Increase In Government Purchases Research Articles

Learning by Necessity: Government Demand, Capacity Constraints, and Productivity Growth

This paper studies how firms adapt to demand shocks when facing capacity constraints. I show that increases in government purchases raise total factor productivity in quantity units at the production line level. Productivity gains are concentrated in plants facing tighter capacity constraints, a phenomenon I call “learning by necessity.” Evidence is based on newly digitized archival data on US World War II aircraft production. Shifts in demand across aircraft with different strategic roles provide an instrument for aircraft demand. I show that plants adapted to surging demand by improving production methods, outsourcing, and combating absenteeism, primarily when facing tighter capacity constraints. (JEL D22, D24, E62, L93, N12, N42, N62)

Accounting for the Effect of Government Spending on Income Inequality: Role of Markup Dynamics

This paper examines the effect of government spending on the markups and income inequality by using a local projection method. We show that markup dynamics play a crucial role in explaining the effect of government spending on income inequality. Our main empirical results are as follows: (i) An increase in government purchases is positively related to the aggregate markup in the developing and closed economies. (ii) Through this positive relationship of markup with fiscal policy, the positive government expenditure shock raises the income inequality in the developing and closed economies. The validity of these results is confirmed by robustness checks.

Taking off into the wind: Unemployment risk and state-Dependent government spending multipliers

We propose a model with involuntary unemployment, incomplete markets, and nominal rigidity, in which the effects of government spending are state-dependent. An increase in government purchases raises aggregate demand, tightens the labor market and reduces unemployment. This in turn lowers unemployment risk and thus precautionary saving, leading to a larger response of private consumption than in a model with perfect insurance. The output multiplier is further amplified through a composition effect, as the fraction of high-consumption households in total population increases in response to the spending shock. These features, along with the matching frictions in the labor market, generate significantly larger multipliers in recessions than in expansions. As the pool of job seekers is larger during downturns than during expansions, the concavity of the job-finding probability with respect to market tightness implies that an increase in government spending reduces unemployment risk more in the former case than in the latter, giving rise to countercyclical multipliers.

Макроэкономические эффекты финансовой репрессии в DSGE-модели с финансовыми фрикциями

To explore the role of financial frictions for macroeconomic policy transmission, this paper compares macroeconomic effects of tightening financial repression in the standard medium-scale DSGE model which assumes perfect capital markets and the one with financial frictions. Introducing financial frictions into the model deepens negative impact of financial repression on private investment, it but leads to weaker initial negative response in output. This result is driven by two effects. Firstly, in the model with financial frictions, investment is more sensitive to changes in the economic activity because negative shock worsens financial health of entrepreneurs and leads to tighter borrowing conditions. Secondly, in the model with financial frictions, the problem of households who consume and save and that of entrepreneurs who invest in capital are considered separately. Financial repression reduces return on capital, which further worsens financial stance of entrepreneurs, but does not impact return received by creditors because it is fixed in the contract. Hence, the impact of financial repression on households and their consumption is smaller in the model with financial frictions. In the consumption-led economy the overall effect on output is less prominent if we model financial market explicitly. Quantitatively, this effect can be quite substantial, so we conclude that analysis of financial repression effects calls for explicit modeling of financial market and its specific characteristics despite possible benefits of a simpler model. Furthermore, when compared to various distortionary taxation measures as a way to finance an increase in government purchases, financial repression produces lower fiscal multipliers.

The effects of a money-financed fiscal stimulus

I analyze the effects of a money-financed fiscal stimulus and compare them with those resulting from a conventional debt-financed stimulus. I study the effects of both a tax cut and an increase in government purchases, with and without a binding zero lower bound (ZLB) on the nominal interest rate. When the ZLB is not binding, a money-financed fiscal stimulus is shown to have much larger multipliers than a debt-financed fiscal stimulus. That difference in effectiveness persists, but is much smaller, under a binding ZLB. Nominal rigidities are shown to play a major role in shaping those effects.

FISCAL STIMULUS WITH LEARNING‐BY‐DOING

AbstractUsing a Bayesian structural vector autoregression analysis, we document that an increase in government purchases raises private consumption, the real wage, and total factor productivity (TFP) while reducing inflation. These three facts are hard to reconcile with both neoclassical and New Keynesian models. We extend a standard New Keynesian model to allow for skill accumulation through past work experience. An increase in government spending increases hours and induces skill accumulation and higher measured TFP and real wages in subsequent periods. Future marginal costs fall lowering expected inflation and, through the monetary policy rule, the real interest rate. Consumption increases as a result.

