Underemployment Equilibria in an Empirical Macromodel for Austria
Austria’s economic performance in the past two decades has compared favourably with that of most other OECD countries. GDP growth has been above the OECD average, inflation has been moderate and the external balance has remained broadly in equilibrium. In the 1980s, however, Austria has had to contend with rising unemployment; since 1981 two consecutive years of sharply rising unemployment were followed by a levelling off, but the full-employment levels attained in the 1970s have never been regained.
KeywordsRoot Mean Square Error Labour Supply Excess Demand Beveridge Curve Real Disposable Income
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Drèze, J.H. and Bean, C.R. (1990) (eds), Europe’s Unemployment Problem (Cambridge, Mass. and London: The MIT Press).Google Scholar
- Lambert, J. and Mulkay, B. (1987) ‘Investment in Disequilibrium Models or Does Profitability Really Matter?’, in Economic Decision Making: Games, Econometrics and Optimisation. Contributions in Honour of Jaques Drèze (Amsterdam: North-Holland).Google Scholar
- Lambert, J. (1988) Disequilibrium Macroeconomic Models: Theory and Estimation of Rationing Models Using Business Survey Data (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
- Neudorfer, P., Pichelmann, K. and Wagner, M. (1990) ‘Unfavourable Shifts of Rationing Equilibria: Austrian Unemployment 1965–86’, in Drèze and Bean (eds), Europe’s Unemployment Problem (Cambridge, Mass. and London: The MIT Press) pp. 90–119.Google Scholar
- Pichelmann, K. (1990) ‘Unemployment Dynamics, Wage Flexibility and the NAIRU in Austria’, Empirica — Austrian Economic Papers, no. 17/2, pp. 171-86.Google Scholar
- Sneessens, H. and Drèze, J.H. (1986) ‘A Discussion of Belgian Unemployment, Combining Traditional Concepts and Disequilibrium Econometrics’, Economica, vol. 53, supplement, pp. 89-119.Google Scholar
- Sneessens, H. (1987) ‘Investment and the Inflation-Unemployment Tradeoff in a Macroeconomic Rationing Model with Monopolistic Competition’, European Economic Review, vol. 31, pp. 781-815.Google Scholar