Private Sector Development
Call it “secular stagnation,” or the disappointing “New Mediocre,” or the baffling “New Normal” – or even the back-from-the-brink “contained depression.” Whatever label you put on today’s chronic economic doldrums, it’s clear that a slow-growth stall is afflicting many nation’s economies – and, seven years into a lackluster recovery from the global financial crisis, some fragile economies seem to be lapsing into another slump.
As policymakers struggle to find a plausible prescription for jump-starting growth, a tug-of-war is under way between techno-utopians and techno-dystopians. It’s a struggle between optimists who foresee a world of abundance thanks to innovations like robot-driven industries, and pessimists who anticipate a cash-deprived world where displaced ex-workers have few or no means of earning an income.
To add a bracing dose of academic rigor to the tech-focused tug-of-war, along comes a data-focused realist who adds a welcome if sobering historical perspective to the debate. Robert J. Gordon, a macroeconomist and economic historian at Northwestern University, takes a longue durée perspective of technology’s impact on growth, wealth and incomes.
Gordon’s blunt-spoken viewpoint has caused a sensation since his newest book, “The Rise and Fall of American Growth,” was launched at this winter’s meetings of the American Economic Association. His analysis injects a new urgency into policymakers’ debates about how (or even whether) today’s growth rate can be strengthened.
When Gordon speaks at the World Bank on Thursday, March 31 – at 11 a.m. in J B1-080, as part of the Macrofiscal Seminar Series – economy-watchers can look forward to hearing some ideas that challenge the orthodoxies of recent macroeconomic thinking. His topic – “Secular Stagnation on the Supply Side: Slow Growth in U. S. Productivity and Potential Output” – seems likely to spark some new thinking among techno-utopians and techo-dystopians alike.
To watch Gordon’s speech live via Webex – at 11 a.m. on Thursday, March 31 – click here. To dial in to listen to the audio, dial (in the United States and Canada) 1-650-479-3207, using the passcode 735 669 472. For those telephoning from outside the United States and Canada, the appropriate numbers can be found on this page.
- Income Inequality
- Global Inequality
- global unemployment
- Macroeconomics and Fiscal Management
- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth
- macroeconomic policy
- Macroeconomic Management
- Macroeconomists for the Poor
- Labor and Social Protection
- Public Sector and Governance
- Private Sector Development
- Global Economy
- Financial Sector
Two questions worth debating are whether we might soon see a renaissance in public private partnerships (PPPs) in urban water supply and services, and whether PPPs are a good way for water companies in developing countries to reduce their staggering level of water losses.
These pressing issues demand our attention because an inordinately high level of water losses – up to 50 percent of water entering the distribution system – burdens water companies and customers in developing countries. More precisely, the culprit is “non-revenue water” (NRW): both physical losses (leakage and bursts) and commercial losses (poor customer databases, meter inaccuracies, and illegal connections).
The consensus is that there is no lack of technical solutions to the NRW problem. In the concluding sessions of a recent conference on water losses in Bangalore, India (February 1–3), organized by the International Water Association (IWA), experts spoke of the need for a “change in mind-set” if the problem of NRW is to be given sufficient attention by politicians and utility managers. True enough, but how exactly do you do that?
In Turkey, as in other countries, refugees are often seen as an unmitigated burden, taking jobs from locals, straining public resources, and stoking fears of rising crime and terrorism. Clearly there are significant costs and risks shouldered by host countries, but there is another side to the story—the contributions made by refugees as they bring new businesses, markets, and skills to their host communities. To the extent that countries focus on an enabling business environment and a modicum of protection for refugees working illegally, the positive side of the ledger can only grow.
Technological content of India’s exports
The evolution of Indian exports has not followed a “textbook” pattern. The pattern of evolution points to a dichotomy in the Indian economy – a well integrated, technologically advanced services sector and a relatively lagging manufacturing sector. The share of service exports in total exports has grown to over 32 percent in 2013 from 28 percent in 2000. On the other hand, the share of manufacturing exports in total export has declined to 67 percent from nearly 80 percent during 1990-2013.
The growth in service exports has been more rapid, resulting in the share of services exports in total exports to increase rapidly over the last decade. This can be explained by technological changes. Many services do not require face-to-face interaction, and can be stored and traded digitally. These services are called modern services. Modern services are the fastest growing sector of the global economy. This is particularly evident in India, where modern services exports account for nearly 70 percent of the total commercial services exports (compared to around 35 percent in EMs) (see Figure 1).
Innovation is the Holy Grail of governance practitioners worldwide – but, when it comes to public-sector management, is there truly a “science of delivery”? Politics is “the art of the possible,” and governing often seems to be more a skilled craft than a predictable science – requiring an ad hoc alchemy of persuasion, pressure, guile and gumption.
