Wednesday, July 19, 2017

 ECONOMIC GROWTH THROUGH DEMOCRACY OR AUTHORITARIANISM
By Kazi Anwarul Masud( former Secretary and ambassador)  
    FOR PUBLICATION ON  FRIDAY THE 2ND MAY 2014
The old debate on the appropriateness of authoritarian or democratic system of government suitable for economic growth has been  getting attention these days. The financial crisis of 2008 that started in the US and engulfed Europe and the rest of the world has raised the question in the minds of many of the efficacy of market oriented economy that would answer the needs of the great majority of the people. Should democracy be dumped for a while( definition of "while" being indeterminate) and a chosen few be entrusted with the responsibility of conducting global affairs? Fortunately most of the world having traversed Samuel Huntington's three waves of democracy and facing the fourth wave in the Middle East would refuse to accept an authoritarian system, be it homemade or foreign exported, because they would like to be the master of their own fate. Democracy is a difficult process to arrive at and many "democratic" countries hold elections to elect President virtually for life ( Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe for example) regarded by the advanced nations as sham elections aimed at perpetuation of rule by a coterie. Princeton's   Michael Walzer agreed with many when he wrote: "Democracy has social and cultural as well as political and legal prerequisites, and its creation is a long-term project. It requires a strong public education system, vibrant universities, independent churches, associations of many different sorts, local governments that work, and much more. It requires a certain kind of public space for group interaction, where citizens can learn the value of compromise and the possibility of living with ongoing disagreement and partial settlements of political disputes"(Ethics & International Affairs, Volume 22.4 (Winter 2008.)  Walzer better known for his books and essays on a wide range of topics, including just and unjust wars, nationalism, ethnicity, economic justice, social criticism, radicalism, tolerance and political obligation like many intellectuals have delved into the question of democratization. Sometimes possession of natural resources can be a bane as has happened in several Arab countries Another Princeton luminary Charles Boix observed that unconstrained by any domestic mechanism of control, the existing political and economic elites alone benefit from those natural riches and  illiberal countries that suddenly strike oil or any other mineral wealth get  trapped in authoritarianism. This is the standard story of many oil- and gas-rich Middle Eastern and North African countries. It is the tale of all the former Soviet Union states in Central Asia. It partially explains the fragile nature of liberal institutions in Russia. It fits the pattern of violence and dictatorship that devastates many African nations. And, in combination with appalling levels of inequality, it is behind the turmoil of several Latin American economies, such as Venezuela, Ecuador, and Bolivia. Russian flexing of muscles following the annexation of Crimea and her indifference to the Western threats of economic sanctions can be accounted for by Russia having abundant oil and gas reserve and European dependence on Russian gas to sustain Europe's prosperity. Despite Condoleezza Rice's exhortation of the US to be independent of Russian and Middle East oil to advance the interest of the petroleum industry she has faced criticism for oversimplifying the fate of Ukraine with North America's bounty of natural gas. In an op-en in the Washington Post Rice writes " :“Soon, North America’s bounty of oil and gas will swamp Moscow’s capacity. Authorizing the Keystone XL pipeline and championing natural gas exports would signal that we intend to do precisely that. And Europe should finally diversify its energy supply and develop pipelines that do not run through Russia.” Her critics find her recommendation troubling. They think that this impulse to accelerate the pace of extraction and combustion of fossilized solar energy is wildly at odds with the bulk of peer-reviewed science that strongly recommends a move in the opposite direction.“Swamping” Russia’s capacity also means swamping the planet with yet more CO2 emissions. The result of accelerating climate change will certainly result in negative outcomes that are far more terrifying than the specter of WMDs that Rice helped conjure up to sell the American public on a costly intervention in an oil-rich region over a decade ago. But then powerful people have been known to become handmaiden of plutocrats once out of power. In our discussion on democracy political stability occupies a central figure. Historians agree that intra-European wars that characterized both pre-colonial and colonial periods were an integral part of the theory of divine rights of the monarchs to rule as they pleased. Louis XIV's famous remark L'etat c'est moi( I am the state) though a demonstration of France's glory at its  peak yet foretold the bloody 1789 French Revolution and the Robbespierre's Reign of Terror.   