金融冲击或生产力放缓:对比美国和英国的大衰退和复苏

Kieran P. Larkin
{"title":"金融冲击或生产力放缓:对比美国和英国的大衰退和复苏","authors":"Kieran P. Larkin","doi":"10.20955/R.103.99-126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Great Recession renewed academic interest in the role of financial factors in the determination of real macroeconomic quantities. The magnitude of the decline in output, fall in house prices, and failure in financial markets led economists to place greater emphasis on financial institutions, debt, and financial variables within macroeconomic thinking (Reinhart and Rogoff, 2009; Brunnermeier, 2009; and Guerrieri and Uhlig, 2016). The synchronized nature of the decline across developed economies has reasonably been interpreted as suggesting a common cause, principally a large negative financial shock. This article studies the behavior of the United States and United Kingdom economies during the Great Recession and subsequent slow recovery to study whether This article contrasts the experiences of the United States and United Kingdom during and after the Great Recession to understand the role of financial shocks in the magnitude of the crises and length of the recoveries. It starts from the common consensus that the Great Recession first and foremost was a financial crisis. It shows that relative to the United States, the Great Recession in the United Kingdom was more closely associated with a decline in productivity. Motivated by the similar behavior of financial variables at a business cycle frequency, it contrasts the behavior of the U.S. and U.K. economies through the lens of a simple real business cycle model augmented with financial shocks. A credit channel that operates on firm hiring decisions captures the magnitude of the output decline in both the United States and United Kingdom but exaggerates the response of the hours margin for the United Kindgom. The conclusion is that the financial channel supported in the U.S. data seems less appropriate for understanding the U.K. experience. (JEL E24, E32, E44, G01, G32)","PeriodicalId":199884,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Parliamentary Review","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Financial Shocks or Productivity Slowdown: Contrasting the Great Recession and Recovery in the United States and United Kingdom\",\"authors\":\"Kieran P. Larkin\",\"doi\":\"10.20955/R.103.99-126\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Great Recession renewed academic interest in the role of financial factors in the determination of real macroeconomic quantities. The magnitude of the decline in output, fall in house prices, and failure in financial markets led economists to place greater emphasis on financial institutions, debt, and financial variables within macroeconomic thinking (Reinhart and Rogoff, 2009; Brunnermeier, 2009; and Guerrieri and Uhlig, 2016). The synchronized nature of the decline across developed economies has reasonably been interpreted as suggesting a common cause, principally a large negative financial shock. This article studies the behavior of the United States and United Kingdom economies during the Great Recession and subsequent slow recovery to study whether This article contrasts the experiences of the United States and United Kingdom during and after the Great Recession to understand the role of financial shocks in the magnitude of the crises and length of the recoveries. It starts from the common consensus that the Great Recession first and foremost was a financial crisis. It shows that relative to the United States, the Great Recession in the United Kingdom was more closely associated with a decline in productivity. Motivated by the similar behavior of financial variables at a business cycle frequency, it contrasts the behavior of the U.S. and U.K. economies through the lens of a simple real business cycle model augmented with financial shocks. A credit channel that operates on firm hiring decisions captures the magnitude of the output decline in both the United States and United Kingdom but exaggerates the response of the hours margin for the United Kindgom. The conclusion is that the financial channel supported in the U.S. data seems less appropriate for understanding the U.K. experience. (JEL E24, E32, E44, G01, G32)\",\"PeriodicalId\":199884,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Parliamentary Review\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Parliamentary Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20955/R.103.99-126\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Parliamentary Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20955/R.103.99-126","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大衰退重新燃起了学术界对金融因素在确定实际宏观经济数量中的作用的兴趣。产出下降的幅度、房价下跌和金融市场失灵导致经济学家在宏观经济思维中更加强调金融机构、债务和金融变量(Reinhart和Rogoff, 2009;象Brunnermeier, 2009;Guerrieri和Uhlig, 2016)。发达经济体经济衰退的同步性被合理地解释为表明存在一个共同的原因,主要是巨大的负面金融冲击。本文研究了美国和英国经济在大衰退期间和随后缓慢复苏期间的行为,以研究是否这篇文章对比了美国和英国在大衰退期间和之后的经验,以了解金融冲击在危机的程度和复苏的长度中的作用。它始于一个普遍的共识,即大衰退首先是一场金融危机。它表明,相对于美国,英国的大衰退与生产率下降的关系更为密切。由于金融变量在商业周期频率上的相似行为,它通过一个简单的真实商业周期模型的镜头来对比美国和英国经济的行为,并增加了金融冲击。根据公司雇用决定运作的信贷渠道反映了美国和英国产出下降的幅度,但夸大了英国工时差额的反应。结论是,美国数据支持的金融渠道似乎不太适合理解英国的经验。(jel e24, e32, e44, g01, g32)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Financial Shocks or Productivity Slowdown: Contrasting the Great Recession and Recovery in the United States and United Kingdom
The Great Recession renewed academic interest in the role of financial factors in the determination of real macroeconomic quantities. The magnitude of the decline in output, fall in house prices, and failure in financial markets led economists to place greater emphasis on financial institutions, debt, and financial variables within macroeconomic thinking (Reinhart and Rogoff, 2009; Brunnermeier, 2009; and Guerrieri and Uhlig, 2016). The synchronized nature of the decline across developed economies has reasonably been interpreted as suggesting a common cause, principally a large negative financial shock. This article studies the behavior of the United States and United Kingdom economies during the Great Recession and subsequent slow recovery to study whether This article contrasts the experiences of the United States and United Kingdom during and after the Great Recession to understand the role of financial shocks in the magnitude of the crises and length of the recoveries. It starts from the common consensus that the Great Recession first and foremost was a financial crisis. It shows that relative to the United States, the Great Recession in the United Kingdom was more closely associated with a decline in productivity. Motivated by the similar behavior of financial variables at a business cycle frequency, it contrasts the behavior of the U.S. and U.K. economies through the lens of a simple real business cycle model augmented with financial shocks. A credit channel that operates on firm hiring decisions captures the magnitude of the output decline in both the United States and United Kingdom but exaggerates the response of the hours margin for the United Kindgom. The conclusion is that the financial channel supported in the U.S. data seems less appropriate for understanding the U.K. experience. (JEL E24, E32, E44, G01, G32)
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信