The Macroeconomics of Itaipú:

Similar documents
Paraguay s Fiscal and Monetary History

International economic context and regional impact

Daniel Titelman Director Economic Development Division

Regional Economic Report April June 2013

7. Demand (passenger, air)

Results of Tourism Activity Mexico, April 2017

Latin America: Outlook and Challenges Alejandro Werner Director Western Hemisphere Department

Data Appendix What Can We Learn from the Depression in Argentina? Timothy J. Kehoe

Results of Tourism Activity Mexico, February 2017

Thessaloniki Chamber of Commerce & Industry TCCI BAROMETER. March Palmos Analysis. March 11

Regional Economic Report

Results of Tourism Activity Mexico, March 2017

South Australian Centre for Economic Studies June 2016 Economic Briefing Report 28 June, 2016

The Economic Impact of Tourism in North Carolina. Tourism Satellite Account Calendar Year 2015

Results of Tourism Activity. Undersecretariat of Planning and Tourism Policy Available in

Regional Economic Report April June 2012

The Economic Impact of Tourism in North Carolina. Tourism Satellite Account Calendar Year 2013

Aviation Economics & Finance

Impact Evaluation of a Cluster Program: An Application of Synthetic Control Methods. Diego Aboal*, Gustavo Crespi** and Marcelo Perera* *CINVE **IDB

An Exploration of LCC Competition in U.S. and Europe XINLONG TAN

Regional Economic Report April June 2015

The Economic Impact of Tourism in Maryland. Tourism Satellite Account Calendar Year 2016

Tourism Satellite Account Calendar Year 2010

5th NAMIBIA TOURISM SATELLITE ACCOUNT. Edition

Contents of the Economic Survey 2012

THIS WAS NOT ARGENTINA S GROWTH AND PRODUCTIVITY DECADE Myths, Legends and Facts about Argentina Growth Patterns

LCC Competition in the U.S. and EU: Implications for the Effect of Entry by Foreign Carriers on Fares in U.S. Domestic Markets

Textile Per Capita Consumption

by Dr. Valia Kasimati Bank of Greece

Spirit Airlines Reports First Quarter 2017 Results

1 Replication of Gerardi and Shapiro (2009)

Economic Effect of Infrastructure : macroeconomic effects and microeconomic effects

Results of Tourism Activity

The Economic Impact of Tourism in Maryland. Tourism Satellite Account Calendar Year 2015

Preliminary Overview of the Economies of Latin America and the Caribbean

Data Appendix Catch-up Growth Followed by Stagnation: Mexico by Timothy J. Kehoe and Felipe Meza

The Economic Impact of Tourism in Buncombe County, North Carolina

Spirit Airlines Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2016 Results

The Manager Company Announcements Australian Stock Exchange Limited Sydney NSW Dear Sir. Demerger of BHP Steel

Wyoming Travel Impacts

Spirit Airlines Reports Third Quarter 2017 Results

Regional Economic Report July- September 2014

Benchmarking Travel & Tourism in Russia

Organization of Multiple Airports in a Metropolitan Area

Estimates of the Economic Importance of Tourism

An Empirical Analysis of Disasters on Regional Economy Case Study of 2000 Flood Disaster in Japan by use of regional GDP data

Tourism Satellite Account: Demand-Supply Reconciliation

Results of Tourism Activity. July, 2017

ESTIMATION OF ECONOMIC IMPACTS FOR AIRPORTS IN HAWTHORNE, EUREKA, AND ELY, NEVADA

Results of Tourism Activity

List of Figures List of Tables. List of Abbreviations. 1 Introduction 1

Directional Price Discrimination. in the U.S. Airline Industry

ARGENTINA: A Strategic Investment and Business Destination

Wyoming Travel Impacts

Thessaloniki Chamber of Commerce & Industry TCCI BAROMETER. Palmos Analysis Ltd.

Fiji s Tourism Satellite Accounts

Evaluation of Alternative Aircraft Types Dr. Peter Belobaba

Results of Tourism Activity

Oregon Travel Impacts p

The Economic Impacts of the Open Skies Initiative: Past and Future

Benchmarking Travel & Tourism in United Arab Emirates

Benchmarking Travel & Tourism in Australia

FOREIGN INVESTMENT IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN 2002 REPORT

Hydrological study for the operation of Aposelemis reservoir Extended abstract

Outlook for (some) Emerging Economies

Jan-18. Dec-17. Travel is expected to grow over the coming 6 months; at a slower rate

Q Earnings Financial Results for the Third Quarter Ended December 31, January 29, 2015 OMRON Corporation

Annual Results. Year ended 28 April June 2018

Results of Tourism Activity Mexico, May 2017

Thank you for participating in the financial results for fiscal 2014.

