Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Research Department Staff Report 306 Nonconvex Factor Adjustments in Equilibrium Business Cycle Models: Do Nonlinearities Matter? *

Recent empirical analysis has found nonlinearities to be important in understanding aggregated investment. Using an equilibrium business cycle model, we search for aggregate nonlinearities arising from the introduction of nonconvex capital adjustment costs. We find that, while such costs lead to nontrivial nonlinearities in aggregate investment demand, equilibrium investment is effectively unchanged. Our finding, based on a model in which aggregate fluctuations arise through exogenous changes in total factor productivity, is robust to the introduction of shocks to the relative price of investment goods. * This paper is the result of a conversation with John Leahy; we are grateful to him for suggesting the topic to us. We would also like to thank Ricardo Caballero and Tony Smith for a series of helpful discussions. In addition we owe thanks to seminar participants at the would like to acknowledge the hospitality of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis or Philadelphia or the Federal Reserve System.

[1]  Edward C. Prescott,et al.  Economic Growth and Business Cycles , 2020, Frontiers of Business Cycle Research.

[2]  K. Hoover,et al.  "Production, growth, and business cycles I: The basic neoclassical model," Journal of Monetary Economics 21(2), March 1988, pp. 195-232 , 2013 .

[3]  Marcelo Veracierto Plant level irreversible investment and equilibrium business cycles , 2002 .

[4]  S. Rebelo,et al.  Resuscitating Real Business Cycles , 2000 .

[5]  Per Krusell,et al.  Income and Wealth Heterogeneity in the Macroeconomy , 1998, Journal of Political Economy.

[6]  Mark E. Doms,et al.  Capital Adjustment Patterns in Manufacturing Plants , 1998 .

[7]  Ricardo J. Caballero,et al.  Aggregate Investment , 1997 .

[8]  Anthony A. Smith,et al.  INCOME AND WEALTH HETEROGENEITY, PORTFOLIO CHOICE, AND EQUILIBRIUM ASSET RETURNS , 1997, Macroeconomic Dynamics.

[9]  Den Haan,et al.  SOLVING DYNAMIC MODELS WITH AGGREGATE SHOCKS AND HETEROGENEOUS AGENTS , 1997, Macroeconomic Dynamics.

[10]  W. D. Haan,et al.  Heterogeneity, Aggregate Uncertainty, and the Short-Term Interest Rate , 1996 .

[11]  K. West,et al.  Business Fixed Investment and the Recent Business Cycle in Japan , 1996, NBER Macroeconomics Annual.

[12]  Russell Cooper,et al.  Machine Replacement and the Business Cycle: Lumps and Bumps , 1995 .

[13]  Ricardo J. Caballero,et al.  Explaining Investment Dynamics in U.S. Manufacturing: A Generalized (S,S) Approach , 1994 .

[14]  Ying Li,et al.  Numerical Solution of Continuous-State Dynamic Programs Using Linear and Spline Interpolation , 1993, Oper. Res..

[15]  G. Hansen Indivisible Labor and the Business Cycle , 1985 .

[16]  Finn E. Kydland,et al.  Time to Build and Aggregate Fluctuations , 1982 .

[17]  Per Krusell,et al.  The Role of Investment-Specific Technological Change in the Business Cycle , 2000 .

[18]  Thomas F. Cooley Frontiers of business cycle research , 1995 .

[19]  Michael Woodford,et al.  Plant-Level Adjustment and Aggregate Investment Dynamics , 1995 .

[20]  K. Geert Rouwenhorst,et al.  Asset Pricing Implications of Equilibrium Business Cycle Models , 1995 .

[21]  Lawrence J. Christiano Linear-Quadratic Approximation and Value-Function Iteration: A Comparison , 1990 .

[22]  Richard Rogerson,et al.  Indivisible labor, lotteries and equilibrium , 1988 .

[23]  Carl de Boor,et al.  A Practical Guide to Splines , 1978, Applied Mathematical Sciences.

[24]  Edward C. Prescott Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Quarterly Review Fall 1986 Theory Ahead of Business Cycle Measurement* , 2022 .

[25]  Robert S. Chirinko,et al.  Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Research Department Staff Report 302 Is Lumpy Investment Relevant for the Business Cycle? , 2022 .