IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ipewps/1162019.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Investment, autonomous demand and long run capacity utilization: An empirical test for the Euro Area

Author

Listed:
  • Gallo, Ettore

Abstract

In recent years, the role attached to the autonomous components of aggregate demand has attracted rising attention, as testified by the development of the Sraffian Supermulti plier model (SSM) and the attempts to include autonomous demand in the Neo-Kaleckian model. This paper reviews and empirically tests the validity and the policy conclusions of the two models in the Euro Area. First, we theoretically assess whether the SSM may con stitute a complex variant of the Neo-Kaleckian model. In this sense, it is shown that results compatible with the SSM can be obtained by implementing a set of mechanisms in a modified Neo-Kaleckian model, leading to the convergence towards a desired rate of utilization. Furthermore, the chief diffierence between the models is recognized to be the role attached to the rate of capacity utilization in the long run. Second, the paper empirically tests the main implications of the models in the Euro Area, based on Eurostat data. In particular, the discussion outlines the short and long-run relation between autonomous demand and output, by testing both the cointegration and the direction of causality between the two with a VECM model. Moreover, the role accounted by both theories to the actual rate of capacity utilization and its discrepancies from the normal rate is empirically assessed, through a time-series estimation of the Sraffian and Neo-Kaleckian investment functions. While confirming the theoretical relation between autonomous demand and output in the long run, the results show that the dynamics of the rate of capacity utilization still plays a key role in the short-run adjustment mechanism - despite its stationary behaviour in the long term. Therefore, admitting that Keynesian results may hold even after the traverse, our work suggests to be Kaleckian in the short run and Sraffian in the long run.

Suggested Citation

  • Gallo, Ettore, 2019. "Investment, autonomous demand and long run capacity utilization: An empirical test for the Euro Area," IPE Working Papers 116/2019, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute for International Political Economy (IPE).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ipewps:1162019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/195933/1/106785827X.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Girardi , Daniele & Pariboni, Riccardo, 2015. "Autonomous demand and economic growth: some empirical evidence," Centro Sraffa Working Papers CSWP13, Centro di Ricerche e Documentazione "Piero Sraffa".
    2. Marc Lavoie & Gabriel Rodriguez & Mario Seccareccia, 2004. "Similitudes and Discrepancies in Post-Keynesian and Marxist Theories of Investment: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 127-149.
    3. Michalis Nikiforos, 2013. "The (Normal) Rate of Capacity Utilization at the Firm Level," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 513-538, July.
    4. Helmut Lütkepohl, 1985. "Comparison Of Criteria For Estimating The Order Of A Vector Autoregressive Process," Journal of Time Series Analysis, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(1), pages 35-52, January.
    5. Olivier Allain, 2015. "Tackling the instability of growth: a Kaleckian-Harrodian model with an autonomous expenditure component," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 39(5), pages 1351-1371.
    6. Marc Lavoie, 1996. "Traverse, Hysteresis, and Normal Rates of Capacity Utilization in Kaleckian Models of Growth and Distribution," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 28(4), pages 113-147, December.
    7. Marc Lavoie, 2014. "Post-Keynesian Economics: New Foundations," Post-Print hal-01343652, HAL.
    8. Sergio Cesaratto, 2017. "Beyond the traditional monetary circuit: endogenous money, finance and the theory of long-period effective demand," Department of Economics University of Siena 757, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    9. Christian Schoder, 2014. "Effective Demand, Exogenous Normal Utilization and Endogenous Capacity in the Long Run: Evidence from a Cointegrated Vector Autoregression Analysis for the USA," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(2), pages 298-320, May.
    10. Mark Setterfield (ed.), 2002. "The Economics of Demand-Led Growth," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1864.
    11. Saikkonen, Pentti & Lutkepohl, Helmut, 2000. "Testing for the Cointegrating Rank of a VAR Process with Structural Shifts," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 18(4), pages 451-464, October.
    12. Peter Skott, 2012. "Theoretical And Empirical Shortcomings Of The Kaleckian Investment Function," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 109-138, February.
    13. A. P. Thirlwall, 2015. "A Model of Regional Growth Rate Differences on Kaldorian Lines," Palgrave Studies in the History of Economic Thought, in: Essays on Keynesian and Kaldorian Economics, chapter 12, pages 286-301, Palgrave Macmillan.
    14. Helmut Lütkepohl & Pentti Saikkonen & Carsten Trenkler, 2001. "Maximum eigenvalue versus trace tests for the cointegrating rank of a VAR process," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 4(2), pages 1-8.
    15. Søren Johansen & Rocco Mosconi & Bent Nielsen, 2000. "Cointegration analysis in the presence of structural breaks in the deterministic trend," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 3(2), pages 216-249.
    16. Marc Lavoie, 2017. "Prototypes, reality and the growth of autonomous expenditures: a rejoinder," Post-Print hal-01435724, HAL.
    17. Markku Lanne & Helmut Lütkepohl & Pentti Saikkonen, 2002. "Comparison of unit root tests for time series with level shifts," Journal of Time Series Analysis, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(6), pages 667-685, November.
    18. Jushan Bai & Pierre Perron, 1998. "Estimating and Testing Linear Models with Multiple Structural Changes," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(1), pages 47-78, January.
    19. Lanne, Markku & Lutkepohl, Helmut, 2002. "Unit root tests for time series with level shifts: a comparison of different proposals," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 109-114, March.
    20. Saikkonen, Pentti & Lütkepohl, Helmut, 2000. "Testing For The Cointegrating Rank Of A Var Process With An Intercept," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 373-406, June.
    21. Sergio Cesaratto, 2015. "Neo-Kaleckian and Sraffian Controversies on the Theory of Accumulation," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(2), pages 154-182, April.
    22. Barbieri Góes, Maria Cristina & Deleidi, Matteo, 2022. "Output determination and autonomous demand multipliers: An empirical investigation for the US economy," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    23. Marc Lavoie, 2016. "Convergence Towards the Normal Rate of Capacity Utilization in Neo-Kaleckian Models: The Role of Non-Capacity Creating Autonomous Expenditures," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(1), pages 172-201, February.
    24. Fabio Freitas & Franklin Serrano, 2015. "Growth Rate and Level Effects, the Stability of the Adjustment of Capacity to Demand and the Sraffian Supermultiplier," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(3), pages 258-281, July.
    25. Søren Johansen & Rocco Mosconi & Bent Nielsen, 2000. "Cointegration analysis in the presence of structural breaks in the deterministic trend," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 3(2), pages 216-249.
    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. Ettore Gallo, 2022. "When is the long run?—Historical time and adjustment periods in demand‐led growth models," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(4), pages 1155-1178, November.
    2. Gahn, Santiago José, 2021. "On the adjustment of capacity utilisation to aggregate demand: Revisiting an old Sraffian critique to the Neo-Kaleckian model," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 325-360.
    3. Barbieri Góes, Maria Cristina & Deleidi, Matteo, 2022. "Output determination and autonomous demand multipliers: An empirical investigation for the US economy," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).

