Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Faculty of Economics, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Economics, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

3 Professor, Faculty of Economics, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

4 Ph.D. Student of Economics, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

 This study uses a three-period overlapping generations (OLG) model to investigate human capital productivity's impact on Iran's economic growth. The central question addresses how intergenerational transfers influence the productivity of human resources and, consequently, overall economic growth. Employing an analytical-quantitative approach, the study uses seasonal data from 1991 to 2021. The model is estimated within a Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) framework. By integrating data from national accounts and household budgets, the study derives productivity levels of human resources across generations. The findings reveal that intra-family transfers related to consumption, education, and healthcare significantly enhance productivity. Moreover, the age group 25 to 64 years shows the strongest impact on economic growth, which is consistent with the life-cycle hypothesis as formulated by Ando and Modigliani, as well as the theoretical perspective provided by the National Transfer Accounts (NTA) framework.
Introduction
The relationship between demographic dynamics and macroeconomic outcomes has become an increasingly important topic in economic research. Among the various mechanisms connecting these domains, the role of intergenerational transfers in shaping human capital productivity is especially significant. This study focuses on the Iranian context, where a shift in population structure, along with institutional and fiscal challenges, has made the efficient use of human capital a key policy priority.
The central aim of this research is to assess intergenerational productivity through the lens of the National Transfer Accounts (NTA) framework. This approach allows for the quantification of how resources are allocated across age groups, highlighting differences in consumption, education, and healthcare. By identifying the age-specific patterns of resource use and output contribution, the study seeks to provide an empirical basis for measuring productivity across generations.
Furthermore, to understand how productivity responds to macroeconomic fluctuations, the study incorporates a Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) model tailored to Iran’s economy. The model integrates shocks in key areas such as household consumption, educational investment, and health expenditures, and tracks their effects across different generational cohorts. Through this dual-layered approach—linking micro-level intergenerational data with macro-level modeling—the research aims to answer a critical question: Which generation is most responsive to shocks in ways that affect human capital productivity?
Ultimately, the study provides not only a diagnostic tool for evaluating demographic-economic interactions but also a foundation for designing more targeted and effective policy interventions that consider the dynamic interplay between age structure, resource allocation, and economic growth.
Methods and Material
This study employs a hybrid modeling framework that combines National Transfer Accounts (NTA), the Overlapping Generations (OLG) model, and a Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) structure to assess the intergenerational dynamics of human capital productivity in Iran. The research integrates demographic structure with macroeconomic modeling to trace the effects of economic shocks on various age cohorts in terms of their productivity levels.
The OLG model used in this study features a three-period structure consisting of youth (15–24 years), working-age adults (25–64 years), and the elderly (65 years and older). This categorization aligns with the age classification defined in the NTA framework. Each cohort is subdivided by skill level, which determines their human capital endowments. Individuals enter the model at the age of 15 and progress through the stages of life, contributing to or benefiting from the economy through consumption, education, healthcare, and labor productivity.
To operationalize the model, we derive age-specific indicators for consumption, education, and health expenditures from household budget survey data. These micro-level estimates are then scaled using aggregate national account data to compute public and private intergenerational transfers. For example, to determine the public health transfer received by each age group, the proportional share of health-related household spending is multiplied by total government health expenditure. A similar technique is used to calculate age-disaggregated values for other transfer categories such as education and consumption.
The DSGE model is calibrated using quarterly macroeconomic data from 1991 to 2021. This framework enables us to incorporate random shocks to productivity, consumption, and fiscal policy, allowing for an analysis of the short- and long-term effects of these disturbances across different generations. The model builds upon the microfoundations of rational expectations and utility maximization, and follows the tradition established by Kydland and Prescott (1982), Clarida et al. (2002), and Smets and Wouters (2003). Technological shocks are modeled as a primary source of uncertainty, in line with the Real Business Cycle (RBC) literature.
Despite some limitations—such as the complexity of infinite-horizon modeling and the challenge of solving nonlinear systems—DSGE models remain the gold standard for macroeconomic policy simulation. This study utilizes a finite-horizon version of the model to capture the productivity responses of distinct age cohorts to economic shocks. By integrating NTA data into a DSGE structure, the research bridges microeconomic resource allocation with macroeconomic performance. It further distinguishes itself by evaluating how generational productivity changes in response to policy-driven and exogenous shocks, providing a novel analytical tool for demographic-economic research.
Results and Discussion
Although the calibration techniques of microeconomic and macroeconomic models slightly differ, the general approach in economic literature includes four key steps: selecting the model, defining the calibration objective, specifying the functional form, and adopting parameters estimated by other researchers or through original estimation. Table 2 presents the calibrated parameters and their estimation methods.
One of the crucial outputs of the Dynare software is the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) diagnostic test, which confirms that there is no issue with the model’s parameter estimations and that the estimates are reliable. Dynare performs several Metropolis-Hastings simulations, starting each time from a different initial point. If the chains behave similarly and converge toward one another, the results are considered trustworthy. Dynare provides three diagnostic indices—Interval, m2, and m3—which represent the 80% confidence interval, variance, and third moment of the parameters, respectively. These are visualized in multivariate diagnostic plots, illustrating the eigenvalue-based diagnostics of the variance-covariance matrix for each parameter. These charts provide evidence of convergence and stability across all parameter moments. The x-axis in each chart shows the number of Metropolis-Hastings iterations, and the y-axis indicates the parameter moments. A lack of similarity across plots suggests incorrect priors and may warrant re-estimation or more iterations.
As shown in Figure 8, the curves converge toward each other, indicating a good model fit.
Table 1. Calibrated Parameters




