Let me first thank Tom Hoenig and his colleagues for inviting
me again to this symposium. It is always a treat to be here in more ways than
one: to partake of the rich feast of insightful and interesting papers, illuminating
commentaries and discussions, accompanied by the warm hospitality of
the Kansas City Fed in this incomparable setting in the shadow of the majestic
Tetons.
It is difficult to provide an overview of this rather disparate
set of sessions reflecting various facets of globalisation ranging from the
new economic geography to monetary policy. Only someone as skilled as Martin
Feldstein can do that effectively. As it happens, however, speaking on a personal
note, the sequencing of this symposium coincidentally reflects my own evolution
as a professional economist. I started out in research and policy as an urban
economist, made my way through policy making in industry, trade and fiscal areas;
while finally ending up as a central banker in charge of monetary policy. So
I will go through a similar sequence in my remarks in this overview, but perhaps
spending more time on my first love, urban economics, since that is central
to understanding the new economic geography. Depending on the time I may not
be able to get past my first love today. In any case I feel more comfortable
with my first love than my current marriage to monetary policy!
ASIAN URBANISATION: PROXIMITY PROMOTING PRODUCTIVITY
Anthony Venables set the stage for this symposium through his
succinct presentation on the new economic geography. Among other issues, he
focused on the productivity promoting aspects of proximity through the realisation
of agglomeration economies from clustering of economic activities in large urban
agglomerations. Gene Grossman and Esteban Rossi-Hansberg characterised
today’s trade pattern as trade in tasks in trying to understand the burgeoning
off-shoring trends in production and service activities. I would like to draw
your attention to some particular characteristics of Asian urbanisation that
have, in my view, contributed to the whole off-shoring process as we now know
it – first in terms of merchandise trade in East and South East Asia and
later in the outsourcing of service activities for which India has come to attention
in recent years.
To begin with, one may note that a key characteristic of Asian
urbanisation has been the heavy concentration of economic activities in coastal
based urban regions.1 In fact, Japanese economic growth in the 1950s
and 1960s owed much to the conscious strategy of concentrating economic activity
in the 500 km Tokkaido urban corridor stretching from Tokyo through Nagoya to
Osaka. Douglas Irwin talked about the absence of policy effects in Venables’,
paper. The concentration of economic activity in this corridor in Japan was
policy driven through focused infrastructure investment in the region as typified
by the Shinkansen - the bullet train. By 1970, 60 per cent of Japan’s
urban population (and a larger proportion of the economy) was concentrated in
this region. This economic concentration economised on infrastructure investment
that would have been larger had it been spread out over a larger part of the
country. The geographical proximity of different activities gave rise to agglomeration
economies that aided rapid productivity growth and also enabled innovation in
traditional production processes through the introduction of new systems such
as Just-in-Time (JiT) modes of inventory management, great outsourcing of components,
and total quality control processes that
contributed to the drastic reduction in manufacturing costs
that was the foundation of Japan’s competitiveness. The more efficient inventory
management resulting from JiT, overall supply management, total quality control
systems also enabled significant reduction in corporate need for bank financing,
leading to significant change in bank portfolios. Furthermore, the Japanese
economy benefited from high savings and investment rates, in excess of 40 per
cent of GDP by the late 1960s, a pattern repeated by some of the later star
performers of East and South East Asia. Thus high economic growth has been achieved
in much of Asia, the main growth story of the latter part of the last century,
without significant absorption of foreign savings. It is no wonder then that
Raghuram Rajan and his colleagues cannot find correlation between the use of
foreign capital and economic growth.
I describe this process at some length to essentially make
the point that this was the precursor to today’s off-shoring of tasks. The idea
of outsourcing components in the engineering industry, particularly the automobile
industry, originally emerged in the Tokkaido corridor of Japan where economic
distance between suppliers and assemblers was reduced through investments in
efficient transportation and other infrastructure. What was traditionally done
at one plant location under the same roof got outsourced to many distinct companies
located within striking distance in the same region. Thus intra-regional
trade in tasks arose: the way the production process was organised in the region
locally has now been extended through to its logical conclusion across borders
through long distances. If task trade could be done within a region, with the
fall in transportation and communication costs it can be done across borders
and long distances as well. As Venables mentioned, "the product market
effects can be long range – firms in New York may benefit from a large market
in California, and reductions in international shipping costs will increase
market access for firms from a continent away".