Robert Dahl recounts  : There were ups and downs, resistance movements, rebellions, civil wars, revolutions. For several centuries the rise of centralized monarchies reversed some of the earlier advances-even though, ironically, these few, monarchies may have helped to create some conditions that were favorable to democratization in the longer run. Looking back on the rise and decline of democracy, it is clear that we cannot count on historical forces to insure that democracy will always advance-or even survive, as the long intervals in which popular governments vanished from the earth remind us .Democracy, it appears, is a bit chancy.  The story of political instability and authoritarian governments that burdened Germany and Italy in the first half of the twentieth century ended only with American occupation. Similarly, the United States democratized Japan and imposed key agrarian reforms in Korea and Taiwan that would then sow the seeds for growth and liberal institutions. Similar was the fate of the  Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe till the collapse of the USSR when the  Eastern Europeans could easily transit to democracy in a way they were unable to do before the end of the cold war.  Can religion be an impediment to democratization? Many  would agree. During the early days of the American quest to cobble together the "united states" there was an attempt of Thomas Jefferson’s Virginia Statute for Establishing Religious Freedom. A Baptist preacher  demanded  that  “The unlawful cohabitation between Church and State, which has so often been looked upon as holy wedlock, must now suffer a separation and be put forever asunder.”With support of freedom-loving evangelicals, James Madison was able to push Jefferson’s Statute through the Virginia legislature; later to became a foundation for the First Amendment. Of late thanks to few intellectuals of outstanding repute coupled with 9/11 terroristic carnage prompting the entry of neocons into George W Bush's inner circle millennial rivalry between Islam and Christianity has come to the fore. Famous Iranian scholar Abdul Karim Soroush views that the key to understanding the root cause of the democracy predicament in Muslim countries does not lie in the text or in the tradition of Islam but in the context of modernity, politics, and culture. In response to the Western critics Soroush adds that democracies are seen by some Muslim activists as systems in which human whim is the source of law, whereas Islamic principles are transcendental and cannot be undermined by popular whim. But what many of them fail to understand is that democratic institutions are not just about law. They are also about prevention of tyranny by the state. Regardless of where sovereignty is placed theoretically, in practice it is the state which exercises it and not God. Even though God was supposedly sovereign in Taliban's Afghanistan, it was in fact the Taliban that was sovereign there; Mullah Omar ruled, not God. Sovereignty in fact is always human, whether in a democracy or an Islamic state. The issue is not whether people are sovereign, but how to limit the de facto sovereignty of people, since they reign under both systems. Western policy makers and intellectuals have to understand that the millennial rivalry has not been between the Muslims and the Christians as the Thirty Years War( 1618-48) was fought in Europe would testify. If the Arab Middle East was the only major region of the world that the Third Wave had bypassed completely, leading some commentators to coin the phrase “Arab exceptionalism” to characterize this phenomenon was a hasty conclusion. The Economist magazine, in an  article that appeared, ironically, just two weeks before the beginning of the uprising in Tunisia, summarized the various arguments that had been offered to explain the democracy deficit in the Arab world—among them the "undemocratic character of Islam" and Arab culture, the colonial inheritance of artificial borders and states that weakened a focus on citizen rights, the manipulation by Arab rulers of the conflict with Israel and the fear of the Islamists, and the abundance of oil which both enriched the regimes and freed them from having to serve the needs of tax-paying citizens( The New Republic- Carl Gershman-March 2011).  President Barak Obama was prescient in his Cairo speech in asking for cooperation between the two worlds( if one were to take Samuel  Huntington and Bernard Lewis less seriously) and conclude that Nial Ferguson's "gated communities" of prosperity is an impractical idea in today's flat earth politico-economic environment. Lest we forget in the early twentieth century Theodore Lothrop Stoddard, the author of the bestseller The Rising Tide of Color against White World Supremacy (1920) invested early in Islamophobia and Niall Ferguson wrote in The Telegraph( 21st May 2006) that " 'Islamism' was a militantly political movement with an anti-Western political ideology that had the potential to spread throughout the Islamic world, and even beyond it". There are many walking around the corridors of power  pining for Stoddardesque laments about the emasculation of Anglo-Saxon power who would like a Colossus(2004) and an Empire(2003) to be reincarnated  to rule the waves. Fortunately however the division of the world and the emergence of non-occidental  competing powers coupled with the refusal  of the West to play John Wayne's muscular roles will bring about cohabitation among the various parts of the world.  

