bgscience@idbg.ru
+7 495 648 62 41 Russia, 127015, Moscow, Novodmitrovskaya st. 5A (b. 7)
Menu

Switch to Russian:to Russian

Macroeconomic effects of investment efficiency growth: general equilibrium analysis


Andrey Polbin
(about the author)

Polbin Andrey Vladimirovich – researcher, Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration under the President of the Russian Federation, Moscow

Published in:
Russian Journal of Entrepreneurship
– № 13 / July, 2014



Keywords: investment, russian economy, stochastic general equilibrium model, technological progress


Citation:
Andrey Polbin (2014). Macroeconomic effects of investment efficiency growth: general equilibrium analysis. Russian Journal of Entrepreneurship, 15(13), 64-72. — url: http://bgscience.ru/com/lib/4704


Share:

Abstract:

In this paper we study the transmission mechanism of investment efficiency growth. This kind of technology change increases the productivity of newly installed capital and leaves unchanged the productivity of «old» capital.







References:
1. Polbin A.V. Postroenie dinamicheskoy stokhasticheskoy modeli obschego ravnovesiya dlya ekonomiki s vysokoy zavisimostyyu ot eksporta nefti // Ekonomicheskiy zhurnal VShE. – 2013. – № 2 (17). – S. 323–359.
2. Canova F., Lopez-Salido D., Michelacci C. The effects of technology shocks on hours and output: a robustness analysis // Journal of Applied Econometrics. – 2010. – № 25 (5). – S. 755–773.
3. Fisher J.D.M. The dynamic effect of neutral and investment-specific technology shocks // Journal of Political Economy. – 2006. – № 114 (3). – S. 413–451.
4. Greenwood J., Hercowitz Z., Huffman G.W. Investment, capacity utilization, and the real business cycle // American Economic Review. – 1998. – № 78 (3). – S. 402–417.
5. Greenwood J., Hercowitz Z., Krusell P. Long-run implications of investment-specific technological change // American Economic Review. – 1997. – № 87 (3). – S. 342–362.
6. Greenwood J., Hercowitz Z., Krusell P. The role of investment-specific technical change in the business cycle // European Economic Review. – 2000. – № 44 (1). – S. 91–115.
7. Ireland P.N., Schuh S. Productivity and US macroeconomic performance: interpreting the past and predicting the future with a two-sector real business cycle model // Review of Economic Dynamics. – 2008. – № 11 (3). – S. 473–492.
8. Justiniano A., Primiceri G.E., Tambalotti A. Investment schoks and business cycles // Journal of Monetary Economics. – 2010. № 57 (2). – S. 132–145.
9. Keynes J.M. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. – Macmillan, London, 1936.
10. Mandelman F., Rabanal P., Rubio-Ramirez J.F., Vilan D., Investment specific technology shocks and international business cycles: an empirical assessment // Review of Economic Dynamics. – 2011. – № 14 (1). – S. 136–155.
11. Raffo A. Technology shocks: novel implications for international business cycles. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, International Finance Discussion, 2010. – P. 992.