Taking off into the Wind: Unemployment Risk and State-Dependent Government Spending Multipliers

We propose a model with involuntary unemployment, incomplete markets, and nominal rigidity, in which the effects of government spending are state-dependent. An increase in government purchases raises aggregate demand, tightens the labor market and reduces unemployment. This in turn lowers unemployment risk and thus precautionary saving, leading to a larger response of private consumption than in a model with perfect insurance. The output multiplier is further amplified through a composition effect, as the fraction of high-consumption households in total population increases in response to the spending shock. These features, along with the matching frictions in the labor market, generate significantly larger multipliers in recessions than in expansions. As the pool of job seekers is larger during downturns than during expansions, the concavity of the job-finding probability with respect to market tightness implies that an increase in government spending reduces unemployment risk more in the former case than in the latter, giving rise to countercyclical multipliers.

The effects of government spending on real exchange rates: Evidence from military spending panel data

Using panel data on military spending for 125 countries, we document new facts about the effects of changes in government purchases on the real exchange rate, consumption, and current accounts in both advanced and developing countries. While an increase in government purchases causes real exchange rates to appreciate and increases consumption significantly in developing countries, it causes real exchange rates to depreciate and decreases consumption in advanced countries. The current account decreases in both groups of countries. These findings are not consistent with standard international business cycle models. We discuss potential sources of the differences between advanced and developing countries in the responses to spending shocks.

Crowding-out (or -in) effect in transition economies: Kyrgyzstan case

PurposeThe crowding-out and crowding-in effects have been at the core of arguments among economists regarding the influence of government spending on private investment. This study aims to examine the crowding-out (or -in) effect of public spending on private investment in the transition economy of Kyrgyzstan.Design/methodology/approachThe empirical model is an autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) and the vector autoregression approach (VAR). Monthly data from 2005 to 2013 of the private investment, government expenditures, remittances from abroad and broad money data were used in the empirical analysis.FindingsThe authors found that an increase in government purchases leads to rise in private investment. More precisely, the public spending crowds-in private investment at the speed with 2.06 months. On the other hand, despite the fact that remittances to GDP ratio has reached to almost 30 per cent, there is no any statistically significant effect between these variables. On the contrary, it was revealed that the broad money has statistically significant, affirmative effect on private investment. Furthermore, findings of the VAR model support the results of ARDL. The variance decomposition demonstrates that private investment shock accounts for 58.16 per cent in government expenditures, 11 per cent in broad money and 5 per cent in remittances.Originality/valueThe results of the study allow policymakers to demonstrate that the growth of national economy of the Kyrgyz Republic may be encouraged by expanding public investment with external source assistance such as grants and international loans. Accordingly, efficient use of those external funds is one of the suggested ways for economic development. Nevertheless, expansionary monetary and fiscal policy may be beneficial for economic growth in Kyrgyzstan.

Do Government Purchases Affect Unemployment?

AbstractWe estimate the effect of government purchases on unemployment in 20 OECD countries, for the period 1980–2007. An increase in government purchases, equal to 1 percent of GDP, is found to reduce unemployment by about 0.3 percentage points in the same year. The effect is greater and more persistent under less “employment‐friendly” labour‐market institutions, and it is greater and more persistent under a fixed exchange rate regime than under a floating regime. The effect is also greater in downturns than in booms. The effect on unemployment reflects a corresponding positive effect of increased government purchases on the employment‐to‐population rate.

Fiscal policy under deflationary gap and long-run stagnation: Reinterpretation of Keynesian multipliers

We develop a Keynesian cross analysis with a dynamic optimization setting that explains long-run stagnation caused by aggregate demand deficiency. We show that an increase in government purchases boosts GDP through a multiplier process, but the implication is quite different from the conventional Keynesian one. It works not through an increase in disposable income but through moderation of deflation. Thus, countries that have lapsed into long-run stagnation should expand government spending that directly creates employment in order to reduce the deflationary gap.

The Optimal Use of Government Purchases for Macroeconomic Stabilization

This paper extends Samuelson’s theory of optimal government purchases by considering the contribution of government purchases to macroeconomic stabilization. We consider a matching model in which unemployment can be too high or too low. We derive a sufficient-statistics formula for optimal government purchases. Our formula is the Samuelson formula plus a correction term proportional to the government-purchases multiplier and the gap between actual and efficient unemployment rate. Optimal government purchases are above the Samuelson level when the correction term is positive — for instance, when the multiplier is positive and unemployment is inefficiently high. Our formula indicates that US government purchases, which are mildly countercyclical, are optimal under a small multiplier of 0.03. If the multiplier is larger, US government purchases are not countercyclical enough. Our formula implies significant increases in government purchases during slumps. For instance, with a multiplier of 0.5 and other statistics calibrated to the US economy, when the unemployment rate rises from the US average of 5.9% to 9%, the optimal government purchases-output ratio increases from 16.6% to 19.8%. However, the optimal ratio increases less for multipliers above 0.5 because with higher multipliers, the unemployment gap can be filled with fewer government purchases. For instance, with a multiplier of 2, the optimal ratio only increases from 16.6% to 17.6%.

