Abstract:Workers separate from jobs, search for jobs, accept jobs, and fund consumption with their wages. Firms recruit workers to fill vacancies. Search frictions prevent firms from instantly hiring available workers. Unemployment persists. These features are described by the Diamond-Mortensen-Pissarides modeling framework. In this class of models, how unemployment responds to productivity changes depends on resources that can be allocated to job creation. Yet, this characterization has been made when matching is parameterized by a Cobb-Douglas technology. For a canonical DMP model, I (1) demonstrate that a unique steady-state equilibrium will exist as long as the initial vacancy yields a positive surplus; (2) characterize responses of unemployment to productivity changes for a general matching technology; and (3) show how a matching technology that is not Cobb-Douglas implies unemployment responds more to productivity changes, which is independent of resources available for job creation, a feature that will be of interest to business-cycle researchers.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The paper primarily explores the response mechanism of unemployment to productivity changes within the framework of the Diamond–Mortensen–Pissarides (DMP) model, considering the impact of general matching technology. Specifically, the paper attempts to address the following key issues:
1. **Response Decomposition under General Matching Technology**: The paper first addresses whether the response of unemployment to productivity changes in the DMP model class depends on two factors, as proposed in the study by Ljungqvist and Sargent (2017), which is based on Cobb–Douglas matching technology. The authors demonstrate that even with a general form of matching technology, this two-factor multiplicative decomposition still holds.
2. **Importance of Matching Technology**: The paper further explores whether the matching technology itself affects labor market volatility. In the case of Cobb–Douglas matching technology, one of the factors (i.e., the fundamental surplus) is considered to play a more important role in explaining unemployment fluctuations. However, for non-Cobb–Douglas matching technology, the second factor (which includes the matching technology factor) may vary with the economic cycle, potentially affecting unemployment dynamics.
3. **Impact of Non-Cobb–Douglas Matching Technology**: Through comparative experiments, the authors show that when non-Cobb–Douglas matching technology is adopted, the response of unemployment to productivity changes is greater. This provides a partial solution to the Shimer or unemployment volatility puzzle, where the classic DMP model struggles to explain the observed unemployment volatility.
In summary, the main contribution of this paper lies in expanding the understanding of the relationship between unemployment and productivity, especially when considering different forms of matching technology. By introducing a broader form of matching function, the authors reveal how the characteristics of the matching technology itself influence unemployment dynamics, which is significant for understanding macroeconomic fluctuations and designing related public policies.