The OECD published its latest interim assessment of the world economy on April 7. This showed a world gradually bouncing back from recession, with growing GDP (albeit at variable speeds in different countries), rising industrial production, increasing business confidence, a stabilising of financial markets, an easing of credit conditions and yet continuing low inflation.
The UK is forecast to have an annualised rate of growth of GDP in quarter 2 of 3.1%. This is the second highest of the G7 countries, behind only Canada. This would seem like good news – an economic spring for the UK.
Despite continuing growth in the OECD countries, in most of them recovery is fragile. The OECD thus recommends caution in removing the stimulus measures adopted in most countries and hence caution in embarking on measures to cut public-sector deficits. As the report states:
Despite some encouraging signs on activity, the fragility of the recovery, a frail labour market and possible headwinds coming from financial markets underscore the need for caution in the removal of policy support. Central banks have already begun to rein in the exceptional liquidity stimulus injected during the recession. Further action in this area will need to be guided by financial conditions. The normalisation of policy interest rates should be carried out at a pace that will be contingent on the strength of the recovery in individual countries and the outlook for inflation beyond the near-term projection horizon. As for fiscal policy, the sharp increase in government indebtedness in the OECD area during the downturn calls for ambitious, clearly communicated medium-term consolidation programmes in many countries. Consolidation should start in 2011, or earlier where needed, and progress gradually so as not to undermine the incipient recovery.
The following webcast from the OECD presents the report.
Webcast
Interim Assessment OECD, Pier Carlo Padoan, OECD Chief Economist (7/4/10)
Report
Portal to report and webcast OECD
What is the economic outlook for OECD countries? An interim assessment OECD, Pier Carlo Padoan (7/4/10)
Articles
Economy set to speed up and beat UK’s rivals, says OECD Independent, Sean O’Grady (8/4/10)
Economy poised for rapid expansion Financial Times, Norma Cohen and Daniel Pimlot (8/4/10)
OECD sees slower growth in US, Europe, Japan Sydney Morning Herald (8/4/10)
UK business confidence ‘hits four-year high’ BBC News (12/4/10)
British companies confident of recovery but need investment, BDO warns Telegraph, Angela Monaghan (12/4/10)
Questions
- What are the main findings in the report?
- What are the policy implications of the findings?
- What are the implications of developments in financial markets? What are the possible ‘headwinds’?
- What factors could threaten the recovery of the UK economy?
As the global recession began to take hold during 2008, so many commodity prices plummeted. Oil prices fell from over $140 per barrel in mid July 2008 to around $35 per barrel by the end of the year (a mere quarter of the price just 6 months previously). From early 2009, however, prices started rising again and have continued to do so during 2010. By mid April 2010, the price of oil had risen to $85 per barrel.
And it’s not just oil prices that have been rising. The prices of metals such as copper, nickel and zinc have been soaring. Since the beginning of February 2010, copper prices have risen by 18%, zinc prices by 20% and nickel prices by 46%. As the article from the Independent states:
The Office for National Statistics said that the input price index for materials and fuels purchased by the manufacturing industry rose 10.1 per cent in the year to March and rose 3.6 per cent between February and March alone. The ONS added that prices of imported materials as a whole, including imported crude oil, rose 4.4 per cent between February and March.
Much of the explanation for this has been the global recovery. But while raw material prices have been rising, grain prices have been relatively steady and recently have fallen. So how can this be explained? The answer, as always with commodity prices, lies with demand and supply, as you will see when you read the following articles.
Articles
Commodity prices fuel inflation spike Independent, Sean O’Grady (10/4/10)
Interest rates may have to rise sooner after figures point to inflation rise Guardian, Katie Allen (9/4/10)
Pound rises as UK producer prices hint at inflation BBC News (9/4/10)
Petrol price hits record high BBC News (8/4/10)
China commodity imports soar despite high costs Reuters (10/4/10)
March Output Price Inflation Highest Since Nov 08 Marketnews.com (9/4/10)
Spring season: What is pushing up the price of copper and other base metals? The Economist (8/4/10)
Factory gate price rise leads to fear of inflation Financial Advice (9/4/10)
Corn Falls as Warm, Dry Weather Will Aid Planting in the U.S. BusinessWeek, Jeff Wilson (8/4/10)
Wheat Futures Fall as U.S. Exports Slump, Global Crop to Gain BusinessWeek, Tony C. Dreibus (9/4/10)
Commodities: Chinese imports defying commodity−price rally for now FZstreet.com, Danske Research Team (12/4/10)
Data
Commodity prices can be found at the following sites:
Commodity price data BBC News: Markets
Commodity prices Index Mundi
World Crude Oil Prices U.S. Energy Information Administration (See, for example, Brent Crude Oil Prices)
UK factory gate prices can be found at:
Latest Producer Prices Office for National Statistics, and
Producer Prices portal Office for National Statistics
Questions
- Use supply and demand analysis to explain why raw material prices have risen so rapidly. Illustrate your answer with a diagram.
