Category: Economics: Ch 04

Here’s an exciting bit of news. Lake Eyre in South Australia is filling and the Lake Eyre Yacht Club’s sailing regatta started on 5 July. So what, you may ask! Well, Lake Eyre is in the middle of one of the driest deserts in the world. It virtually never rains there and most of the time, the ‘lake’ is one huge dry salt pan.

But just a few times per century, the rainfall many kilometres away is heavy enough to fill the dry river beds of Cooper Creek, Finke River, Georgina River and Diamantina River. These ‘rivers’ drain about one sixth of the whole of Australia (about the size of Germany, France, Italy combined) – but a sixth where rainfall is normally very low. But this season’s rains have been exceptionally high; the rivers are flowing – and the lake is filling.

When the lake does fill, it teems with life. Fish eggs that have lain buried in the salt for years hatch. Sea birds fly in nearly 1000 kilometres from the Southern Ocean. And it’s then that the enthusiasts come to play.

What’s this got to do with economics? Well economics is about scarcity and choice. Many of the choices we make are not simple buying and selling choices. Many clubs and other organisations thrive on the enthusiasm of their members. They’re not there to make money but certainly add to people’s ‘utility’. And enthusiasm, and hope, is what the members of the Lake Eyre Yacht Club have in abundance. Let’s hope they get lots of utility from sailing in the desert over the coming weeks.

Articles
Outback Sailors 10 News (6/7/10)
Floods and boat race brings life to desert lake ABC News (7/7/10)
Flightseeing Lake Eyre Stuff.co.nz, James Shrimpton (25/5/10)
Gone (not fishing) flying over Lake Eyre Australian Daily Telegraph, Maralyn Parker (6/6/10)
The Lake Eyre Yacht Club Lounge of the Lab Lemming, Chuck Magee (21/3/10)
Lake Eyre Regatta ExplorOz, The Landy blog (14/6/10)
Boom follows boom in the Lake Eyre Basin ABC Western Queensland, Julia Harris (23/3/10)
Entries flood in for rare outback regatta ABC News (23/6/10)
Yacht club sails into history with a desert regatta The Age (7/7/10)
Chasing water to Lake Eyre ABC Rural, Caitlyn Gribbin (6/7/10)
Lake Eyre brims with life ABC News, Paul Lockyer (15/6/10)
Yachting regatta in Australian desert for first time in 20 years Telegraph, Bonnie Malkin (7/7/10)
Plain sailing for desert regatta Gulf Times (7/7/10)

Information sites
Lake Eyre Yacht Club
Current Lake Status Lake Eyre Yacht Club
Lake Eyre Wikipedia
Lake Eyre Rita’s Outback Guide

Questions

  1. What attitude do the members of Lake Eyre Yacht Club have towards risk and uncertainty?
  2. How would you set about estimating the consumer surplus that members are likely to gain from attending the regatta and sailing on the lake?
  3. How price elastic would you expect the demand for and supply of services to be, such as ferry crossings and accommodation?
  4. What business opportunities are likely to be associated with sailing on the lake? Would it be ‘rational’ to set up such a business?

As the news from the Gulf of Mexico goes from very bad to even worse, so BP is increasingly coming under the international spotlight for its approach to risk management and safety. Was it sufficiently cautious? Could the accident on April 20 that killed 11 men and has been gushing some 800,000 gallons per day of crude oil into the sea have been averted? When the consequences of a pipe rupture are so catastrophic, is ‘catastrophic risk’ appropriately priced? As Tony Hayward, BP’s Chief Executive, told the Financial Times (see links below): “It was ‘an entirely fair criticism’ to say the company had not been fully prepared for a deep-water oil leak.”

One insight into BP’s approach to risk has come to light with the leaking of a 2002 memo from BP on how human life ought to be valued in any cost–benefit analysis of a project. As the Chicagoist summarises the memo:

A two page document prepared by risk managers in 2002 titled “Cost benefit analysis of three little pigs” shows the type of thinking BP put into risk assessment. The memo shows, in cartoonish fashion, that blast resistant trailers for BP’s workers weren’t necessary, because the cost was too high. In 2005, a refinery caught fire, killing 15 and injuring 170 people.

So how should catastrophic risk be taken into account? What does a company do when the probability of a disaster is extremely low and yet the costs of such a disaster, were it to occur, are extremely high?

