跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

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。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要明确使用混合频率时变 VAR 描述宏观动态,并分析政府支出冲击与财政乘数,对应时间序列和 VAR 冲击分析。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Jacopo Cimadomo

结合时变参数与混合频率:意大利政府支出乘数分析

研究问题
在财政变量季度序列较短、年度序列较长的情形下,如何结合不同频率信息,估计意大利政府支出冲击及财政乘数的时变路径?
方法与思路
作者将含随机波动的时变参数 VAR 扩展到混合频率框架,在同一模型中纳入高、低频变量,并研究1988年第四季度至2013年第三季度的意大利数据。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称,该模型重建缺失观测优于线性插值;应用中政府支出冲击对产出倾向于正向影响,乘数在一年期最大,并随样本呈 U 形变化。
阅读关注点
核对政府支出冲击的识别方式、不同频率变量的衔接和时变参数设定,并检查缺失观测比较的设计及乘数估计的不确定性。
阅读边界
摘要未说明冲击识别假设、插值比较的具体设计或乘数区间;所述改进与 U 形路径均为作者报告,不能据此判断普遍适用性。

原文摘要

Summary In this paper, we propose a time‐varying parameter vector autoregression (VAR) model with stochastic volatility which allows for estimation on data sampled at different frequencies. Our contribution is twofold. First, we extend the methodology developed by Cogley and Sargent (Drifts and volatilities: monetary policies and outcomes in the post WWII U.S. Review of Economic Studies 2005; 8 : 262–302) and Primiceri (Time varying structural vector autoregressions and monetary policy. Review of Economic Studies 2005; 72 : 821–852) to a mixed‐frequency setting. In particular, our approach allows for the inclusion of two different categories of variables (high‐frequency and low‐frequency) into the same time‐varying model. Second, we use this model to study the macroeconomic effects of government spending shocks in Italy over the 1988:Q4–2013:Q3 period. Italy—as well as most other euro area economies—is characterized by short quarterly time series for fiscal variables, whereas annual data are generally available for a longer sample before 1999. Our results show that the proposed time‐varying mixed‐frequency model improves on the performance of a simple linear interpolation model in generating the true path of the missing observations. Second, our empirical analysis suggests that government spending shocks tend to have positive effects on output in Italy. The fiscal multiplier, which is maximized at the 1‐year horizon, follows a U‐shape over the sample considered: it peaks at around 1.5 at the beginning of the sample; it then stabilizes between 0.8 and 0.9 from the mid 1990s to the late 2000s, before rising again to above unity during the recent crisis. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

笔记与分组