* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download PowerPoint プレゼンテーション
Balance of trade wikipedia , lookup
Economic growth wikipedia , lookup
Exchange rate wikipedia , lookup
Currency war wikipedia , lookup
Balance of payments wikipedia , lookup
Currency War of 2009–11 wikipedia , lookup
Transformation in economics wikipedia , lookup
Fear of floating wikipedia , lookup
Rostow's stages of growth wikipedia , lookup
Economic Development of Japan TRADE YEN OIL No.11 Economic Maturity & Slowdown TOPICS – 1970s & 80s • • • • • End of catching up, economic maturity Global stagflation in the 1970s Growth vs. inequality (and other social evils) Interpretation of the Japan system Current account surplus & international politics – trade friction, exchange rate pressure, systemic demands • The 1955 Regime (LDP dominance) Growth Slowdown in the 1970s-80s • Japan’s economic maturity—income reached the world’s highest level • Oil shock and global stagflation • General floating of major currencies Catching Up: Real Per Capita GNP (1995 dollars, conversion at actual exchange rate) 50000 100 40000 Per Capita Income at PPP (US=100, price-level adjusted) 80 30000 US 60 20000 Japan 10000 0 US W.Ger. France Japan UK Italy 40 20 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1994 10582 12060 13046 15454 17310 18754 21392 23858 26744 28157 US Japan 776 1336 2127 3984 6962 11676 16486 15658 28912 40421 0 1955 1965 1975 1980 Speed of Catching Up: East Asia Per capita real income relative to US (Measured by the 1990 international Geary-Khamis dollars) 100% Japan 90% Singapore 80% Hong Kong 70% Taiwan 60% S. Korea 50% Malaysia 40% Thailand Indonesia 30% Philippines 20% Vietnam 10% China 2010 2005 2000 1995 1990 1985 1980 1975 1970 1965 1960 1955 1950 0% Sources: Angus Maddison, The World Economy: Historical Statistics, OECD Development Centre, 2003; the Central Bank of the Republic of China; and IMF, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2010 (for updating). Real GDP Growth (Fiscal Year – April to March) Average 1956-73 9.1% Average 1974-90 4.2% Average 1991-2010 0.9% Source: The System of National Accounts site, Cabinet Office. PP.188-90 The Cause of 1970s Stagflation P Supply shock view AS • OPEC’s oil price hike was the main cause. Aggressive wage hikes also contributed. • Expansionary fiscal & monetary policy accommodated and softened the blow. AD Global monetarist view Y 1974 1972 1970 1968 1966 1964 World Money Growth 1962 Source: McKinnon (1979), p.264 1960 • As US lost monetary discipline, the fixed rate regime collapsed in 1971-73 and USD fell. 14 % 12 • Major central banks expanded money to 10 counter appreciation pressure, causing global 8 liquidity glut in the early 1970s. 6 4 • Oil shock was the result, not the cause, of 2 global inflation. 0 Bretton Woods World Dollar Standard • USA as the center country providing price stability to the world (“benign neglect”: US to mind domestic affairs only); all other countries set “parities” against US$ (“adjustable peg”). Gold=US$=other currencies • 1950s-early 60s: American prices were stable; BW system achieved high growth & price stability globally. • Mid 60s-early 70s: US began to inflate & US$ was under downward pressure (war in Vietnam, social welfare, space race with USSR). • Gold=US$ link broken (1968); US$=other currencies link broken (1971-73: Nixon Shock). Floating exchange rates began. P.187 Growth Inflation (12-month change) MonetaryMonetary Growth andand Inflation (12-month change) 40% M2+CD WPI CPI 30% 20% 10% 0% -10% 1965Q1 1966Q1 1967Q1 1968Q1 1969Q1 1970Q1 1971Q1 1972Q1 1973Q1 1974Q1 1975Q1 1976Q1 1977Q1 1978Q1 1979Q1 1980Q1 1981Q1 1982Q1 1983Q1 1984Q1 1985Q1 1986Q1 1987Q1 1988Q1 1989Q1 1990Q1 1991Q1 1992Q1 1993Q1 1994Q1 1995Q1 1996Q1 1997Q1 1998Q1 1999Q1 -20% Bubble Bretton Woods fixed dollar system ends 1st oil shock General float begins 2nd oil shock Bubble collapses Plaza Agreement High Growth & Inequality Japan, Korea and Taiwan narrowed internal income gaps (personal, sectoral, regional); but in China, Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, etc. income