- Use supply and demand analysis to explain why grain prices have fallen. Again, illustrate your answer with a diagram.
- What is the significance of income elasticity of demand and price elasticities of demand and supply in explaining the price changes in questions 1 and 2?
- How would you estimate the likely effect of a 1% rise in (a) general raw material prices and (b) factory gate prices on the rate of consumer price inflation?
- Why has the price of petrol risen above the level of July 2008, given that oil prices now are only about 60% of those in 2008?
- Why has a rise in factory gate prices led to a rise in the sterling exchange rate?
- If inflation rises as a result of a rise in commodity prices, what type of inflation would this increase in inflation be? Does the answer depend on what caused the rise in commodity prices?
The Quarterly National Accounts from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) reveal that the output of the UK economy grew by 0.4% in the fourth quarter of 2009. This is another upward revision to the growth number for Q4; the first estimate put growth at 0.1% and the second estimate at 0.3%.
The ONS release also reported the value of the UK economy’s output in calendar year 2009. In the release, GDP in 2009 is estimated at £1.396 trillion. Now, this is what economists call the nominal estimate because it measures the economy’s output using the prevailing prices, e.g. in the case of output in 2009, the prices of 2009. Of course, the problem arises when we compare nominal GDP – or GDP at current prices – over time. If prices are changing how can we know whether the volume of output is actually rising or falling? Therefore, constant-price or real estimates are reported which aim to show what GDP would have been if prices had remained at their levels in some chosen year (the base year). The base year currently used in the UK is 2005.
If we look at nominal GDP estimates for the UK from 1948 up to 2008 we find that they rise each year. So, regardless of the fact that in some of these years output volumes fell, price rises (inflation) have been sufficient to cause nominal or current-price GDP to rise. But, this was not true in 2009!
But, why did nominal GDP fall in 2009? Well, firstly, the average price of the economy’s output, which is measured by the GDP deflator, rose by only 1.36% in 2009. This was the lowest rate of economy-wide inflation since 1999 (although real GDP or output rose by 3.9% in 1999). And, secondly, in 2009 output fell by 4.9%. The extent of the fall in output meant that price increases were not sufficient for nominal GDP to rise. In fact, the actual value of GDP in 2008 was £1.448 trillion as compared with £1.396 trillion in 2009. This means that nominal GDP fell by 3.6% in 2009. The next lowest recorded change, since comparable figures began in 1948, was actually in 2008 when nominal GDP rose by 3.5% (real GDP rose too in 2009, albeit by only 0.5%).
So, in short, the decline in both nominal and real GDP in 2009 indicates just how deep the economic downturn has been.
Articles
Britain’s economic growth revised up to 0.4% The Times, Gary Parkinson and Grainne Gilmore (30/3/10)
UK pulls out of recession faster than thought Reuters, Matt Falloon and Christina Fincher (30/3/10)
UK growth unexpectedly revised up to 0.4% BBC News (30/3/10) )
UK Q4 growth revised upward again to 0.4 pct Associated Press (AP), Jane Wardell (30/3/10)
Instant view – Q4 final GDP revised up to 0.4 per cent Reuters UK (30/3/10)
Data
Latest on GDP growth Office for National Statistics (30/3/10)
Quarterly National Accounts, Statistical Bulletin, March 2010 Office for National Statistics (30/3/10)
United Kingdom Economic Accounts, Time Series Data Office for National Statistics
For macroeconomic data for EU countries and other OECD countries, such as the USA, Canada, Japan, Australia and Korea, see:
AMECO online European Commission
Questions
- Explain what you understand by the terms ‘nominal GDP’ and ‘real GDP’. Can you think of other examples of where economists might distinguish between nominal and real variables?
