Influence of a shadow sector of economy on heterogeneous agent behavior

Abstract

The influence of the shadow, informal and household sectors that produce goods for own consumption on the dynamics of a stochastic model with heterogeneous agents is considered. The general equilibrium approach that explains the behavior of demand, supply and prices in economy with several interactive markets is used in the study. The model under consideration describes an economy with aggregated uncertainty and with an infinite number of heterogeneous agents (households). The source of heterogeneity is the idiosyncratic shocks of agents' incomes in the legal and shadow sectors of economy. The presence of two sectors of the economy (legal and shadow) leads, respectively, to two sources of heterogeneity associated with the individual distribution of household income in these sectors. In the analysis an approximation algorithm of the dynamics of capital supply functions of individual agents – the dynamics of its first and second moments is used. The parameters of the model are estimated by the Bayesian method in the case study of the empirical data of Russian economy. An important fact is that the likelihood function of the model with heterogeneous agents is more important than the analogous model for the model with representative agents, i. e. the model under consideration describes the empirical data of Russian economy more adequately. The behavior of the impulse response functions of the basic variables of the model confirms the positive influence of the shadow economy (below a certain limit) on minimizing the rates of decline in economic indicators during recessions, especially for developing economies. The original result is that when analyzing the dynamics of aggregated variables in the model under consideration with two sources of heterogeneity, it is necessary to take into account not only the first-order moments of the distribution function of capital stocks, but also second-order moments. The further prospects of research can be connected to the application of more detailed models of the general (common) balance allowing, in particular, to describe also behavior of non-uniform groups of agents of enterprise sector of economy.

Keywords

heterogeneous agents, expectations, idiosyncratic shocks, aggregated uncertainty, shadow economy, informal sector of economy, legal sector of economy, household sector, Bayesian method, general economic equilibrium

For citation

Serkov L.A. Influence of a shadow sector of economy on heterogeneous agent behavior. Perm University Herald. Economy, 2018, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 177–195. DOI 10.17072/1994-9960-2018-2-177-195

References

1. Linde J. DSGE models: Still useful in policy analysis? Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 2018, vol. 34, iss. 1-2, pp. 269‒286.
2. Rees D., Smith P., Hall J. A Multi-sector model of the Australian economy. Research Discussion Paper, 2015, vol. 7. 63 p.
3. Costa S.M. de Azevedo Structural trends and cycles in a DSGE model for Brazil. Working Paper. Banco Central do Brasil, 2016, no. 434, pp. 1–57.
4. Valdivia D. Handbook on DSGE models: Some useful tips in modeling a DSGE models // Munich Personal RePEc Archive Paper, 2015, no. 61347. Available at: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/61654/ (accessed 18.06.2018).
5. Malakhovskaya O.A., Minabutdinov A.R. Dinamicheskaya stokhasticheskaya model' obshchego ravnovesiya eksportnoorientirovannoi ekonomiki [Dynamic stochastic model of general equilibrium of export oriented economy]. Preprint WP12/2013/04 [Preprint WP12/2013/04]. Moscow, Vysshaya shkola ekonomiki Publ., 2013. 33 p. (In Russian).
6. Polbin A.V. Postroenie dinamicheskoi stokhasticheskoi modeli obshchego ravnovesiya dlya ekonomiki s vysokoi zavisimost'yu ot eksporta nefti [Development of a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model for an economy with high dependence on oil export]. Ekonomicheskii zhurnal VShE [Higher School of Economics Economic Journal], 2013, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 347–387. (In Russian).
7. Shul'gin A.G. Skol'ko pravil monetarnoi politiki neobkhodimo pri otsenke DSGE – modeli dlya Rossii? [How much monetary policy rules do we need to estimate DSGE model for Russia]. Prikladnaya ekonometrika [Applied Econometrics], 2014, no. 4 (36), pp.3–31. (In Russian).
8. Andreev M.Yu., Pospelov I.G. Printsip ratsional'nykh ozhidanii: Obzor kontseptsii i primery modelei [Rational expectation principle: Review of concepts and model examples]. Moscow, VTs RAN Publ., 2008. 79 p. (In Russian).
9. Muth J.F. Rational expectations and the theory of price movements. Econometrica, 1961, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 315–335.
10. Giannitsarou C. Heterogeneous learning. Review of Economic Dynamics, 2003, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 885–906.
11. Honkapohja S. Bounded rationality in macroeconomics. A review essay. Journal of Monetary Economics, 1995, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 509–518.
12. Serkov L.A., Elizarov D.B. Modelirovanie ozhidanii v sistemakh s geterogennymi agentami pri nalichii tenevogo sektora ekonomiki [Modelling of expectations in the system with heterogeneous agents in the presence of shadow economy]. Izvestiya UrGEU [Journal of the Ural State University of Economics], 2017, no. 2 (70), pp. 17–26. (In Russian).
13. Krusell P., Smith A. Income and wealth heterogeneity in the macroeconomy. Journal of Political Economy, 1998, vol. 106, no. 5, pp. 867–896.
14. Maliar L., Maliar S., Valli F. Solving the incomplete markets model with aggregate uncertainty using the Krusell‒Smith algorithm. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 2010, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 42–49.
15. Den Haan W.J. Solving dynamics models with aggregate shocks and heterogeneous agents. Macroeconomic Dynamics, 1997, vol. 1, iss. 2, pp. 355–386.
16. Busato F., Chiarini B. Steady state Laffer curve with the underground economy. Public Finance Review, 2013, no. 5, pp. 608– 632.
17. Colombo E., Onnis L., Tirelli P. Shadow economies at times of banking crises: Empirics and theory. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2016, no. 62, pp.180– 190. doi: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2014.09.017.
18. Reiter M. Solving heterogeneous – Agent models by projection and perturbation. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 2009, vol. 33, iss. 3 pp. 649–665.
19. Aiyagari S. Uninsured idiosyncratic risk and aggregate saving. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1994, vol. 109, iss. 3, pp. 659–684.
20. Pospelov I.G. Modelirovanie rossiiskoi ekonomiki v usloviyakh krizisa [Russian economy modelling in crisis conditions]. Voprosy ekonomiki [Economics Issues], 2009, no. 11, pp. 50–75. (In Russian).
21. Geweke J. Using simulation methods for Bayesian econometrics models: Inference, development and communication. Econometric Reviews, 1999, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1–73.
22. Benhabib J., Rogerson R., Wrigh R. Homework in macroeconomics: household production and aggregate fluctuations. Journal of Political Economy, 1991, vol. 99, no. 6, pp. 1166–1187.
23. King R., Plosser C. Real business cycles: Introduction. Journal of Monetary Economics, 1988, vol. 21, iss. 2-3, pp. 191–193.
24. King R., Rebelo S. Resuscitating real business cycles. NBER Working Paper, 2000, no. 7534. Available at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w7534.pdf (accessed 18.06.2018).
25. Kreptsev D., Seleznev S. DSGE – modeli rossiiskoi ekonomiki s malym kolichestvom uravnenii [DSGE models of Russian economy with a small nimber of equations]. Seriya dokladov ob ekonomicheskikh issledovaniyakh. Tsentral'nyi bank Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Series of reports about economic studies. Central Bank of the Russian Federation], 2016, no. 12. (In Russian). Available at: https://www.cbr.ru/ Content/Document/File/16728/wps_12.pdf (accessed 18.06.2018).

Show full text