To the extent that a good deal of the off-shoring activity
is concentrated in Asia, there are good reasons for it. The strategy of concentrated
spatial development in urban concentrations was emulated by the flying geese
of Asia mentioned by Venables. The focus of growth in the 1970s and 1980s shifted
to the tigers like Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan. Singapore and
Hong Kong being city states naturally exhibited strong natural economic concentration.
Furthermore, economic activity got concentrated in Seoul/Pusan in South Korea,
and in Taipei/Kaohsiung in Taiwan. By the late 1970s/ early 1980s, 70 per cent
of urban population in South Korea was concentrated in the Seoul and Pusan
regions. This concentrated pattern of development later spread from the
tigers to the cubs, the Bangkok region in Thailand, Jabotobek (Jakarta and its
environs) in Indonesia, and Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia. It then moved on to the
coastal regions of China - specifically to Pearl River Delta Special Economic
Zones and Shanghai. Once again even a large country like China decided to concentrate
economic activity in specified coastal regions.
What were the common characteristics of all these regions?
First, there was heavy investment in transportation links with rest of the world,
such as, airports, ports and communication infrastructure. Second, export oriented
outward oriented labor using manufacturing gained prominence while consistently
ascending the technology ladder over time.
Did all these lead to a death of distance? Consider the following.
An urban coastal corridor emerged from Tokyo to Sydney, through Seoul, Taipei,
Shanghai, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore and Jakarta. If we extend Venables’
argument on productivity enhancement through increase in size of urban agglomerations,
we can begin to appreciate the productivity effects of this mega urban corridor
in East Asia. Business and production linkages within this corridor are intense:
there is a great deal of off-shoring and task trade within the corridor resulting
from the death of distance. It is the emergence of this corridor that has brought
off-shoring into its own with the grafting of these dense linkages within Asia
to the outside, particularly to the US. These productivity effects have presumably
contributed to the overall downward pressure on prices of products produced
in this multi-country Asian region: the globalisation effect on relative prices
that Rogoff has talked about.
The various examples given by Gene Grossman and Rossi-Hansberg on the
one hand and by Friedman (2004) on the other, mostly concentrate on the interlinkage
between these countries and with and within multi-national corporations (MNCs)
from the US and Japan. The manufacturing flat world essentially spans the Asian
coastal corridor linked with the US. The dense inter-linkages have also been
possible because of an unusual degree of openness to external ideas that can
be observed throughout the region, particularly through receptivity to high
level professionals. Even Beijing is now said to be host to about 100,000 foreign
citizens. It is the physical location of these international professionals that
has also promoted off shoring and trade in tasks.
What is interesting is how India is somewhat different, but
how this difference itself promoted the trade in services. First, the ethos
in India was of dispersal of development. In fact, urban concentration was frowned
upon and discouraged. Second, as described by T.N. Srinivasan, the import substituting
inward oriented manufacturing approach persisted till the 1980s. Third, investment
in infrastructure, particularly urban infrastructure was of lower intensity
- this includes ports, airports, railways, and highways. Furthermore, no attempt
was made to concentrate activity in coastal areas. Imagine what would have happened
if India had developed her East coast in accordance with the East Asia miracle
– a point similar to that made by T.N. Srinivasan. Interestingly, metros like
Calcutta, Madras and Bombay slowed down in the 1980s and 1990s and became Kolkata,
Chennai and Mumbai, while inland cities like Delhi, Pune, Bangalore,
Chandigarh and Hyderabad have prospered. Though infrastructure investment in
transportation hubs and logistics is finally receiving importance now, biases
against labour using manufacturing continue and hence India has still not followed
the labour using export-oriented manufacturing strategy that was in vogue in
East and South East Asia. What are the features of the cities that have prospered?
They all exhibit affinity to high technology, have concentration of higher education,
culture of meritocracy, a high knowledge base and research & development
laboratories. All that was needed was communication infrastructure, which appeared
in the 1990s and Y2K was an added bonus. It was this very lack of investment
in transportation and communication infrastructure, both within the country
and to the outside world, that has ironically led to these inland cities becoming
software off-shoring concentrations. All that was needed was investment in communication
and electronic infrastructure that could enable information technology transmission
at low cost across the world: again the death of distance for services off-shoring.
If one looks at the pattern of outsourcing in India, one finds
that outsourcing of service activities got born in Bangalore and then spread
elsewhere. T.N. Srinivasan talked about the relatively slow growth of India’s
merchandise trade: what he didn’t mention is that gross Indian service exports
are now almost equivalent to its merchandise exports. Gross exports and imports
of merchandise trade and services put together are now in excess of 45 per cent
of GDP, and growing at about 20 per cent a year. This figure was just under
20 per cent in 1990-91. There is perhaps no other country which has a similar
composition of merchandise and service exports and illustrates the large role
of service off-shoring in the flattening world as it extends to India. The openness
of the Indian economy is quite high now, even on the capital account as indicated
by the large increase in gross capital flows, (i.e., both inflows
and outflows), which are now in excess of 25 per cent of GDP.
