Does cross-fertilization occur in recent macroeconomics? A quantitative exploration of the interactions between DSGE and MAB models

IF 5 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Alberto Baccini, Martina Cioni, Muriel Dal Pont Legrand, Eugenio Petrovich
{"title":"Does cross-fertilization occur in recent macroeconomics? A quantitative exploration of the interactions between DSGE and MAB models","authors":"Alberto Baccini,&nbsp;Martina Cioni,&nbsp;Muriel Dal Pont Legrand,&nbsp;Eugenio Petrovich","doi":"10.1111/joes.12674","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The dominant approach to macroeconomics has always claimed its capacity to incorporate new ideas, continuously adapting its models in order to address contemporaneous challenges. This narrative leads to present academic macroeconomics research as driven by a continuous linear progress. 2008 and its trail of crises seems to have revealed more openly that such interactions, to consider that they may have existed, may no longer operate. Focusing on recent period, we propose to challenge this narrative, investigating whether such interactions still exist today and questioning their nature. We established a set of 2299 articles composed by Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) models and Macro Agent-Based Models (MABM). We investigate the structure of the social communities authoring these articles and their intellectual interactions in view of establishing their relative fragmentation or strong scientific unity. Bibliographic coupling reveals that DSGE and MABM literatures refer to two different sets of bibliographic references. We also pay attention to two communities known to be interstitial: HANKs and hybrid models. While the overall results exhibit a relative fragmentation of these communities, they do not provide evidence of collaboration between MABM and DSGE authors. Rather, results suggest a completely dissymmetric influence from DSGE on the MABM literature</p>","PeriodicalId":51374,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Surveys","volume":"39 4","pages":"1758-1794"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Surveys","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joes.12674","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The dominant approach to macroeconomics has always claimed its capacity to incorporate new ideas, continuously adapting its models in order to address contemporaneous challenges. This narrative leads to present academic macroeconomics research as driven by a continuous linear progress. 2008 and its trail of crises seems to have revealed more openly that such interactions, to consider that they may have existed, may no longer operate. Focusing on recent period, we propose to challenge this narrative, investigating whether such interactions still exist today and questioning their nature. We established a set of 2299 articles composed by Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) models and Macro Agent-Based Models (MABM). We investigate the structure of the social communities authoring these articles and their intellectual interactions in view of establishing their relative fragmentation or strong scientific unity. Bibliographic coupling reveals that DSGE and MABM literatures refer to two different sets of bibliographic references. We also pay attention to two communities known to be interstitial: HANKs and hybrid models. While the overall results exhibit a relative fragmentation of these communities, they do not provide evidence of collaboration between MABM and DSGE authors. Rather, results suggest a completely dissymmetric influence from DSGE on the MABM literature

在最近的宏观经济学中是否出现了异花受精现象?DSGE和MAB模型之间相互作用的定量探索
宏观经济学的主流方法一直声称自己有能力吸收新思想,不断调整自己的模型,以应对当代的挑战。这种叙述导致目前的学术宏观经济学研究是由一个连续的线性进展驱动的。2008年及其危机的轨迹似乎更公开地揭示了这样的相互作用,考虑到它们可能存在,可能不再起作用。关注最近的时期,我们建议挑战这种叙述,调查这种相互作用今天是否仍然存在,并质疑其性质。我们建立了由动态随机一般均衡(DSGE)模型和宏观Agent-Based模型(MABM)组成的2299篇文章。我们调查了撰写这些文章的社会群体的结构,以及他们的智力互动,以确定他们的相对碎片化或强大的科学统一性。文献耦合揭示了DSGE和MABM文献指的是两组不同的文献参考。我们还关注了两个已知的插页式社区:HANKs和混合模型。虽然总体结果显示这些社区相对分散,但它们并没有提供MABM和DSGE作者之间合作的证据。相反,结果表明DSGE对MABM文献的影响是完全不对称的
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
3.80%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: As economics becomes increasingly specialized, communication amongst economists becomes even more important. The Journal of Economic Surveys seeks to improve the communication of new ideas. It provides a means by which economists can keep abreast of recent developments beyond their immediate specialization. Areas covered include: - economics - econometrics - economic history - business economics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信