|Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
DSGE models with heterogeneous economic agents: A new notion at the characteristics of the functioning of the economy
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2022-9-53-72
Abstract
In the article we systematize foreign experience in building dynamic stochastic general equilibrium models (DSGE) with heterogeneous economic agents. The advantages of models of this class relative to simpler specifications are analyzed while studying a few fundamental topics: starting with the reaction of aggregates in models where agents face idiosyncratic income risk, monetary and fiscal policies, and ending with models with entrepreneurship, the problem of the zero lower bound, and models of the social security system. Models with heterogeneous economic agents often give a radically different look at many well studied things in simpler models. They allow more accurate reproduction of empirical data and relationships, for example cross-sectional distributions of income and wealth. Therefore, it is very promising to study these models.
Keywords
dynamic stochastic general equilibrium models,
heterogeneous agents,
monetary policy,
fiscal policy,
entrepreneurship,
social security system
JEL: E10, Е20, E30, E40, E50, E60
Supporting agencies: The study was funded by the Russian Science Foundation (grant No. 21-78-10020).
About the Authors
A. V. Polbin
Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration; Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Andrey V. Polbin
Moscow
N. D. Fokin
Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Nikita D. Fokin
Moscow
References
1. Votinov A. I., Lazaryan S. S. (2020). The influence of trends in the data on the accuracy of DSGE model estimates. HSE Economic Journal, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 372—390. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8691-2020-24-3-372-390
2. Zubarev A. V., Nesterova K. V. (2019). Assessing the consequences of the pension reform in Russia in a global CGE‑OLG model. HSE Economic Journal, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 384—417. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8691-2019-23-3-384-417
3. Shulgin A. G., Shulgin S. G. (2021). Investments in the infrastructure of Siberia and the Far East. Macroeconomic analysis based on general equilibrium model. Journal of the New Economic Association, Vol. 49, No. 1, pp. 81—114. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.31737/2221-2264-2021-49-1-3
4. Achdou Y., Han J., Lasry J.-M., Lions P.-L., Moll B. (2022). Income and wealth distribution in macroeconomics: A continuous-time approach. Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 89, No. 1, pp. 45—86. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdab002
5. Ahn S., Kaplan G., Moll B., Winberry T., Wolf C. (2018). When inequality matters for macro and macro matters for inequality. NBER Macroeconomics Annual, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 1—75. https://doi.org/10.1086/696046
6. Aiyagari S. R. (1994). Uninsured idiosyncratic risk and aggregate saving. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 109, No. 3, pp. 659—684. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118417
7. Aiyagari S. R. (1995). Optimal capital income taxation with incomplete markets, borrowing constraints, and constant discounting. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 103, No. 6, pp. 1158—1175. https://doi.org/10.1086/601445
8. Andreyev M., Polbin A. (2022). Monetary policy for a resource-rich economy and the zero lower bound. Ekonomicheskaya Politika, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 44—73.
9. Arellano C., Bai Y., Bocola L. (2017). Sovereign default risk and firm heterogeneity. NBER Working Paper, No. 23314. https://doi.org/10.3386/w23314
10. Auclert A., Rognlie M., Souchier M., Straub L. (2021). Exchange rates and monetary policy with heterogeneous agents: Sizing up the real income channel. NBER Working Paper, No. 28872. https://doi.org/10.3386/w28872
11. Baluta V. I., Shul’ts D. N., Lavrinenko P. A. (2022). Assessing the impact of global hydrocarbon prices on the Russian economy based on the DSGE model with capital-owning firms. Studies on Russian Economic Development, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 107—117. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1075700722010038
12. Bayer C., Lütticke R., Pham-Dao L., Tjaden V. (2019). Precautionary savings, illiquid assets, and the aggregate consequences of shocks to household income risk. Econometrica, Vol. 87, No. 1, pp. 255—290. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA13601
13. Bewley T. (1987). Stationary monetary equilibrium with a continuum of independently fluctuating consumers. In: W. Hildenbrand, A. Mas-Colell (eds.). Contributions to mathematical economics in honor of Gerard Debreu. Amsterdam: North Holland, pp. 79—102.
