IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/fedgif/774.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How do Canadian hours worked respond to a technology shock?

Author

Abstract

This paper investigates the response of hours worked to a permanent technology shock. Based on annual data from Canada, we argue that hours worked rise after a positive technology shock. We obtain a similar result using annual data from the United States. These results contradict a large literature that claims that a positive technology shock causes hours worked to fall. We find that the different results are due to the literature making a specification error in the statistical model of per capital hours worked. Finally, we present results that Canadian monetary policy has accommodated technology shocks.

Suggested Citation

  • Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin S. Eichenbaum & Robert J. Vigfusson, 2003. "How do Canadian hours worked respond to a technology shock?," International Finance Discussion Papers 774, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedgif:774
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/ifdp/2003/774/default.htm
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/ifdp/2003/774/ifdp774.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kwiatkowski, Denis & Phillips, Peter C. B. & Schmidt, Peter & Shin, Yongcheol, 1992. "Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root : How sure are we that economic time series have a unit root?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 54(1-3), pages 159-178.
    2. Elliott, Graham & Jansson, Michael, 2000. "Testing for Unit Roots with Stationary Covariances," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt47k7z69n, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    3. Elliott, Graham & Jansson, Michael, 2003. "Testing for unit roots with stationary covariates," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 75-89, July.
    4. Gali, Jordi & Lopez-Salido, J. David & Valles, Javier, 2003. "Technology shocks and monetary policy: assessing the Fed's performance," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 723-743, May.
    5. Hansen, Bruce E., 1995. "Rethinking the Univariate Approach to Unit Root Testing: Using Covariates to Increase Power," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(5), pages 1148-1171, October.
    6. Jordi Gali, 1999. "Technology, Employment, and the Business Cycle: Do Technology Shocks Explain Aggregate Fluctuations?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 249-271, March.
    7. Matthew D. Shapiro & Mark W. Watson, 1988. "Sources of Business Cycle Fluctuations," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1988, Volume 3, pages 111-156, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. repec:cup:etheor:v:11:y:1995:i:5:p:1148-71 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Lawrence J. Christiano & Lars Ljungqvist, 1987. "Money does Granger-cause output in the bivariate output-money relation," Staff Report 108, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    10. Christiano, Lawrence J. & Ljungqvist, Lars, 1988. "Money does Granger-cause output in the bivariate money-output relation," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 217-235, September.
    11. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1997. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 557-586, May.
    12. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Robert Vigfusson, 2003. "What Happens After a Technology Shock?," NBER Working Papers 9819, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Sims, Christopher A & Stock, James H & Watson, Mark W, 1990. "Inference in Linear Time Series Models with Some Unit Roots," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(1), pages 113-144, January.
    14. Jonas D. M. Fisher, 2002. "Technology shocks matter," Working Paper Series WP-02-14, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    15. Neville Francis & Valerie A. Ramey, 2002. "Is the Technology-Driven Real Business Cycle Hypothesis Dead?," NBER Working Papers 8726, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Martin Eichenbaum & Kenneth I. Singleton, 1986. "Do Equilibrium Real Business Cycle Theories Explain Postwar US Business Cycles?," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1986, Volume 1, pages 91-146, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mukantabana, Athanasie & Habimana, Olivier, 2015. "Technology Shock and the Business Cycle in the G7 Countries: A Structural Vector Error Correction Model," MPRA Paper 69651, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin S. Eichenbaum & Robert J. Vigfusson, 2003. "What happens after a technology shock?," International Finance Discussion Papers 768, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    2. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Robert Vigfusson, 2004. "The Response of Hours to a Technology Shock: Evidence Based on Direct Measures of Technology," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(2-3), pages 381-395, 04/05.
    3. Jordi Gali & Pau Rabanal, 2004. "Technology Shocks and Aggregate Fluctuations: How Well Does the RBS Model Fit Postwar U.S. Data?," NBER Working Papers 10636, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Jonas D. M. Fisher, 2002. "Technology shocks matter," Working Paper Series WP-02-14, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    5. Sergio Rebelo, 2005. "Real Business Cycle Models: Past, Present, and Future," NBER Working Papers 11401, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. David Altig & Lawrence Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Jesper Linde, 2011. "Firm-Specific Capital, Nominal Rigidities and the Business Cycle," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 14(2), pages 225-247, April.
    7. Chari, V.V. & Kehoe, Patrick J. & McGrattan, Ellen R., 2008. "Are structural VARs with long-run restrictions useful in developing business cycle theory?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(8), pages 1337-1352, November.
    8. Francesco Busato & Alessandro Girardi & Amadeo Argentiero, 2005. "Technology and non-technology shocks in a two-sector economy," Economics Working Papers 2005-11, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    9. Holly, S. & Petrella, I., 2008. "Factor demand linkages and the business cycle: Interpreting aggregate fluctuations as sectoral fluctuations," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0827, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    10. Yongsung Chang & Jay H. Hong, 2006. "Do Technological Improvements in the Manufacturing Sector Raise or Lower Employment?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 352-368, March.
    11. Hashmat Khan & John Tsoukalas, 2005. "Technology Shocks and UK Business Cycles," Macroeconomics 0512006, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Barbara Rossi & Elena Pesavento, 2004. "Do Technology Shocks Drive Hours Up or Down?," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 96, Econometric Society.
    13. Domenico J. Marchetti & Francesco Nucci, 2007. "Pricing Behavior and the Response of Hours to Productivity Shocks," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 39(7), pages 1587-1611, October.
    14. Eiji Kurozumi & Daisuke Yamazaki & Kaddour Hadri, 2012. "Covariate Unit Root Test for Cross-Sectionally Dependent Panel Data," Global COE Hi-Stat Discussion Paper Series gd12-256, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    15. Francis, Neville & Ramey, Valerie A., 2005. "Is the technology-driven real business cycle hypothesis dead? Shocks and aggregate fluctuations revisited," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(8), pages 1379-1399, November.
    16. Rochelle M. Edge & Thomas Laubach & John C. Williams, 2003. "The responses of wages and prices to technology shocks," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2003-65, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    17. Giancarlo Corsetti & Luca Dedola & Sylvain Leduc, 2008. "Productivity, External Balance, and Exchange Rates: Evidence on the Transmission Mechanism among G7 Countries," NBER Chapters, in: NBER International Seminar on Macroeconomics 2006, pages 117-194, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Kenneth D. West, 1993. "An Aggregate Demand–Aggregate Supply Analysis of Japanese Monetary Policy, 1973–1990," NBER Chapters, in: Japanese Monetary Policy, pages 160-188, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Whelan, Karl T., 2009. "Technology shocks and hours worked: Checking for robust conclusions," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 231-239, June.
    20. Lupi, Claudio, 2009. "Unit Root CADF Testing with R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 32(i02).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Productivity; Technology;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fip:fedgif:774. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ryan Wolfslayer ; Keisha Fournillier (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbgvus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.