The rebuilding macroeconomic theory project: an analytical assessment

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 1-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Vines ◽  
Samuel Wills
2021 ◽  
pp. 016001762098659
Author(s):  
Kieran P. Donaghy

The inability of macroeconomists to anticipate the Global Financial Crisis or reproduce it in their models has led to an important stock-taking of deficiencies in, and necessary modifications to, theories and models used pervasively by researchers and taught to graduate students. This stock-taking—the so-called “Rebuilding Macroeconomic Theory Project,” organized by David Vines and Samuel Wills—has provided an opportunity for economy-wide modelers (who include regional scientists) to consider whether the theories and models they employ are adequate and appropriate to the tasks to which they put them. In this paper I provide a brief report on the project, retrace the development of macroeconomics, and summarize responses by prominent macroeconomists to a set of questions posed by organizers of the project, while drawing implications of these questions and responses for regional science. I then offer original suggestions from a regional scientist’s perspective on what is missing from the “benchmark” macro-model, how financial frictions can be introduced, how behavioral foundations might be modified, how heterogeneity of agents might be captured, and what new stylized facts need to be explained. I proceed to illustrate how several of the suggested changes can be integrated in economy-wide models by drawing on a study of the impacts of monetary policy on consumption by different income groups in Indonesia. I close the paper by posing a number of “big-picture questions” on the implications of the RMTP for economy-wide modelers and regional scientists to ponder and by offering a brief reflection and aspiration.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Servaas Storm

The Rebuilding Macroeconomic Theory Project, led by David Vines and Samuel Wills (2020), is an important, albeit long overdue, initiative to rethink a failing mainstream macroeconomics. Professors Vines and Wills, who must be congratulated for stepping up to the challenge of trying to make mainstream macroeconomics relevant again, call for a new multiple-equilibrium and diverse (MEADE) paradigm for macroeconomics. Their idea is to start with simple models, ideally two-dimensional sketches, that explain mechanisms that can cause multiple equilibria. These mechanisms should then be incorporated into larger DSGE models in a new, multiple-equilibrium synthesis – to see how the fundamental pieces of the economy fit together, subject to it being ‘properly micro-founded’. This paper argues that the MEADE paradigm is bound to fail, because it maintains the DSGE model as the unifying framework at the center of macroeconomic analysis. The paper reviews 10 fundamental weaknesses inherent in DSGE models which make these models irreparably useless for macroeconomic policy analysis. Mainstream macroeconomics must put DSGE models, once and for all, in the Museum of Implausible Economic Models – and learn important lessons from non-DSGE macroeconomic approaches.


2019 ◽  
Vol 111 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Betancur ◽  
Benjamin Margolin Rottman ◽  
Elizabeth Votruba-Drzal ◽  
Christian Schunn

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 382-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giancarlo Bertocco ◽  
Andrea Kalajzić

2013 ◽  
Vol 51 ◽  
pp. 295-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Belis ◽  
Chiara Bedon ◽  
Christian Louter ◽  
Claudio Amadio ◽  
Rudy Van Impe

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document