02.07.2013 Views

Macroeconomics and Methodology Christopher Sims

Macroeconomics and Methodology Christopher Sims

Macroeconomics and Methodology Christopher Sims

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

MACROECONOMICS AND METHODOLOGY<br />

CHRISTOPHER SIMS<br />

Journal of Economic Perspectives 1996<br />

() 1 / 14


Outline<br />

Advances in sciences: discuss the view of science as data reduction<br />

Evaluation of theories⇒ science-as-data-reduction view vs hypothesis<br />

testing view<br />

The role of statistical inference across disciplines<br />

Rhetoric of economics<br />

Real Business Cycle School<br />

Progress in Quantitative <strong>Macroeconomics</strong><br />

() 2 / 14


Science as data reduction<br />

Advances in natural sciences are discoveries of ways to compress<br />

data with minimal loss of information.<br />

Example: Tycho Brahe accumulated large amounts of reliable data on the movements of<br />

the planets. Kepler observed that they are all elliptical orbits with the sun at a focus.<br />

Economics: same aim but less successful ⇒ Whatever theory<br />

economist use to characterize data on the economy, the actual data<br />

contain substantial variation that is not captured in the theory.<br />

() 3 / 14


Critique to the hypothesis testing view<br />

Common view of economists: formulate testable hypothesis <strong>and</strong><br />

confront them with data.<br />

⇒ True hypothesis survive the test, false ones would be eliminated.<br />

Critique 1: Hypothesis testing view is dependent on the idea that there<br />

are true <strong>and</strong> false theories.<br />

⇒ The degree to which theories succeed in reducing data can be a continuum.<br />

⇒There are better theories than others. “Worse” theories are not necessarily false <strong>and</strong> do<br />

not have to be rejected.<br />

Critique 2: A naive hypothesis testing approach might accept a theory<br />

as “true” but the theory can be so complex that do not allow important<br />

data reduction.<br />

() 4 / 14


The role of statistical inference across disciplines<br />

Formal statistical inference is not important when:<br />

the data are so abundant that allow the available theories to be clearly<br />

ranked ⇒ Experimental natural sciences.<br />

there is no need to choose among competing - observationally<br />

equivalent- theories.<br />

() 5 / 14


The role of statistical inference across disciplines<br />

Economics:<br />

Then if:<br />

Little experimentation possible. Particularly true for macroeconomics.<br />

Exist competing theories - observationally equivalent- to some questions.<br />

Important policy questions dem<strong>and</strong> opinions from economic experts.<br />

If data do not make the choice of the theory obvious<br />

<strong>and</strong> predictions of policy effects depend on the choice of the theory<br />

⇒ experts can only discuss their conclusions only using notions of probability.<br />

() 6 / 14


The rhetoric of Economics<br />

Concern: Too much attention is given to the development of rhetorical<br />

devices in economic argument <strong>and</strong> to encourage rhetorical skill among<br />

economist. (McCloskey (1983) methodological essay).<br />

⇒ Many economist are willing to use arguments they know are flawed<br />

without explaining the flaws or cite evidence they know could be shown<br />

to be misleading, for sake of rhetorical effectiveness.<br />

Rhetoric should remain secondary.<br />

() 7 / 14


General equilibrium modeling<br />

<strong>Macroeconomics</strong> is a branch of economics that makes drastic<br />

simplifications for the sake of studying a phenomena (the business cycle,<br />

economic growth) that inherently requires analysis of general<br />

equilibrium.<br />

It is natural <strong>and</strong> promising that macroeconomists, as computational<br />

power exp<strong>and</strong>s, are exploring <strong>and</strong> using dynamic, stochastic, general<br />

equilibrium (DSGE) models.<br />

Still, the models are too stylized <strong>and</strong> too remote from fitting the data to<br />

provide reliable guide to policy.<br />

DSGE modeling has delivered little empirical payoff so far.<br />

() 8 / 14


Real Business Cycle School (Kydl<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> Prescott)<br />