- Explain under what circumstances nominal GDP could rise despite the output of the economy falling.
- The average annual change in nominal GDP since 1948 is 8.2% while that for real GDP is 2.4%. What do you think we can learn from each of these figures about long-term economic growth in the UK?
- What do you understand to be the difference between short-term and long-run economic growth? Where, in the commentary above, is there reference to short-term growth?
The latest inflation numbers are a joy for headline writers! With the falling price of toys, we can perhaps speak of ‘inflation toying with us’, while the fall in the cost of gas might allow us to say that ‘gas takes the fuel out of inflation’. More generally, the latest inflation figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show the annual rate of CPI inflation falling from 3.5% in January to 3% in February. In other words, the weighted price of a representative basket of consumer goods and services rose by 3% in the 12 months to February as compared with 3.5% over the 12 months to January.
In compiling the Consumer Price Index (CPI), the ONS collects something in the range of 180,000 price quotations over 650 representative goods and services. These goods and services fall into 12 broad product groups. The items to be selected for these groups are reviewed once a year so that, in the face of changing tastes and preferences and changes in the goods and services available to us, the ‘CPI shopping basket’ remains representative. A price index and a rate of price inflation are available for each of these 12 broad groups as well as for goods and services within these groups. So, for instance, we can obtain a price for ‘transport’, then, within this group, we can obtain a price for the purchase of ‘vehicles’ and, finally, a price for ‘new cars’ and for ‘second-hand cars’. This level of detail also means that individuals can calculate their own personal inflation rates using the ONS personal inflation calculator.
So what of the latest fall in the rate of CPI inflation? Well, the ONS reports ‘widespread’ downward pressures. This phrase needs some careful unpicking. Downward pressure is reported from ‘recreation and culture’ because its average price was static in February, but rose a year earlier. Within this group, the average price of games, toys and hobbies fell this year, but increased a year ago and, so, our possible headline ‘inflation is toying with us’. Similarly, downward pressure is reported from ‘housing and household services’ where a fall in its average price this year follows static prices a year ago. A major driver of this change was a reduction in average gas bills and so our other possible headline, ‘gas takes the fuel out of inflation’.
The latest price numbers from the ONS show that some product groups are experiencing long-term price deflation. For instance, while the average price of ‘clothing and footwear’ actually rose in February, when we analyse annual rates of price inflation for this product group, one has to go back to March 1992 to find the last time it was positive! Indeed, within the slightly narrower product group of ‘clothing’, the average annual rate of price deflation over the past ten years has been 6.1%. A similar longer-term trend of price deflation can be found in the product group ‘audio-visual, photo and data processing’. Here there has been an average annual rate of price deflation of 9.9% over the past ten years. So, smile for the camera!
Articles
Rates set to remain at record low as inflation falls back sharply heraldscotland, Ian McConnell (23/3/10)
Inflation data boosts government before budget AFP (23/3/10)
UK inflation rate falls to 3% in February BBC News (23/3/10) )
Inflation slows more than expected Reuters UK, David Milliken and Christina Fincher (23/3/10)
UK inflation falls sharply to 3% Financial Times, Daniel Pimlott (23/3/10)
Inflation rate fell to 3 per cent in February Independent. James Moore (24/3/10)
Inflation falls back to 3% Guardian, Philip Inman (23/3/10)
How soon before we scrap the Bank’s inflation target? Telegraph, Edmund Conway (23/3/10)
Data
Latest on inflation Office for National Statistics (23/3/10)
Consumer Price Indices, Statistical Bulletin, March 2010 Office for National Statistics (23/3/10)
Consumer Price Indices, Time Series Data Office for National Statistics
For CPI (Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices) data for EU countries, see:
HICP European Central Bank
Questions
- Explain the difference between an increase in the level of prices and an increase in the rate of price inflation.
- The annual rate of price inflation for clothing in February was -3.9%. If the average price of clothing was cheaper, year-on-year, how could it have exerted ‘upward’ pressure on the overall rate of CPI inflation?