A Macroscopic Tool for Measuring Delay Performance in the National Airspace System. Yu Zhang Nagesh Nayak

The Economic Impact of Civil Aviation on the North Atlantic (NAT) Region

Economic Impact of Aviation in Arizona

The Economic Impact of Travel in Kansas. Tourism Satellite Account Calendar Year 2013

The Economic Impact of Tourism on Galveston Island, Texas

Korean Air Q Financial Results. Jul 28, 2011

Quantile Regression Based Estimation of Statistical Contingency Fuel. Lei Kang, Mark Hansen June 29, 2017

Forecasting effects of weather extremes: El Nino s influence maize yields in Mexico

Economic Impact of Tourism in South Dakota, December 2018

Measuring travel services and tourism in New Zealand. October 2013

Economic Impact of Tourism in South Dakota, December 2017

Land area 1.73 million km 2 Queensland population (as at 31 December 2017) Brisbane population* (preliminary estimate as at 30 June 2017)

1Q 2017 Earnings Call. April 18, 2017

Competition in the domestic airline sector in Mexico *

Benchmarking Travel & Tourism in Colombia

Caribbean: Outlook and Challenges

Broad-Based Growth: The Caribbean Experience

UK Aviation Forecasts

Commercial Exchange Rate

BRAZIL INTERNATIONAL INBOUND TRAVEL MARKET PROFILE (2011) Copyright 2012 by the U.S. Travel Association. All Rights Reserved.

COLOMBIAN: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

Gerry Laderman SVP Finance, Procurement and Treasurer

4Q15 and 2015 Results Presentation. March 30, 2016

SLOW GROWTH OF SOUTHERN NEVADA ECONOMY

The Economic Impact of Tourism in Hillsborough County. July 2017

Presentation on Results for the 2nd Quarter FY Idemitsu Kosan Co.,Ltd. November 14, 2018

IATA ECONOMIC BRIEFING DECEMBER 2008

Q Earnings Financial Results for the First Quarter Ended June 30, July 28, 2016 OMRON Corporation

United Kingdom. How does Travel & Tourism compare to other sectors? GDP. Size. Share. UK GDP Impact by Industry. UK GDP Impact by Industry

LATAM AIRLINES GROUP REPORTS OPERATING INCOME OF US$267 MILLION FOR FOURTH QUARTER 2014 AND US$513 FOR FULL YEAR 2014

Transcription:

The Macroeconomics of Itaipú: Measuring the Impact of a Large Fiscal Shock Javier Charotti University of Chicago Banco Central del Paraguay Constantino Hevia Universidad T. di Tella Andy Neumeyer Universidad T. di Tella Banco Central de la República Argentina August, 2017 Note: The opinions expressed in this presentation are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Central Bank of Argentina, nor those of the Central Bank of Paraguay or their boards of directors.

The Itaipú Hidroelectric Dam 1 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Satellite view of Itaipu and Ciudad del Este 2 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipu

Satellite view of Itaipu and Ciudad del Este 3 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipu

The Itaipú Binacional Created in the 1970s by the governments of Paraguay and Brazil Each country owns 50 percent of the Binacional and its production Itaipú provides 17 percent of all of Brazil s energy consumption and 70 percent of Paraguay s Brazil buys Paraguay s excess production at negotiated prices The firm borrowed from Brazil to finance the construction of the dam Amount borrowed: about 27 billion USD (GDP in 1974 was 1.2 billion USD) Expected to repay in full by 2023 Construction period: 1974-1981 Itaipú begun exporting electricity in 1984 4 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

The Construction of Itaipú The course of the seventh biggest river in the world was shifted, as were 50 million tons of earth and rock. The amount of concrete used to build the Itaipú Power Plant would be enough to build 210 football stadiums the size of the Estádio do Maracanã. The iron and steel used would allow for the construction of 380 Eiffel Towers. The volume of excavation of earth and rock in Itaipu is 8.5 times greater than that of the Channel Tunnel and the volume of concrete is 15 times greater. Around forty thousand people worked in the construction. Ciudad del Este was built as a support town for the construction of the dam Itaipú is one of the most expensive objects ever built. 5 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Itaipú as a Macroeconomic Impulse Investment in Itaipú Government Expenditure with no Taxes Percent of trend GDP 25 20 15 10 5 Itaipu investment Electricity exports Large transitory shock to government expenditure in non-tradable goods Almost 12% of GDP in 1979 Financing: No taxes FDI from Brazil, repaid in kind Paraguay exports electricity to Brazil after 1984 at negotiated prices. 17% of GDP in 1991 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Investment data on NT within Paraguay constructed from company records 6 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

