Do SVAR Models Justify Discarding the Technology‐Shock‐Driven Real Business Cycle Hypothesis?
Hyeon‐seung Huh, David Kim
Abstract
Hyeon‐seung Huh, David Kim
Abstract
This study investigates the validity of technology shocks as a driving force of US business cycle fluctuations. Using three well‐known structural vector autoregression (SVAR) models, we analyse how structural shocks are associated with the variations of output and hours worked at business cycle frequencies. Empirical results reveal that technology shocks remain an important source of cyclical movements in output. Furthermore, a positive technology shock does not lead to a decline in hours worked, in contrast to previous studies. Our SVAR‐based evidence does not support discarding a technology‐shock‐driven business cycle theory.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This study investigates the validity of technology shocks as a driving force of US business cycle fluctuations. Using three well‐known structural vector autoregression (SVAR) models, we analyse how structural shocks are associated with the variations of output and hours worked at business cycle frequencies. Empirical results reveal that technology shocks remain an important source of cyclical movements in output. Furthermore, a positive technology shock does not lead to a decline in hours worked, in contrast to previous studies. Our SVAR‐based evidence does not support discarding a technology‐shock‐driven business cycle theory.
Key concepts: Business cycle, Shock (circulatory), Technology shock, Economics, Vector autoregression, Econometrics, Structural vector autoregression, Monetary economics