Upload
truda
View
27
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Political Economy After the Crisis. Michael Woolcock Week 2 The Past and Future of Economic Growth February 6, 2014. Overview. Prelude: Where you sit shapes where you stand Economic growth in the past (the ‘long run’) Eight ‘stylized facts ’, some initial principles - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Political Economy After the Crisis
Michael WoolcockWeek 2
The Past and Future of Economic Growth
February 6, 2014
Overview
• Prelude: Where you sit shapes where you stand• Economic growth in the past (the ‘long run’)
– Eight ‘stylized facts’, some initial principles– What don’t we know that we need to know?
• Not just for ‘policy’, but for implementation? – Where might we search for answers?
• The future of economic growth– Integrating diverse evidence, coherent theory,
capability for implementation, legitimacy
Prelude• Different types of problems…
– require different types of solutions, which require• different types of strategies for assessing effectiveness
– attract (‘select for’) different kinds of people, who in turn• are trained, socialized, hired, assessed by people like them• creating reasonable – and sometimes unreasonable – differences. E.g.,
– Academics vs practitioners vs ‘policymakers’– Heart surgeons vs cardiologists– Debates over rise/fall of ‘global poverty’ (Kanbur 2001)– Sachs vs Easterly on effectiveness of ‘foreign aid’ (ongoing!)
Prelude• Different types of problems…
– require different types of solutions, which require• different types of strategies for assessing effectiveness
– attract (‘select for’) different kinds of people, who in turn• are trained, socialized, hired, assessed by people like them• creating reasonable – and sometimes unreasonable – differences. E.g.,
– Academics vs practitioners vs ‘policymakers’– Heart surgeons vs cardiologists– Debates over rise/fall of ‘global poverty’ (Kanbur 2001)– Sachs vs Easterly on effectiveness of ‘foreign aid’ (ongoing!)
• So, in debates over ‘growth strategies’…– ‘Washington Consensus’ (‘neo-liberalism’) vs MDGs vs HR– Policy X vs Policy Y vs Policy X’ (i.e., ‘the what’)– Little attention to implementation (‘how?’, ‘by whom’?)– Little attention to identifying, interrogating the actual problem
• Many experts ‘sell’ solutions; don’t wrestle with novel problems
Stylized Fact #1a: ‘Modern economic growth’ (Kuznets) is a recent phenomena
Growth in Real World GDP per Capita, 1000-Present
-100%
0%
100%
200%
300%
400%
500%
600%
700%
800%
900%
1000%
11th 12th 13th 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Century
#1b: Or, ‘poverty’ is the historical norm; need to explain national wealth
6
India, $2990
1851
China, $5332
1898
Ethiopia, $688 ~ Year 12501929
Mexico, $8165
Economic Trajectory of Leading Country
CurrentCrossSection
From: Pritchett (2009)
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
1700 2000
GD
P PP
P pe
r Cap
ita
UK USA
#2: Divergence: some countries (OECD) rich, some rising (BRICs), most still poor
Economic growth, 1980-2010Great divergence continues…
8
How wealthy is the US?
#3a: Global inequality today is mostly a result of between-country differences
1820 1929 20050
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
within-country inequalitybetween-country in-equalitylo
g m
ean
devi
ation
#3b: Though within-country inequality rising at unprecedented rates in late 20th C
11
#4: But still better to be poor in a rich country than rich in a poor country
0.2
.4.6
4 6 8 10 12ln income (2005 PPP dollars)
Nigeria
China
U.S.A.
Within- and Between-country inequality today
13
#5: 100+ years of stable, 2.6% pa growth = Prosperity (OECD)
Source: Pritchett and Werker 2012
#6a: Few countries have initiated and sustained rapid growth
• China, (India)• “Getting to Portugal” (poorest OECD country)
– Who’s made it in the last 60 years?• South Korea• (Taiwan…)• Chile• (Singapore)• Selected Eastern European States
– Czech Republic, Poland, Estonia, Slovenia…
#6b: Turbulent, volatile growth characterizes most poor countries
Source: Pritchett and Werker (2012)
#7: Heterodoxy (‘many recipes’) required; ‘best fit’ not ‘best practice’
• Rodrik (2007, 2012)– No single story can (yet?) accommodate this variety
• Or, this diversity requires at least a coherent array of theories• Work inductively from evidence to principles to ‘policy’
– Successful cases often followed non-orthodox path• China, Taiwan, South Korea…• Rich countries themselves took different paths, have different institutional
configurations (e.g., Japan vs Canada vs Netherlands)• Lots of devils in lots of details
• Whether to pursue a particular policy course must be fit for purpose, context-specific– Much of professional life, and our global institutional architecture,
actively conspires against this
#8: Getting ‘good institutions’, implementing effective policy, is really hard• Sustained economic growth is a ‘relentless revolution’
(Appleby 2011)– Legitimacy of change process is key– More complex economic activity requires correspondingly robust,
adaptable global and national institutions• Good aggregate description of ‘institutions’ does not map on a
good theory or ‘instruments’ for getting them• Many countries struggle to deliver the mail (i.e., perform
purely logistical tasks), let alone implement something as complex as ‘the rule of law’
• ‘Institutions’ as human inventions– Cf. languages, religions (Fukuyama 2011)– Back to types of problems… (to be continued!)
Big picture, rival views?
• ‘Culture’ • ‘Institutions’• ‘Geography’