An Itaipú Business Cycle? Does the Itaipú impulse explain the business cycle in the late 70s and 80s? What is the role of TFP or other impulses? Itaipú investment (percent of trend GDP) 12 10 8 6 4 2 Itaipú investment (left axis) Tradable output (right axis) Non-tradable output (right axis) GDP (right axis) 50 40 30 20 10 0-10 -20 Percentage deviation from trend 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000-30 7 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

The Relative Price of Non-Traded Goods Relative price Non-Tradable / Tradable (1975=1) 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 Consumer/Wholesale Construction/Manufactures Services/Goods CPI/(CPI * E) 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Note: Three measures of the relative price of non-traded goods. Consumer Price Index/Wholesale Price Index, Implicit Price Deflator of Construction over Manufacturing, Implicit Price Deflator of Services over Goods in national accounts excluding electricity 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Itaipu investment (percent of trend GDP) 8 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

The Relative Price of Non-Traded Goods How does the increase in the demand for non-traded goods affect its relative price? Why does the relative price of construction and services fall? Relative price Non-Tradable / Tradable (1975=1) 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 Consumer/Wholesale Construction/Manufactures Services/Goods CPI/(CPI * E) 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Itaipu investment (percent of trend GDP) 9 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

A Model of the Macroeconomics Itaipú Small open economy with incomplete capital markets Two sector neoclassical growth model with sector specific capital Traded goods Non-traded goods Itaipú Investment is an exogenous process that uses non-traded goods in the resource constraint C N,t + I N,t + I Itaipu t = Y N,t Electricity exports to Brazil are an exogenous process akin to an endowment of traded goods, Q t, C T,t + I T,t + D t = D t+1 1 + r t + Y T,t + Q t Itaipú capital does not yield capital in other production functions Productivity shocks in each sector 10 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Modeling Itaipú Shocks We model Itaipú shocks as an auto-regressive process [ ] [ ] [ ] I Itaipu t ρi 0 I Itaipu = t 1 + ɛ Q t 0 ρ It Q Q t 1 In the experiments we feed the model with the true realizations of ɛ It {Q t} shocks induce persistent movements in consumption, labor, and output. Incomplete capital markets Perfect foresight model: work in progress Allows agents to anticipate Itaipú shocks Only present value of {Q t} matters 11 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Preferences and Technology Preferences E 0 β t U (C t, L t) C t is consumption and L t is labor. Cobb-Douglas preferences: t=0 [ C η t (1 L 1 η] 1 σ t) 1 U (C t, L t) =. 1 σ Consumption is a composite of tradable and non-tradable goods C t = [γ 1 θ C θ 1 θ N,t + (1 γ) θ 1 θ 1 ] θ θ 1 C θ T,t. 12 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Preferences and Technology Production functions Tradables: Non-tradables: Y T,t = A 1 α T T,t K α T T,t L1 α T T,t Y N,t = A 1 α N N,t K α N N,t L1 α N N,t. Stocks of capital The stocks of capital are a (CRS) composite of capital goods made of tradable and non-tradable capital goods K T,t = ( ) KN,t T ωt ( ) K T 1 ωt T,t K N,t = ( ) KN,t N ωn ( ) K N 1 ωn T,t Once installed, capital is immobile and remains in the sector until it depreciates. 13 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Preferences and Technology Capital accumulation Four types of capital goods which evolve as K i T,t+1 = (1 δ T )K i T,t + I i T,t Φ T (K i T,t+1, K i T,t) K i N,t+1 = (1 δ N )K i N,t + I i N,t Φ N (K i N,t+1, K i N,t) i = T, N i = T, N Φ T and Φ N are quadratic capital adjustment cost functions Investment Investment made out of tradable goods is allocated to increase the stock of capital used to produce tradables (I T T,t) or non-tradables (I N T,t), I T,t = I T T,t + I N T,t. Likewise for non-tradable investment goods I N,t = I T N,t + I N N,t. 14 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Feasibility Tradable sector C T,t + I T,t + D t = Dt+1 1 + r t + Y T,t + Q t D t is one period debt (in tradables) acquired at time t 1, r t is the implicit interest rate on the bond price (charged by the rest of the world), and Q t is the flow of payments received from the electricity exported to Brazil. Interest rate is ( ) r t = r + φ r e D t+1 D GDP 1 Non-tradable sector C N,t + I N,t + I Itaipu t = Y N,t. Labor allocation L N,t + L T,t = L t. 15 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Exogenous Processes Exogenous impulses evolve as an auto-regressive process I Itaipu t Q t A Nt A Tt = ρ I 0 0 0 0 ρ Q 0 0 0 0 ρ AT 0 0 0 0 ρ AN I Itaipu t 1 Q t 1 A Nt 1 A Tt 1 + ɛ t where ɛ t are independently and normally distributed. 