170 likes | 346 Views
Economic and political challenges of acceding to the euro area in the post-Lehman Brothers world: Latvia. Jānis Bērziņš – Riga Stradins University janis@berzins.in. Background. Euro adoption as main goal Until 2007 was fulfilling all indicators of the Maastricht criteria, except inflation
E N D
Economic and political challenges of acceding to the euro area in the post-Lehman Brothers world: Latvia Jānis Bērziņš – Riga Stradins University janis@berzins.in
Background • Euro adoption as main goal • Until 2007 was fulfilling all indicators of the Maastricht criteria, except inflation • Although facing a process of unsustainable social and economic development, could have adopted the Euro
Latvia’s economic problems • Deepening economic restructurization after joining the EU • Ineffective model/strategy of development, both from inside (Latvia) and outside (impositions from the EU) • Changing strategy of the actors of the financial sector after Latvia joining the EU • Lack of appropriated regulation, as a result of neoliberal ideology • Market determines everything • Politicians and civil servants have no responsibility for what is going in the economic and social spheres.
Price Stability • M2 increased 163% between May 2004 and Jun e 2008 • Official discourse: • Increasing wage affecting costs and profits • Fuel • Food • Indirect taxes and administrated prices • Energy • Lagged effective depreciation of the lat • Buoyant domestic demand associated with credit growth
Government Budgetary Position • Deficit of -3,9% of the GDP in 1999 • Surplus of 0,1% in 2007 • After the crisis: expected to be around -13%
Exchange rate • Exchange rate was fixed against the Euro in 30 December 2004 • Ls 0,702804 for 1 Euro • Corridor of + or - 1% • Member of the ERM II since 2 May 2005
Additional factors • The ERM II indicators aren’t adequate to deal with Latvia • They are based on models related to well developed countries • They presuppose some level of “normality” • Sustainable development
Additional factors • The ERM II indicators aren’t adequate to deal with Latvia • They are based on models related to well developed countries • They presuppose some level of “normality” • Sustainable development • May be temporally falsified (Latvia did it!) • These indicators became an autonomised expression of the Maastricht criteria, turning to be an objective per se • Lost objectivity
Latvia and the adotion of Euro • Maastricht criteria is irrelevant in Latvia’s case • The political gains surpass the economic problems • Latvia’s economic size is less than 1/3 of Munich’s GDP • No risk of spreading inflation to the monetary union • Economic stability as development facilitator • Even the IMF doesn’t believe it is possible through “normal ways” (last report October 2009)