Models and Reality: Teaching Macroeconomics in the Nineties. A Note
Keywords:
linear quadratic algorithm, deep parameters, teaching macroeconomics, Lucas critique, numerical methodsAbstract
This note is intended to suggest an improvement to the methodology used by Quiroz et al. (1991) in the paper «Modelos y Realidad: Enseñando Macroeconomía en los Noventa», which was published in the Revista de Análisis Económico. Besides, this note establishes a superior numeric procedure to solve out the quadratic linear algorithm used by Quiroz et al.Downloads
References
Kydland, F., & Prescott, E. (1982). Time to build and aggregate fluctuations. Econometrica, 50(6), 1345–1370. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913386
Lucas, R. E., Jr. (1976). Econometric policy evaluation: A critique. In K. Brunner & A. H. Meltzer (Eds.), The Phillips curve and labor markets (pp. 19–46). North-Holland.
McGrattan, E. (1990). Solving the stochastic growth model by linear-quadratic approximation. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 8(1), 41–43.
Prescott, E. (1991). Real business cycle theory: What have we learned? Revista de Análisis Económico, 6(2).
Quiroz, J., Bernasconi, F., Chumacero, R., & Revoredo, C. (1991). Modelos y realidad: Enseñando macroeconomía en los noventa. Revista de Análisis Económico, 6(2), 79–103.
Sargent, T. (1981). The observational equivalence of natural and unnatural rate theories of macroeconomics. In R. Lucas & T. Sargent (Eds.), Rational expectations and econometric practice (Vol. 2). University of Minnesota Press.
Sargent, T. (1987). Dynamic macroeconomic theory. Harvard University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 1996 Roberto Muñoz

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Article usage
- ViewsTimes this article's page was opened since the journal started recording statistics. One person can visit more than once.
- 119
- DownloadsTimes the full text of this article (usually the PDF) was opened or downloaded.
- 9
All time, as recorded by the journal.
Last 2 years: 35 views, 9 downloads.
0.08 downloads per view (journal average 1.65).Downloads of the full text for every abstract view of this article, compared with the whole journal.
Explore the journal's metrics