16 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Calibration Set σ = 2. Labor shares α T = 0.48 and α N = 0.62 (National Accounts) Foreign interest rate r = 0.05 and sensitivity parameter φ r = 0.001. Steady state Debt/Output ratio of 0.4. Depreciation rates δ N and δ T δ N = 0.027 (half-life structures=25 years) δ T = 0.094 (half-life equipment and machinery=7 years) Set ω N and ω T so that investment ratios Ī T T /Ī T N = 1 and Ī N T /Ī N N = 1. Set an arbitrary value for the relative price of non-tradables, p N, and choose ĀT /ĀN to match p N (Balassa-Samuelson). Elasticity of substitution T-NT θ = 0.4 (Neumeyer & Gonzalez-Rozada) Set γ to match share tradables on output ȲT /GDP = 0.52 (Nat. Acc.) Choose η so that L = 1/3 and Ā T so that GDP = 1. 17 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Calibration Parameters of the exogenous stochastic process and capital adjustment cost For Itaipú investment and electricity exports, we run AR(1) regressions I Itaipu t = 0.97I Itaipu t 1 + ɛ It ; ɛ It N(0, 0.014 2 ) Q t = 0.99Q t 1 + ɛ Qt ; ɛ Qt N(0, 0.02 2 ) Use SMM to estimate productivity parameters ρ AT, ζ AT, ρ AN, ζ AN, and capital adjustment costs φ T and φ N to match 1 First order autocorrelation of tradable output 2 First order autocorrelation of non-tradable output 3 Volatility of tradable output 4 Volatility of non-tradable output 5 Volatility of construction (NT) relative to GDP 6 Volatility of machinery and equipment (T) relative to GDP 18 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Summary of calibrated parameters Description Symbol Value Risk aversion σ 2 Exponent C in utility η 0.46 Share C T in C γ 0.417 Elasticity substitution T-NT θ 0.4 Foreign interest rate r 0.05 Labor share T α T 0.48 Labor share NT α T 0.62 Depreciation rate T δ T 0.094 Depreciation rate NT δ N 0.027 Share NT capital in K T ω T 0.67 Share NT capital in K N ω N 0.67 Persistence A T shock ρ AT 0.977 Volatility A T shock ζ AT 0.033 Persistence A N shock ρ AN 0.999 Volatility A N shock ζ AN 0.001 Persistence I Itaipu ρ I 0.97 Volatility I Itaipu ζ I 0.014 Persistence Q t ρ Q 0.99 Volatility Q t ζ Q 0.02 Capital Adjustment T φ T 0.008 Capital Adjustment NT φ N 0.214 19 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Recovering Productivity Shocks Productivity shocks are unobservable: Labor and capital in each sector is unobservable. Employment data only on labor force. Tracks working age population. In the model, output is a function of productivity shocks in each sector, Itaipú shocks, other endogenous state variables, and parameters. ( ) YNt = f ( A Y Nt, A Tt, I Itaipu t, Q t, parameters ) Tt Recover productivity shocks (A Nt, A Tt ) using data for Y Nt, Y Tt, I Itaipu t, and Q t inverting the policy functions in f ( ) 20 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Recovered Productivity Shocks and Output in Each Sector 50 40 Percentage deviation from trend 30 20 10 0-10 -20-30 Tradable output (data - excludes electricity) Tradable productivity (model implied) Non-Tradable output (data) Non-Tradable productivity (model implied) 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 21 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Realization of shocks 25 20 15 Deviation from trend 10 5 0-5 -10-15 -20 Tradable productivity Non-Tradable productivity Itaipu investment Electricity exports 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 22 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Macroeconomic Effect of Itaipu Experiments: 1 Feed the model with the shocks to I Itaipu t 2 Feed the model with the shocks to I Itaipu t and Q t. 3 Feed the model with all shocks: A Nt, A Tt, I Itaipu t, Q t 4 Feed the model with all but Q t Results: Output Output of non tradable good expands Output of tradable good contracts Labor Employment increases Labor is reallocated from traded to non-traded goods sector Prices Relative price of non-traded increases Relative price of non-traded decreases once productivity shocks are included Results depend on the elasticity of the labor supply Inelastic labor supply: large effect on output and small effect on prices Elastic labor supply: small effect on output and large effect on prices 23 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Macroeconomic Effect of Itaipu Output: Only Investment Shock I itaipu t 50 40 Percentage deviation from trend 30 20 10 0-10 -20-30 Tradable output (data) Non-Tradable output (data) Tradable output (model) Non-Tradable output (model) 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 24 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Macroeconomic Effect of Itaipu Labor: Only Investment Shock I itaipu t 30 25 Percentage deviation from trend 20 15 10 5 0-5 -10-15 -20 Tradable labor (model) Non-Tradable labor (model) Aggregate labor (model) 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 25 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Macroeconomic Effect of Itaipu Output: Only Endowment Shock Q t 50 40 Percentage deviation from trend 30 20 10 0-10 -20-30 Tradable output (data) Non-Tradable output (data) Tradable output (model only endowment shock) Non-Tradable output (model only endowment shock) 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 26 