Tejvan Pettinger

This years OCR F585 global economy pre-release stimulus material is about Estonia and its economic performance. This post gives a few extra graphs about the state of the Estonian economy and considers important issues and questions, related to Estonia.

Brief synopsis

From the early 2000s Estonia experienced rapid economic growth as it benefited from joining the EU (in 2004) and receiving greater inward investment from Europe.

Estonia’s economic growth since 1991 has been based on its transition to a market economy, e.g. policies such as privatisation. It also benefited from low inflation and macro-economic stability. It has also encouraged inward investment through low taxes. In the boom period of 2000-2007, Estonia was able to borrow on European capital markets to finance investment, which spurred strong growth in exports and international trade.

However, the credit crunch and EU crisis of 2007-11 harmed Estonia’s economy. It’s reliance on EU loans meant that it saw investment drying up and GDP contracted by 5% in 2008 and by 14% in 2009. In the recession, the Estonian government embarked on a controversial austerity programme, which saw spending cut by up to 20%, to try and reduce the budget deficit. After a deep recession, the Estonian economy has shown a strong recovery, though unemployment is still over 10%.

Firstly, these are some elements of the Estonian / Latvian economy not mentioned in the extract. In particular, the extract gives little mention of unemployment. Knowing the unemployment rate, helps give a wider perspective on Estonia’s economic situation.

Unemployment in Estonia

After falling to less than 5% in 2007, during the economic crisis unemployment in Estonia increased rapidly reaching a peak of 17%.

EU unemployment rates at Eurostat

However, unemployment in Estonia has now fallen to just below the EU27 level, but it is still high at over 10%.

Unemployment was even higher in Latvia. This suggests that Estonia achieved a more successful recovery than Latvia. Estonia has been much successful than Greece.

Estonia recession and recovery

Since the recession of 2008-09 Estonia has posted stronger recovery than other countries within the EU. However, if you have a deep recession, it is easier to recover lost output.

EU economic growth at Eurostat

It also depends which way you look at real GDP.

Read more

No one doubts the commitment of many in the EU to seeking a way to prevent the Euro breaking up. The Euro project is deeply embedded in the European establishment. But, are they fighting a lost cause? Are the structural problems with the single currency so severe, they would be better off pursuing an orderly break-up? Or would the break-up of the Eurozone lead to an even worse period of instability and economic crisis?

Reasons Why the Eurozone is heading for a Break-up

1. There has been no Economic Harmonisation

Harmonised competitive indicators in the EU (2011 Q1), source: ECB Stats based on unit labour costs indices for the total economy:

Since 1998, Germany (DE) has seen a reduction in labour costs of 18.5%. By contrast, Italy and Ireland have seen an increase of 6.6% and Greece of 9.7%.

The Eurozone is not an optimal currency area. There is a huge difference between northern European economies (Germany) and Southern European economies. This is not a difference in debt levels. It is a difference in productivity and relative wage costs.

In normal circumstances, this would not be a problem because the German currency would appreciate due to its hyper-competitiveness – and the exchange rate of Italy, Greece e.t.c. would devalue, but this has not happened because the Euro permanently locks in exchange rates. See also: (competitiveness in Europe) | Two Speed Europe

2. Current Account Deficit

• This divergence in labour costs, productivity and inflation is reflected in the current account statistics within the Eurozone. In particular, it shows that Germany has had a persistently large current account surplus, which is matched by a current account deficit in other Eurozone economies.
• With a fixed exchange rate, German goods have become more competitive in the Eurozone. Southern Eurozone goods have been uncompetitive. The exchange rate imbalance is a significant factor in the persistently low economic growth in Southern Europe.
• Without a mechanism for exchange rate adjustment within the Eurozone, the current account imbalances will persist.
• Furthermore, this issue rarely gets much attention. The EU and Germany frequently talk about the need for internal devaluation for countries to regain competitiveness. But, internal devaluation is causing economic misery of unemployment and falling GDP.
• Economic Imbalances in the Euro by Christian Schoder 2011

Read more

Readers Question: How sustainable do you think that the austerity measured imposed on European countries are in economic and political terms?

This is a good question. Firstly, I feel there is a certain political appeal of austerity. See: Why is austerity politically popular?

When austerity was introduced, there was a reluctant support for austerity – because of the widely disseminated view it was necessary. However, as time passes and austerity appears to have given more pain than gain, the political support will continue to dwindle.

A politician promising to ‘get tough on debt’ has a certain political capital. A politician promising to bring in counter cyclical budget policies is  (firstly, is very rare) and also likely to get ignored or mis-understood. There is growing criticism of austerity, but it is a rare to hear a politician talking about – targeting full employment, running a bigger cyclical deficit and / or monetising debt.

There are a few issues:

Unemployment is a marginalised political issue

Eurozone Unemployment

In my opinion, unemployment is one of the greatest personal finance disasters and one of biggest economic / social problems facing society. It is not just a loss of income, but also a loss of self-esteem because you don’t have the opportunity to contribute to society. But, there never seems to be the same political urgency to tackle high unemployment. When the Coalition government was elected in 2010, the impression I got is that they were more concerned with reducing the budget deficit than tackling unemployment.

The ECB seem to live in a bubble where they define economic success as achieving an increasingly meaningless inflation target, budget deficit reductions and lower bond yields.

However, with unemployment rates in Europe continuing to increase, it may become a bigger issue amongst the electorate. If European policy makers don’t engage with the unemployment issue, there may be an increased gap between the unemployed and policy makers.

Austerity hasn’t worked

Generally, a temporary rise in unemployment and fall in GDP can be shrugged off. However, the problem with the austerity policies of the last few years, is that they have left Europe in continued difficulty. Even by a very narrow view – measuring success by debt to GDP targets, it has often failed (Austerity self-defeating). Some of the worse affected countries like Greece, Italy and UK are failing to stop the rise in debt to GDP.

EU debt

But, in the bigger picture, austerity and monetary inflexibility are contributing to a significant double dip recession. Unemployment for 6 months is one thing, but a rise in long-term unemployment is much more serious.

The problem Europe faces is that it is hard to see where strong economy recovery is going to come from. With tight monetary, tight fiscal policy and fixed exchange rates, there is an inertia – preventing economic recovery and reducing unemployment. Even countries who don’t need to pursue austerity – Germany and Netherlands have embraced the trend for cutting spending. The consequence has been to push European growth lower. There is a real danger of a lost decade; we already have lost half a decade.

Read more