DAILY STARMay 01, 2016 / LAST MODIFIED: 12:00 AM, May 01, 2016 Increasing productivity to revive growth Shamshad Akhtar

The Asia-Pacific region's successful achievement of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development needs to be driven by broad-based productivity gains and rebalancing of economies towards domestic and regional demand. This is the main message of the Economic and Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific 2016, published on April 28 this year by the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. Such a strategy will not only underpin the revival of robust and resilient economic growth, but also improve the quality of growth by making it more inclusive and sustainable. How should Asia-Pacific policymakers go about implementing such a strategy? Approaches by developing Asia-Pacific economies, which are tilted more towards reliance on export-led economic recovery, will be ineffective under the current circumstances. Despite extraordinary measures, global aggregate demand remains weak and China's economic expansion is moderating. The impact of further loosening of the monetary policy is also likely to remain muted, and is not advisable. The key reason is a confluence of macroeconomic risks that are clouding the economic outlook, such as low commodity prices affecting resource-dependent economies, volatility in exchange rates, as well as growing private household and corporate debt - the impact of which is likely to be complicated by the ambiguous path of interest rate increases to be pursued by the United States. The contribution of export-led economic growth to overall development of economies, supported by low interest rates and rising private debt, seems to have plateaued, with economic growth in developing Asia-Pacific economies in 2016 and 2017 forecast to marginally increase to 4.8 percent and 5 percent respectively from an estimated 4.6 percent in 2015. This is considerably below the average of 9.4 percent in the pre-crisis period of 2005-2007.Along with the economic slowdown, progress in poverty reduction is slowing, inequalities are rising and prospects of decent employment are weakening. At the same time, rapid urbanisation and a rising middle class are posing complex economic, social, and environmental and governance challenges. Such conditions can undermine the significant development successes of the region in recent decades, making it more difficult to deal with the unfinished development agenda, such as lifting 639 million people out of poverty. Had inequality not increased, approximately 200 million more people could have been lifted out of poverty in the three most populous countries of the region alone. To overcome these challenges, and to revive the region's economic dynamism and effectively pursue the 2030 Agenda, policymakers are advised to use all available policy levers, including countercyclical fiscal policy and supportive social protection measures, which critically calls for raising domestic resources. Such interventions would not only support domestic demand but also strengthen the foundations for future productivity-led growth by targeting areas such as: labour quality, including knowledge, skills, and health of the workforce; innovation through trade, investment and R&D; adequate infrastructure in transport, energy and ICT; and access to finance, especially by SMEs. Fiscal measures underpinning such initiatives should be accompanied by sustained reforms towards efficient and fair tax systems which deliver the necessary revenues for the required investment in sustainable development. Sustained increases in domestic demand will also require steady growth in real wages. This requires linking labour productivity more closely to wage levels. Strengthening the enabling environment for collective bargaining is one necessary component in the policy arsenal of governments, with the enforcement of minimum wages as another important policy tool. After increasing significantly over the last few decades, productivity growth has declined in recent years. This is worrying not only because wage growth has lagged behind productivity growth, but also because wage growth ultimately depends on productivity growth. Specifically, compared to the period between 2000 to 2007, annual growth of total factor productivity has declined by more than 65 percent in developing countries of the region, averaging only 0.96 percent per year between 2008 and 2014; labour productivity growth has declined by 30 percent, reaching just 3.9 percent in 2013.The recently-adopted Sustainable Development Goals provide an entry point to strengthen productivity. For instance, raising agricultural productivity and thus lifting rural households' income must be at the centre of the focus to end poverty (Goal 1), and to end hunger and achieve food security (Goal 2). This is because agriculture accounts for one in four workers in the region and more than half of the region's people live in rural areas. Efforts to eradicate poverty and increase agricultural productivity would also foster development of the rural sector and encourage industrialisation (Goal 9).Higher levels of productivity in agriculture will also free-up labour, which would be available to work in the non-agricultural sector. It is therefore imperative to consider a broader development strategy that moves towards full and productive employment (Goal 8) to accommodate the “agricultural push” of labour. This will require mechanisms to provide, particularly those with low skills, access to quality education and lifelong learning (Goal 4).The need to provide quality education cannot be overemphasised in view of the skills bias of modern technology, which reduces the pace of absorption of unskilled labour released from the agricultural sector.Thus, whereas the Goals will contribute to strengthening productivity, which will also contribute to the success of a number of the Goals, creating a virtuous cycle between sustainable development, productivity and economic growth.The writer is an Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations and Executive Secretary of ESCAP. She previously served as Governor of the Central Bank of Pakistan and Vice President of the MENA Region of the World Bank.READ

