Russia is now ranked alongside Zimbabwe on the worldwide corruption index, despite the fact that the Russian authorities have been doing their best to tackle it. The Russian bribery ‘industry’ is worth some $300 billion per year and those who can be bought include several government officials.
The Russian economy is in much need of foreign investment, but the growing world of bribery is deterring international businesses from investing in Russia. Not only will they face the costs of building and running the business, but they are also likely to face substantial costs in trying to get the paperwork through, as IKEA found. Having said that they would never resort to bribery, IKEA had to pay $4 million for investment in local infrastructure and donate a further $1 million for local government projects just to get the 300+ permits they needed to begin construction. This then led to further bribes and a number of lawsuits. For some companies, the delays caused by not paying a bribe may actually cost more than the bribe itself.
The following webcast and articles look at the case of IKEA and the push by foreign businesses to avoid the clutches of Russian bribery.
Webcast
Russian bribes culture hits international business BBC News (14/5/10)
Articles
Foreign firms pledge not to give bribes in Russia BBC News (21/4/10)
IKEA masters rules of Russian business The Moscow Times (14/5/10)
Russians are spending twice as much on bribes Prime Time Russia (13/5/10)
Data Source
Corruption Perceptions Index 2009 Transparency International 2009
Questions
- Why is Russia in need of significant foreign investment? How would it help the economy?
- Can we classify IKEA (or any other company that uses bribery) as a risk-lover? Explain your answer.
- If a foreign firm wants to invest in Russia, which type of expansion do you think would be the easiest and the least open to bribery?
- IKEA began building without the necessary permits, but then ‘the bureaucrats took advantage of the situation’. Was IKEA operating under conditions of risk or uncertainty?
- In the article ‘IKEA masters rules of business’, Lennart Dahlgren said: “If we had waited to receive them all, we would have lost years”. What economic concept is being referred to?
- To what extent is government intervention and international co-operation needed to tackle corruption in Russia?
At the start of the new decade, many commentators are getting out their crystal balls to take a look into the future. Below you will find a selection of their predictions, including six extracts from The Economist’s ‘The World in 2010’.
In 2009, the world economy shrank for the first time since 1945. Will it now bounce back, or will global recovery be slow, or will there be a ‘double-dip recession’ with output falling once more before sustained recovery eventally sets in? And what about particular economies? How will the UK fare compared with other countries? How will the USA and the eurozone perform? Will China and India be the powerhouses of global recovery?
Then there is the whole question of the financial sector. Is it now fixed? Will businesses and consumers have sufficient access to credit – is the credit crunch over? Has toxic debt been expunged from the banking system? Do banks now have sufficient capital?
And what about debt? Even though private-sector debt is falling in many countries as households and businesses scale back borrowing and as banks have imposed tighter lending criteria, public-sector debt is soaring around the world. Will financial markets continue to support these growing levels of sovereign debt? Will central banks have to continue with quantitative easing in order to support these levels of debt and to keep interest rates down?
Economic Outlook: 2010 may narrow gap Financial Times, Chris Flood (27/12/09)
CIPD Annual Barometer Forecast: UK economy to shed a further 250,000 jobs before unemployment peaks at 2.8 million in 2010 Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) (21/12/09)
Unemployment ‘set to peak in 2010’ Guardian (29/12/09)
Unemployment ‘will peak at 2.8m’ in 2010 BBC News (29/12/09)
What employment prospects lie ahead in 2010? BBC News, Shanaz Musafer (3/1/10)
Money printing scheme is working, Bank of England says Times Online, Gráinne Gilmore and Francesca Steele (1/1/10)
Bank optimism rises as credit to business eases Guardian, Ashley Seager (31/12/09)
The world in 2010: China continues its unstoppable economic charge Independent, Alistair Dawber (2/1/10)
The US slowly emerges from the gloom of 2009 Independent, Alistair Dawber (2/1/10)
Year dominated by weak dollar Financial Times, Anjli Raval (2/1/10)
A year when tipsters took a tumble Times Online, David Wighton (1/1/10)
PMEAC pegs growth at 8% in ’10-11 Times of India (2/1/10)
China and the other Brics will rebuild a new world economic order The Observer, Ashley Seager (3/1/10)
Five countries that crashed and burned in the credit crunch face a hard road to recovery The Observer, Heather Stewart, Ashley Seager, David Teather, Richard Wachman and Zoe Wood (3/1/10)
HSBC goes out on a limb and predicts growth beyond dreams of Chancellor Times Online, Gráinne Gilmore (2/1/10)
Uncertainty dogs sterling Financial Times, Peter Garnham (2/1/10)
A tough year to forecast as recovery hangs in the balance Scotsman, George Kerevan (30/12/09)
Unstable equilibrium in 2010 BBC News blogs, Peston’s Picks (30/12/09)
Intriguing economic questions for 2010 BBC News blogs, Stephanomics (23/12/09)
The hard slog ahead The Economist (13/11/09)
In the wake of a crisis The Economist (13/11/09)
Now for the long term The Economist, Matthew Bishop (13/11/09)
Recessionomics The Economist, Anatole Kaletsky (13/11/09)
The World in 2010: From the editor The Economist, Michael Pilkington (13/11/09)
The hard slog ahead The Economist (13/11/09)
For forecasts of various economies and regions see
World Economic Outlook (OECD)
European Economic Forecast – autumn 2009 (European Commission)
Tables set A and Tables set B from World Economic Outlook (IMF)
Questions
- What is likely to happen to the major economies of the world in 2010?