- What factors might help to explain why, over the past 10 years, the average annual rate of price inflation for audio-visual, photo and data processing equipment has been -9.9%?
- What factors might help to explain why, over the past 10 years, the average annual rate of price inflation for clothing and footwear has been -5.7%?
- What factors might help to explain why the annual rate of ‘new car’ price inflation was 5.4% in February 2010 compared with -0.2% in February 2009?
- What factors might help to explain why the annual rate of ‘second-hand’ car price inflation was 19.0% in February 2010 compared with -15.1% in February 2009? And, are you surprised at the difference in the rates of ‘new’ and ‘second-hand’ car price inflation?
It is often said of statistics that you can make of them whatever you want to. Well, this appears especially true of the latest labour market figures from the Office for National Statistics. Firstly, the good news: unemployment fell. But, secondly, the not so good news: the number of economically inactive individuals rose to an all-time high. So what are we supposed to make of the latest figures? And, are there any other little gems to be uncovered in the latest set of labour market numbers?
At its most simple, an economically active individual is somebody 16 or over who is either in employment or is unemployed but actively seeking work. In the three months to January 2010, the total number of economically active individuals in the UK stood at 31.309 million, of which 28.860 million were employed and 2.449 million were unemployed. The number unemployed in the previous three months had been at 2.482 million. When expressed as a percentage of those economically active, the unemployment rate has fallen from 7.9% in the previous three months to 7.8% in the three months to January.
The total number of economically inactive individuals of working age, i.e. those aged 16 to 59 (women) or 64 (men), stood at 8.157 million in the three months to January, which, as well being an historic high, was a rise from 8.009 million in the previous three months. This converts into an inactivity rate amongst those of working age of some 21.5%, the highest since the three months to October 2004. A key point though is that inactivity rates do tend to rise either during periods of rising unemployment and/or following prolonged periods of relatively high unemployment. For instance, following the early 1990s downturn the rate of inactivity peaked at 22.1% in the three months to January 1995. In comparison, following the boom of the late 1980s the rate, the inactivity rate began the 1990s at only 19.3% – a record low. A large contributing factor to the rise in inactivity in the three months to January has been the rise in the number of students not in the labour market to 2.13 million, an increase of some 98,000 over the three months. Again, parallels can be drawn with the early 1990s because this is the highest number of students not in the labour market since comparable figures began in 1993.
In part, it appears that inactivity levels reflect perceptions amongst individuals of the probability of finding employment. So, while unemployment has fallen by 33,000 over the latest three months we do have to keep in mind that inactivity has increased by 149,000. Therefore, this may be a case of a ‘jobless’ decrease in unemployment!
Some commentators, however, are more optimistic about the current trend in unemployment, pointing to the fact that unemployment levels have not hit the levels predicted, despite the economy contracting by 5% in 2009. They point to the flexible labour market. Of course, time will tell if this is truly a ‘benefit’ of a more flexible labour market. But, what is clear is that one manifestation of a changing structure to the UK labour market is the growth in part-time work. In the three months to January, 26.69% of those employed were employed part-time: this was another record high which seems to have been largely lost in the mass of statistics.
Articles
Unemployment falls as ‘economic inactive hits record’ Telegraph, Harry Wallop (17/3/10)
Unemployment plunge boost economy hopes thisismoney, Ed Monk (17/3/10)
UK unemployment records further fall BBC News (17/3/10) )
Gordon Brown given unexpected boost by fall in unemployment Guardian, Kathryn Hopkins and Julia Kollewe (17/3/10)
Not lagging, but not leading either BBC News blogs: Stephanomics, Stephanie Flanders (17/3/10)
Data
Latest on employment and unemployment Office for National Statistics (17/3/10)
Labour market statistics, March 2010 Office for National Statistics (17/3/10)
Labour Market Statistics page Office for National Statistics
For macroeconomic data for EU countries and other OECD countries, such as the USA, Canada, Japan, Australia and Korea, see:
AMECO online European Commission
Questions
- What factors do you think could affect labour market inactivity rates?
- How might inactivity rates affect an economy’s potential output?
- What factors do you think will have contributed to the growth in part-time employment in the UK?
- The UK economy came out of recession in the last quarter of 2009. Does this mean that unemployment will continue to fall from now on?