It is in this way that East and South East Asia have led the
way in facilitating the flattening of the world in merchandise trade and trade
in associated tasks, and India’s different pattern of development to the outsourcing
of information technology activities that have enabled wider trade in services.
The flat world therefore extends from the United States through East and South
East Asia to India. The distinction I have made between the merchandise trade
and that in services is now getting blurred as East Asian countries also partake
in information technology outsourcing and as Indian firms get their act together
in manufacturing.
WHERE DO WE GO IN THE FUTURE?
What of the future role of Asia in the flattening world? What
are the implications of on going Asian urbanisation patterns on the future direction
of capital flows and world real interest rates? Let me address some of these
questions in a futuristic scenario.
Asian urban population is expected to double in the next 30
years; about 1.3 billion people, equivalent to about 60 per cent of total expected
urban population growth in the world, and equivalent to the urban population
growth in Asia that took place over the last 50 years, are likely to be added
to urban areas in Asia during this period. 12 of 21 cities of over 10 million
by 2015 will be in Asia. So the doubling of the global labour force talked about
by Venables will accelerate adding to the further flattening of the world,
especially if we take account of the resurgence of Eastern Europe and Africa
as talked about by Svejnar and Collier. If large urban agglomerations promote
productivity growth, as posited by Venables, the shift in the mega city fulcrum
to Asia is itself suggestive of relatively higher productivity growth in this
region. Since Asia is still a technology follower, with much catching up to
do, the potential for further significant productivity growth is high, and hence
the likelihood of continuing low inflation in the world.
Chairman Bernanke has earlier talked about the savings glut.
Since world savings haven’t really grown since the late 1990s, while investment
has fallen, particularly in Asia after the 1997 financial crisis, he could perhaps
have talked instead about the investment drought in Asia. The relatively higher
decline in investment in Asia, compared to savings rates, has probably contributed
to the emergence of foreign exchange surpluses, and consequent rapid accumulation
of foreign exchange reserves, after the 1997 Asian crisis. The mirror image,
of course, is the US current account deficit, reflecting its opposite savings/investment
imbalance. The question is whether the Asian relative investment drought will
continue well into the future?
The expectation of urbanisation in Asia in the next 30 years
in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Indonesia and China would suggest that
there will be unprecedented demand for investment in infrastructure in the coming
decades in this region. Chinese infrastructure investment is shifting inward
from the coast: this may be less efficient than on the coast and hence the demand
for resources could well be correspondingly higher. Although India and other
countries in South and South East Asia may concentrate investments more towards
the coast, the backlog of infrastructure investment in India is so high that
its demand for resources can be expected to be correspondingly higher.
The question that I am concerned with is whether regional savings
will be adequate for meeting this demand as they have been in the last decade.
Will the globalising world face the opposite of a savings glut or investment
drought? With the kind of urbanisation pattern that I have outlined for Asia
in the next 30 years, and the associated demand for enhanced resources for infrastructure
investment, it is likely that the demand for external savings will re-merge.
If we add the possible emergence of similar demand from Africa, the likelihood
is that we will revert to the traditional pattern of financial capital moving
in the right direction, from the rich to less rich countries in Asia and also
in Africa. If Raghuram Rajan repeats his correlation exercises in 2030 he might
emerge a happier man. This will, however, coincide with the adverse demographics
of Europe and Japan contributing to contraction of world savings.
Various questions arise. Will we then see a hardening of world
real interest rates? What will be the new challenges that we, as monetary authorities,
will face in the years to come? How soon will this reversal take place in global
imbalances? Will they be gradual or sudden? If this scenario is correct,
the commodity price boom that Paul Collier talked about will continue for some
time; in which case additional demand will arise from Africa as well. We should,
therefore, expect an acceleration of cross border global capital flows, with
the usual implication for exchange rate and monetary management in the recipient
countries.
Another interesting comment on off-shoring that the Venables
and Grossman papers have talked about is off-shoring low skill activities. What
is intriguing is that great investment is taking place in human resources in
Asia as well: Tokyo has 113 universities, Beijing has 59, and Hong Kong and
Singapore are becoming educational centres. US and European educational institutions
are competing with each other to off-shore their activities in Asia. So where
will this off-shoring stop?