- How much reliance should be placed on macroeconomic forecasts for the medium term (1 or 2 years)?
- For what reasons might the UK economy fare (a) better or (b) worse than forecast?
- Why has unemployment risen less in the UK, and many other countries too, during the current recession compared to previous recessions? Does the flexibility of labour markets affect the amount that unemployment rises during a period of declining aggregate demand?
- Why may the world face a ‘long hard slog’ in recovering from recession?
- Why is the world in 2010 ‘balanced precariously’ and why are there huge uncertainties? (See Robert Peston’s blog.)
- Why are China and India likely to see much faster rates of economic growth than the USA, the EU and Japan?
- What is likely to happen to stock markets over the coming 12 months? What will be the main factors influencing the demand for and supply of shares?
- What fiscal and monetary policies are most appropriate during the coming 12 months?
Should economists have foreseen the credit crunch? A few were warning of an overheated world economy with excessive credit and risk taking. Most economists prior to 2007/8, however, were predicting a continuation of steady economic growth. Inflation targeting, fiscal rules and increasingly flexible markets were the ingredients of this continuing prosperity. And then the crash happened!
So why did so few people see the downturn coming? Were the models used by economists fundamentally flawed, or was it simply a question of poor assumptions or poor data? Do we need a new way of modelling the economy, or is it simply a question of updating theories from the past? Should, for example, models become much more Keynesian? Should we abandon the new classical approach of assuming that markets are essentially good at pricing in risk and that herd behaviour will not be seriously destabilising?
The following podcast looks at these issues. “Aditya Chakrabortty’s joined in the studio by the Guardian’s economics editor Larry Elliott, as well as Roger Bootle, the managing director of Capital Economics, and political economist and John Maynard Keynes biographer Robert Skidelsky. Also in the podcast, we hear from Nobel prize-winning economist, Elinor Ostrom, Freakonomics author Steven Levitt, and UN advisor and developmental economist Daniel Gay.”
The Business: A crisis of economics Guardian podcast (25/11/09)
See also the following news items from the Sloman Economics news site:
Keynes is dead; long live Keynes (3/10/09)
Learning from history (3/10/09)
Macroeconomics – Crisis or what? (6/8/09)
The changing battle grounds of economics (27/7/09)
Repeat of the Great Depression – or learning the lessons from the past? (23/6/09)
Animal spirits (30/4/09)
Keynes – do we need him more than ever? (26/10/08)
Questions
- Why did most economists fail to predict the credit crunch and subsequent recession? Was it a problem with the models that were used or the data that was put into these models, or both?
- What was the Washington consensus? To what extent did this consensus contribute to the current recession?
- What is meant by systemic risk? How does this influence the usefulness of ‘micro’ financial models?
- What particular market failures were responsible for the credit crunch?
- What is meant by ‘rational behaviour’? Is it reasonable to assume that people are rational?
- Is macroeconomics too theoretical or too mathematical (or both)? If you think it is, how can macroeconomics be reformed to improve its explanatory and predictive power?
- Does a ‘really good economist’ need to have a good grounding in a range of social sciences and in economic history?
The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is the independent agency in the UK charged, amongst other things, with assessing the cost-effectiveness of new drugs. In a report published on 19 November 2009, NICE found that the drug sorafenib, branded as Nexavar by its manufacturer, the German pharmaceutical company, Bayer AG, was not cost-effective. The drug can extend the life of terminally ill patients with liver cancer. However, it is very expensive, costing about £3000 per month per patient.
