Home » Opinion » Foreign Views
Eurozone needs structural reform
Print Edition
IT has been three years since the outbreak of the euro crisis, and only an inveterate optimist would say that the worst is definitely over.
Some, noting that the eurozone’s double-dip recession has ended, conclude that the austerity medicine has worked.
But try telling that to those in countries that are still in depression, with per capita GDP still below pre-2008 levels, unemployment rates above 20 percent, and youth unemployment at more than 50 percent. At the current pace of “recovery,” no return to normality can be expected until well into the next decade.
A recent study by Federal Reserve economists concluded that America’s protracted high unemployment will have serious adverse effects on GDP growth for years to come. If that is true in the US, where unemployment is 40 percent lower than in Europe, the prospects for European growth appear bleak indeed.
What is needed, above all, is fundamental reform in the structure of the eurozone.
By now, there is a clear understanding of what is required:
1. A real banking union, with common supervision, common deposit insurance, and common resolution; without this, money will continue to flow from the weakest countries to the strongest;
2. Some form of debt mutualization, such as Eurobonds: with Europe’s debt/GDP ratio lower than that of the US, the eurozone could borrow at negative real interest rates, as the US does. The lower interest rates would free money to stimulate the economy, breaking the crisis-hit countries’ vicious circle whereby austerity increases the debt burden, making debt less sustainable, by shrinking GDP;
3. Industrial policies to enable the laggard countries to catch up; this implies revising current strictures, which bar such policies as unacceptable interventions in free markets;
4. A central bank that focuses not only on inflation, but also on growth, employment, and financial stability;
5. Replacing anti-growth austerity policies with pro-growth policies focusing on investments in people, technology, and infrastructure.
Much of the euro’s design reflects the neo-liberal economic doctrines that prevailed when the single currency was conceived.
It was thought that keeping inflation low was necessary and almost sufficient for growth and stability; that making central banks independent was the only way to ensure confidence in the monetary system; that low debt and deficits would ensure economic convergence among member countries; and that a single market, with money and people flowing freely, would ensure efficiency and stability.
Each of these doctrines has proved to be wrong.
If the eurozone adopts the program outlined above, there should be no need for Germany to pick up any tab.
Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor at Columbia University. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2013.www.project-syndicate.org. Shanghai Daily condensed the article.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