BP’s Shocking Memo The Daily Beast, Rick Outzen (25/5/10)
Old BP document calculates worth of human life with “Three Little Pigs” diagram Yahoo News, Brett Michael Dykes (25/5/10)
Industry can cut accident risks, says BP chief Financial Times, Ed Crooks and Edward Luce (2/6/10)
BP ‘not prepared’ for deep-water spill Financial Times, Ed Crooks (2/6/10)
The BP Oil Spill’s Lessons for Regulation Project Syndicate, Kenneth Rogoff (1/6/10)
US oil firms ‘unprepared’ for major offshore disaster BBC News (15/6/10)

Questions

  1. What is meant by catastrophic risk?
  2. Why is it difficult to put an accurate valuation on outcomes with a very low probability of occurrence?
  3. Explain the table entitled “Cost benefit analysis of three little pigs” in the Rick Outzen blog.
  4. How should human life be valued?
  5. What value should be put on a serious injury (of a particular type)?
  6. Should BP (or any other company, for that matter) ever conduct operations that risk human life? Explain your answer.
  7. On what basis should BP have decided whether or not to install a $500,000 acoustic trigger that could have shut off the well when the blowout protector failed?
  8. How is the existence of environmental externalities relevant to BP’s decisions on safety?

On the 14th May the IMF published its latest Fiscal Monitor. The key message coming out of this was the need for countries to reduce their public debt ratios, i.e. public debt relative to GDP. Specifically, the IMF is arguing that public debt ratios should be reduced to their ‘post-crisis levels’. In effect, this means countries need to undertake fiscal consolidation. The IMF recognises that the pace of fiscal consolidation should reflect underlying fiscal and macroeconomic conditions, but warns of the dangers of not doing so especially in those countries where the credibility of the current and medium-term fiscal position is weakest.

Underpinning the IMF’s argument for fiscal consolidation is their concern that higher public debt ratios necessitate higher interest rates in order to entice investors to purchase government debt. In those countries with weak fiscal credibility, a sizeable interest rate premium may be needed to entice investors to hold government debt over other types of investments. For instance, we have seen how the markets reacted to the perceived lack of fiscal credibility in Greece and how a series of measures, as discussed in Fixing the Euro: a long term solution or mere sticking plaster were needed to both restore normality to debt markets and to prevent contagion in markets for other country’s public debt.

The IMF argues that the impact of higher interest rates from high public debt-to-GDP ratios would be to reduce an economy’s potential growth. The mechanism by which this would happen would primarily be a reduction of labour productivity growth resulting from lower levels of investment and, hence, from slower growth in the country’s capital stock.

In short, the IMF is arguing that without credible fiscal consolidation plans, countries – particularly advanced economies – run a real risk of restricting their rate of economic growth over the longer-term. Of course, the challenge is to implement fiscal consolidation plans that protect short-term growth by cementing the current economic recovery but do not hinder longer-term growth. Now that is a real challenge!

Report

Fiscal Monitor, May 14 2010 IMF

Articles

IMF Says Rising Public Debt Risk ‘Cannot Be Ignored’ Bloomberg Businessweek, Sandrine Rastello (14/5/10)
US faces one of the biggest crunches in the world – IMF Telegraph, Edmund Conway (14/5/10)
IMF says that developed countries must curb their deficits BBC News (14/5/10)
Outlook for rich economies worsening – IMF Eurasia Review (14/5/10)
Britain’s public debt falls under IMF focus Financial Times, Alan Beattie (15/5/10)
Advanced Economies Face Tougher, Not Impossible, Fiscal Adjustment MarketNews.com, Heather Scott (14/5/10)
A good squeeze The Economist (31/3/10)

Data

IMF Data and Statistic Portal IMF
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

  1. Evaluate the argument put forward by the IMF that fiscal consolidation is necessary to prevent harming long-term economic growth.
  2. What are the economic dangers of consolidating a country’s fiscal position too quickly?
  3. What do you understand by short-run and long-term economic growth?
  4. What do you understand by potential growth?
  5. What could a government do to increase the perceived credibility of its fiscal position?

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

  1. Why is Russia in need of significant foreign investment? How would it help the economy?
  2. Can we classify IKEA (or any other company that uses bribery) as a risk-lover? Explain your answer.
  3. 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?
  4. 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?
  5. 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?
  6. To what extent is government intervention and international co-operation needed to tackle corruption in Russia?

