Essays on Information Frictions, Prices and Unemployment

I investigate the effects of information frictions in price setting decisions. I show that firms' output prices and wages are less sensitive to aggregate economic conditions when firms and workers cannot perfectly understand (or know) the aggregate state of the economy. Prices and wages respond with a lag to aggregate innovations because agents learn slowly about those changes, and this delayed adjustment in prices makes output and unemployment more sensitive to aggregate shocks. In the first chapter of this dissertation, I show that workers' noisy information about the state of the economy help us to explain why real wages are sluggish. In the context of a search and matching model, wages do not immediately respond to a positive aggregate shock because workers do not (yet) have enough information to demand higher wages. This increases firms' incentives to post more vacancies, and it makes unemployment volatile and sensitive to aggregate shocks. This mechanism is robust to two major criticisms of existing theories of sluggish wages and volatile unemployment: the flexibility of wages for new hires and the cyclicality of the opportunity cost of employment. Calibrated to U.S. data, the model explains 60% of the overall unemployment volatility. Consistent with empirical evidence, the response of unemployment to TFP shocks predicted by my model is large, hump-shaped, and peaks one year after the TFP shock, while the response of the aggregate wage is weak and delayed, peaking after two years. In the second chapter of this dissertation, I study the role of information frictions and inventories in firms' price setting decisions in the context of a monetary model. In this model, intermediate goods firms accumulate output inventories, observe aggregate variables with one period lag, and observe their nominal input prices and demand at all times. Firms face idiosyncratic shocks and cannot perfectly infer the state of nature. After a contractionary nominal shock, nominal input prices go down, and firms accumulate inventories because they perceive some positive probability that the nominal price decline is due to a good productivity shock. This prevents firms' prices from decreasing and makes current profits, households' income, and aggregate demand go down. According to my model simulations, a 1% decrease in the money growth rate causes output to decline 0.17% in the first quarter and 0.38% in the second followed by a slow recovery to the steady state. Contractionary nominal shocks also have significant effects on total investment, which remains 1% below the steady state for the first 6 quarters.

Essays on Uncertainty, Imperfect Information, and Investment Dynamics

Understanding how imperfect information affects firms' investment decision helps answer important questions in economics, such as how we may better measure economic uncertainty; how firms' forecasts would affect their decision-making when their beliefs are not backed by economic fundamentals; and how important are the business cycle impacts of changes in firms' productivity uncertainty in an environment of incomplete information. This dissertation provides a synthetic answer to all these questions, both empirically and theoretically. The first chapter, provides empirical evidence to demonstrate that survey-based forecast dispersion identifies a distinctive type of second moment shocks different from the canonical volatility shocks to productivity, i.e. uncertainty shocks. Such forecast disagreement disturbances can affect the distribution of firm-level beliefs regardless of whether or not belief changes are backed by changes in economic fundamentals. At the aggregate level, innovations that increase the dispersion of firms' forecasts lead to persistent declines in aggregate investment and output, which are followed by a slow recovery. On the contrary, the larger dispersion of future firm-specific productivity innovations, the standard way to measure economic uncertainty, delivers the ``wait and see" effect, such that aggregate investment experiences a sharp decline, followed by a quick rebound, and then overshoots. At the firm level, data uncovers that more productive firms increase investments given rises in productivity dispersion for the future, whereas investments drop when firms disagree more about the well-being of their future business conditions. These findings challenge the view that the dispersion of the firms' heterogeneous beliefs captures the concept of economic uncertainty, defined by a model of uncertainty shocks. The second chapter presents a general equilibrium model of heterogeneous firms subject to the real productivity uncertainty shocks and informational disagreement shocks. As firms cannot perfectly disentangle aggregate from idiosyncratic productivity because of imperfect information, information quality thus drives the wedge of difference between the unobserved productivity fundamentals, and the firms' beliefs about how productive they are. Distribution of the firms' beliefs is no longer perfectly aligned with the distribution of firm-level productivity across firms. This model not only explains why, at the macro and micro level, disagreement shocks are different from uncertainty shocks, as documented in Chapter 1, but helps reconcile a key challenge faced by the standard framework to study economic uncertainty: a trade-off between sizable business cycle effects due to changes in uncertainty, and the right amount of pro-cyclicality of firm-level investment rate dispersion, as measured by its correlation with the output cycles.

ESSAYS ON DISPLACED WORKERS AND RESIDENTIAL MIGRATION

In this dissertation, I explore how workers’ human capital, local industry composition, and business cycles affect employment outcomes and residential migration for job losers and other workers. I first examine whether the poor employment outcomes of job losers are due to a lack of jobs that require their human capital within their local labor market. I answer this question by analyzing the extent to which the industry composition in the job loser’s local labor market affects employment outcomes when job loss occurs during expansions and during recessions. I find that if job losers reside in an area with a high employment concentration of their original industry of employment, they are 2.1-2.8 percent more likely to be re-employed at another job if job loss occurs during an expansion; I find an insignificant relationship in most specifications when job loss occurs during a recession, and in some specifications I even find a negative relationship between industry concentration and employment. I conclude that the industry composition within an area matters for job losers, since firms are more willing to hire workers from within their own industry, as these workers have more relevant accumulated human capital. However, firms are less likely to hire during a recession, making job losers’ human capital less important for job finding. Next, Erika McEntarfer, Henry Hyatt, and I examine whether the business cycle affects earnings changes for job losers, and the factors that explain these differences across time. We find that job losers who lost their job during the Great Recession have earnings changes that are 10 percent more negative relative to other job losers from other periods. This result is driven primarily by longer nonemployment lengths and worse subsequent job matches. Finally, Erika McEntarfer, Henry Hyatt, Alexandria Zhang, and I explore the extent to which residential migration is driven by job opportunities. We use four databases and find that changes in job moves explain some of the changes in residential migration, but the relationship is not as strong as previously documented. We find that migration patterns differ across databases, with some databases documenting steeper declines and more cyclicality.