In case you had not noticed,
the IMF is blogging
and it is not "merely" the garden variety IMF staffers they are rolling
out to fill the pages; nope here we are treated to the likes of
Blanchard, Atkinson, Lipsky, Cottarelli and a host of other of the
Fund's A-listers. Consequently, it would seem that in an already
(over)crowded world of econblogging, the IMFdirect blog merits more
than a little bit attention.
In the past week, the dual post coverage by Mr. Anoop Singh of the recent Regional Economic Outlook for the Asian and Pacific Region
caught my attention in particular. In the first, Mr. Singh invokes
among other things the puzzle of Asia's relatively sharp recovery given
the notion that the region is largely dependent on exports to grow. Two
reasons especially are important here. One is the simple fact that as
these economies moved into the crisis with bulging coffers (especially
on the reserves vis-a-vis the rest of the world), the room for fiscal
manoeuvre was greater and it was used decisively. According to
calculations by the IMF, the collective stimulus programs in the
Asia-Pacific region added 1.75% to GDP growth in the first half of 2009
and it makes the programs even more generous than those observed in the
OECD and other emerging markets. Secondly, Asian economies has
benefited from the, so far, V-shaped comeback by part of the global
economy and key regions who are likely to grow smartly in h02-2009.
In general, Mr. Singh's analysis appears cautiously tied to the
great unknown of 2010 where it appears that we will see whether all
those battered economies of the world will be able to hold their own in
a world where quantitative easing from central banks and lax fiscal
policies are withdrawn rather than enacted. Here, Singh's remarks echo
the general discourse where the the underlying tone is one of
skepticism. A long period of risky asset buoyancy coupled with upbeat
economic data releases have proved before to be crying wolf of an impending recovery and policy makers are advised to take this into account.
It is hard for me to disagree with Mr. Singh that the green shoots
observed in the Spring of 2009 seem way too shaky a foundation on which
to build a narrative of recovery. Yet, this is exactly what has
happened and the famous inflection point will be reached when we
discover that the recovery observed thus has been because of
and not despite monetary and fiscal stimulus which makes the
enforcement of exit strategies going into 2010 a very interesting
experiment in the making. Some will make it, some won't and some will
inevitably fall back into recession (not just in Asia).
However, the most important part of Singh's argument and indeed the
most important part of IMF's analysis in general is the question of
whether Asia's economic trajectory, in a post stimulus/recovery
context, will be driven by domestic demand or not? To put it in the
most reductionist form. Will Asia be a provider of net capacity to the
global or economy or not? If yes, it would mean that a post crisis Asia
had truly emerged as something new in the form of a force of a real addition
to total demand. If not, it would mean that Asia would revert to old
tricks and habits of relying on exports and foreign asset income to
propel growth in national income.
Now, leaving the question of the number of export dependent
economies the world economy can muster neatly to the side, I am not so
optimistic here on Asia's contribution to the rebalancing of global
imbalances through a net expansion of domestic demand. Yet, let me also
immediately qualify here that I am not very comfortable with talking
about Asia/Pacific in one both because of the obvious heterogeneity
amongst the economies, but more importantly; also because I am not
really an expert here. I have done the analysis on Japan
though and on this I can say with unequivocal certainty that we won't
we seeing any provision of excess domestic demand from this side.
Ultimately of course, Japan is of little real importance here and so
is the rest of Asia really. What really matters on this topic is China
and all the hopes currently pinned on her shoulders in the form of the
ability of the economy to pull the global economy out of the mire.
Traditionally, this has boiled down to a rather technical discussion
about the RMB and an almost perennial Becketian wait for the shackles
to break and an appreciating RMB to solve all problems. While I concede
that the RMB should rise, it won't solve any of the underlying problems
inherent in China's investment driven economy. Basically, chalk it down
to culture and institutional specificity in the origin, but the simple
fact remains I believe that just as China may evolve to become the
economy we all hope and believe her to become (say in a 2020 context)
the one child policy will have done its work so to speak and China will
be sporting an OECD like age structure and is likely to even surpass
many of OECD's economies.
This is no recipe for an axis of rebalancing and although China will
be the main story to follow for the immediate future I think we should
look elsewhere to find the potential rebalancing candidates. This may
indeed involve other parts of Asia (India for instance and Indonesia),
but in the current discourse the likes of China, Japan (and Korea) hold
little promise in terms of providing a decisive engine for rebalancing
through sustainable growth in domestic demand which exceed the
investment rate.
In this sense I remain cautious on the overall sustainability of the
recovery in Asia mainly because of my skepticism towards the
sustainability of overall global momentum where I acknowledge that I
may be very wrong. Watch out for 2010 and all those exit strategies is
what I say and particularly for the "post fiscal stimulus" world. This
also means that I am more than a little bit skeptical on the prospects
of a sustained recovery across Asia driven by domestic demand,
especially in relation to Japan and China.
At least, this would be my humble argument here a murky Monday
morning in Copenhagen. In any case, you might want to punch the
IMFdirect blog into your RSS reader, just to make sure that you know
what the IMF is up on a daily "research" basis.
Originally published at
Alpha.Sources blog and reproduced here with the author's permission.
Opinions and comments on RGE EconoMonitors do not necessarily
reflect the views of Roubini Global Economics, LLC, which encourages a
free-ranging debate among its own analysts and our EconoMonitor
community. RGE takes no responsibility for verifying the accuracy of
any opinions expressed by outside contributors. We encourage
cross-linking but must insist that no forwarding, reprinting,
republication or any other redistribution of RGE content is permissible
without expressed consent of RGE.