Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T08:40:42.193Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conflicting Specifications for Investment Functions in Rationing Models: A Reconciliation (*)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 August 2016

Jean-Paul Lambert
Get access

Extract

A number of attempts have been made recently (see, a.o., Mulkay [1983], Artus and Muet [1984], Gérard and Vanden Berghe [1984]) to develop and estimate appropriate specifications for investment functions in a rationing context. Some of the specifications proposed are however clearly conflicting, not in the usual sense that they reflect conflicting theoretical premises (between which empirical testing might hopefully discriminate) but in the unacceptable sense that there exists some logical incompatibility between different specifications derived from the same theoretical framework.

In this note, we focus our attention on two specifications among the most significant ones proposed recently, show why they are contradictory and then explain what is the correction to be brought to one of them in order to reconcile both specifications. In the course of the discussion, we also seize the opportunity to point to common empirical practices which are clearly unwarranted and could account for some deceptive results encountered (even with a theoretically correct specification).

Type
Research Article
Information
Recherches Économiques de Louvain/ Louvain Economic Review , Volume 53 , Issue 2 , June 1987 , pp. 135 - 145
Copyright
Copyright © Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de recherches économiques et sociales 1987 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

(**)

Université Catholique de Lille, and CORE, Louvain-la-Neuve.

(*)

This paper has been written in the context of a research project on investment behaviour in rationing models, which is jointly supported by the Commissariat Général du Plan, France and the Commission of the European Community. I would like to thank J.H. Drèze and two anonymous referees for very useful comments, but the usual disclaimer of course applies.

References

REFERENCES

Artus, P. and Muet, P.A. (1984), Investment, Output and Labor Constraints, and Financial Constraints: the Estimation of a Model with Several Regimes, Recherches Economiques de Louvain, vol. 50, n° 1–2.Google Scholar
Gerard, M. and Vanden Berghe, C. (1984), Econometric Analysis of Sectoral Investment in Belgium (1956–1982), Recherches Economiques de Louvain, vol. 50, n° 1–2.Google Scholar
Lambert, J.P. (1984), Disequilibrium Macroeconomic Models: Theory and Estimation of Rationing Models Using Business Survey Data, forthcoming, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lambert, J.P. and Mulkay, B. (1987), Investment in a Disequilibrium Context or Does Profitability really matter?, CORE Discussion Paper n° 8703.Google Scholar
Malgrange, P. and Villa, P. (1984), Comportement d’investissement avec coûts d’ajustement et contraintes quantitatives, Annales de l’INSEE, 53.Google Scholar
Malinvaud, E. (1983), Profitability and Investment Facing Uncertain Demand, Working Paper INSEE, n° 8303.Google Scholar
Michel, P. (1986), Dynamique de l’accumulation du capital en présence de contraintes de débouchés, Annales d’Economie et de Statistique, 2.Google Scholar
Muet, P.A. (1979), Modèles économétriques de l’investissement: une étude comparative sur données annuelles, Annales de l’INSEE, 35.Google Scholar
Mulkay, B. (1983), Fonctions d’investissement néoclassiques dans un modèle macroéconomique avec rationnement, Recherches Economiques de Louvain, vol. 49, n° 3.Google Scholar
Poret, P. (1986), Econométrie de l’investissement et enquêtes de conjoncture, Economie et Prévision, n° 74.Google Scholar