400 likes | 541 Views
THE EUROPEAN UNION: ECONOMY, SOCIETY, AND POLICY. by Andr és Rodríguez-Pose London School of Economics Oxford University Press ISBN 0-19-874286-X. Part I. ECONOMY. Chapter 1. Competitiveness. The stages of economic integration. Free trade areas:
E N D
THE EUROPEAN UNION: ECONOMY, SOCIETY, AND POLICY by Andrés Rodríguez-Pose London School of Economics Oxford University Press ISBN 0-19-874286-X
Part I ECONOMY
Chapter 1 Competitiveness
The stages of economic integration • Free trade areas: • Free trade between members, different external tariffs • Little or no institutional co-ordination • Customs union: • Free trade between members and common external trade restriction • Common regulatory bodies • Common (or single) markets: • Removal of all barriers to free factor mobility • Free mobility of goods, capital, labour, and services • Greater level of regulation and strong institutions to monitor decisions adopted by member states
The stages of economic integration (II) • Economic union: • Harmonisation of economic policies (generally monetary or fiscal policy) • Members give up powers. Strong central institutions which dictate common economic policy • Complete economic integration: • All economic policy areas are harmonised • The capacity of states to implement independent policies disappears • Central institutions become the centres of economic decision-making
Economic integration to achieve competitiveness • Why did a customs union (the EC) decide to increase the pace of economic integration during the 1980s and 1990s? • Increasing globalisation of the world economy (increased competition, especially from the US, Japan, and the NICs) • More sophisticated systems to dodge trade barriers (multinational corporations) • Belief that market fragmentation (nationally divided markets) was reducing economies of scale
The limits of European competitiveness • The costs of the ‘non-Europe’ (Cecchini, 1991): • Physical barriers: Intra-European stoppages, controls at border checkpoints, red-tape, different currencies… • Technical barriers: Different national product standards and technical regulations across Member States • Fiscal barriers: Lack of fiscal harmonisation
Physical barriers • Custom related costs: • Customs controls, border stoppages • Paperwork and red-tape • Exchange of low-value added perishable goods suffered as a result • High administrative costs and regulatory hassles: • Higher cost of red-tape of SMEs (higher proportion of their business volume, and lack of expertise and human resources)
Physical barriers (II) • Protected markets (II): • Fear of foreign dependence leads to protection of ‘national strategic sectors’ • Many sectors fall under this umbrella: petrochemical industries, shipbuilding, iron and steel, tobacco, car manufacturing, telecommunications, air transport,... • Formation of monopolies (BT, Deutsche Telekom, SIP, Air France, Iberia,...) or oligopolies • Cost of protection born by the consumer: • Lack of competition and underperforming industries • And companies: • Higher prices for services than their competitors
Physical barriers (III) • Different currencies: • Transaction costs of changing currencies • Higher costs of holding higher international reserves • Costs associated to exchange rate volatility • Higher interest rates in many countries
Technical barriers • Different product standards and technical regulations: • Problems and additional costs for consumers • Cost for firms which had to adapt their products to different national standards • Cost premium for SMEs • Protected public-sector procurement: • Government supply and construction contrast restricted to national firms • Or technical regulations discriminating against foreign bidders
Fiscal barriers • Different fiscal regimes: • Different regimes for companies • Different VAT rates • Different national accounting standards: • Duplication or multiplication of accounting standards for multinational companies • ‘Fiscal suspicion’ by national authorities in order to prevent tax evasion • Premium for SMEs
The expected benefits of economic integration • Cecchini report (1988). Cost saving effects: • ‘Static trade effect’: benefits reaped from allowing public authorities to buy from the cheapest suppliers • ‘Competition effect’: Downward pressure on prices as a result of greater competition • ‘Restructuring effect’: Reorganisation of industrial sectors and individual companies as a result of greater competition • Other possible benefits: • Benefits on investment, innovation (rationalisation of R&D expenditure) and growth • Savings for the public sector (lower government subsidies for inefficient firms
The expected benefits of economic integration (II) • Combination of cost saving effects results in two kinds of benefits: • Direct benefits: from the eradication of economic borders • Indirect benefits: from economic restructuring, increases in trade and competition and greater economies of scale • Result: • The emergence of virtuous cycles of innovation and competition • Lowering of prices for consumers • Greater job creation
Estimation of benefits • Cecchini (1988): 4 to 7% of Europe’s GDP • Baldwin:
The expected benefits of monetary union • For all Member States adopting the Euro: • Price transparency across borders, inducing a greater ‘competition effect’ • Elimination of transaction costs of changing currencies • Savings through holding lower international reserves • Reduction of uncertainty caused by exchange rate volatility • Specific benefits for peripheral economies: • Image premium and credibility in international markets • Monetary and macroeconomic stability (lower inflation, deficit, debt, and interest rates)
The possible impact of monetary union • Possible impact: • Large benefits expected … • But Commission reluctant to issue estimates (as was the case of with the Single Market)
The impact of economic integration • Is European economic integration delivering the benefits predicted by its supporters? • Has the EU experienced the increases in trade, the more efficient allocation of resources, and the greater growth and welfare gains expected? • Have European economies become more competitive?
