|
|
|
|
The
Signs of a Global Recovery |
|
Jun
16th 2009, C.P. Chandrasekhar and Jayati Ghosh |
|
Finance
Ministers of the G8 meeting at Lecce in Italy during
the latter part of week ending June 14, were cautiously
optimistic. The final communiqué noted that in
the aftermath of efforts at financial stabilisation
and fiscal stimulation ''there are signs of stabilization
in our economies, including a recovery of stock markets,
a decline in interest rate spreads, (and) improved business
and consumer confidence''. But, the ministers cautioned
''the situation remains uncertain and significant risks
remain to economic and financial stability''.
There were two elements of the communiqué that
pointed to a compromise between the differing perceptions
of the US and UK, on the one hand, and Germany and France,
on the other, regarding the principal problems and tasks
at hand. The first of these elements was the reference
to the persistence of ''significant risks'' which was
not there in the original draft of the communiqué,
and was ostensibly inserted by those countries (UK and
US) who feel that it is not yet time to decide that
the recovery is here and the stimulus provided thus
far has been adequate. Moreover, the mention of ''encouraging
figures in the manufacturing sector'' that figured in
the draft was dropped, since it went against the evidence
that industrial production in the eurozone area had
fallen by 21 per cent in April, relative to the corresponding
month of the previous year.
Chart
1 >>
The second element of the communiqué of interest
is that it pushes for going beyond thinking of recovery
and formulating national level ''exit strategies'' ''for
unwinding the extraordinary policy measures taken to
respond to the crisis.'' The reference here is to the
huge budget deficits and high levels of public debt
that many countries, especially the US, have accumulated
in the wake of the bail-outs and the stimulus packages
they have been put in place. Though the US and UK have
played down this aspect of the discussions, there is
clearly a difference in emphasis among the leading powers
on where the world economy stands and what is the immediate
priority in terms of action.
The difference hinges, quite clearly, on the extent
to which different sections believe that the worst is
over. The reason for uncertainty regarding a potential
recovery is that the figures are yet to point to a definitive
revival. As of May 2009, nearly two years since the
financial crisis broke and a year-and-a-half after the
onset of the global recession, the economic scenario
remains uncertain, if not bleak. The rate of unemployment
in the US, which stood at less than 5 per cent in the
first quarter of 2008, had risen to 8.1 per cent in
the first quarter of 2009 (Chart 1) and is estimated
to have touched 9.4 per cent in May 2009—its highest
rate for the last 26 years. This possibly explains US
pessimism. It is true that the unemployment rate in
the European Union had also risen from 6.8 to 8.1 per
cent between the first quarters of 2008 and 2009. But
the higher base level may be making the problem appear
less alarming to ruling governments there than in the
US, influencing their perceptions.
Output growth too gives no cause for optimism. Quarter-on-quarter
growth rates of US GDP (as measured relative to the
corresponding quarter of the previous year) had declined
sharply in the last quarter of 2008 and first quarter
of 2009 across the G7. This decline was even sharper
in the UK and the EU, than the US (Chart 2). The crisis
had clearly not gone away by the beginning of April,
despite signs of recovery in the stock market. The disconcerting
element is that this situation prevails despite huge
infusion of funds by G7 governments. According to one
estimate, the US Federal Reserve had by April 2009 offered
about $12.7 trillion in guarantees and commitments to
the US financial sector, and spent a little over $4
trillion in combating the crisis. As a result the federal
deficit has risen to more than 12 per cent of GDP, frightening
fiscal conservatives who predict the onset of stagflation.
The big thrust seems to be over and the recovery is
still not in sight. What it has possibly done, and even
that is not certain, is prevent the recession from turning
into a depression.