BROOKINGS  Can Asia reach high-income?Donghyun Park, Abdul Abiad, Gemma Estrada, Xuehui Han, and Shu TianTuesday, May 16, 2017

In a single generation, Asia has transformed itself from a low-income continent to a middle-income one. In 1991 more than 90 percent of the region’s population still lived in low-income countries. By 2015, more than 95 percent lived in middle-income countries (Figure 1). Rapid growth propelled most of the region—including the most populous countries of China, India, and Indonesia—into middle-income status. Is the continent now on its way to reaching high income in the next generation? The experiences of the newly industrialized economies might give some cause for optimism about the region’s prospects. After all, the Republic of Korea made the transition from middle to high income in only 23 years. Yet global experience is far less reassuring. Historically it has taken the typical middle-income country more than half a century to graduate to high-income status, leading some economists to label this the “middle-income trap.”Moving up to high income is particularly challenging, as the easy source of growth in early stages—increasing the amount of capital and labor used in production—can only take countries so far. Countries can only reach high income if their workers and companies become more efficient in using these inputs; in economists’ language, this means that total factor productivity (TFP) will need to play a larger role. TFP growth accounts for almost 30 percent of growth in middle-income countries that graduated to high income, but less than 10 percent of those that did not (Figure 2). But what can boost TFP growth? There is new evidence that TFP growth in middle-income countries depends on innovation, human capital, and infrastructure.( Total factor productivityFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In economics, total-factor productivity (TFP), also called multi-factor productivity, is a variable which accounts for effects in total output growth relative to the growth in traditionally measured inputs of labor and capital. TFP is calculated by dividing output by the weighted average of labor and capital input, with the standard weighting of 0.7 for labor and 0.3 for capital. If all inputs are accounted for, then total factor productivity (TFP) can be taken as a measure of an economy’s long-term technological change or technological dynamism.{\displaystyle Y=A\times K^{\alpha }\times L^{\beta }}Technology growth and efficiency are regarded as two of the biggest sub-sections of Total Factor Productivity, the former possessing "special" inherent features such as positive externalities and non-rivalness which enhance its position as a driver of economic growth.Total Factor Productivity is often seen as the real driver of growth within an economy and studies reveal that whilst labour and investment are important contributors, Total Factor Productivity may account for up to 60% of growth within economies. It has been shown that there is a historical correlation between TFP and energy conversion efficiency. Also, it has been found that integration (among firms for example) has a casual positive impact on total factor productivity.) As countries develop their economies, traditional sources of productivity growth—such as shifting labor from agriculture to manufacturing or the imitation of foreign technologies—decline in importance. Innovation assumes a more central role, especially for upper middle-income countries. Middle-income economies that successfully graduated to high income had 2.5 times more research and development stock per worker as those that did not, for example.Risk-taking entrepreneurs often lead in fostering innovation, turning new ideas or technology into innovation-based productivity growth. As economies become more sophisticated, “opportunity-driven” entrepreneurship, which builds on new ideas or technology, outweighs “necessity-driven” entrepreneurship, which responds to existing market needs. The ratio of opportunity-driven to necessity-driven entrepreneurship is 1.6 times higher in high-income economies than in middle-income ones. Middle-income economies should encourage and nurture entrepreneurs to pursue new business opportunities and provide novel products and services.In addition to entrepreneurship, innovation requires a skilled and knowledgeable workforce capable of using and creating new technologies. In Asia, like elsewhere, human capital accumulation can promote both growth and equity. Estimates indicate that a 20 percent increase in human capital can raise labor productivity by up to 3.1 percent and narrow labor income inequality by up to 4.5 percent. The bonus in income growth is more salient among poorer families, which may explain the income-equalizing effect. The emphasis needs to be on ramping up the quality of Asia’s education. Economies with relatively high cognitive skills benefit from having a critical mass of students likely to become innovators. Research indicates that as economies move closer to the technological frontier the returns on research-oriented innovation pick up tangibly. In globally standardized math and science tests, the proportion of top-performing 15-year-old students in the advanced economies is on average 5 times the proportion in middle-income economies. An exception like Vietnam, which ranks eighth among the 72 economies covered, demonstrates that the gap can be closed with sound education policies. Advanced infrastructure such as information and communication technology (ICT) can help sustain growth in middle-income economies. The fastest-growing middle-income economies invest more in infrastructure and tend to have more of their infrastructure in sectors such as ICT. Middle-income economies that graduate to high income have 18 more internet users per 100 people and 31 more mobile phone subscriptions than their peers, for example. Mobile telephone and broadband networks are vital tools for creating and disseminating knowledge. Investment in advanced infrastructure can boost growth by promoting both innovation and human capital. Analysis of developing economies shows that a 1 percent GDP increase in public infrastructure investment lifts output by 0.3 percent in the same year and by nearly 1.2 percent after seven years.Sustaining rapid growth is not easy, but is within reach for middle-income Asia. Many norms that served the region well in the past, such as macroeconomic stability and high investment, still serve it well at middle income. Empirical estimates show that when a country reaches middle income, its growth rate is more vulnerable to indicators affecting macroeconomic stability—such as whether the country faces a banking or currency crisis, the extent of capital inflows other than foreign investment, and government debt as a share of GDP. At the same time, patterns of growth must evolve if Asia is to sustain rapid growth and eventually reach high income. The productivity-enhancing trinity of education, innovation, and infrastructure all have vital roles to play. The nexus of advanced infrastructure, highly developed skills, and innovative entrepreneurship can support Asia’s productivity growth and enable a successful transition to high income. The transition will not be easy, but Asia’s dynamic track record and strong fundamentals encourage optimism that the region can meet the middle-income challenge.Donghyun Park, Abdul Abiad, Gemma Estrada, Xuehui Han, and Shu Tian are Principal Economist, Advisor, Senior Economics Officer, Economist, and Economist in the Economic Research and Regional Cooperation Department at the Asian Development Bank. This article is based on Asian Development Outlook 2017 special theme chapter “Transcending the Middle-Income Challenge.”READ

