Incomplete Information in Macroeconomics or Revisiting Coordination and Aggregate Demand George-Marios Angeletos MIT Chicago: April 24, 2015 Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 1 / 27 The mysterious, seductive notions of... coordination failure aggregate demand But what do they stand for? – buzz words? – formal meaning? – measurement? Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 2 / 27 State of the art (at least as of the previous handbook) coordination failure = multiple equilibria aggregate demand = gaps from flex-price allocations Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 3 / 27 State of the art (at least as of the previous handbook) coordination failure = multiple equilibria aggregate demand = gaps from flex-price allocations This chapter (and recent developments) coordination failure aggregate demand Angeletos = strategic uncertainty Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 3 / 27 Roadmap 1 some clarifications and a unified perspective 2 global games 3 beauty contests 4 revisiting aggregate demand 5 macroeconomic policy Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 4 / 27 Informational Frictions and Strategic Uncertainty decision-theoretic uncertainty I beliefs of exogenous payoff fundamentals (preferences, technology, etc) strategic uncertainty (SU) I beliefs of the actions of others (consumer spending, labor demand, etc) my focus: SU I I I I attacks the core of GE/macro mechanisms formalizes friction in coordination relaxes RE solution concept delivers distinct testable implications Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 5 / 27 Is this about Crises, or about Business Cycles? standard practice: I macroeconomists prefer to interpret the business-cycle data and to guide policy on the basis of unique-equil models I coordination failure has thus found limited application to the modern study of business cycles, despite its central position in traditional Keynesian thinking the alternative: I SU = unified method for studying coordination in business cycles and crises Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 6 / 27 Revisiting Coordination Failure before: sharp distinction between unique- and multiple-equil models now: distinction becomes blurry, perhaps even irrelevant I SU selects a unique equilibrium in models with multiple equilibria I SU rationalizes “animal spirits” in models with unique equilibrium recalibrating the “right” question: I the observables of a model (volatility, co-movement, etc) I not the determinacy of its solutions Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 7 / 27 Global Games incomplete info in games of “regime change” I coordination games that admit multiple equilibrium under complete info I natural context: crises Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 8 / 27 Global Games Morris and Shin → unique equilibrium I disturbing discontinuity: tiny noise can drastically alter predictions! I important: what matters is SU, not information about fundamentals Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 9 / 27 Global Games Morris and Shin → unique equilibrium I disturbing discontinuity: tiny noise can drastically alter predictions! I important: what matters is SU, not information about fundamentals numerous applications.... [to be reviewed in the chapter] Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 9 / 27 Global Games Morris and Shin → unique equilibrium I disturbing discontinuity: tiny noise can drastically alter predictions! I important: what matters is SU, not information about fundamentals numerous applications.... [to be reviewed in the chapter] my prior work (with Hellwig, Pavan, Werning) → multiplicity hits back! I endogenous signals can “tame” SU and facilitate coordination Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 9 / 27 Global Games Morris and Shin → unique equilibrium I disturbing discontinuity: tiny noise can drastically alter predictions! I important: what matters is SU, not information about fundamentals numerous applications.... [to be reviewed in the chapter] my prior work (with Hellwig, Pavan, Werning) → multiplicity hits back! I endogenous signals can “tame” SU and facilitate coordination Weinstein-Yildiz → generic uniqueness but “anything