Yet beyond its operational finesse or its scientific rigor, strong governance also requires something more practical – and perhaps more painstaking: diligent management. Improving government agencies’ performance is a key priority for policymakers, and private-sector-style thinking – especially about delivering cost-effective results, on time and on budget – can make a constructive contribution to public-sector management.
Public-sector leaders must always design finely tailored solutions that suit ever-shifting political moods, but they can also adapt the most deft techniques – many of them tested in the private sector – that emphasize achieving tangible results. With a blend of the private sector's can-do drive and the public sector's focus on accountability, an imaginative crosscurrent of ideas enlivened a recent “deep dive” conference at the World Bank that explored a relatively new management mechanism: the results-focused executive “delivery unit.”
The World Bank Group’s Governance Global Practice (GGP) teamed up with a global nonprofit foundation, the Centre for Public Impact (CPI), to convene an expert group exploring this recent innovation in public-sector management. The gathering – “The Future of Delivery Units: Accomplishments, Challenges and New Directions for Reforms at the Center of Government” – was co-sponsored by the President’s Delivery Unit within the Bank Group.
The forum heard various perspectives from governance practitioners, political theorists and academic scholars, along with both practicing and former civil servants. Much of the conference-goers’ thinking also seemed to have been influenced by private-sector logic. The conference’s pragmatism was reassuring amid this year’s primal-scream spectacle, in all too many countries, of political dysfunction. For many good-government idealists, it’s been alarming to see the tumult in many once-stable, now-volatile developed economies where an advanced capacity for governing had seemed well-established.
Bob Beschel, the Global Lead of the Center of Government Global Solutions Group – part of the World Bank's Governance Global Practice – convenes the conference's opening session. Photo by Lana Wong.
The use of delivery units should be evaluated “in the context of management innovation,” as the conference chairmen – Bob Beschel, the Global Lead of the GGP’s Center of Government Global Solutions Group, and Adrian Brown, the Executive Director of CPI – told the participants. Indeed, such consulting firms as the Boston Consulting Group (which funds CPI) and McKinsey & Company have long aimed to bring private-sector-minded efficiencies to public-sector institutions. Having labored in those vineyards awhile, some years ago, I came to see how creatively cross-pollinating ideas can transfer knowledge about best practices among the public, private, social and academic sectors.
Grenada – Photo by Steve Utterwulghe
Many Caribbean States have long been trapped in a vicious cycle of low growth, high debt and limited fiscal space. The impact of the 2008 financial crisis, as well as recurrent natural disasters, has made the situation even more acute in the region.
To address the structural and policy obstacles to development and growth, a multi-stakeholder dialogue platform on growth in the Caribbean was launched in 2012 by policymakers, the private sector and civil society from 12 states in the region. The Caribbean Growth Forum (CGF) was championed by the states’ prime ministers, and focal points were appointed in the respective Ministries of Finance. The World Bank, acting as the CGF Secretariat, has been behind this initiative from the onset, in collaboration with other regional development banks and various development partners active in the region.
Using a conceptual framework of reform identification, tracking and reporting, CFG’s stakeholders have made 495 reform recommendations so far – 40 percent of them actionable in the three pre-identified thematic areas: investment climate, connectivity and logistics, and productivity and skills. The World Bank in 2015 undertook a stocktaking exercise, which identified the CGF’s positive impacts and the areas of improvement.
The benefits of the CGF are unanimously recognized: the generation and dissemination of knowledge to support the reform implementation in the three thematic areas; support for the prioritization of government reforms; the strengthening of stakeholders’ accountability; the creation of social capital by giving a voice to a range of stakeholders; peer-to-peer exchanges and pressure; and the fostering of a culture of dialogue in the policy reform agenda.
Along with Cecile Fruman, Director of the Trade and Competitiveness Global Practice of the World Bank Group, I was honored to participate and speak at the launch of the Second Phase of the CGF in Belize on March 1 and 2. The objective of the event was twofold: to share and discuss the lessons learned so far, and to have the finance ministers of 12 Caribbean countries endorse a Joint Communiqué.
That communiqué, according to Sophie Sirtaine, the World Bank’s Country Director for the Caribbean, “signals the renewed commitments of these Caribbean nations to accelerate growth enhancing reform implementation, while strengthening public accountability through strengthened public-private dialogue (PPD) mechanisms.”
Achieving gender equality and the economic empowerment of women is both a moral and social imperative — and it's also good business.
A study conducted by the McKinsey Global Institute estimates that, if all countries matched the level of progress toward gender equality of the most advanced country in their region, annual global GDP could increase by up to $12 trillion in 2025.
Over the past two decades, significant progress has been made toward raising living standards and closing the gap between men and women, particularly in health and education. Life expectancy at birth has risen in tandem with reductions in maternal mortality, while differences in access to primary education between boys and girls are diminishing steadily.
These gains — although significant — conceal differences between countries and regions, and are insufficient to ensure equal access to economic opportunities for boys and girls.