Precautionary saving and aggregate demand
预防性储蓄与总需求AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要直接估计含家庭异质性的结构 DSGE 模型,并利用状态空间表示及宏观时间序列。
预防性储蓄与总需求AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
We construct, and then estimate by maximum likelihood, a tractable dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model with incomplete insurance and heterogenous agents. The key feature of our framework is that cross-sectional heterogeneity remains finite dimensional. The solution to the model thus admits a state-space representation that can be used to recover the distribution of the model's parameters. Household heterogeneity expands the set of observables to cross-sectional moments available at the business-cycle frequency (in addition to the usual macro and monetary time series). Incomplete insurance gives rise to a precautionary motive for holding wealth that propagates aggregate shocks via (i) a stabilizing aggregate supply effect, working through the supply of capital, and (ii) a destabilizing aggregate demand effect coming from the feedback loop between unemployment risk and precautionary saving. Using the estimated model to measure the contribution of precautionary savings to the propagation of recent recessions, we find strong aggregate demand effects during the Great Recession and, to a lesser extent, during the 1990–1991 recession. In contrast, the supply effect at least offsets the demand effect during the 2001 recession.