    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. Daniele Girardi & Riccardo Pariboni, 2019. "Normal utilization as the adjusting variable in Neo‐Kaleckian growth models: A critique," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 341-358, May.
    2. Gahn, Santiago José, 2021. "On the adjustment of capacity utilisation to aggregate demand: Revisiting an old Sraffian critique to the Neo-Kaleckian model," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 325-360.
    3. Guilherme Spinato Morlin & Nikolas Passos & Riccardo Pariboni, 2024. "Growth Theory and the Growth Model Perspective: Insights from the Supermultiplier," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(3), pages 1130-1155, July.
    4. Santiago José Gahn & Alejandro González, 2022. "On the empirical content of the convergence debate: Cross‐country evidence on growth and capacity utilisation," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 825-855, July.
    5. Eckhard Hein & Ryan Woodgate, 2021. "Stability issues in Kaleckian models driven by autonomous demand growth—Harrodian instability and debt dynamics," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 388-404, May.
    6. José A. Pérez‐Montiel & Carles Manera, 2022. "Is autonomous demand really autonomous in the United States? An asymmetric frequency‐domain Granger causality approach," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 78-92, February.
    7. Pariboni, Riccardo & Girardi, Daniele, 2018. "A(nother) Note on the Inconsistency of Neo-Kaleckian Growth Models," Centro Sraffa Working Papers CSWP31, Centro di Ricerche e Documentazione "Piero Sraffa".
    8. Eckhard Hein, 2019. "Harrodian instability in Kaleckian models and Steindlian solutions," FMM Working Paper 46-2019, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
    9. Barbieri Góes, Maria Cristina & Deleidi, Matteo, 2022. "Output determination and autonomous demand multipliers: An empirical investigation for the US economy," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    10. Lorenzo Di Domenico, 2021. "Multiplicity and not necessarily heterogeneity: implications for the long-run degree of capacity utilization," Working Papers PKWP2116, Post Keynesian Economics Society (PKES).
    11. Guilherme Haluska & Julia Braga & Ricardo Summa, 2021. "Growth, investment share and the stability of the Sraffian Supermultiplier model in the U.S. economy (1985–2017)," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 345-364, May.
    12. Marc Lavoie, 2016. "Convergence Towards the Normal Rate of Capacity Utilization in Neo-Kaleckian Models: The Role of Non-Capacity Creating Autonomous Expenditures," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(1), pages 172-201, February.
    13. Olivier Allain, 2021. "A supermultiplier model of the natural rate of growth," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 612-634, July.
    14. Eckhard Hein & Valeria Jimenez, 2022. "The macroeconomic implications of zero growth: a post-Keynesian approach," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 19(1), pages 41-60, April.
    15. Steven M Fazzari & Piero Ferri & Anna Maria Variato, 2020. "Demand-led growth and accommodating supply," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 44(3), pages 583-605.
    16. Nah, Won Jun & Lavoie, Marc, 2019. "The role of autonomous demand growth in a neo-Kaleckian conflicting-claims framework’," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 427-444.
    17. Sergio Cesaratto & Stefano di Bucchianico, 2020. "Endogenous money and the theory of long-period effective demand," Bulletin of Political Economy, Bulletin of Political Economy, vol. 14(1), pages 1-38, June.
    18. Lídia Brochier & Antonio Carlos, 2019. "A supermultiplier Stock-Flow Consistent model: the “return” of the paradoxes of thrift and costs in the long run?," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 43(2), pages 413-442.
    19. Matteo Deleidi & Claudia Fontanari & Santiago José Gahn, 2023. "Autonomous demand and technical change: exploring the Kaldor–Verdoorn law on a global level," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 40(1), pages 57-80, April.
    20. Sergio Cesaratto, 2017. "Beyond the traditional monetary circuit: endogenous money, finance and the theory of long-period effective demand," Department of Economics University of Siena 757, Department of Economics, University of Siena.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    distribution; effective demand; Eurozone; growth; Neo-Kaleckian; Sraffian; Supermultiplier;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B51 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - Socialist; Marxian; Sraffian
    • E11 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - Marxian; Sraffian; Kaleckian
    • E12 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - Keynes; Keynesian; Post-Keynesian; Modern Monetary Theory
    • O41 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - One, Two, and Multisector Growth Models
    • O47 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Empirical Studies of Economic Growth; Aggregate Productivity; Cross-Country Output Convergence
    • O52 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Europe

    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:zbw:ipewps:1162019. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iphwrde.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.