Why Global and Local Solutions of Open-Economy Models with Incomplete Markets Differ and Why it Matters
Global and local methods used to study open-economy incomplete-markets models yield different cyclical moments, impulse responses, spectral densities and precautionary savings. Endowment and RBC model solutions obtained with first-order, higher-order, and risky-steady-state local methods are compared with fixed-point-iteration global solutions. Analytic and numerical results show that the differences are due to the near-unit-root nature of net foreign assets under incomplete markets and inaccuracies of local methods in computing their autocorrelation. In a Sudden Stops model, quasi-linear methods that handle occasionally binding constraints understate the size of credit constraint multipliers, financial premia and macroeconomic responses.
-
-
Copy CitationOliver de Groot, Ceyhun Bora Durdu, and Enrique G. Mendoza, "Why Global and Local Solutions of Open-Economy Models with Incomplete Markets Differ and Why it Matters," NBER Working Paper 31544 (2023), https://doi.org/10.3386/w31544.Download Citation
-
Published Versions
Oliver de Groot & C. Bora Durdu & Enrique G. Mendoza, 2025. "Why global and local solutions of open-economy models with incomplete markets differ and why it matters," Journal of International Economics, vol 158.