goes” Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 9 / 27 Global games: take-home lessons forget about multiplicity vs uniqueness! the robust prediction of the theory is “excess sensitivity” I discontinuities I sharp reaction to noisy public signals I sunspots recast as higher-order beliefs (HOB) Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 10 / 27 Global games: take-home lessons forget about multiplicity vs uniqueness! the robust prediction of the theory is “excess sensitivity” I discontinuities I sharp reaction to noisy public signals I sunspots recast as higher-order beliefs (HOB) but also: details of information/communication matter a lot I knowledge vs common knowledge I e.g., stress tests, CDS markets Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 10 / 27 Beauty Contests incomplete info in games with linear best responses I settings that admit a unique equilibrium no matter the info structure I natural context: business cycles and asset markets in “normal times” Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 11 / 27 Beauty Contests: Theory and Applications Morris-Shin, Angeletos-Pavan, Bergemman-Morris ai = Ei [(1 − α)θ + αA] Woodford, Mankiw-Reis, Mackowiac-Wiederholt, Nimark, Hellwig-Venkateswaran, Gaballo, Melosi, etc pit = Eit [(1 − α)θt + αPt ] Angeletos-La’O, Benhabib-Wang-Wen, Angeletos-Lian yit = Eit [(1 − α)θt + αYt ] cit = Eit [(1 − α)θt + αCt ] Allen-Morris-Shin, Rondina-Walker, etc pt = E¯it [θt + βpt+1 ] related topics: I I I info aggregation (Grossman-Stiglitz, Hassan-Mertens, etc) news/noise (Lorenzoni etc) heterogeneous beliefs (Scheinkman-Xiong, Simsek, etc) Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 12 / 27 Beauty Contests: take-home lessons inertia of HOB to innovations in fundamentals → macro-level rigidity I e.g., nominal rigidity in response to monetary shocks, or real rigidity in response to technology shocks “noise” in HOB → sunspot-like volatility I dual role of public signals contagion, propagation, waves of optimism and pessimism Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 13 / 27 Revisiting Aggregate Demand is “aggregate demand” a monetary or a real phenomenon? where does nominal rigidity come from? Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 14 / 27 AD and the NKPC aggregate demand = gaps from flex-price allocations discomforting facts: I disconnect between unemployment and inflation I the Great Recession and the “missing disinflation” puzzle I Bachmann et al: inflation expectations reduce consumer spending I a simple test of the NKPC (ongoing work) F in the theory: positive inflation innovations predict positive output gaps F in the data: the opposite is true! maybe time to move past the NK formalization of AD??? Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 15 / 27 2: IRFs VAR(u VAR(u ,,fifi )) VAR on (u, π), CholeskyFigure decomposition Figure 2: IRFs tt tt (a) Share Shock innovation in Share unemployment (a) Labor Labor Shock Unemployment Unemployment Inflation Inflation 0.3 0.3 00 0.2 0.2 -0.02 -0.02 0.1 0.1 -0.04 -0.04 00 20 20 40 40 Quarters Quarters 60 60 80 80 -0.06 -0.06 20 20 (b) Inflation Shock Shock (b) Inflation 40 40 Quarters Quarters 6060 8080 60 60 80 80 innovation in inflation Unemployment Unemployment 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0 0 20 20 40 Table602: Variance 80 20 40 Decomposition 40 60 80 20 40 Quarters Quarters Quarters Quarters Unemployment Note: Shaded area: 68% HPDI. Note: Shaded area: 68% ÁHPDI. fi Áu t t 1 4 8 20 Inflation Inflation 0.25 0.25 0.2 0.2 0.15 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.05 0.05 0 0 100.00 [100.00,100.00] 95.15 [92.44,97.16] 79.72 [71.28,86.78] 47.60 [34.48,60.84] 0.00 [0.00,0.00] 4.85 [2.84,7.56] 20.28 [13.22,28.72] 52.40 [39.16,65.52] Inflation Rate Áu t Áfi t 0.30 [0.03,1.18] 0.73 [0.17,2.46] 1.75 [0.38,5.11] 4.69 [0.86,12.03] 99.70 [98.82,99.97] 99.27 [97.54,99.83] 98.25 [94.89,99.62] 95.31 [87.97,99.14] Note: 68% HPDI into brackets Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 16 / 27 Beliefs and Nominal Rigidity Woodford, Mankiw-Reis, Mackowiac-Wiederholt, etc key mechanism: inertia of beliefs about endogenous outcomes (inflation) Coibion-Gorodnichenko: I evidence of this kind of belief inertia I but disconnect from theory ongoing work: use forecast data to quantify the theory Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 17 / 27 Coibion and Gorodnichenko (2011) Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 18 / 27 An Anatomy of the Data VAR on {Y , U, H, I , C , W , π, R, G , TFP, SP, VIX , ...