^{(n)}}^*}{2\left[ (R-1)u+x^{(n)}_mr^{(1)}r^{(2)}\right] x^{(n)}_m}\qquad n=\{1,2,3\} \end{aligned}$$
(29)

where \({\pi ^{(n)}}^*\) is the profit of sector n computed in \(k^*\). In order to analyse the existence of a positive fixed point for capital consider that fixed points are solutions of

$$\begin{aligned} k=\sum _{n=1}^{3}\left[ \left( 1-\delta ^{(n)}\right) b^{(n)}k+\left( 1-\nu ^{(n)}_t\right) \left( b^{(n)}\right) ^2k^{s^{(n)}}\left( l^{(n)}+b^{(n)}k^{s^{(n)}}\right) ^{\frac{1}{s^{(n)}}-1}\right] \end{aligned}$$

where previous equation is obtained substituting (4) in (5) and eliminating the subscript t from k. Notice that when price are in equilibrium it has \(\nu ^{(n)}_t=.5\), \(\forall n \in \{1,2,3\}\), hence previous inequality may be written as

$$\begin{aligned} k=\sum _{n=1}^{3}b^{(n)}k -\sum _{n=1}^{3}b^{(n)}\delta ^{(n)}k + 0.5\sum _{n=1}^{3} \left( b^{(n)}\right) ^2k^{s^{(n)}}\left( l^{(n)}+b^{(n)}k^{s^{(n)}}\right) ^{\frac{1}{s^{(n)}}-1}\,. \end{aligned}$$

Dividing both the side of the equation for k and recalling that \(\sum _{n=1}^{3}b^{(n)}=1\) the condition reads

$$\begin{aligned} 2\sum _{n=1}^{3}b^{(n)}\delta ^{(n)}=\sum _{n=1}^{3}\left( b^{(n)}\right) ^2k^{s^{(n)}-1}\left( l^{(n)}+b^{(n)}k^{s^{(n)}}\right) ^{\frac{1}{s^{(n)}}-1} \end{aligned}$$

We define \(db=2\sum _{n=1}^{3}b^{(n)}\delta ^{(n)}\) and

$$\begin{aligned} C(k)=\sum _{n=1}^{3}\left( b^{(n)}\right) ^2k^{s^{(n)}-1}\left( l^{(n)}+b^{(n)}k^{s^{(n)}}\right) ^{\frac{1}{s^{(n)}}-1} \end{aligned}$$
(30)

so that fixed points for capital are solution of \(db=C(k)\).

Function (30) first derivative is

$$\begin{aligned} C^\prime (k)=\sum _{n=1}^{3}-\frac{l^{(n)}\left( b^{(n)}\right) ^2\left( 1-s^{(n)}\right) }{k^{2-s^{(n)}}\left( l^{(n)}+b^{(n)}k^{s^{(n)}}\right) ^{2-\frac{1}{^{(n)}}}} \end{aligned}$$
(31)

and it is negative for all parameters combinations proving that C(k) is strictly decreasing. Being \(db>0\) and \(C^\prime (k)<0\) no more than one fixed point may exist. Two cases may occur:

(i):

if all sectors satisfy \(s^{(n)}<0\) it has \(\lim _{k\rightarrow 0^+}C(k)=\sum _{n=1}^{3}\left( b^{(n)}\right) ^{\frac{1}{s^{(n)}+1}}\) and \(\lim _{k\rightarrow +\infty }C(k)=0\) therefore a fixed point exists iff \(db<\sum _{n=1}^{3}\left( b^{(n)}\right) ^{\frac{1}{s^{(n)}+1}}\);

(ii):

if \(j\in \{1,2,3\}\) sectors satisfy \(s^{(n)}>0\) it has \(\lim _{k\rightarrow 0^+}C(k)=+\infty \) and \(\lim _{k\rightarrow +\infty }C(k)=\sum _{n=1}^{j}\left( b^{(n)}\right) ^{\frac{1}{s^{(n)}+1}}\) therefore a fixed point exists iff \(db>\sum _{n=1}^{j}\left( b^{(n)}\right) ^{\frac{1}{s^{(n)}+1}}\).

