This is the second in a series of blogs where we take a look at the issues and the countries that will be at the forefront of the development agenda, not now, not next year, but over the next 2 to 5 years—as we discuss it in more detail in the recently released book The Day After Tomorrow: A Handbook on
Seventy percent of all trade is trade in goods. World trade volume declined by over 20% from peak levels trough April 2008 to January 2009, and this decline was observed across the board – advanced economies recorded a decline of over 23%, Asia about 25%, and so on. Several explanations were provided. One was that countries were raising tariffs and nontariff measures to protect domestic industries during the global downturn.
After all is said and done, this crisis had its genesis in US and European countries living beyond their means. This was reflected in large current account deficit which was financed by emerging economies of China, Russia, Brazil, Korea and others.
We took advantage of the recent ABCDE conference in Stockholm during May 31-June 2, 2010 to hold side discussions with 15 high-profile academics and researchers. We were expecting that they would tell us that economic development thinking should be revisited in the light of the crisis, but surprisingly, the responses were that likely no.
The current recovery in advanced economies is now exhibiting several signs of fragility. Their medium term growth prospects also look difficult. In this environment two questions arise: Will developing economies experience a renewed downward “recoupling” as a result of a low-growth scenario in advanced economies?
by Rebekka E. Grun
Why save the banks, and not their clients?
In order to fight the financial crisis, Greece will take new austerity measures ranging from cutting civil salaries to increasing consumer taxes. A summary of some of these key fiscal measures can be found here.
Yes, according to Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan in his speech to Washington on Tuesday. He added in the Bloomberg News article that the global recovery from the recent crisis will be "extremely unbalanced".
This global crisis in not only about financial market failures but also government failures in several countries as reflected in failure to contain the housing bubbles and credit booms, bad regulations, and lack of supervision and enforcement). Both in advanced and developing countries, there are second thoughts on open markets, private ownership of nationally ‘strategic’ industries (autos, banks), and movement of transnational financial and industrial firms, and migrant labor. Trade and financial protection is on the increase as countries that have been less reliant on exports and foreign capital are weathering the storm better. In this semi-open global environment, would export-led growth strategy be combined with industrial policies to protect domestic industries, and/or emphasize resource-dependent growth, where possible?
Before we respond to these questions, it will be useful to focus on what went wrong in economics in 2007-08. Some economists are re-inventing economics to respond to such a query.
The collapse of the dot.com bubble in early-2001 and the 9/11 attacks was followed by an easing of monetary policy in the US and Euro Area as a response to avert an economic slow-down. Around the same time, coming out of the Asian crisis, emerging BRICs and Gulf countries started building up huge foreign exchange reserves, primarily denominated in US dollars and safest financial securities, such as US Treasury bills.