Economics

العمل نحو النموذج الاقتصادي التالي

Feb 27, 2018 Mohamed A. El-Erian

لاجونا بيتش ــ على مدار عقود من الزمن، وَضَع العالَم الغربي يقينه في نموذج اقتصادي محدد بشكل جيد ومقبول على نطاق واسع ويضم تطبيقات على الصعيدين الوطني والعالمي. ولكن على خلفية من تراجع الثقة في قدرة "الخبراء" على تفسير التطورات الاقتصادية، ناهيك عن توقعها، تدهور ذلك اليقين. وفي انتظار نموذج جديد لم يظهر بعد، يواجه الاقتصاد العالمي خطرا متناميا يتمثل في التفتت، مع تأخر الدول الأكثر عُرضة للخطر بالفعل عن الركب لمسافة أبعد.

يتجسد النموذج الذي كان حتى وقت قريب يهيمن على قدر كبير من الفِكر الاقتصادي وعملية صنع السياسات في ما يسمى "إجماع واشنطن" ــ والذي يتألف من عشر وصفات يمكن تطبيقها على نطاق واسع في إدارة السياسات في مختلف الدول على أساس فردي ــ وعلى المستوى الدولي، في ملاحقة العولمة الاقتصادية والمالية. كانت الفكرة ببساطة أن الدول ستستفيد من تبني التسعير القائم على السوق وإلغاء الضوابط التنظيمية في الداخل، مع تعزيز التجارة الحرة وتدفقات رأس المال المفتوحة نسبيا عبر الحدود.

كان تعميق الروابط الاقتصادية والمالية بين الدول يُعَد الوسيلة الأفضل لتحقيق مكاسب دائمة، وتعزيز الكفاءة والإنتاجية، وتخفيف التهديد المتمثل في عدم الاستقرار المالي. كما اعتُبِر هذا النهج كفيلا بجلب فوائد مصاحبة، من تعزيز الحراك الاجتماعي الداخلي إلى الحد من خطر الصراع العنيف بين الدول. وقد وَعَد بدعم التقارب الإيجابي بين الدول النامية والمتقدمة، وبالتالي الحد من كل من الفقر المطلق والفقر النسبي وإضعاف الحوافز الاقتصادية للهجرة غير القانونية عبر الحدود.

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to PS Digital

Access every new PS commentary, our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More – and the full PS archive.

Subscribe Now

Restoring Trust in Expertise
Eduardo Munox Alvarez/Stringer

Politics 24

Restoring Trust in Expertise

Minouche Shafik proposes several steps to revive public trust in those shaping consequential policy decisions.
Big Tech Meets Big Government
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Economics 4

Big Tech Meets Big Government

Mohamed A. El-Erian
In an ideal world, major tech companies would recognize and adjust to their growing systemic importance in step with external actors, including governments and consumers, thereby striking the right balance between innovation, consumer benefits and protection, and national security. But this is not an ideal world.
warns tech firms that if they don't recognize their systemic importance, they may face a powerful backlash.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 13 Comments on this article

Pablo Andrade Mar 4, 2018

Africa mighty be the extreme the case but Latin Ameica is facing the same threat
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Cary Fraser Mar 4, 2018

According to Mohammed El-Erian "Complacency was a central reason for the last economic paradigm’s loss of credibility." It is an observation that confirms J.K. Galbraith's astute quip: "The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking."

The view that the Washington consensus could inform the long-term evolution of the global economy was erroneous - especially since economic transformation has increasingly shifted the central economic axis of the global economy to the Asia-Pacific region after the end of the Cold War.

