At its heart, Harry Saunders' Comment raises two principal criticisms I of the EMF study, "Macroeconomic Impacts of Energy Shocks"; The EMF study held constant the disrupted-state world oil price; effects of policy actions on the world oil price were not included. Saunders faults the EMF for not explicitly examining these effects. But further, he implies that, in estimating effects of policy actions to counter the oil shock, modelers should have held constant the disrupted-state quantity of oil consumed in the US.
Energy Modeling Forum. (1987). “Macroeconomic Impacts of Energy Shocks,” Working Group Report 7, in Macroeconomic Impacts of Energy Shocks, HickmanB. G.HuntingtonH. G.SweeneyJ. L. (eds.), Amsterdam: North Holland: pp. 1-123.
2.
FilatovV.HickmanB. G.KleinL. R. (1983). “Long-term Simulations with the Project LINK System 1978-85,” in Global International Economic ModelsHickmanB. G. (ed.), Amsterdam: North Holland, pp. 29-51.
3.
HickmanB. G. (1987). “Macroeconomic Impacts of Energy Shocks and Policy Responses: A Structural Comparison of Fourteen Models,” in Macroeconomic Impacts of Energy Shocks, pp. 125-198.
4.
HickmanB. G.HuntingtonH. G.SweeneyJ. L.. (1987). Macroeconomic Impacts of Energy Shocks, Amsterdam: North Holland.
5.
MorkK. A. (1987). “Energy Price Shocks, Rational Expectations, and Wage and Price Rigidities,” in Macroeconomic Impacts of Energy Shocks: Contributions from Participating Modelers. HickmanB. G.HuntingtonH. G. (eds.), Energy Modeling Forum, Stanford University, Stanford, CA pp. 419-471.
6.
SalinasJ. A.WeyantJ. P. (1987). “A Comparison of Macroeconomic Model Structures,” in Macroeconomic Impacts of Energy Shocks, pp. 269-331.
7.
SaundersH. D. (1989). “Comment on Macroeconomic Impacts of Energy Shocks, the Energy Modeling Forum Comparison of Models.” The Energy Journal, 10(4).
