Lumpy Investment, Sectoral Propagation, and Business Cycles



where δj is an industry specific depreciation rate. Investment ij,t is a composite good
produced by combining all the goods symmetrically as:

N

ij,t = N 1'<1-ξ>(∑⅛1)(1-ξvξ )' (1 '                           (3)

l=1

where ξ > 1 is the elasticity of substitution between inputs in the production of invest-
ment good.

We assume that the investment rate is chosen from a discrete set. Specifically, we
assume that:

ij,t/kj,t {(1 - δj)(λjκt - 1)}κt=012,...                           (4)

where λj > 1. Note that the choice space for kj,t is indepent of the path: kj,t
{
((1 δ)∕g)tkj,0λKt}κt=012,...∙ The assumption implies that the next period capital
kj,t+1 has to be either the naturally depreciated level kj∙,t(1 δj)/g or its multiplication
or division of λ
j . By this assumption, the producer is forced to invest in a lumpy
manner. Thus this constraint is a shortcut for the lumpy behavior which typically
occurs when a fixed cost incurs in investment. This is the only modification from
the usual model of monopolistic economies. The main objective of this paper is to
examine the aggregate consequence of a non-linear behavior of producers induced by
the discreteness constraint.

Let pj,t denote the price of good j at t. Define a price index pt
(jN=1 pj1/N)1^1-ξ> and normalize it to one. Let wt denote a real wage for an ef-
ficiency unit of labor. Then the monopolist’s profit (normalized by A
t) at t is written
as:

N

πj,t Pj,tyj,t - wthj,t - P,tzI,j,t                            (5)

l=1

The demand function for good j is derived by usual procedure as in Dixit and
Stiglitz (1977). Let us suppose that the representative household has a preference over
the sequence of consumption and labor:

βtU(Ct, ht)                                 (6)

t=0

where Ct = Atct is a composite consumption good produced identically as the invest-
ment good:

N

ct = N W>((zg)<1-ξ>'ξ )ξ<1-ξ>.                        (7)

l=1



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. The name is absent
3. The name is absent
4. Declining Discount Rates: Evidence from the UK
5. The name is absent
6. TINKERING WITH VALUATION ESTIMATES: IS THERE A FUTURE FOR WILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT MEASURES?
7. The name is absent
8. ANTI-COMPETITIVE FINANCIAL CONTRACTING: THE DESIGN OF FINANCIAL CLAIMS.
9. The name is absent
10. The name is absent
11. The name is absent
12. The name is absent
13. Update to a program for saving a model fit as a dataset
14. Ability grouping in the secondary school: attitudes of teachers of practically based subjects
15. Corporate Taxation and Multinational Activity
16. Estimating the Impact of Medication on Diabetics' Diet and Lifestyle Choices
17. The name is absent
18. A Rare Case Of Fallopian Tube Cancer
19. MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON VIRGINIA DAIRY FARMS
20. The name is absent