} “X shock” = shock that maximizes volatility of X at BC frequencies I method builds on Uhlig, Barsky-Sims, and others inspect IRFs and variance contributions → anatomy of co-movement Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 19 / 27 An Anatomy of the Data U shock ≈ Y shock ≈ (I , H) shock but very different from I π shock I TFP and PI /PC shocks I SP, VIX evidence at odds with technology/news/noise/uncertainty shocks an “invisible” TFP shock? a mysterious “demand shock”? Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 20 / 27 The “Business-Cycle Shock” Output 1 Consumption 0.5 0 0 -0.5 5 10 15 20 Inflation Rate 0.2 0 5 10 15 20 TFP 0 -1 1 5 10 15 20 Nom. Interest Rate 0 -0.2 1 -1 5 10 15 20 Angeletos Quarters -1 1 Investment 2 1 0 -1 0.5 0 5 10 15 20 Labor Productivity -1 1 0 -0.2 -0.5 Real Interest Rate 5 10 15 20 1 Wages 0 5 10 15 20 P i /P c 0 0 -1 -1 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20 Inco Info, Coordination, Quarters Quarters and AD Unemployment 0.2 0 5 10 15 20 1 Hours (Total) -1 4 2 0 -2 -4 5 10 15 20 1 Labor Share 0 5 10 15 20 Stock Prices 5 10 15 20 Quarters -1 4 2 0 -2 -4 5 10 15 20 Stock Mkt Volat. 5 10 15 20 Quarters 21 / 27 Revisiting AD in the Theory Angeletos and La’O (2013), Angeletos, Collard, Dellas (2014) I AD = coordination failure = gaps from complete-info outcomes I AD = confidence about short-run outlook irrational? Akerlof and Shiller (2009), Gennaioli, Ma, and Shleifer (2015) Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 22 / 27 Confronting the data: Angeletos, Collard and Dellas (2014) textbook RBC/NK model augmented with “confidence shocks” does wonders mechanism outperforms alternatives (I-shocks, C-shocks, news shocks, etc) I parsimonious calibration / pony races I medium-scale DSGE / structural estimations “confidence shock” in the model mirrors I “mysterious demand shock” in the data I empirical measures of consumer confidence I Gennaioli-Ma-Shleifer evidence on CEO beliefs Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 23 / 27 Pony Race: Confidence vs NK NK with TFP plus... Data Our RBC stddev(y ) stddev(h) stddev(c) stddev(i) 1.42 1.56 0.76 5.43 corr(c, y ) corr(i, y ) corr(h, y ) corr(c, h) corr(i, h) corr(c, i) corr(y , y /h) corr(h, y /h) corr(y , sr ) corr(h, sr ) Angeletos I shock C shock News Monetary 1.42 1.52 0.76 5.66 1.24 1.18 0.86 7.03 1.15 0.97 0.95 7.04 1.29 1.02 0.84 7.24 1.37 1.44 0.77 6.20 0.85 0.94 0.88 0.84 0.82 0.74 0.77 0.92 0.85 0.34 0.99 0.47 0.42 0.82 0.80 -0.19 1.00 -0.17 0.37 0.75 0.77 -0.29 1.00 -0.33 0.43 0.84 0.86 -0.07 1.00 -0.13 0.73 0.90 0.84 0.24 0.99 0.35 0.08 -0.41 0.82 0.47 0.15 -0.37 0.85 0.47 0.37 -0.24 0.92 0.52 0.54 -0.10 0.92 0.49 0.61 0.13 0.94 0.65 0.20 -0.36 0.94 0.61 Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 24 / 27 Confidence shock (model) vs business-cycle shock (data) 4 Output 15 Investment 6 Hours Worked Consumption 2 3 10 4 5 2 1.5 2 1 1 0.5 0 0 0 0 -0.5 -1 -5 -2 -10 -4 -1 -2 -3 -1.5 -2 -4 -15 1970 1980 1990 2000 Angeletos -6 1970 1980 1990 2000 1970 1980 1990 2000 Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 1970 1980 1990 2000 25 / 27 VAR on models vs VAR on data Output Consumption 0.5 Investment 4 1 2 0 0 0 -1 1.5 5 10 15 Quarters Hours Worked 20 -0.5 1 5 10 15 20 Quarters Labor Productivity 10 15 Quarters Inflation Rate 20 0.2 1 0.5 0 0 0 -0.5 5 -0.2 5 10 15 Quarters Angeletos 20 -1 5 10 15 Quarters Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 20 5 10 15 Quarters 20 26 / 27 Conclusion strategic uncertainty = a method for studying, and quantifying, the role of I coordination failure I “mistakes” in expectations, “market psychology” I belief inertia, macro rigidity I “aggregate demand” beyond sticky prices implications for macroeconomic policy I optimality of price stability I Ricardian equivalence, fiscal multipliers I stress tests I macro-prudential insurance Angeletos Inco Info, Coordination, and AD 27 / 27
© Copyright 2024