It is time to move beyond Washington - especially since it is clear that the American political system has entered a long-term crisis.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Stan Sorscher Mar 4, 2018

Here's what I hear you saying. 1) Once production moved to low-cost countries, the economics profession was held hostage to defending that investment. 2) Economists defended neoliberalism as an orthodoxy, denying the success of well-designed industrial policies and manufacturing strategies in other countries.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
B Wilds Mar 3, 2018

The growth in inequality is a "pox on the house" of society. For decades the rich and powerful have been increasing grabbing a larger slice of the economic pie. In 1929, before the Great Depression, Marriner Eccles described a lack of "effective demand" by saying: "The United States economy is like a poker game where the chips have become concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, and where the other fellows can stay in the game only by borrowing. When their credit runs out the game will stop. The game stopped when players ran out of chips." More on this subject in the article below.

http://Inequality Is Far Worse For Society Than We Think28.html
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Per Kurowski Mar 1, 2018

Deregulation? Why do regulators want banks to hold more capital against what, by being perceived as risky has been made quite innocous, than against what, precisely because it is perceived as safe, is so much more dangerous?
http://perkurowski.blogspot.com/2016/04/here-are-17-reasons-for-why-i-believe.html
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Godfree Roberts Feb 28, 2018

"Building support for a new unifying economic paradigm to replace the discredited Washington Consensus"?

Chill, dude, it's already built. Not just built, but inhabited, too. 1.4 billion people live in it and like it. According to a recent World Values Survey, 96% of Chinese expressed confidence in their government (compared to 37% of Americans). Likewise, 83% of Chinese thought their country is run for everyone’s benefit rather than for a few big interest groups (36% of Americans thought the same). http://www.wvsevsdb.com/wvs/WVSData.jsp?Idioma=I+(http://www.wvsevsdb.com/wvs/WVSData.jsp?Idioma=I)

Here's the funny part, though: our media have done such a fine job of dis- mis- and under-reporting it that practically nobody in the West has any idea of what it is. Worse, they have very wrong ideas, which will take years to correct. By which time the paradigm will have evolved and China will be even further ahead. Amusing, no?

And BTW, according to Edelman's 2016 Report, 80–90% of Chinese trust their government, the highest trust level of any national government. And why not: their unifying economic paradigm is working great!
https://www.slideshare.net/EdelmanAPAC/2016-edelman-trust-barometer-china-english?qid=c13f229d-8a8f-4a93-bce8-aeb779e8cc70&v=&b=&from_search=1 .
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
jagjeet sinha Feb 28, 2018

PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE ASSETS - THE HEART OF INCLUSIVENESS
Economic Paradigm shifts became inevitable once Democracy took over.
Inequalities across borders becomes irrelevant once the poorest can be confined.
Inequalities within borders cannot be wished away, the poorest can't be confined.
The causes of Inequalities within were misunderstood deliberately.
Blaming Globalization was demagoguery - that Democracy exposed.
Inequalities within can only be addressed by Fiscal Redesign.
So that the benefits of Globalization can be distributed within.
Unwillingness to end Inequalities within - enables the Marginalized Majority.

Enlightenment that enables Unlimited Inclusiveness requires Chancellors.
Governors are unable to secure the best hope - their tools long past due.
Unlimited Inclusiveness requires Public Infrastructure Assets that builds.
New MegaCities Architecture enables Unlimited Inclusiveness.
In its absence Unlimited Migration requires facilitation - One Language uber allies.
Even with One Language - geographic dispersion is needed for Inclusiveness.
The Anglosphere Template has Multiple New Londons - across its Geography.

The Mandarins Architecture is predicated on MegaCities Megalomania.
The Mandarins Architecture replicates The Anglosphere Template.
Both now confronted by Inequalities within - Democracy will prevail.
Until Inclusiveness is the foundation - The Tokaido Enlightenment.
Kansai and Kanto linked by Shinkansen bridges distance and time.
But above all - MegaCities Architecture enables Unlimited Inclusiveness.
In the Anglosphere, Canada is building The Tokaido Corridor.
Windsor to Quebec linked by Infrastructure creating Inclusiveness.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Henry Rech Feb 27, 2018

It's not about economics. Globalization and financialization are driven by the politics and ideology of power, greed and self interest.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Frans Verhagen Feb 27, 2018

The next economic paradigm has to include not only a clear foundation of the mentioned justice and fairness principle, but also the unmentioned climate change principle, the physical reality upon which fair societies are to be built.