When a fixed point \(k^*\) exists, it can be substituted in the equations of prices to find the equilibrium prices as defined by (29).

Proof of Proposition 3

We consider prices in equilibria therefore \(\left( 1-\nu ^{(n)}_t\right) =0.5\). Then the fixed point \(E_0\) is stable if \(\left| {\mathcal {K}}^\prime \left( 0,p\right) \right| <1\). When \(\exists n\in \{1,2,3\}\) s.t. \(s^{(n)}>0\), it has \(\lim _{k_t\rightarrow 0^+}{\mathcal {K}}^\prime =+\infty \). When \(s^{(n)}<0 \forall n\in \{1,2,3\}\), it has \(\lim _{k_t\rightarrow 0^+}{\mathcal {K}}^\prime =\sum _{n=1}^{3}b^{(n)}\left[ 1-\delta ^{(n)}+0.5\left( b^{(n)}\right) ^\frac{1}{s^{(n)}}\right] \) and \(\lim _{k_t\rightarrow 0^+}{\mathcal {K}}^\prime >1\) as long as condition (i) of Proposition 2 holds. In both cases \(k=0\) is an unstable fixed point for the evolution of capital, therefore \(E_0\) is unstable.

Parametrization

The range of values used for simulations are summarized in the following table.

Variable Range Source
\(l^{(n)}\) (0.01, 0.79) OECD
\(b^{(n)}\) (0.01, 0.83) OECD
\(\delta ^{(n)}\) (0.18, 0.61) OECD
L (289, 42.400) OECD
R (.8, 1.3) OECD
\(\sum _{i=1}^3x^{(i)}_m\) (.5, 6) ECB

For the portion of implied labour force in each sector we considered the percentage of employees in the three sectors Agriculture, hunting and foresty/ Industry/ Services (ISIC rev. 4, groups A/B-F/G-U) for European Countries in 2019, the dataset is provided by OECD (Dataset: Employment by activities and status ALFS).

For the portion of implied capital in each sector we considered the percentage of gross capital formation by activity in the three sectors Agriculture, hunting and foresty/ Industry/ Services (ISIC rev. 4, groups A/B-F/G-U) for European Countries in 2019, the dataset is provided by OECD (Dataset: Capital formation by activity ISIC rev 4).

For the depreciation rate of capital, we considered the depreciation rate that express the age-price profile of fixed capital, considering assets for assets from new to 10 years old. Esteems are given in [24].

For the total number of workers we considered the employed population (aged by 15) in 2019 for European Countries, expressed in thousands. The dataset is provided by OECD (Dataset: Short-term labour market statistics).

For total shares \(x_m\), we based on the Statistical Data Warehouse from European Central Bank and selected the listed shares issued by non-financial corporations (ESA 2010 classification) in EU countries, for the period 2015-2020. The total number of issued shares per country is expressed in million.

For the return R we considered the long-term interest rates for Italy, Germany, France and UK in the period 2015-2020. The dataset is provided by OECD (Dataset: Long-term interest rates).

Free parameters: Parameter \(s^{(n)}\) determines the elasticity of substitution between capital and labour: \(\sigma ^{(n)}=\left( 1-s^{(n)}\right) ^{-1}\). As discussed in Knoblach and Stöckl [18], empirical estimates about elasticity of substitution are heterogeneous due to the specification of the estimation equation. Despite the heterogeneity, the range of esteemed values is dense in the set (-2,2). Due to the differences on the esteems, we let \(s^{(n)}\) as free parameter but, throughout simulations, we focuses on cases in which it results \(\sigma \in (-2,2)\).

Parameters \(\alpha ^{(i)}\), \(r^{(i)}\) and \(z^{(i)}\) refer to risk attitude, beliefs over short-term continuation for cum-dividend-prices and overconfidence. They may not be directly esteemed, despite so, higher values refer to higher risk-aversion and stronger beliefs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Grassetti, F., Mammana, C. & Michetti, E. A dynamical model for real economy and finance. Math Finan Econ 16, 345–366 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11579-021-00311-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11579-021-00311-3

Keywords

  • Economic growth
  • Asset prices
  • Economic dynamics
  • Heterogeneous beliefs
  • General equilibrium model

JEL Classification

  • C61
  • O41
  • G12