2
CONTEMPORARY MONETARY PUZZLES
Much of discussion in this symposium has centered around the
rearrangement of economic thinking to take account of the efforts of globalisation
and the new economic geography. What have the implications been for central
bankers? Rogoff has shown how monetary stability has been accompanied by price
stability and output stability, but not asset price and exchange rate stability.
He goes on to say that exchange rates do not really reflect fundamentals and
act more like asset prices. How do we then to look at exchange rates as equilibrating
price mechanisms? Does this mean that shifts in the Chinese exchange rate determination
will have no effect on other variables? Given the complexity of trade patterns
and offshoring of tasks, and complex production patterns behind many products,
it would perhaps not be surprising that exchange rates are no longer to be seen
to reflect fundamentals. If a product consists of a large number of components
that have been produced over a dozen different countries, and even assembled
across two countries, how will any bilateral exchange rate changes be expected
to affect trade patterns? Moreover, with the proportion of value added in upstream
(e.g., research and development and design) and downstream (e.g.,
marketing and trading) activities increasing, the role of exchange rates in
effecting trade flows becomes even more complex. In
fact we have seen low pass through of exchange rate depreciation
to inflation – both in developing and developed countries.
I would like to reflect on a few other contemporary puzzles as well.
LOW CONSUMER INFLATION IN THE PRESENCE OF ABUNDANT LIQUIDITY AND INCREASING
ASSET PRICES
First, we have been experiencing low global inflation despite
abundant liquidity in the last few years, with little sign of change. Is this
a result of globalisation or effective worldwide monetary policy?
Kenneth Rogoff in his paper has argued plausibly that high
productivity Asia, particularly China, could not have exported deflation. As
he says, "But hyper-competitive Chinese exports only affect the relative
price. As long as the central bank targets inflation in the overall price level,
which it can over sufficiently long horizons, cheap goods from China simply
imply that other goods must become expensive. From this perspective, we might
actually say that China is exporting inflation to other sectors of the global
economies". Whereas I naturally find Kenneth’s theoretical argument persuasive,
is it borne out empirically? The global economy is currently awash with
liquidity. As we all know, around eight years ago, the US Fed responded
to the `low probability but highly adverse events’ (Blinder and Reis, 2005)
leading up to the Russian debt default and the LTCM collapse by an emergency
cut in interest rates in September, October and November 1998. Even though the
reduction was just 25 basis points each month, it shifted the monetary policy
stance to accommodation. Later, prompted by a deflation scare, the fed fund
rate was cut over a 42-month stretch from December 2000 to June 2003 to a 45
year low of 1 per cent, taking the real federal funds rate into negative territory.
Thus, real policy rates were effectively zero or negative until very recently
in the US and perhaps remain below the "Wicksellian" long-term
neutral rate. Real policy rates in the UK and Euro area are also generally hovering
around zero. Coupled with the benign policy rates, money supply growth has increased
worldwide during this period. The policy accommodation pursued until recently
by the US and the European Central Bank has had a global impact, flooding the
rest of the world with an abundance of liquidity. Low interest rates in the
US have encouraged capital to flow into emerging market economies. For the countries
that prefer some form of managed parity against the US dollar this has resulted
in a large build-up of foreign exchange reserves and excessive domestic liquidity,
amplifying the Fed’s policy stance. Examination of the data clearly reveals
a global glut of liquidity, which has facilitated highly leveraged positions,
debt financed consumption and booming credit growth, raising financial stability
concerns. The great puzzle in current global developments is indeed the co-existence
of abundant liquidity and low consumer inflation. Even soaring oil prices and
the elevated prices of non-fuel commodities have yet to affect the overall price
level significantly. Such low levels of inflation have not been witnessed since
the pre-World War period. So I remain puzzled: is Asia not exporting deflation
despite overall increases in global monetary aggregates? Or, will we inevitably
see global inflation eventually because of this global glut of liquidity? Or,
is the spill over essentially in asset prices?
STRONG GLOBAL GROWTH DESPITE SOARING OIL PRICES
The second puzzle is the continuing strong global growth despite
high oil and commodity prices. Can we attribute this to increasing oil use efficiency
along with productivity effect of globalisation alluded to earlier?
