Jr. Freeman et D. Houser, A COMPUTABLE EQUILIBRIUM-MODEL FOR THE STUDY OF POLITICAL-ECONOMY, American journal of political science, 42(2), 1998, pp. 628-660
Theory: The need for the development and use of a concept of joint, po
litical-economic equilibrium is increasingly recognized by students of
democracy and markets. Yet, to date, no adequate theoretical and meth
odological synthesis of this kind has been produced. The few works whi
ch have attempted it suffer from a lack of theoretical balance between
economic and political theory; unrealistic, temporally aggregated con
ceptions of political-economic equilibrium; failure to incorporate the
oretically meaningful stochastic elements of economic and political pr
ocesses; and the absence of a coherent methodology for gauging the emp
irical power of political-economic models. Methods: In the spirit of t
he AJPS workshop, it is shown how these problems can be solved. An imp
roved model is built, one which fuses a branch of real business cycle
theory and the theory of presidential approval. This model produces a
notion of computable political-economic equilibrium that provides for
market clearing and simultaneous stochastic optimization by economic a
nd political agents. Then, using data analysis techniques developed in
parallel by real business cycle theorists (Hansen and Heckman 1996; K
ydland and Prescott 1990, 1996; Lucas 1987; Prescott 1986a, 1986b, 199
1; Sims 1996) and political methodologists (Brady 1996; Jackson 1995),
the model is parameterized for the United States. More specifically,
on the basis of estimates from economics and political science and som
e numerical experimentation, certain of its parameters are set so that
, when simulated, the model mimics the United States political economy
in the 1980s. Results: The parameterized model is used to study some
important counterfactuals. The first is the impact of increased approv
al volatility on political-economic equilibration. Such volatility is
expected in view of America's likely involvement in the post Cold War
era's increasing number of ''low intensity'' international conflicts.
The second is the impact of presidents pursuing relatively high-nonmin
imum winning-levels of approval. This kind of behavior is attributed t
o certain presidents along with the claim that it has harmful effects
on markets and hence on various facets of social welfare. The former a
nalysis shows how ''business cycle phenomena'' (Lucas 1987) can be tra
ced, in part, to government approval management in an increasingly vol
atile international polity, management which is associated with a slig
ht drop in social welfare. The latter investigation demonstrates that
the president's pursuit of a consensual approval target is not necessa
rily socially harmful.