Consumption, government spending, and the real exchange rate

Using panel structural VAR analysis and quarterly data from four industrialized countries, we document that an increase in government purchases raises output and private consumption, deteriorates the trade balance, and depreciates the real exchange rate. This pattern of comovement poses a puzzle for both neoclassical and Keynesian models. An explanation based on the deep-habit mechanism is proposed. An estimated two-country model with deep-habits is shown to replicate well the observed responses of output, consumption, and the trade balance, and the initial response of the real exchange rate to an estimated government spending shock.

DOES FISCAL POLICY MATTER? BLINDER AND SOLOW REVISITED

This paper uses the old Keynesian representative agent model developed by Roger E. A. Farmer [Expectations, Employment and Prices. New York: Oxford University Press (2010)] to answer two questions: (1) Do increased government purchases crowd out private consumption? (2) Do increased government purchases reduce unemployment? Farmer compared permanent tax-financed expenditure paths and showed that the answer to (1) was yes and the answer to (2) was no. We generalize his result to temporary bond-financed paths of government purchases that are similar to the actual path that occurred during WWII. We find that a temporary increase in government purchases does crowd out private consumption expenditure as in Farmer. However, in contrast to Farmer's experiment, we find that a temporary increase in government purchases can also reduce unemployment.

Can Government Purchases Stimulate the Economy?

This essay briefly reviews the state of knowledge about the government spending multiplier. Drawing on theoretical work, aggregate empirical estimates from the United States, as well as cross-locality estimates, I assess the likely range of multiplier values for the experiment most relevant to the stimulus package debate: a temporary, deficit-financed increase in government purchases. I conclude that the multiplier for this type of spending is probably between 0.8 and 1.5. (JEL E23, E62, H50)

The Effects of Government Purchases Shocks: Review and Estimates for the EU

In this article, we review the theoretical consequences of government purchases shocks for both closed and open economies, followed by a discussion of the empirical literature. Next, we provide our own estimates for the EU countries. We find that an increase in government purchases raises output, consumption and investment and reduces the trade balance. However, the stimulating effect is weaker and the trade balance reduction is larger for the more open EU economies, consistent with larger leakage effects. Further, we show that government purchases shocks in large EU economies have non-negligible consequences for economic activity in the main trading partners.

When Expansionary Fiscal Policy is Contractionary: A Neoklassikal Scenario*

The paper presents a simple theoretical account of how an increase in government purchases may reduce total employment. It is shown that in a ‘neoklassikal’ model – in which utility maximising consumption choices are combined with a fixed‐coefficient technology – an increase in government purchases will reduce the demand for labour at the given wage rate. The reasoning turns on the link between optimising consumption behaviour and employment in the investment sector. An increase in G will (as a matter of arithmetic) make current consumption scarcer relative to future consumption; and thereby reduce the valuation of future consumption in terms of current consumption. As labour is valued according to its contribution to future consumption (through its contribution to capital formation), it follows that an increase in G will reduce the wage at any given volume of employment.

Government Purchases and the Real Exchange Rate

Recent empirical research documents that an exogenous rise in government purchases in a given country triggers a persistent depreciation of its real exchange rate—which raises an important puzzle, as standard macro models predict an appreciation of the real exchange rate. This paper presents a simple model with limited international risk sharing that can account for the empirical real exchange rate response. When faced with a country-specific rise in government purchases, local households experience a negative wealth effect; they thus work harder, and domestic output increases. Under balanced trade (financial autarky) this supply-side effect is so strong that the terms of trade worsen, and the real exchange rate depreciates. In a bonds-only economy, an increase in government purchases triggers a real exchange rate depreciation, if the rise in government purchases is sufficiently persistent and/or labor supply is highly elastic.

By How Much Does GDP Rise If the Government Buys More Output?

During World War II and the Korean War, real GDP grew by about half the increase in government purchases. With allowance for other factors holding back GDP growth during those wars, the multiplier linking government purchases to GDP may be in the range of 0.7 to 1.0, a range generally supported by research based on vector autoregressions that control for other determinants, but higher values are not ruled out. New Keynesian macroeconomic models yield multipliers in that range as well. Neoclassical models produce much lower multipliers, because they predict that consumption falls when government purchases rise. Models that deliver higher multipliers feature a decline in the markup ratio of price over cost when output rises, and an elastic response of employment to increased demand. These characteristics are complementary to another Keynesian feature, the linkage of consumption to current income. The GDP multiplier is higher—perhaps around 1.7—when the nominal interest rate is at its lower bound of zero.

COMPARATIVE DYNAMICS AND OPTIMAL FISCAL POLICY IN A SIMPLE MODEL OF ENDOGENOUS GROWTH

ABSTRACTI analyze optimal fiscal policy choices in a continuous time endogenous growth model similar to Barro’s. The government uses income taxes from representative ‘rich’ and ‘poor’ households to finance purchases of productive goods and to make transfer payments to poor households. Increases in government purchases can increase the growth rate, while increases in transfers reduce growth. I examine the socially optimal allocation of government resources to purchases and transfer payments and describe conditions under which both the rich and poor would benefit from cuts in entitlements if the savings are used to finance increased government purchases of productive goods.