Trade • Sizeable increase in trade across the EU • Greater expansion in absolute terms than in other developed areas of the world • But not in relative terms, where the US has expanded more (but not Japan) • This means that in a world context the evolution of European trade has been rather disappointing, especially in comparison with countries like Canada or Mexico, which have undergone milder processes of integration
Trade at a national level • Several countries have experienced significant increases: • Countries with relatively open economies: Ireland • Countries which were relatively closed: Finland, Sweden, Spain, or Italy • The trend is far from universal: • Germany, Greece, and Portugal have seen their exports as a share of GDP decline • Luxembourg, Greece, and Portugal have seen a decline in their import share • The lack of a clear pattern in the evolution of trade suggests that no greater territorial specialization is evident
Changes in trade patterns • Increase in intra-industry trade… • But, stability of inter-industry trade • This has prevented a further concentration of capital intensive industries in core countries to the detriment of the periphery • Former lagging countries such as Ireland and Spain have profited from integration to expand trade and attract capital intensive industries… • Portugal and Greece have been less successful • The level of intra-industry trade suggests that the expected specialization may be starting to happen
Foreign direct investment • Early stages of integration seem to have had a lower impact on FDI than on trade • Net inflows of FDI oscillate with economic cycles • Flows of FDI reached their peak around 1990 • After the implementation of the Single Market they followed a downward trend • In international comparisons the EU does not score favourably • When compared to the US, net inflows of FDI into the EU have declined with respect to the period before 1993. • FDI flows among the member states have lost some importance... • But, outflows to the rest of the world have increased.
Economies of scale • Ex-ante reports highlighted that economic integration was to bring about a more efficient concentration of resources • And a restructuring of companies • Number of mergers and acquisitions has increased by more than two and a half times between 1987 and 1998 • The bulk of this happened in anticipation of the Single Market • Transnational M&As have taken off after the Single Market and in anticipation of EMU.
Economies of scale (II) • Three stages in the process: • National M&As: started to take place during the late 1980s in anticipation of the Single Market • European M&As: the percentage of M&A involving at least one foreign company almost doubled between 1990 and 1998. • Trans-national M&As: Increasingly M&As are global. In 1998 one third of all M&As involved at least one non-EU partner. • During the 1990s there has been an important increase in the volume of the deals. • The total volume of deals has been multiplied by six between 1991 and 1998 • Greater expansion in outward M&As
Economies of scale (III) • European companies have become more ambitious and aggressive: • Probably in connection to the launch of the Euro • But also as a result of the emergence of new TNCs in Europe resulting from previous mergers • New mergers increasingly involve companies from two different European countries: • Orange and Mannesman • Vodafone and Mannesman • And also truly global M&As: • Daimler-Chriysler • Terra Lycos • Repsol-YPF
Economies of scale (IV) • But have EU companies become the leading actors in international M&As? • Despite the increase in numbers and size, EU companies have lagged behind the US... • And during much of the 1990s also behind Japan and the Asian Dragons • Only the Asian crisis of 1997/98 changed the tide • And a diminishing number of European companies can be found among the top 50 in the world
Productivity • European labour productivity has been reducing the gap with the US in the post-war decades • Convergence came to an end in the second half of the 1980s • Increasing technology gap between the US and the EU • Permanence of fragmented markets in Europe (monopolies which prevented access to new technologies) • Rigidity of European labour markets (which kept the young out of work) • Productivity has grown faster in the US in the 1990s • Some encouraging signs for EU (advantage in mobiles)
Productivity in selected EU countries Source:World Bank World Development Indicators (2000).
Growth • On average, the EU has had slightly greater growth than the US and lower than Japan during the post-war decades • Precisely at the time of European economic integration, the roles have been reversed • Greater growth in the US (double that of the EMU area) • Lower in Japan • Strong internal divergence in growth patterns in the EU • Extremely high growth in Ireland and Luxembourg • Moderate in Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands and Portugal • Low elsewhere in the EU
Conclusion • The impact of economic integration on the economic performance of the EU has not been as spectacular and immediate as predicted by ex-ante studies • The gap between the EU and the US has increased in many areas (growth, productivity, trade, M&As) • Different economic cycles may have a lot to say about diverging economic performances • However, economic integration may be setting the bases for a quicker adaptation by the EU in the future to new economic challenges