John Grigsby

I am an Assistant Professor in the Economics Department and School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University.

I am also a faculty research fellow with the NBER and an Associate Editor of the Journal of the European Economic Association.

My research is on empirical macroeconomics. Click here to read more and for full text of my research papers.

I received my PhD in Economics from the University of Chicago in 2020, and my Bachelor's Degree from Washington and Lee University in 2012.

New and Updated Research

Embed dynamic principal-agent problem into model of inflation and unemployment dynamics.
In standard model, wage cyclicality dampens response of unemployment to productivity shocks, all else equal
Incentive pay model implies effort may also move in response to shocks, which may offset movement in wages
Optimal contract: wage and effort movements exactly offset
- Due to envelope theorem
Implication: Incentive pay cyclicality does not dampen response of impulse response of unemployment
Also doesn't affect slope of Phillips Curve b/c marginal costs are rigid.
Wage cyclicality due to bargaining or outside option fluctuations still dampens responsiveness for standard reasons
Estimate that approximately 46% of wage cyclicality reflects incentives
Therefore, calibrating model without incentives to relatively rigid wage generates same impulse responses as incentive model

We develop a framework to measure the effects of price movements on well-being, accounting for consumption prices, labor income, asset income, capital gains, and government transfers.
Inflation caused by oil price shocks disproportionately hurt low-education households
- Driven by motor fuel prices, unemployment, and equity price responses
But inflation caused by monetary expansions are progressive
- Labor income rises more for low-education, and increases in asset prices from expansion hurts high-education wealth accumulators
Source of inflation matters for distributional consequences!