Asian Development Outlook (ADO) 2017: Transcending the Middle-Income ChallengePublication | April 2017 Developing Asia has continued to perform well, even as recovery in the major industrial economies remains weak. The region is forecast to expand by 5.7% in 2017 and 2018, nearly the 5.8% growth achieved in 2016.Decades of rapid growth transformed developing Asia from a low-income region to middle income. Sustaining growth to power the transition to high income will depend on much greater improvement in productivity. Innovation, human capital, and infrastructure are the three pillars of productivity growth. Supportive institutions and policies, underpinned by macroeconomic stability, can strengthen all three pillars. Asia’s dynamic track record suggests that attaining high income status, while challenging, is achievable.

Raising Productivity Growth is Critical for Middle-income Asia — ADB Study  6 April 2017

HONG KONG, CHINA (6 April 2017) — Reforms to increase productivity on the basis of better innovation, education, and infrastructure can help developing countries in Asia and the Pacific graduate to high-income status, says a new Asian Development Bank (ADB) report.Transcending developing Asia’s middle-income challenge is the subject of the special theme chapter in the Asian Development Outlook (ADO) 2017 report. ADO is ADB’s flagship economic publication.“Past development success in Asia and the Pacific means most citizens in the region now live in a middle-income country,” said Yasuyuki Sawada, ADB’s Chief Economist, “Policymakers will need to change their approach to reach high income. It is no longer a question of them using more resources to sustain growth, economies must become more productive to clear the final hurdle.”The report notes that in 1991 only 10% of the population in Asia and the Pacific lived in middle-income economies. By 2015, this had increased to over 95% of the region’s population, fueled by growth in the region’s most populous countries: the People’s Republic of China (PRC), India, and IndonesiaTo raise productivity, countries in developing Asia will need to focus on innovation. Middle-income countries that successfully moved up to high income have more than two and half times as much stock of accumulated research and development as other middle-income countries. Innovation requires a skilled workforce, and hence an emphasis on improving education quality. The report estimates that a 20% increase in human capital spending per capita can increase labor productivity by up to 3.1%. Sound educational policies can also promote equity and close the wide education gaps between developing Asia and high-income economies, while encouraging innovation and entrepreneurship.Infrastructure investment, particularly in energy and information and communications technology, can contribute to innovation and human capital, and thus sustaining growth in middle-income countries. A one-time public investment in infrastructure equal to 1% of gross domestic product can lift a country’s output by as much as 1.2% in 7 years. Asia’s dynamic track record suggests that the journey to high income, while challenging, can be completed. Supportive institutions and policies, underpinned by macroeconomic stability, can strengthen the pillars of productivity growth — innovation, human capital, and infrastructure.ADB, based in Manila, is dedicated to reducing poverty in Asia and the Pacific through inclusive economic growth, environmentally sustainable growth, and regional integration. Established in 1966, ADB is celebrating 50 years of development partnership in the region. It is owned by 67 members—48 from the region.READ

MIDDLE INCOME TRAP

WORKING PAPER NO. 715 | April 2012

Tracking the Middle-income Trap

What Is It, Who Is in It, and Why?This paper provides a working definition of what the middle-income trap is. We start by defining four income groups of GDP per capita in 1990 PPP dollars: low-income below $2,000; lower-middle-income between $2,000 and $7,250; upper-middle-income between $7,250 and $11,750; and high-income above $11,750. (BANGLADESH GDP BASED ON PURCHASING POWER PARITY (PPP) PER CAPITA GDPTHE GDP BASED ON PURCHASING POWER PARITY (PPP) PER CAPITA GDP IN BANGLADESH WAS REPORTED AT 1465.00 U.S. DOLLARS IN 2009, ACCORDING TO THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND (IMF). IN 2015, BANGLADESH'S GDP BASED ON PURCHASING POWER PARITY (PPP) PER CAPITA GDP IS EXPECTED TO BE 2043.02 U.S. DOLLARS. IN 2009, BANGLADESH'S ECONOMY SHARE OF WORLD TOTAL GDP, ADJUSTED BY PURCHASING POWER PARITY, WAS 0.35 PERCENT. IN 2015, BANGLADESH'S SHARE OF WORLD TOTAL GDP IS FORECASTED TO BE 0.39 PERCENT. ).We then classify 124 countries for which we have consistent data for 1950–2010. In 2010, there were 40 low-income countries in the world, 38 lower-middle-income, 14 upper-middle-income, and 32 high-income countries. Then we calculate the threshold number of years for a country to be in the middle-income trap: a country that becomes lower-middle-income (i.e., that reaches $2,000 per capita income) has to attain an average growth rate of per capita income of at least 4.7 percent per annum to avoid falling into the lower-middle-income trap (i.e., to reach $7,250, the upper-middle-income threshold); and a country that becomes upper-middle-income (i.e., that reaches $7,250 per capita income) has to attain an average growth rate of per capita income of at least 3.5 percent per annum to avoid falling into the upper-middle-income trap (i.e., to reach $11,750, the high-income level threshold). Avoiding the middle-income trap is, therefore, a question of how to grow fast enough so as to cross the lower-middle-income segment in at most 28 years, and the upper-middle-income segment in at most 14 years. Finally, the paper proposes and analyzes one possible reason why some countries get stuck in the middle-income trap: the role played by the changing structure of the economy (from low-productivity activities into high-productivity activities), the types of products exported (not all products have the same consequences for growth and development), and the diversification of the economy. We compare the exports of countries in the middle-income trap with those of countries that graduated from it, across eight dimensions that capture different aspects of a country’s capabilities to undergo structural transformation, and test whether they are different. Results indicate that, in general, they are different. We also compare Korea, Malaysia, and the Philippines according to the number of products that each exports with revealed comparative advantage. We find that while Korea was able to gain comparative advantage in a significant number of sophisticated products and was well connected, Malaysia and the Philippines were able to gain comparative advantage in electronics only.READ

 

 

 

 


 

No comments:

Post a Comment