A realistic proposal for a new integrated economic, social and ecological order would at least include the physical reality of a warming climate and the social reality of a financial/monetary system of gross inequity not only domestically but especially globally.

Verhagen 2012 "The Tierra Solution: Resolving the climate crisis through monetary transformation" proposes a transformative way of dealing with those two basically unacceptable realities of a looming climate catastrophe and an unjust, unsustainable and, therefore, unstable international monetary system. The conceptual, institutional, ethical and strategic dimensions of the proposed monetary carbon standard of a specific tonnage of CO2e per person are updated at www.timun.net.

An outstanding economics author and global warming specialist stated about this carbon-based international monetary system proposal: “The further into the global warming area we go, the more physics and politics narrows our possible paths of action. Here’s a very cogent and well-argued account of one of the remaining possibilities.” Bill McKibben, May 17, 2011
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Marc Laventurier Feb 27, 2018

Capitalism, now financialized, has done precisely what it was destined to do.

Chomsky presents a relevant look at the reigning 'paradigm', U.S. style:
https://www.netflix.com/watch/80083790?trackId=13752289&tctx=0%2C0%2C93adcc13d286714ecb92b17f105b8ee1e7e2971a%3A9dbed7393507f67a0c7112ab910b9849142eec6e
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
rob de laet Feb 27, 2018

I have great respect for Mohamed El Erian's analyses and have been following him for a long time. The call for a new economic paradigm is important and urgent. ''Building consensus around a revised unifying paradigm will not be easy. It will be an analytically challenging, politically demanding, and time-consuming process that will probably entail the consideration and rejection of a few bad ideas before good ones take root. It will also be a more multidisciplinary and intellectually inclusive process – more bottom-up than top-down – than the one that preceded it. It will need to adapt intelligently to innovations in artificial intelligence, Big Data, and mobility.'' I agree that the next paradigm will see much more bottom-up thinking and organizing, as citizens are connecting directly from the community level up to a planetary level through the internet. States as intermediaries necessarily decline in importance because of the increased global networks. In this multidisciplinary process, we need to include straight from the beginning the limitations of our Planet and its resources. Central in our thinking must be the importance of the natural support systems of our biosphere and the need to get to a circular, sustainable human culture and economy, embedded in a sound vision of our ecology. Our planning horizons need to focus on multi-generational development. Our greatest challenge lies in the need to organize ourselves radically differently if we are to thrive as a species within the fabric of life on our beautiful Planet.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
M M Feb 27, 2018

Very good article from the author, well said. Trust (or the lack of it) and the Bipolar political system in many western countries, and the authoritarian rule in at least two major countries, are also major factors that have contributed to the current situation. How can one reinstate Trust between the G7 countries and in the major financial Institutions after so many events / serious mistakes that took place in the last decade or so and considering the aforementioned and the issues raised by the author in his article? One hates to be pessimistic, but actions or the reaction thus far of the political leadership of the G7 countries gives very little hope for any real breakthrough on any of the major outstanding issues.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Paul Daley Feb 27, 2018

There was way too much tolerance for ignorance and way too many comforting assumptions regarding reserves and capital stocks in the Washington consensus. Those gaps need to be filled by full information on the beneficial ownership of capital assets throughout the world. Constructing a new economic consensus with the same deficient information we've used to date is likely to be simply a waste of time.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/Te2O1Gyar

العمل نحو النموذج الاقتصادي التالي

Subscribe to PS Digital

Restoring Trust in Expertise

Big Tech Meets Big Government

New Comment

Contact us

Handpicked to read next

Does Trade Fuel Inequality?

Log in/Register

العمل نحو النموذج الاقتصادي التالي

Subscribe to PS Digital

Handpicked to read next

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification