Since then, economists have vied with each other to overturn this orthodoxy. Indeed, rejecting the conventional wisdom is now conventional, as Jeffrey Frankel, an economist at Harvard University, has pointed out. Three years ago, Michael Dooley, David Folkerts- Landau and Peter Garber, all Japan, Saudi Arabia, America and the EU economists at Deutsche Bank, argued the world economy was enjoying a reprise, the Bretton Woods era. America's large external deficit could be sustained for years as Asian central banks kept their currencies cheap in order to foster export led growth. In '05, Ben Bernanke said global interest rates were oddly low, suggesting a glut of saving abroad, not a shortfall of saving at home, was responsible for the flow of capital to America. Recent papers have picked up similar threads, arguing that imbalances may prove to be more persistent and less perverse than once thought. A study by IMF economists showed poor countries which export capital grew faster than those which rely on importing it from abroad.
One reason may be the feebleness of their financial markets. Ricardo Caballero and Emmanuel Farhi of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas of the University of California, Berkeley say emerging economies have been accumulating real assets, but their generation of financial assets has not kept pace. Thanks to weak property rights, fear of expropriation and poor bankruptcy procedures, newly rich countries are unable to create enough trustworthy claims on their future incomes. Lacking vehicles for saving at home, the thrifty buy assets abroad instead, because emerging economies' supply of financial instruments is so unreliable, people may hoard more of them as a precautionary measure.
If global imbalances are the result of such frictions, they are unlikely to unwind quickly. Financial systems do not mature overnight. If Mr. Caballero is right, America is also less vulnerable to a sudden run on its securities. Where will the excess demand for global assets go? So far, the behaviour of financial markets seems to vindicate his point. But it's a mistake to place too much faith in these new studies. If the dollar tumbles, there will be plenty of academics ready to take the old theories off the shelf and eager to say: "We told you so."
One reason may be the feebleness of their financial markets. Ricardo Caballero and Emmanuel Farhi of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas of the University of California, Berkeley say emerging economies have been accumulating real assets, but their generation of financial assets has not kept pace. Thanks to weak property rights, fear of expropriation and poor bankruptcy procedures, newly rich countries are unable to create enough trustworthy claims on their future incomes. Lacking vehicles for saving at home, the thrifty buy assets abroad instead, because emerging economies' supply of financial instruments is so unreliable, people may hoard more of them as a precautionary measure.
If global imbalances are the result of such frictions, they are unlikely to unwind quickly. Financial systems do not mature overnight. If Mr. Caballero is right, America is also less vulnerable to a sudden run on its securities. Where will the excess demand for global assets go? So far, the behaviour of financial markets seems to vindicate his point. But it's a mistake to place too much faith in these new studies. If the dollar tumbles, there will be plenty of academics ready to take the old theories off the shelf and eager to say: "We told you so."
No comments:
Post a Comment