14. Cagetti M., De Nardi M. (2009). Estate taxation, entrepreneurship, and wealth. American Economic Review, Vol. 99, No. 1, pp. 85—111. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.99.1.85
15. Cantore C., Ferroni F., Mumtaz H., Theophilopoulou A. (2022). A tail of labor supply and a tale of monetary policy. Bank of England Staff Working Paper, No. 989. https://doi.org/10.21033/wp-2022-30
16. Chamley C. (1986). Optimal taxation of capital income in general equilibrium with infinite lives. Econometrica, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 607—622. https://doi.org/10.2307/1911310
17. Christiano L. J., Eichenbaum M., Evans C. L. (2005). Nominal rigidities and the dynamic effects of a shock to monetary policy. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 113, No. 1, pp. 1—45. https://doi.org/10.1086/426038
18. Cole H. L., Obstfeld M. (1991). Commodity trade and international risk sharing: How much do financial markets matter? Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 3—24. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3932(91)90023-H
19. Deaton A. (2016). Measuring and understanding behavior, welfare, and poverty. American Economic Review, Vol. 106, No. 6, pp. 1221—1243. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.106.6.1221
20. Fernández-Villaverde J., Hurtado S., Nuño G. (2019). Financial frictions and the wealth distribution. NBER Working Paper, No. 26302. https://doi.org/10.3386/w26302
21. Fernández-Villaverde J., Marbet J., Nuño G., Rachedi O. (2021). Inequality and the zero lower bound. Unpublished manuscript. https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~jesusfv/inequality_ZLB.pdf
22. Gali J., Monacelli T. (2005). Monetary policy and exchange rate volatility in a small open economy. Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 72, No. 3, pp. 707—734. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-937X.2005.00349.x
23. Hagedorn M., Manovskii I., Mitman K. (2019). The fiscal multiplier. NBER Working Paper, No. 25571. https://doi.org/10.3386/w25571
24. Harenberg D., Ludwig A. (2019). Idiosyncratic risk, aggregate risk, and the welfare effects of social security. International Economic Review, Vol. 60, No. 2, pp. 661—692. https://doi.org/10.1111/iere.12365
25. Hedlund A., Karahan F., Mitman K., Ozkan S. (2017). Monetary policy, heterogeneity, and the housing channel. Society for Economic Dynamics Meeting Paper, No. 1610.
26. Huggett M. (1993). The risk-free rate in heterogeneous-agent incomplete-insurance economies. Journal of Еconomic Dynamics and Control, Vol. 17, No. 5—6, pp. 953—969. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1889(93)90024-M
27. Huggett M., Parra J. C. (2010). How well does the US social insurance system provide social insurance? Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 118, No. 1, pp. 76—112. https://doi.org/10.1086/651513
28. Ivashchenko S. (2022). Dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model with multiple trends and structural breaks. Russian Journal of Money and Finance, Vol. 81, No. 1, pp. 46—72. https://doi.org/10.31477/rjmf.202201.46
29. Kaplan G., Moll B., Violante G. L. (2018). Monetary policy according to HANK. American Economic Review, Vol. 108, No. 3, pp. 697—743. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20160042
30. Kaplan G., Violante G. L. (2018). Microeconomic heterogeneity and macroeconomic shocks. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 167—194. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.32.3.167
31. Kimball M. (1990). Precautionary saving in the small and in the large. Econometrica, Vol. 58, No. 3, pp. 53—73. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.32.3.167
32. Kitao S. (2008). Entrepreneurship, taxation and capital investment. Review of Economic Dynamics, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 44—69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.red.2007.05.002
33. Kreptsev D., Seleznev S. (2018). Forecasting for the Russian economy using small-scale DSGE models. Russian Journal of Money and Finance, Vol. 77, No. 2, pp. 51—67. https://doi.org/10.31477/rjmf.201802.51
34. Krueger D., Kubler F. (2006). Pareto-improving social security reform when financial markets are incomplete!? American Economic Review, Vol. 96, No. 3, pp. 737—755. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.96.3.737
35. Nishiyama S., Smetters K. (2007). Does social security privatization produce efficiency gains? Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 122, No. 4, pp. 1677—1719. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2007.122.4.1677
36. Ottonello P., Winberry T. (2020). Financial heterogeneity and the investment channel of monetary policy. Econometrica, Vol. 88, No. 6, pp. 2473—2502. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA15949
37. Quadrini V. (2000). Entrepreneurship, saving, and social mobility. Review of Economic Dynamics, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 1—40. https://doi.org/10.1006/redy.1999.0077
Supplementary files
Review
For citations:
Polbin A.V., Fokin N.D. DSGE models with heterogeneous economic agents: A new notion at the characteristics of the functioning of the economy. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2022;(9):53-72. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2022-9-53-72
Views:
1027
Email this article 
