|
|
|
|
World
Prices and The Transmission of Inflation |
|
Apr
8th 2008, Jayati Ghosh |
|
The chances are that people under the age of thirty
living in most countries of the world would never have
experienced price rises of the extent and rapidity of
the past year. Globally, the prices of many basic commodities
have not risen faster for around three decades.
Inflation as a feature of capitalist economies was subdued
and reined in especially from the early 1980s. This
was when monetarist policies were used to great effect
to counter the inflationary trends of the 1970s. These
policies worked not so much by restricting money supply
as was the explicit claim, but rather by destroying
the ability of the working classes in the developed
countries and commodity producers in the developing
world to maintain their income shares, even as profit
shares have soared.
Since then, across the world the policy obsession with
inflation control has been reinforced by the domination
of internationally mobile finance capital, which has
viewed the possibility of the re-emergence of inflation
with both dread and distaste. In countries like India,
where the dominant part of the population receives incomes
that are not indexed to inflation, price rises have
always been politically fraught. But in other countries
where indexation was more widely prevalent, it was really
the power of finance that made inflation control such
an overweening policy priority.
This made most governments unwilling to use expansionary
monetary and fiscal policies even in periods of slump,
and unable to use them to reduce the amplitude of business
cycles. The important exception has been the United
States, which has happily run both government and external
deficits in its own growth process, and benefited from
the access to imports and external savings that came
because of the role of the dollar. The privileged position
of the US economy allowed it to attract resources from
the rest of the world to pay for its own expansion,
but this advantage was not shared even by other developed
economies.
So the world economy became used to national macroeconomic
policies that were so focussed on being sharply anti-inflationary
that they were willing to tolerate higher unemployment
as well as levels of economic activity well below potential.
These policies also dampened inflationary expectations,
and thereby prevented rapid price rises even in periods
of relatively sustained growth. Thus, the recent expansion
of global capitalism in the past decade, with real world
output increasing at an annual rate of around 5 per
cent and world trade increasing by around 8 per cent
annually, has been marked by low inflation rates of
only around 2 per cent per year.
But all this seems to have changed dramatically, especially
in the last two years. While primary commodity prices
in world trade have been increasing gradually since
2002, there have been significant increases in these
since around the middle of 2006. Chart 1 (based on IMF
data) indicates these trends for the major commodity
categories, providing an index based on US dollar prices.
It shows that, except for agricultural raw materials
whose prices have increased very little, all the other
commodity groups have shown sharp rises in price.
Chart
1 >>
Does It may be imagined that the large price increases
in these commodities are more apparent than real because
they are denominated in US dollars, and the dollar has
depreciated substantially in the past two years. But
over the past year the increases have been so marked
that they are evident even in other currencies. Thus,
while all commodity prices in dollar terms increased
by 45 per cent in 2007, they increased by 37 per cent
in SDR terms.
The rise in price levels for metals was the earliest
in the recent surge, with the weighted average of metal
prices increasing sharply from the last quarter of 2005,
and almost doubling in the two-year period to February
2008. Global oil prices really began increasing in 2004,
as it became evident that the US war aggression in Iraq
was unsuccessful in ensuring either peace or stable
oil supplies from that country. But subsequently the
price has been more volatile, even falling in 2006,
and only the past year has witnessed the most rapid
price increases for oil since the 1970s. (See related
article on oil prices.) In 2007, other energy prices
have also soared. Coal prices more than doubled last
year, thereby showing a faster rise than even the oil
price.
Food prices, like agricultural raw materials, had shown
only a modest increase until early 2007. But since then
they have zoomed, such that the IMF data show more than
40 per cent increase in world food prices over 2007.
The FAO food price index, which includes national prices
as well as those in cross-border trade, suggests that
the average index for 2007 was nearly 25 per cent above
the average for 2006. Apart from sugar, nearly every
other food crop has shown very significant increases
in price in world trade over 2007, and the latest evidence
suggests that this trend has continued and even accelerated
in the first few months of 2008.
What explains the recent increase in global commodity
prices? It has been argued that this is essentially
demand-led, the result of several years of rapid economic
growth and the voracious demand from some fast-growing
countries such as China in particular. Certainly there
is some element of truth in this. And to the extent
that this is true, it implies that the world economy
is heading back to the old Phillips-curve based scenario,
whereby rapid and prolonged growth in a capitalist economy
comes up against an inflationary barrier.
For the past two decades and more, international capitalism
was able to deal with this and avoid Phillips-curve
type outcomes through political economy processes that
restrained the wage and income demands of working classes
and primary producers. But clearly there are limits
to such a process, and these limits are now being reached.
If this were the only cause of the recent commodity
price inflation, it would not necessarily be of such
concern to policy makers, because it could then be expected
that a slowing down of overall growth would simultaneously
reduce inflation. It would also reflect some recovery
of the drastically reduced bargaining power of workers
and primary producers. But there are other, more worrying
tendencies in operation, that suggest that the current
global inflationary process has other factors pushing
it which will not be so easily controlled. In other
words, the possibility of stagflation – of rising prices
combined with output recession or stagnation – cannot
be ruled out.
To understand this, it is necessary to examine the forces
behind the prices rises for different commodities. In
the case of food, there are more than just demand forces
at work, although it is certainly true that rising incomes
in Asia and other parts of the developing world have
led to increased demand for food. Four major aspects
affecting supply conditions have been crucial in changing
global market conditions for food crops.
First, there is the impact of high oil prices, which
affect agricultural costs directly because of the significance
of energy as an input in the cultivation process itself
(through fertiliser and irrigation costs) as well as
in transporting food. Across the world, governments
have reduced protection and subsidies on agriculture,
which means that high costs of energy directly translate
into higher costs of cultivation, and therefore higher
prices of output.
