Do Equilibrium Real Business Cycle Theories Explain Post-War U.S. Business Cycles?
This paper presents and interprets some new evidence on the validity of the Real Business Cycle approach to business cycle analysis. The analysis is conducted in the context of a monetary business cycle model which makes explicit one potential link between monetary policy and real allocations. This model is used to interpret Granger causal relations between nominal and real aggregates. Perhaps the most striking empirical finding is that money growth does not Granger cause output growth in the context of several multivariate VARs and for various sample periods during the post war period in the U.S. Several possible reconciliations of this finding with both real and monetary business cycles models are discussed. We find that it is difficult to reconcile our empirical results with the view that exogenous monetary shocks were an important independent source of variation in output growth.
Eichenbaum, Martin and Kenneth J. Singleton. "Do Equilibrium Real Business Cycle Theories Explain Post-War U.S. Business Cycles?" NBER Macroeconomics Annual, ed. by S. Fischer, Vol. 1, pp. 91-134. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1986.
Do Equilibrium Real Business Cycle Theories Explain Postwar U.S. Business Cycles?, Martin Eichenbaum, Kenneth I. Singleton. in NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1986, Volume 1, Fischer. 1986