Chart
2 >>
Despite this evidence relating
to the period till the last full quarter for which numbers
are available, speculation that the downturn has bottomed
out and the developed world is on the verge of recovery
proliferates. This optimism is based on still tenuous
evidence, including evidence that the rate of decline
of economies is slowing. The most important of these
is that the monthly decline in employment in the US
is down sharply. In May 2009 nonfarm payroll employment
fell by 345,000, which is around half the average monthly
decline over the previous six months and well below
the close to 750,000 fall in January this year. Associated
with this fall in monthly employment declines is a fall
in new unemployment claims. Economist Robert Gordon
of Northwestern University in the US, a respected analyst
of growth and productivity trends in the US, has found
that past recessions came to an end four to six week
after new unemployment claims peaked, which they have
now done. So he conjectures that the business cycle
will find its trough in May or June (Financial Times,
June 3, 2009). While these developments are reassuring,
we should view them in the light of the fact that the
unemployment rate is at record levels and new unemployment
claims are still above the figures they touched in the
worst months of the last recession.
Chart
3 >>
A second cause for optimism is that US producers may
be reaching the phase of their inventory cycle where
an increase in production is inevitable. By April, wholesale
inventories had fallen for the eighth month running
as firms cut back production to clear the excess inventories
generated by falling demand. Having made those adjustments,
it is argued, firms are now in a position where they
would have to step up production, especially if demand
begins to stabilise. In other words, the argument is
that since things are so bad, they can only get better.
But the figures do not support even this position. Thus,
after seven months of decline, inventories in April
fell 1.4 per cent relative to the year before and 6.4
per cent relative to the corresponding month of the
previous year. That was because sales fell by 0.4 per
cent in April, led by automobiles and parts. Sales of
durable goods too were down 1.9 per cent during the
month and 23.4 per cent over the year.
The third potential cause for comfort is the sign that
relative to previous months, the decline in production
is slowing. As Chart 3 shows, the decline in GDP relative
to the immediately preceding quarter, which was rising
till the first quarter of 2009, seems to have bottomed
out in the US and to a lesser extent in the EU. What
is more, this trend seems to be reflected even in the
month-on-month annual growth rates of industrial production,
with the rate of decline in April 2009 relative to the
corresponding month of the previous year showing signs
of reversing its hitherto continuous increase in the
US, UK and EU (Chart 4).
Chart
4 >>
While this third factor may be adequate reason for optimism
for some, there are two reasons why we should not read
too much into this data. To start with, even if the
downturn is touching bottom in terms of the stabilisation
of the rate of decline, the decline could persist and
the economy could ''bounce along the bottom'' as some
analysts reportedly speculate. That is, there is no
''statistical'' reason why a stable rate of decline should
automatically lead to lower rates of decline and positive
rates of growth in the coming months or quarters.
Further, it is unclear whether there would be adequate
alternative stimuli to sustain the recovery when the
effects of the already implemented fiscal stimulus wane.
Governments could hold back on providing any fresh stimulus
because of arguments of the kind espoused by conservative
economists, representatives of the financial sector
and even some European governments, which emphasise
the dangers of inflation. If that happens, recovery
would depend on the return of the consumer to the market.
But here too the prognosis is not all too happy. Fears
generated by the recession and rising unemployment and
the increased desire to save to make up for the decline
in the values of accumulated housing and financial assets
is encouraging savings even in the US. According to
a recent estimate of the Federal Reserve, the net worth
of US households had fallen 2.5 per cent or by $1,300
billion in just the first three months of 2009. This
comes on top of the 18 per cent fall in the previous
year which was the worst since the Fed began estimating
household wealth in 1946. The net result is that household
savings rates in the US are rising and consumer spending
was falling in March and April this year.
In the event many still remain sceptical. The Financial
Times quotes Martin Feldstein as saying that ''it is
possible but unlikely'' that the recession is over. ''I
think it is a more likely scenario that we are seeing
the favourable effects of the fiscal stimulus,'' he reportedly
said. ''That, for a while, will offset the general diminished
trend we have seen over the past two quarters, but it
is a one-shot thing.'' Put otherwise, there could be
more bad news ahead.
|
|
Print
this Page |
|
|
|
|