Second, there is the impact of both oil prices and government
policies in the US, Europe, Brazil and elsewhere that
have promoted bio-fuels as an alternative to petroleum.
This has led to significant shifts in acreage as well
as use of certain grains. For example, in 2006 the US
diverted more than 20 per cent of its maize production
to the production of ethanol; Brazil used half of its
sugar cane production to make bio-fuel, and the European
Union used the greater part of its vegetable oil production
as well as imported vegetable oils, to make bio-fuel.
This has naturally reduced the available land for producing
food.
Third, the impact of policy neglect of agriculture over
the past two decades is finally being felt. The prolonged
agrarian crisis in many parts of the developing world;
the shifts in acreage from food crops to cash crops
relying on purchased inputs; the excessive use of ground
water and inadequate attention to preserving or regenerating
land and soil quality; the lack of attention to relevant
agricultural research and extension; the over-use of
chemical inputs that have long run implications for
both safety and productivity; the ecological implications
of both pollution and climate change, including desertification
and loss of cultivable land: all these are issues that
have been highlighted by analysts but largely ignored
by policy makers in most countries. Reversing these
processes is possible but will take time and substantial
public investment, so until then global supply conditions
will remain problematic.
Fourth, there is the impact of changes in market structure,
which allow for greater international speculation in
commodities. It is often assumed that rising food prices
automatically benefit farmers, but this is far from
the case, especially as the global food trade has become
more concentrated and vertically integrated. A small
number of agribusiness companies worldwide increasingly
control all aspects of cultivation and distribution,
from supplying inputs to farmers to buying crops and
even in some cases to retail food distribution. This
means that marketing margins are large and increasing,
so that direct producers do not get the benefits of
increases expect with a time lag and even then not to
the full extent. This concentration also enables greater
speculation in food, with more centralised storage.
As the global financial system remains fragile with
the continuing implosion of the US housing finance market,
investors are searching for other avenues of investment
to make up their losses. Commodity speculation is increasingly
emerging as an important area for such financial investment.
(Incidentally, this is one reason why there is so much
pressure from the finance lobby even in India to allow
the commodities futures market to develop.) Such speculation
by large banks and financial companies is in both agricultural
and non-agricultural commodities, and explains at least
partly why the very recent period has seen such sharp
hikes in price.
Commodity speculation has also affected the minerals
and metals sector. For these commodities, it is evident
that recent price increases have been largely the result
of increased demand, especially from China and other
rapidly growing developing countries, but also from
the US and European Union. A positive fallout of the
recent growth in demand and diversification of sources
of demand is that it has allowed primary metals producing
countries, especially in Africa, to benefit from competition
to extract better prices and conditions for their mined
products. But there is also the unfortunate reality
that higher mineral prices have rarely if ever translated
into better incomes and living conditions of the local
people, even if they may benefit the aggregate economy
of the country concerned.
At any rate, metal prices are high and likely to remain
high because of the growing imbalance between world
supply and demand. A reduction in global output growth
rates would definitely have some dampening effect on
prices from their current highs, but the basic imbalance
is likely to continue for some time. This is also because
there has been a neglect of investment in this sector
as well, so that building up new capacity will take
time given the long gestation period involved in investments
for metal production.
So the medium term outlook for global commodity prices,
while uncertain, is that they are likely to remain high
even if the world economy slows down in terms of output
growth. What does this mean for India? Until the 1990s,
both producers and consumers in India were relatively
sheltered from the impact of such global tendencies
because of a complex system of trade restrictions, public
procurement and distribution and policy emphasis on
at least food self-sufficiency.
The liberalising policies that began in the early 1990s
have rendered all of that history, since one explicit
aim of the reform strategy was to bring Indian prices
closer in line to world prices. As a result, especially
with respect to food, both producers (that is cultivators)
and consumers are now more or less directly affected
by global trends. The increases in price have not been
as sharp for some commodities, but they have nonetheless
been significant, and in a country with a dominantly
poor population whose incomes are not indexed to inflation,
they are already unacceptably large. Yet Indian farmers
have not seen the full benefit of these price hikes.
Thus, while world wheat prices (in rupee terms) increased
by 92 per cent in the year to February 2008, Indian
prices have increased by 33 per cent. Similarly, global
soya bean prices increased by 65 per cent over the same
period, while Indian prices went up by 34 per cent.
Our wheat and soya bean prices are still below world
prices so that further integration will only cause further
increases in domestic price. Indian rice prices have
gone up less than world prices only because exports
have been prohibited.
The government’s response to the domestic price rise,
which is already creating panic in official corridors
in an election year, has been to reduce or eliminate
import duties on several food items such as edible oils,
so as to allow imports to bring the price down. But
that is a short-sighted and probably ineffective strategy.
It provides direct competition to Indian farmers producing
oilseeds, even as they suffer rapidly rising costs.
It sends confused signals not only to farmers for the
next sowing season, but also to consumers, and leaves
the field open for domestic speculators as well because
the imports are not under public supervision but left
to private traders.
Most of all, given the tendency of international commodity
prices noted here, it will not solve the basic problem
of rising inflation in such commodities. Instead, it
will make the Indian economy even more prone to the
volatility and inflationary pressure of world markets.
Therefore, the Indian economy cannot hope to remain
insulated from these global trends without much more
proactive policies that rely substantially on government
intervention in several areas. In the case of food,
this essentially requires a more determined effort to
increase the viability of food cultivation, to improve
the productivity of agriculture through public measures,
and to expand and strengthen the public system of procurement
and distribution. For other commodities too, it is now
evident that a lassez faire system is simply not good
enough, and public intervention and regulation of markets
is essential.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|