The NICE press release (see link below) quotes Andrew Dillon, the Chief Executive of NICE, as saying: “We were disappointed not to have been able to recommend the use of sorafenib, but after carefully considering all the evidence, including the proposed ‘patient access scheme’ in which the manufacturer offered to provide every fourth pack free, sorafenib does not provide enough benefit to patients to justify its high cost.”
Not surprisingly people suffering from liver cancer, and also various patient groups, were highly critical of the decision. But with a limited budget for the National Health Service and the increasing pressure to save costs in order to reduce the public-sector debt, many difficult choices like this have to be made.
What NICE attempts to do is a cost–benefit analysis of new drugs. Whilst costs can be difficult to measure, especially over the longer term, the benefits are much more problematic as they have to take into account the effects on the quality of people’s lives – something that will vary enormously from one patient to another. And then there are the effects on family and friends and on the economy. The measure used in the NHS and elswhere is the QALY – ‘quality-adjusted life year’. In paragraph 4.8 of the full NICE report (see link below), it was noted that
“the base-case ICER [incremental cost-effectiveness ratio] presented by the manufacturer was originally £64,800 per QALY gained and when the patient access scheme was included [where every fourth pack is supplied free to the NHS by Bayer] this went down to £51,900 per QALY gained. Both ICERs were substantially higher than those normally considered to be an acceptable use of NHS resources.”
2009/069 NICE appraisal of sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma NICE press release (19/11/09)
Final appraisal determination Sorafenib for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (Full document) NICE (19/11/09)
NHS denies drug to cancer patients (video) ITN (on YouTube) (18/11/09)
Liver cancer drug ‘too expensive’ (including videos) BBC News (19/11/09)
UK’s NICE says Bayer liver cancer drug too costly Reuters (18/11/09)
Nice’s decision not to approve the liver cancer drug Nexavar is painful but necessary and Drug for terminal liver cancer patients ‘too expensive’Telegraph, Rebecca Smith (19/11/09)
NHS says it’s too expensive to keep you alive Telegraph, Janet Daley (19/11/09)
Bayer’s patent case hearing in HC today Tines of India (18/11/09)
Questions
- What makes the choice of whether to provide a particular drug to a pateint an ‘economic’ one?
- Imagine you were a person suffering from liver cancer. What evidence would you wish to bring to the government to persuade it to ignore NICE’s recommendation?
- Is the use of QALYs the best means of assessing the benefits of a drug? Explain.
- What are the arguments for and againist the NHS providing expensive drugs free to people on low incomes but charging a price well above the current prescription fee to those who could afford to pay? If such as scheme were introduced, on what basis should such a price be determined and should it be on a sliding scale according to people’s income and/or wealth?
The traditional macroeconomic issues are well-known: unemployment, inflation, economic growth and the balance of payments. However, the environment, and specifically climate change, have become increasingly important objectives for the global economy. Over recent months, many countries have announced new policies and measures to tackle climate change.
The costs of not tackling climate change are well-documented, but what about the costs of actually tackling it? Why is a changing climate receiving such attention and what are the economics behind this problem? The articles below consider this important issue.
Tougher climate target unveiled BBC News (16/10/08)
Brown proposes £60 billion climate fund BBC News (26/6/09)
EU says tackling climate change will cost global economy €400 billion a year Irish Times, Frank McDonald (26/6/09)
Obama makes 11th-hour climate change push Washington AFP, Ammenaul Parisse (25/6/09)
UK to outline emission cut plans BBC News (26/6/09)
What’s new in the EU: EU examines impact of climate change on jobs The Jerusalem Post, Ari Syrquin (25/6/09)
Climate change: reducing risks and costs The Chronicle Herald, Jennifer Graham (25/6/09)
Obama to regulate ‘pollutant’ CO2 BBC News (17/4/09)
Billions face climate change risk BBC News (6/5/07)
Obama vows investment in science BBC News (27/4/09)
Japan sets ‘weak’ climate target BBC News (10/6/09)
Questions
- Why is climate change an example of market failure?
- Apart from imposing limits on emissions, what other interventionist policies could be used? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each of them?
- According to the EU, the cost of tackling climate change is very high. So, why are we doing it? See if you can carry out a cost-benefit analysis!
- Why is climate change presenting a problem for insurance companies? Can it be overcome?
- Why is finance such an issue between developed and developing countries in relation to tackling climate change?
- What is the likely impact of climate changing policies on the labour market? Will we be able to adapt in the current economic crisis?