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Macroeconomic Effect of Itaipu Labor: Only Endowment Shock Q t 0 Percentage deviation from trend -5-10 -15-20 -25-30 Tradable labor (model only endowment shock) Non-Tradable labor (model only endowment shock) Aggregate labor (model only endowment shock) 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 27 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Macroeconomic Effect of Itaipu Output: Investment and Endowment Shock: It itaipu and Q t 50 40 Percentage deviation from trend 30 20 10 0-10 -20-30 -40 Tradable output (data) Non-Tradable output (data) Tradable output (only I itaipu t and Q t ) Non-Tradable output (only I itaipu t and Q t ) 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 28 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Macroeconomic Effect of Itaipu Labor: Investment and Endowment Shock: It itaipu and Q t 30 Percentage deviation from trend 20 10 0-10 -20-30 Tradable labor (only itaipu) Non-Tradable labor (only itaipu) Aggregate labor (only itaipu) Tradable labor (all shocks) Non-Tradable labor (all shocks) Aggregate labor (all shocks) 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 29 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Macroeconomic Effect of Itaipu Labor: All shocks but Q t Percentage deviation from trend 30 25 20 15 10 5 0-5 -10-15 Tradable labor (all but Qt) Non-Tradable labor (all but Qt) Aggregate labor (all but Qt) 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 Dashed lines: model with all shocks 30 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Model Validation I: Relative Prices Non-tradables Relative price Non-Tradable / Tradable (1975=1) 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0-0.05-0.1-0.15-0.2-0.25 Construction/Manufactures Services/Goods Model only itaipu Model all shocks Model all but Qt 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 31 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Model Validation I: Relative Prices Non-tradables Relative price Non-Tradable / Tradable (1975=1) 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0-0.1-0.2-0.3-0.4-0.5 Consumer/Wholesale CPI/(CPI * E) Model only itaipu Model all shocks 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 32 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Model Validation II: Productivity in Construction Note: Value added in construction over employment in construction. Census data. 33 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Model Validation III: Solow Residuals Solow residuals in model generated data and in actual data Log-deviation from sample mean (percent) 30 20 10 0-10 -20-30 Model Model (constant labor) Data -40 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 34 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Model Validation IV: Aggregate Investment Log-deviation from sample mean (percent) 80 60 40 20 0-20 -40 Data Model Model (no Qt) -60 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 35 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Concluding Remarks The building of Itaipú is a natural experiment on the macroeconomic effects of government spending. Independent of cycle Large Transitory, but persistent, so that it has time to work Constructed data on Itaipu investment on non-tradable goods from company records Constructed a simple macroeconomic model to evaluate the effect of Itaipu on output, employment and prices. Preliminary results: There is a business cycle associated to Itaipu Output and employment increase Reallocation of resources towards NT sector Novel method to measure TFP shocks Model validation: relative prices, Solow residuals, investment, labor productivity in construction are consistent with the predictions of the model. 36 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

BACKUP SLIDES 37 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Other Shocks?: Terms of Trade 50 Log-deviation from sample mean (percent) 40 30 20 10 0-10 -20-30 -40 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 38 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Consumption and capital: model only Q t 20 15 Percentage deviation from trend 10 5 0-5 -10-15 -20-25 -30 Tradable consumption (only Q t ) Non-Tradable consumption (only Q t ) Aggregate consumption (only Q t ) Tradable capital Non-tradable capital 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 39 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Model Validation II: Impulse Response Functions Data and Model Insert graph with Impulse Response Functions Data and Model 40 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Separate income from expenditure shocks in itaipu Insert graphs pf output, prices and employment with only expenditure and with only income shock from itaipu 41 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Government Finance 42 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Real Exchange Rate 43 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú

Robustness check add terms of trade and government non-itaipu government expenditure shocks to the model 44 / 44 Charotti-Hevia-Neumeyer Itaipú