After the oil shocks of the 1970s, the first half of the 1990s
witnessed deflationary pressures in terms of real oil prices. However, this
lull in oil prices turned out to be short-lived. Soaring oil prices have characterised
the period since 2000. Oil prices are scaling new heights every day driven mainly
by growing or unchanged demand, low inventories, lack of spare capacity, and
geo political tensions and uncertainties. While the accommodating global monetary
conditions have placed oil futures in the class of sought-after financial assets,
the persisting high levels of oil prices increasingly indicate that a large
part of the oil price hike has attained a permanent character. Yet, global growth
remains remarkably on track. Indeed, the growth momentum has only improved from
the second half of the 1990s to the first half of this decade. The growth in
world trade volume (goods and services) has also recovered after some slowdown
in 2001 and 2002. Obviously, global activity has benefited from the stunning
decline in output volatility observed by Rogoff which would have also cushioned
the oil shocks.
SLOWDOWN IN GLOBAL SAVING AND INVESTMENT VS STRONG GLOBAL GROWTH
The third puzzle that I would like to mention is high global
growth despite slow down in savings and investment.
Global saving and investment rates have declined in recent
years. Notwithstanding the declining saving and investment rates, global growth
has continued its surge from period to period. While consumption has arguably
played a critical role in the industrial countries’ growth momentum, exports
might have played a similar role in the emerging markets. The sustenance of
consumption as opposed to investment-led growth has thus given rise to new controversies
on present versus future allocation of resources as also on the relevance
of overlapping generation outlooks. Raghuram Rajan and his colleagues attempt
to reconcile this phenomenon as they try to explain the role of foreign capital
in developing countries.
Once again, this unusual phenomenon can presumably be explained
by the productivity increasing pattern of the current Asian growth process,
coupled with the positive Asian demographic effects promoting both consumption
and investment growth. Thus, high growth is continuing from resource availability
due to demographically effected Asian savings patterns, along with positive
productivity effects. The resource diversion due to rising oil and commodity
prices is accordingly being compensated.
I therefore feel that, in whichever way we characterise the
current new phenomenon: globalisation, the flat world, or as the new economic
geography, economics faces now questions that still need to be answered. We
central bankers have benefited from "the great moderation" but we
need to understand better to what extent we have been responsible for this fortunate
turn of events. I hope that the Kansas Fed will continue to organise such meetings
to address these continuing puzzles.
REFERENCES
Blinder, Alan and Ricardo, Reis (2005): "Understanding
the Greenspan Standard", paper presented at the Federal Reserve Bank of
Kansas City symposium, The Greenspan Era: Lessons for the Future, Jackson
Hole, Wyoming, August 25-27, 2005.
Friedman, Thomas (2004): The World Is Flat: A Brief History
of the Twenty-first Century, New York: Farrar Straus & Giroux.
Grossman, Gene and Esteban, Rossi-Hansberg(2006): "The
Rise of Offshoring: It’s Not Wine for Cloth Anymore", paper presented at
Symposium sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Jackson Hole,
Wyoming, on August 25, 2006.
Mohan, Rakesh (2005): "Some Apparent Puzzles for Contemporary
Monetary Policy", key note address at the Conference on "China’s and
India’s Changing Economic Structures", organised by the IMF, the China
Society of Finance and Banking and the Stanford Center for International Development
in Beijing during October 27-28, 2005, printed in Reserve Bank of India Bulletin,
December 2005.
Mohan, Rakesh (2006): "Asian Urban Century: Emerging Trends",
Keynote address at the Conference on Land Policies and Development at the Lincoln
Institute of Land Policy and Development, Cambridge, Massachusetts on June 5,
2006, printed in Reserve Bank of India Bulletin, July 2006.
Prasad Eswar, Rajan Raghuram and Arvind Subramanian (2006):
"Pattern of International Capital Flows and Their Implications for Economic
Development", paper presented by Rajan Raghuram at Symposium sponsored
by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Jackson Hole, Wyoming on August
25, 2006.
Rogoff, Kenneth (2006): "Impact of Globalisation on Monetary
Policy", paper presented at Symposium sponsored by the Federal Reserve
Bank of Kansas City, Jackson Hole, Wyoming, on August 25, 2006.
Venables, Anthony (2006): "Shifts in Economic Geography
and Their Causes", paper presented at Symposium sponsored by the Federal
Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Jackson Hole, Wyoming, on August 25, 2006.
* Comments by Dr. Rakesh Mohan, Deputy Governor, Reserve Bank
of India,
as an Overview Panelist at a Symposium sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank
of Kansas City at Jackson Hole, Wyoming, August 24-26, 2006.
All the papers presented in the Symposium are available at
http://www.kansascityfed.org/PUBLICAT/SYMPOS/2006/Sym06prg.htm
1 For detailed discussion see Mohan (2006).