Parameter Name


Symbol


Prior Distribution


Posterior Distribution


Distribution Type






Time Preference Rate


γ


0.968


0.967


Gamma




Labor Force Growth Rate


β


0.035


0.04


Beta




Social Security Tax Rate


γ


0.32


0.35


Gamma




Intertemporal Substitution Elasticity


γ


0.92


0.95


Gamma




Intra-period Substitution Elasticity


γ


0.79


0.81


Gamma




Leisure Preference Rate (Age 1–30)


γ


0.29


0.31


Gamma




Leisure Preference Rate (Age 31–55)


γ


1


1


Gamma




Productivity Growth Rate


β


0.015


0.02


Beta




Capital Share in Production


γ


0.53


0.61


Gamma




Private Household Consumption Transfer Rate


β


0.34


0.32


Beta




Private Household Health Transfer Rate


γ


0.18


0.19


Gamma




Private Household Education Transfer Rate


β


0.24


0.23


Beta




Public Consumption Transfer Rate


γ


0.29


0.28


Gamma




Public Health Transfer Rate


γ


0.37


0.38


Gamma




Public Education Transfer Rate


γ


0.44


0.39


Gamma




Source: Research Study
The dynamic behavior of economic growth variables in response to various shocks was examined using impulse response functions. Table 3 summarizes how different generational cohorts respond to intergenerational transfers in key domains—household consumption, education, and healthcare, as well as public transfers.
Overall, results indicate that household-based transfers are more effective and positively correlated with productivity and economic growth compared to public sector transfers. Households seem to allocate resources intergenerationally in a more optimal way, particularly in the domains of health and consumption. Conversely, public sector allocations often fail to produce the same economic impact, possibly due to inefficiencies in governance, planning limitations, and resource misallocation.
Table 2. Production Response to Various Intergenerational Transfer Shocks




Shock Type


Age 0–24


Age 25–64


Age 65+


All Age Groups




Household Consumption Transfer


Positive impact throughout


Positive impact throughout


Negative impact throughout


Positive impact throughout




Household Health Transfer


Initially negative, then positive


Positive throughout


Positive throughout


Positive throughout




Household Education Transfer


Negative throughout


Positive throughout


Negative throughout


Positive throughout




Public Consumption Transfer


Negative throughout


Positive throughout


Positive throughout


Positive throughout




Public Health Transfer


Initially negative, then positive


Initially negative, then positive


Negative throughout


Positive throughout




Public Education Transfer


Negative throughout


Initially negative, then positive


Negative throughout


Positive throughout




The findings suggest that households tend to allocate intergenerational resources more efficiently, leading to higher productivity across most generations. The public sector, in contrast, appears less effective in aligning transfers with economic growth objectives. These discrepancies may be attributed to governance inefficiencies, widespread corruption, and the lack of long-term strategic planning.
Conclusion
National Transfer Accounts (NTA) reflect the quantity and structure of economic flows across age groups and generations. These intergenerational flows are crucial as they embody a fundamental feature present in all societies. The findings of this study highlight that household-based transfers—particularly in consumption, education, and healthcare—are more effective than government-based transfers in enhancing human capital productivity across generations, thereby fostering economic growth.
The results reveal that the age group of 25 to 64 years contributes most significantly to economic growth, consistent with the life-cycle theory as proposed by Ando and Modigliani and further supported by the intergenerational perspective of the NTA framework.
Based on the empirical findings, the following policy recommendations are proposed:

Enhancing Public Transfer Efficiency:Given that public transfers in consumption, education, and healthcare are generally less efficient—especially outside the 25–64 age range—it is recommended that the government allocate resources more effectively in accordance with the productivity levels of different generations. Such alignment could enhance the efficiency of public spending and improve intergenerational productivity outcomes.
Facilitating Private Transfers:Since intergenerational transfers have a positive impact on labor productivity, and household-level transfers outperform public transfers in terms of effectiveness, it is recommended that the government minimize disruptions in private transfers by mechanizing and streamlining the transfer processes between households.
Extending the Demographic Dividen: Considering the relatively limited contribution of the retired population to economic growth and their impact on both the first and second demographic dividends, policies should be designed to delay the depletion of these dividends. Potential strategies include promoting financial literacy in retirement, extending work life in low-intensity occupations, increasing human capital among the elderly, leveraging gender dividends by expanding female labor force participation, and improving consumption and healthcare patterns among retirees. Additionally, long-term strategic foresight in retirement policy is essential.
Harnessing Youth Potential:On one hand, the young, educated population represents a latent advantage for growth and development; on the other hand, labor market limitations hinder their absorption, leading to rising unemployment and reduced youth productivity. Emphasis should be placed on fostering entrepreneurship among youth through legal, educational, and financial support. Encouraging youth-driven innovation, human resource planning, and investment in digital economic sectors—where younger generations demonstrate high adaptability—can help address this challenge.
Aligning with Macro-Level Population Policies:At the macro policy level, these recommendations align with several of the Supreme Leader’s population policy guidelines, especially clauses 6, 8, and 10, which emphasize the importance of leveraging both demographic dividends. These include increasing life expectancy, promoting health and nutrition, empowering the working-age population through vocational and entrepreneurial training, and supporting rural and border populations through investment and job creation. Additionally, prioritizing knowledge-based economic development—consistent with successful global experiences—can enable Iran to fully capitalize on its second demographic dividend for achieving sustainable economic growth.

Acknowledgments
The authors of this article sincerely express their gratitude to the editorial board and the esteemed members of the journal’s editorial team. Their support, attention to detail, and constructive guidance throughout the review and publication process have played a significant role in enhancing the scientific and editorial quality of this work. Undoubtedly, the valuable efforts of this dedicated team in advancing the journal’s academic mission and supporting researchers are worthy of appreciation and recognition. 

Keywords

احمدپور، الهام، گیلک حکیم آبادی، محمد تقی، دشتبان فاروجی، مجید و قاسمی، مجتبی. (۱۴۰۲). اصلاح نظام بازنشستگی ایران با استفاده از شبیه‌سازی الگوی نسل‌های همپوشان. نشریه اقتصاد و بانکداری اسلامی، ۱۲ (۴۳)، ۲۶۹-۲۹۲.
افقه، سید مرتضی، منصوری، سید امین، ملتفت، حسین و بهاروند، پرستو. (1401). بررسی اثر تغییرات جمعیتی و سرمایه انسانی بر رشد اقتصادی در ایران. اقتصاد باثبات، 3(1)، 161-185.
بهمنی، مرضیه، راغفر، حسین و موسوی، میرحسین. (1398). اصلاح پارامتری نظام بازنشستگی ایران با کاهش نرخ جایگزینی: مدل تعادل عمومی نسل‌های همپوش و بازار ناقص نیروی کار. پژوهشنامه اقتصادی، 19(72)،. 67-104
کوششی، مجید و نیاکان ،لیلی (1400). برآورد و تحلیل نخستین سود جمعیتی در ایران. نامه انجمن جمعیت‌شناسی ایران، 16(32)، 39-7.
موسوی لقمان ،سیده اشرف، موسوی ،سیده سارا، داوودی زاده، لیلا و پیشوایی، میرسامان. (۱۴۰۲). ارائه مدل مفهومی «بهره‌وری خانواده» با تاکید بر جنبه اقتصادی: یک تحلیل مضمون رفاه اجتماعی.«فصلنامه رفاه اجتماعی » ۲۳ (۹۱) :۳۶۴-۳۲۳.
نجاتی، مهدی، شکیبایی، علیرضا، و غلامی، مصطفی. (1399). بررسی اثر ساختار سنی جمعیت بر رشد اقتصادی و بهره‌وری در ایران. مطالعات جمعیتی، 6(2)، (پیاپی 12)، 293-313.
واعظ برزانی، محمد و محمدی مطلق، محمد. (1401). تحلیل تأثیر سیاست‌های مالی توزیعی بین نسلی بر رشد سرمایه در ایران در چارچوب الگوی نسل‌های تداخلی (OLG). پژوهش‌های رشد و توسعه اقتصادی، 12(47)، 133-148.
Adrangi, Bahram, and Juan Nicolás D’Amico. (2023). Equity Returns and the Output Shocks in a Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium Framework. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 16: 257. https://doi.org/10.3390/ jrfm16050257
Adrangi, B., et al. (2023). Comparing DSGE and time-series models in macroeconomic forecasting. Economic Analysis and Policy, 77, 145–160.
Afshari, Z. (2013). Family Economics. Al-Zahra University and Center for Women and Family Affairs.
Afaq, S. M., Mansouri, S. A., Moltafet, H., & Bahramvand, P. (2022). Examining the Effect of Demographic Changes and Human Capital on Economic Growth in Iran. Stable Economy, 3(1), 161–185. [In Persian]
Ahmad, Shahzad, and Adnan Haider. (2019). An evaluation of the forecast performance of DSGE and VAR Models: The case of a developing country. Business Review, 14, 28–52.
Ahmadpour, E., Gilak Hakimabadi, M. T., Dashtban Faroji, M., & Ghasemi, M. (2023). Pension System Reform: Overlapping Generations Model Simulations for Iran. Islamic Economics and Banking, 12(43), 269–292. [In Persian]
Ahmed, S., & Haider, A. (2019). Forecasting inflation using DSGE models: The case of Pakistan. SBP Research Bulletin, 15(1), 1–26.
Alpanda, Sami, Kevin, Kotzé, and Geoffrey, Woglom. (2011). Forecasting performance of an estimated DSGE model for the South African economy. South African Journal of Economics, 79, 50–67.
Alpanda, S., et al. (2010). Forecasting with small-scale DSGE models. The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, 10(1).
Bahmani, M., Raghfar, H., & Mousavi, M. H. (2019). Parametric Reform of Iran's Pension System by Reducing the Replacement Rate: An Overlapping Generations General Equilibrium Model with Imperfect Labor Market. Economic Research Journal, 19(72), 67–104. [In Persian]
Balcilar, M., et al. (2015). Forecasting inflation with a hybrid DSGE model: Evidence from South Africa. Economic Modelling, 45, 302–315.
Balcilar, Mehmet, Rangan, Gupta, and Kevin, Kotzé. (2015). Forecasting macroeconomic data for an emerging market with a nonlinear DSGE model. Economic Modelling ,44, 215–28.
Beblo, M. (2001). Bargaining over time allocation: Economic modeling and econometric investigation of time use within families. Springer Science & Business Media.
Beblo, Miriam. Intrafamily Time Allocation: The Bargaining Approach and Empirical Evidence from Germany. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag, 2001.
Becker, G. S. (1990). Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education (3rd ed.). University of Chicago Press.​
Bernhard, Hammer. Sonja, Spitzer. Lili, Vargha. Tanja, Istenic. (2019). The Gender Dimension of Intergenerational Transfers in Europe. VID Working Papers 1907، Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna.
Bernhard, Hammer & Alexia, Prskawetz. (2022). Measuring private transfers between generations and gender: an application of national transfer accounts for Austria 2015. Empirica, Springer; Austrian Institute for Economic Research; Austrian Economic Association، vol. 49(3) ، pages 573-599، August.
Bernhard Hammer, Sonja Spitzer, Lili Vargha, Tanja Istenic. (2019). The Gender Dimension of Intergenerational Transfers in Europe. VID Working Papers 1907, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID), Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna​
Bhattarai, Keshab, and Dawid Trzeciakiewicz. (2017). Macroeconomic impacts of fiscal policy shocks in the UK: A DSGE analysis. Economic Modelling, 61, 321–38.
Bhattarai, S., & Trzeciakiewicz, D. (2017). Macroeconomic effects of quantitative easing in the euro area: A structural VAR approach. Journal of International Money and Finance, 85, 93–111.
Bloom, D. E., Canning, D., & Sevilla, J. (2003). The demographic dividend: A new perspective on the economic consequences of population change. RAND Corporation.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1274.html
Bloom, D. E., & Williamson, J. G. (1998). Demographic transitions and economic miracles in emerging Asia. The World Bank Economic Review, 12(3), 419–455.
 https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/12.3.419
Braun, R. A., Körber, L., & Waki, Y. (2010). Some unpleasant properties of log-linearized solutions when the nominal rate is zero. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Working Paper, 2010-01.
Burriel, Pablo. Jesús, Fernández-Villaver. and Juan, F. Rubio-Ramírez. (2010). MEDEA: A DSGE model for the Spanish economy. SERIEs, 1, 175–243.
Cai, Y., et al. (2019). Forecasting inflation in China with DSGE models. China Economic Review, 55, 1–15.
Cai, Michael, Marco Del Negro, Marc P. Giannoni, Abhi Gupta, Pearl Li, and Erica Moszkowski. (2019). DSGE forecasts of the lost recovery. International Journal of Forecasting, 35, 1770–89.
Clarida, Richard, Jordi Gali, and Mark Gertler. (2002). A simple framework for international monetary policy analysis. Journal of Monetary Economics, 49, 879–904.
Clarida, R., Galí, J., & Gertler, M. (2002). A simple framework for international monetary policy analysis. Journal of Monetary Economics, 49(5), 879–904.
Costa, C. (2016). Bayesian estimation of a DSGE model for the Brazilian economy. Economic Modelling, 55, 164–181.
Costa, Celso. (2016). Understanding Dsge Models: Theory and Applications. Wilmington: Vernon Press.
Crespo Cuaresma, J., Lutz, W., & Sanderson, W. (2014). Is the demographic dividend an education dividend? Demography, 51(1), 299–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-013-0245-x
Del Negro, M., & Schorfheide, F. (2013). DSGE model-based forecasting. In G. Elliott & A. Timmermann (Eds.). Handbook of Economic Forecasting (Vol. 2, pp. 57–140). Elsevier.
Del Negro, Marco, and Frank Schorfheide. (2013). DSGE model-based forecasting. Handbook of Economic Forecasting, 2, 57–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Dornbusch, R., Fischer, S., & Startz, R. (2001). Macroeconomics (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.​
Edge, Rochelle M., Michael T. Kiley, and Jean-Philippe Laforte. (2009b). A Comparison of Forecast Performance Between Federal Reserve Staff Forecasts, Simple Reduced-Form Models, and a DSGE Model. Available online: https://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2009/200910/200910pap.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2023).
Edge, R. M., & Gürkaynak, R. S. (2011). How useful are estimated DSGE model forecasts for central bankers?. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2011(2), 209–259.
Edge, Rochelle M., and Refet S. Gürkaynak. (2011). How Useful are Estimated DSGE Model Forecasts? Available online: https://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2011/201111/201111pap.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2023).
Edge, R. M., Kiley, M. T., & Laforte, J.-P. (2009). A comparison of forecast performance between federal reserve staff forecasts, simple reduced-form models, and a DSGE model. Finance and Economics Discussion Series, 2009-10.
Fernandez de Cordoba, G., & Torres, J. L. (2011). The role of the exchange rate regime in the real effects of monetary policy. Open Economies Review, 22(2), 331–345.
Fernández-de-Córdoba, Gonzalo, and Jose L. Torres. 2011. Forecasting the Spanish economy with an augmented VAR–DSGE model. SERIEs, 2, 379–99.
Gemma Abio، Concepció Patxot and Guadalupe Souto. (2023). Using National Transfer Accounts to Face Aging. Population and Development in the 21st Century.
DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1002930
Gorodnichenko, Yuriy, and Serena Ng. (2010). Estimation of DSGE models when the data are persistent. Journal of Monetary Economics ,57, 325–40.
Gorodnichenko, Y., & Ng, S. (2010). Estimation of DSGE models when the data are persistent. Journal of Monetary Economics, 57(3), 268–283.
Kim, J., Gutter, M. S., & Spangler, T. (2017). Review of family financial decision making: Suggestions for future research and implications for financial education. Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, 28(2), 253-267.
Kim, Jinhae, Michael S. Gutter, and Taylor Spangler. "Review of Family Financial Decision Making: Suggestions for Future Research and Implications for Financial Education.Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning (28), no. 2 (2017), 253–267. https://doi.org/10.1891/1052-3073.28.2.253
Kolasa, M., & Rubaszek, M. (2015). Forecasting with DSGE models: The role of nonlinearity and structural breaks. Journal of Forecasting, 34(4), 283–303.
Kolasa, Marcin, and Michał Rubaszek. 2015. Forecasting using DSGE models with financial frictions. International Journal of Forecasting, 31, 1–19.
Koosheshi M.، (2021)، the Impact of Demographic Changes on Economic Growth and Productivity Research report for Ministery of Cooperatives، Labour، and Social Welfare، sponsored by UNFPA Iran.
Korinek, Anton. (2018). Thoughts on DSGE Macroeconomics: Matching the Moment, But Missing the Point? In Toward a Just Society. New York Columbia University Press, pp. 159–73.
Kousheshi, M., & Niakan, L. (2021). Estimation and Analysis of the First Demographic Dividend in Iran. Journal of the Iranian Population Association, 16(32), 7–39. [In Persian]
Kumhof, M. (2018). DSGE models and the current account. In: DSGE Models in Emerging Markets. RePEc.
Kydland, F. E., & Prescott, E. C. (1982). Time to build and aggregate fluctuations. Econometrica, 50(6), 1345–1370.
Kydland, Finn E., and Edward C. Prescott. (1982). Time to build and aggregate fluctuations. Econometrica 50, 1345–70.
Landsberger, M. (1970). Restitution Receipts, Households Savings and Consumption Behavior in Israel: A Case Study of the Effect of Personal Restitution Receipts from West Germany on Savings and Consumption Behavior of Israeli Households. Bank of Israel, Research Department.​
Lee, J., & Zhang, J. (2018). Does low birth rate affect China's total factor productivity? Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 34(1), 1-17. ​
Lee, R., & Mason, A. (2006). What is the demographic dividend? Finance and Development, 43(3).
Lee, R. (2000). Intergenerational transfers and the economic life cycle: A cross-cultural perspective. In A. Mason & G. Tapinos (Eds.), Sharing the wealth: Demographic change and economic transfers between generations (pp. 17–56). Oxford University Press.
Li, H., Liu, X., & Yao, Y. (2022). Demographic transition, industrial policies, and economic growth in China. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas Working Paper Series, No. 2210. Retrieved from
Lindé, Jesper. (2018). DSGE models: Still useful in policy analysis? Oxford Review of Economic Policy 34: 269–86.
Lindé, J. (2018). DSGE models: Still useful in policy analysis? Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 34(1-2), 269–286.
Lucas, Robert Jr., (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 3-42, July.
Martínez-Martín, Jaime, Richard Morris, Luca Onorante, and Fabio M. Piersanti. (2019). Merging Structural and Reduced-Form Models for Forecasting: Opening the DSGE-VAR Box. Available online: https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpwps/ecb.wp2335~4b1503404b.en.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2023).
Martínez-Martín, J., et al. (2019). The predictive performance of the ECB's New Area-Wide Model. International Journal of Forecasting, 35(3), 1178–1194.
Mason, A. (2005). Demographic transition and demographic dividends in developed and developing countries. United Nations Expert Group Meeting on Social and Economic Implications of Changing Population Age Structures, Mexico City.
Mason, A. (2001). Population changes and economic development in East Asia: Challenges met; opportunities seized. Stanford University Press.
Miguel Sánchez-Romero, (2022). Assessing the generational impact of COVID-19 using National Transfer Accounts (NTAs), Vienna Yearbook of Population Research. Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in.
