Thanks to fantastic coauthors @dragobergholt.bsky.social Nicolo Maffei Faccioli, Pål Ulvedal and 👑Fabio Canova. Thanks to the editor and referees: the paper has improved. Last version: www.norges-bank.no/contentasset...

Practical implication for humble users like me: Juan's old codes are still ok and we can keep using them! 😅2/2

This is the outcome of @fossoluca.bsky.social PhD internship at Norges Bank which started in September 2020. The topic is extremely interesting, and we have tried to approach it using tools that we normally use for inflation or monetary policy. We hope you like the contamination. N/N

Bonus result III: since gender trends are the main drivers of employment growth, the estimated crowding out of males is relatively small, as in Fukui-Nakamura @jonsteinsson.bsky.social Notably, crowding out is shock-specific and smaller in response to labor supply shocks. 10/N

Bonus result II: the slowdown in the gender convergence explains in part the emergence of jobless recoveries. However, demographic factors and automation (together with import competition) play also a substantial role. 9/N

Bonus result I: the gender convergence is driven mainly by labor demand factors but labor supply factors become more important once we control for skills. There has been a large shock to the supply of skilled females over time. 8/N

In fact, we use a SVAR model with common trends that so far has been used to estimate the star variables. We go one step further and link these star variables (like trend GDP growth or trend employment) to unobserved structural drivers (like gender trends). This is new. 7/N

The finding that gender matters for macro connects us with the seminal papers by Hsieh-Hurst-Jones-Klenow and @heathcote.bsky.social -Storesletten-Violante. However, while they use calibrated structural models, we instead rely on a “let the data speak approach”. 6/N

Is muted growth the new normal? Gender differences in the US labor market are still sizeable and thus ample pockets of growth are still available. However, further growth may prove more difficult than in the past because the gender convergence has a natural upward bound. 5/N

The gender convergence stopped around 2000, with major negative effects on the macroeconomy: this explains around half of the overall decline in trend GDP growth and trend productivity growth between the 1990s and the 2010s. 4/N

We find that the trends driving the gender convergence (in green and light blue) have played a big role. During the 1970s, 80s and 90s, they account for 30-50% of trend GDP growth, 20-40% of trend productivity growth, and almost all the increase in trend employment. 3/N

Female-to-male ratios on employment rates and wages have increased substantially over time. However, this “grand convergence” stopped around 2000. Our key question:
Is the gender convergence important for the US macroeconomy? 2/N

Hei! Happy to be added 😊

Lorenzo has a super promising research agenda that you can find on his webpage sites.google.com/view/lorenzo... Do not miss the chance to interview him!
Link to the paper: www.norges-bank.no/contentasset...
N/N