According to K&P:<br />

⇒ macroeconomists are said to have available a “well-tested” theory, or<br />

“st<strong>and</strong>ard” theory.<br />

⇒ They do computational “experiments”.<br />

⇒ These experiments usually results in “established theory becoming<br />

stronger” but occasionally discover an extension of the existing theory that is<br />

useful, <strong>and</strong> thereby “established theory” is “improved”.<br />

These analogies with established physical sciences are strained.<br />

() 9 / 14


Real Business Cycle School (Kydl<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> Prescott)<br />

K&P say that the neoclassical stochastic growth model is a “well<br />

tested” theory but they do not discuss its limitations.<br />

⇒ Even within the researches using this theory there is no illusion that it<br />

is uncontroversial.<br />

RBC research has ignored most of the known facts about the<br />

business cycle in assessing the match between DSGE models <strong>and</strong> the<br />

facts<br />

⇒ K&P do not document the way theory does <strong>and</strong> does not match<br />

the data.<br />

We may still be interested in a poorly fitting theory if:<br />

⇒ it offers a dramatic data compression.<br />

⇒ it is a type of theory that promisses to fit better with further work.<br />

() 10 / 14


Real Business Cycle School (Kydl<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> Prescott)<br />

What K&P call “computational experiments” are computations, not<br />

experiments.<br />

k&P argue that is reasonable to look at the theoretical probability<br />

distribution implied by a model for a set of statistics <strong>and</strong> to compare this<br />

to the statistics computed from actual data<br />

⇒ How to compare a distribution from the stochastic model to a<br />

statistic of the actual data? Little guidance.<br />

() 11 / 14


Real Business Cycle School (Kydl<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> Prescott)<br />

K&P definition of what constitutes a well tested theory does not suffices<br />

when we need to consider which of two or more models/theories<br />

with different policy implications is more reliable.<br />

⇒ K&P argument: Neoclassical stochastic growth model constitutes a<br />

well tested theory because this framework produce “normal-looking<br />

fluctuations” or “similar to those actually observed”.<br />

⇒ When we have 2 or more models it is not convincing to say that we<br />

should be more confident in the one whose simulated data is more<br />

“normal-looking” ⇒ Need to engage in statistical inference.<br />

() 12 / 14


Real Business Cycle School (Kydl<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> Prescott)<br />

K&P claim that “searching within some parametric class of economies<br />

for the one that best fits a set of aggregate time series makes litlle sense,<br />

because it isn’t likely to answer an interesting question”.<br />

It does make sense.<br />

Example:<br />

⇒ “How much of the US postwar economy would have fluctuated if technology shocks had<br />

been the only source of fluctuations?<br />

Approach:<br />

⇒ construct a parametric class of DSGE models in which the parameter indexed the<br />

contribution of technology shocks to fluctuations.<br />

⇒ Examine behavior of model fit as a function of this parameter.<br />

- The model fit is insensitive to the parameter (model weakely identified)<br />

or<br />

- Some sources of impulse response could be ruled out as unlikely, because they implied a<br />

poor fit.<br />

() 13 / 14


Progress in quantitative macroeconomics<br />

Streams of research:<br />

Work based on DSGE models using formal methods of probability-based<br />

inference:<br />

- McGrattan, Rogerson <strong>and</strong> Wright (1993): estimate a st<strong>and</strong>ard real<br />

bussiness cycle model using maximum likelihood.<br />

- Leeper <strong>and</strong> <strong>Sims</strong> (1994): RBC + fluctuating relative price of<br />

consumption <strong>and</strong> capital goods + monetary <strong>and</strong> fiscal sectors.<br />

Policy modeling in the tradition of simultaneous equations modeling.<br />

Work based on weakely identified time series models to isolate the<br />

effects of monetary policy.<br />

() 14 / 14

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!