Mousavi Laghman, S. A., Mousavi, S. S., Davoudi Zadeh, L., & Pishvaei, M. S. (2023). Presenting a Conceptual Model of 'Family Productivity' with Emphasis on the Economic Aspect: A Thematic Analysis of Social Welfare. Social Welfare, 23(91), 323–364. [In Persian]
Nejati, M., Shakibaei, A., & Gholami, M. (2020). Examining the Effect of Population Age Structure on Economic Growth and Productivity in Iran. Population Studies, 6(2), 293–313. [In Persian]
Peighami, A., & Toghyani, M. (2015). Economic education and training, a proposed model for the Islamic Republic of Iran (Vol. 2). Imam Sadiq University publications.
Potino, L., & Vermandel, G. (2015). Optimal monetary policy with heterogeneous expectations. Revue Économique, 66(3), 479–496.
Poutineau, Jean-Christophe, and Gauthier Vermandel. 2015. Cross-border banking flows spillovers in the Eurozone: Evidence from an estimated DSGE model. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 51, 378–403.
Qahroodi, Z. R. (2013). Investigating the pattern of investment and the factors affecting the investment of households during the years 1999-2011. Journal of Official Statistics of Iran, 23(22), 179-198.
entería, E., Souto, G., Mejía-Guevara, I., & Patxot, C. (2016). The effect of education on the demographic dividend. Population and
Rettig, K. D. (1987). Household production: Beyond the economic perspective. Journal of Consumer Studies & Home Economics, 11(2), 141-156.
Saavedra, J. E., & Garcia, S. (2022). Conditional Cash Transfers for Education: A Survey of Impact and Policy Design. SSRN Electronic Journal.
Schorfheide, F., et al. (2010). DSGE model-based forecasting of non-modelled variables. International Journal of Forecasting, 26(2), 409–435.
Schorfheide, Frank, Keith Sill, and Maxym Kryshko. (2010). DSGE model-based forecasting of non-modelled variables. International Journal of Forecasting, 26, 348–73.
Seddigh, R. (2018). Economic management styles of Mashhad families. journals of economic sociology and development, 8(2), 311-331.
Seddigh, R.  (2010). Sociological investigation of the reasons for saving and its methods among the people of Mashhad by the method of grounded theory. Social Studies of Iran, 4(4).
Shahraki, M., Behbodi, D., & Qadri, S. (2010). Investigating the effect of household savings on investment and consumption in Iran (calculable general equilibrium model). Quantitative Economics, 7(3), 67-94.
Sharma, Saurabh, and Harendra Behera. (2022). A dissection of Indian growth using a DSGE filter. Journal of Asian Economics, 80,101480.
Siegrist, J., Von dem Knesebeck, O., & Pollack, C. E. 2004. Social productivity and well-being of older people: A sociological exploration. Social Theory & Health, 2, 1-17.
Smets, Frank, and Raf Wouters. (2003). An estimated dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model of the euro area. Journal of the European Economic Association ,1,1123–75.
Smets, F., & Wouters, R. (2004). Forecasting with a Bayesian DSGE model: An application to the euro area. Journal of Common Market Studies, 42(4), 841–867.
Solow, R. M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 70(1), 65–94.
 https://doi.org/10.2307/1884513
Swan, T. W. (1956). Economic growth and capital accumulation. The Economic Record, 32(2), 334–361.
 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4932.1956.tb00434.x
Waters, G. A. (2015). Predictive accuracy of DSGE and VAR models. Applied Economics Letters, 22(6), 458–463.
Wickens, M. (2014). Macroeconomic theory: A dynamic general equilibrium approach (2nd ed.). Princeton University Press.
Wickens, Michael. (2014). How useful are DSGE macroeconomic models for forecasting? Open Economies Review, 25, 171–93.
Woodford, M. (2003). Interest and prices: Foundations of a theory of monetary policy. Princeton University Press.
Woodford, Michael. (2003). Woodford, Michael. Optimal interest-rate smoothing. The Review of Economic Studies, 70, 861–86.
Wouters, Maik H. 2015. Evaluating point and density forecasts of DSGE models. Journal of Applied Econometrics 30: 74–96.
Vaezi Barzani, M., & Mohammadi Motlagh, M. (2022). Analyzing the Impact of Intergenerational Fiscal Policies on Capital Growth in Iran within the Framework of the Overlapping Generations Model (OLG). Economic Growth and Development Research, 12(47), 133–148. [In Persian]