became polarized during high growth. To sustain growth and achieve high income, three policies are needed. In principle, they can be executed separately—cf. “pro-poor growth,” “inclusive growth” (1) Industrial policy—creation of growth sources (2) Social policy—coping with new problems caused by high growth: income gaps, pollution, migration, traffic, congestion, crime & corruption, cultural change… (3) Macroeconomic management under globalization— coping with global business cycles, price shocks, huge and unstable capital flows Separability of Growth & Social Policies in E.Asia’s Successful Latecomers Economic growth START Developmental policies Generation of growth sources New social problems Macro instability under integration Political stability END A few decades later Exit to a richer & more democratic society (examples: Korea, Taiwan) Supplementing policies - Social policies - New macro management Precision machinery Transport machinery Electrical machinery General machinery Metal products Iron and steel Ceramics etc. Oil and gas Chemicals US (1972) (1997) chap.2 McKinnon-Ohno 60 Nonferrous metals Japan (1969) Paper and pulp 80 Wood products 100 1954-73 1974-90 Textiles (estimated by labor-material Cobb-Douglas prod. func.) 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 -4 Food Productivity Slowdown Productivity Change by Industry (%/year) W. Germany (1973) 40 France (1970) UK (1973) 20 Italy (1969) Income Distribution (Lorenz Curve) OECD Economic Outlook, July 1976 Top 20% Next 20% Next 20% Next 20% Lowest 20% 0 --Postwar land reform --Agricultural subsidies (1955 Regime) --Labor migration to cities Sharing of Fruits of Growth between Rich & Poor, Urban & Rural, Industry & Agriculture • Japan around 1960s—direct (income) tax for redistribution, rural-urban labor migration, SME support, fiscal policy in favor of rural areas (public investment, agro subsidy & protection, regional development plans, etc.); household Gini coef.: 0.31 (1963), 0.25 (1970) • Korea around 1970s—Saemaul (New Village) Movement for invigorating and improving rural life and production; regional income gaps were small and even narrowed; regional Gini coef: 0.16 (1971), 0.08 (1981), 0.06 (1991) • Taiwan 1960s-80s—Strong export-led growth driven by vigorous SMEs • Indonesia—Gini coefficient 0.32 in 1990, 0.33 in 2002, 0.41 in 2012. The Japan System: Delayed Reform? PP.190-91 • After catch-up industrialization, Japan should have changed its system in the 1970s Long-term relations Official intervention Open markets Private initiative • However, large macro shocks (oil shocks, floating, stagflation, trade disputes) diverted policy makers’ attention from structural issues. • As a result, the Japanese economy continues to be over-regulated even today. Opposing view: • Don’t copy US financial capitalism—trust, stability, equity, patience, teamwork should be maintained. The 1940 Regime: Farewell to the War Economy by Yukio Noguchi (1995) • I would like to advance the hypothesis that the key components of the Japanese economy today were created during the war. • The 1940 Regime--(i) production-first; (ii) suppression of competition, (iii) social policies to reduce friction • These alien systems were implanted to execute total war (enterprise system, finance, bureaucracy, land reform) and they continued as systemic core even after the war. • They worked well for high growth, but not for coping with change. Deregulation and consumer-oriented society cannot be realized unless this regime is removed. Kaikaku Gyakuso (Reform in Reverse) by Hiroko Ota, GRIPS (2010) • Prof. Ota was the Minister of Economy and Fiscal Policy during 2006-2008 (serving PM Abe and PM Fukuda), promoting economic deregulation and fiscal discipline. • The Democratic Party government (2009-2012) has reversed the economic reform and reintroduced past policies that do not work any more: – Fiscal activism & random subsidies leading to fiscal crisis – Economic deregulation was slowed down or reversed. Mercantilist Pressure on Surplus Countries Komiya (1994), McKinnon-Ohno (1997), McKinnon (2005) When a country emerges as a new industrial power, it is often criticized for unfair trade practice and an undervalued currency. Trade and exchange pressures mount. But the trade gap cannot be eliminated by currency appreciation or trade liberalization. Ronald McKinnon PP.191-94 Elasticities Approach vs. Absorption Approach in Financially Open Economies Conventional view (elasticities approach) • Exchange rate adjustment can reduce Japan’s trade surplus and US trade deficit. Fred Bergsten, W. Cline (IIE, Washington) Krugman—the Mass. Ave. Model: Imports = f (yt, rert-2) Friedman, Krugman— “daylight saving time” argument for currency float Our unconventional view (syndrome of the ever-higher yen) • Thanks to wrong economics and Washington lobbying, the yendollar rate was manipulated for mercantile purposes. • But yen appreciation could not reduce Japan’s surplus and US deficit, because it was structural (US savings < US investment). The real solution was increasing US savings. Current account = Y – A = S – I • Intermittent yen appreciation only destabilized the Japanese economy through recession, deflation and depressed interest rates. 1971-73, 1977-78, 1985-87, 1993-95 Japan’s surplus with US American responses Pressure to appreciate yen Bilateral trade negotiations Reinforcement through failure Persistent trade gap Exchange Rate Impacts Are Complex... Subject to M-L condition & J-curve Relative price effect Yen appreciation E Engineered (+/?) Competitiveness Price channel (-) Passthrough offset Inflation Reverse absorption effect Absorption Monetary expansion LM curve shifts (-) Trade balance Quantity channel “Endaka fukyo” or high-yen induced recession --Countries with large foreign exchange inflows often buy up USD to resist currency appreciation --However, having too much foreign reserves may cause: --Excess liquidity and bubbles --Unbalanced asset position --Exchange risk Reserves TradeInternational surplus against US ($billion) “Original sin” (inability to borrow in home currency) • Developing countries that borrow in USD face exchange risks in trade and debt payments. This may lead to higher risk premium, higher interest rates, balance-sheet mismatches, and the possibility of currency crisis. “Conflicted virtue” (inability to lend in home currency) • Any high-saving country that lends in USD faces (i) exchange risk on accumulated foreign assets, both private and public; and (ii) accusation of unfair trade and pressure to appreciate the currency by deficit countries (esp. US) • If the leading economy (US) is the largest lender, this problem does not arise. In fact, it is now the largest borrower. Estimates of Japan’s Net Liquid International Asset Holdings (% of GDP) 40% 30% USD 1.17 trillion Private Official 20% 10% 0% 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 -10% Source: R. McKinnon, “Japan’s Deflationary Hangover: The Syndrome of the Ever-Weaker Yen,” April 2007. P.178 The 1955 Regime (LDP political dominance) • The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) formed in 1955, held power until now (except 1993-96, 2009-12) • Securing rural votes by subsidizing agriculture and building rural infrastructure (firmly established by PM Kakuei Tanaka 1972-74). • LDP had many factions and zoku-giin groups (politicians promoting subsidies in particular sectors) • Opposition parties were too weak to challenge LDP’s rule. LDP • Reform movement inside LDP Koizumi reform—how successful? Factions & zoku-giin Was it desirable? Other parties Abe, Fukuda, Aso: weak PMs Now second Abe Democratic institution (Form) Constitution Laws Parliament Election Court Full democracy US rule Showa2 1960 Now? 1945-51 Democratization New constitution LDP dominance Lack of policy debate Military rises 1931 Democracy movement, Party cabinet 1937 Defeat War Male suffrage 1925 Showa1 Taisho Constitution 1889 Parliament Fascism 1937-45 Edo Pure dictatorship Meiji Political fights Reform vs conservatism, big vs small government, other policy debates (Content) Political competition