The paper examines a stochastic analogue of the Polterovich model of economic dynamics. The study focuses on the asymptotic properties of equilibrium paths. The main results are stochastic turnpike theorems with exponential estimates of the convergence rate.

The paper studies the nature of expectations formation rules for deterministic economic laws with an expectations feedback within the framework of dynamical systems theory. In such systems, the expectations formation rules, called predictors, have a dominant influence. The concept of a perfect predictor, which generates perfect-foresight orbits, is proposed and analyzed. Necessary and sufficient conditions are given for which local as well as global perfect foresight is possible. The concept is illustrated for the general linear model as well as for models of the cobweb type. For the standard overlapping generations model of economic growth, the existence of perfect predictions depends strongly on the savings behavior of the agents and on the technology.

In a seminal paper, Robert E. Lucas, Jr. provided the theoretical relationship between aggregate demand and real output based on relative price confusion at the individual market level. Subsequently, an alternative New Keynesian aggregate supply relationship was derived and it was demonstrated that the two theories can be distinguished on the basis of how both the rate of inflation and the volatility of relative prices affect its slope. By emphasizing the first implication of New Keynesian theory, strong evidence was obtained supporting this model using international data. We also concentrate on the second difference between the two theories. We derive the individual market-level equilibrium relationship for the Lucas model, i.e., the disaggregate supply curve. We estimate the crucial parameters of the relationship between aggregate nominal demand shocks and real output using U.S. intranational state and industry data. We find that the Lucas model omits important New Keynesian features of the data.

This paper diagnoses the symptoms of the Dutch disease in a two-sector stochastic endogenous growth model. A productive, low-skill-intensive primary sector causes the currency to appreciate in real terms, thus hampering the development of a high-skill-intensive secondary sector and thereby reducing growth. Moreover, the volatility of the primary sector generates real-exchange-rate uncertainty and may thus reduce investment and learning in the secondary sector and hence also growth. Cross-sectional and panel regressions based on data for 125 countries in the period 1960–1992 confirm a statistically significant inverse relationship between the size of the primary sector and economic growth, but not between the volatility of the real exchange rate and growth.

Weekly live cattle prices in various markets would be expected to share common trends, i.e., they cannot be driven by separate nonstationarities because at some point the prices will diverge sufficiently for it to be economic to cross-ship the cattle, or at least the beef. This paper extends previous bivariate work to a multivariate analysis that is capable of modeling the multiple market linkages in prices for many geographical regions. The empirical estimation represents the application of an innovation on Aoki's Linear Systems State Space model that allows determination of long- and short-run dynamics common to multiple series. The common dynamics permit characterization of the multiple markets with a limited number of states (sufficient statistics for the past), resulting in dynamic arbitrage relations between the series. A nonparametric test is used to evaluate the value of expected arbitrage forecasts implied by the structure of the model. The arbitrage relationship also is employed to generate efficient discounts/premiums for either physical delivery or cash settlement of futures contracts. The proposed settlement mechanism accounts for spatial arbitrage opportunities and therefore better represents the true geographical discounts faced by traders in individual markets.

We study the quantitative properties of a dynamic general equilibrium model. Agents face both idiosyncratic and aggregate income risk, state-dependent borrowing constraints that bind occasionally, and markets that are incomplete. Equilibrium consumption-savings plans and asset prices are computed under various assumptions about income uncertainty. Then, we investigate whether the model replicates two empirical observations: the high correlation between individual consumption and individual income, and the equity premium puzzle. We find that, when the driving processes are calibrated according to the data from wage income in different sectors of the U.S. economy, the results move in the direction of explaining these observations, but we fall short of explaining the observations quantitatively. If the incomes of agents are assumed to be independent of each other, the observations can be explained quantitatively.

Bob Lucas is widely regarded as the most influential economist of the past 25–30 years, at least among those working in macro and monetary economics. His work provided the primary stimulus for a drastic overhaul and revitalization of that broad area, an overhaul that featured the ascendance of rational expectations, the emergence of a coherent equilibrium theory of cyclical fluctuations, and specification of the analytical ingredients necessary for the use of econometric models in policy design. These are the accomplishments for which he was awarded the 1995 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences. In addition, he has made outstanding contributions on other topics—enough, arguably, for another prize. Among these are seminal writings on asset pricing, economic growth and development, exchange-rate determination, optimal fiscal and inflation policy, and tools for the analysis of dynamic recursive models.

Clearly, Bob Lucas is very much a University of Chicago product; he studied there both as an undergraduate and as a Ph.D. student and has been on the faculty since 1975. Also, he has served as chairman of the Chicago Department of Economics and two terms as an editor of the Journal of Political Economy. Nevertheless, I and several colleagues at Carnegie Mellon like to point out that Bob was a professor here in the Graduate School of Industrial Administration from 1963 until 1974, during which time he conducted and published the central portions of the work for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize. Consequently, I could not resist asking Bob a few questions about his GSIA years in the interview.

Many researchers in the economics profession have been impressed and inspired by Lucas's technical skills, but the clarity and elegance of his writing style also deserve mention, plus his choice of research topics. The latter is reflective of Bob's utter seriousness of purpose. Each of his projects attacks a problem that is simultaneously of genuine theoretical interest and also of considerable importance from the perspective of economic policy. There is nothing frivolous about Lucas's research, as he had occasion to remind me during our interview.

As is well known to those who have been around him, Bob Lucas is a person who never uses three words when one will suffice—but that one will usually be carefully chosen. This characteristic shows up in the interview below. As a departure from standard MD Interview practice, and with the Editor's permission, this interview was conducted at a distance—i.e., via mail and e-mail. It yielded a smaller number of pages than have previous interviews, but I think that readers will find them stimulating. The process of obtaining them was somewhat challenging but highly informative and thoroughly enjoyable for me.