In the past few days, the euro has been under immense speculative pressure. The trigger for this has been the growing concern about whether Greece would be able to force through austerity measures and cut its huge deficit and debt. Also there has been the concern that much of Greece’s debt is in the form of relatively short-term bonds, many of which are coming up for maturity and thus have to be replaced by new bonds. For example, on 19 May, Greece needs to repay €8.5 billion of maturing bonds. But with Greek bonds having been given a ‘junk’ status by one of the three global rating agencies, Standard and Poor’s, Greece would find it difficult to raise the finance and would have to pay very high interest on bonds it did manage to sell – all of which would compound the problem of the deficit.

Also there have been deep concerns about a possible domino effect. If Greece’s debt is perceived to be unsustainable at 13.5% of GDP (in 2009), then speculators are likely to turn their attention to other countries in the eurozone with large deficits: countries such as Portugal (9.4%), Ireland (14.3%) and Spain (11.2%). With such worries, people were asking whether the euro would survive without massive international support, both from within and outside the eurozone. At the beginning of 2010, the euro was trading at $1.444. By 7 May, it was trading at $1.265, a depreciation of 12.4% (see the Bank of England’s Statistical Interactive Database – interest & exchange rates data

If the euro were in trouble, then shock waves would go around the world. Worries about such contagion have already been seen in plummeting stock markets. Between 16 April and 7 May, the FTSE100 index in London fell from 5834 to 5045 (a fall of 13.5%). In New York, the Dow Jones index fell by 8.6% over the same period and in Tokyo, the Nikkei fell by 7.6%. By 5 May, these declines were gathering pace as worries mounted.

Crisis talks took place over the weekend of the 8/9 May between European finance ministers and, to the surprise of many, a major package of measures was announced. This involves setting aside €750bn to support the eurozone. The package had two major elements: (a) €60bn from EU funds (to which all 27 EU countries contribute) to be used for loans to eurozone countries in trouble; (b) a European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism (a ‘Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV)’), which would be funded partly by eurozone countries which would provide €440bn and partly by the IMF which would provide a further €250bn. The SPV would be used to give loans or loan guarantees to eurozone countries, such as Greece, which were having difficulty in raising finance because of worries by investors. The effect would also be to support the euro through a return of confidence in the single currency.

In addition to these measures, the European Central Bank announced that it would embark on a ‘Securities Markets Programme’ involving the purchase of government bonds issued by eurozone countries in difficulties. According to the ECB, it would be used to:

.. conduct interventions in the euro area public and private debt securities markets to ensure depth and liquidity in those market segments which are dysfunctional. The objective of this programme is to address the malfunctioning of securities markets and restore an appropriate monetary policy transmission mechanism.

Does this amount to quantitative easing, as conducted by the US Federal Reserve Bank and the Bank of England? The intention is that it would not do so, as the ECB would remove liquidity from other areas of the market to balance the increased liquidity provided to countries in difficulties. This would be achived by selling securities of stronger eurozone countries, such as Germany and France.

In order to sterilise the impact of the above interventions, specific operations will be conducted to re-absorb the liquidity injected through the Securities Markets Programme. This will ensure that the monetary policy stance will not be affected.

So will the measures solve the problems? Or are they merely a means of buying time while the much tougher problem is addressed: that of getting deficits down?

Webcasts and podcasts
Rescue plan bolsters the euro BBC News, Gavin Hewitt (10/5/10)
The EU rescue plan explained Financial Times, Chris Giles, Emily Cadman, Helen Warrell and Steve Bernard (10/5/10)
Peston: ‘Crisis is not over’ BBC Today Programme (10/5/10)
Greece ‘will get into even more deep water’ BBC Today Programme (11/5/10)

Articles
EU ministers offer 750bn-euro plan to support currency (including video) BBC News (10/5/10)
EU sets up crisis fund to protect euro from market ‘wolves’ Independent, Vanessa Mock (10/5/10)
Euro strikes back with biggest gamble in its 11-year history Guardian, Ian Traynor (10/5/10)
Debt crisis: £645bn rescue package for euro reassures markets … for now Guardian, Ian Traynor (10/5/10)
The E.U.’s $950 Billion Rescue: Just the Beginning Time, Leo Cendrowicz (10/5/10)
Eurozone bail-out (portal) Financial Times
Bailout does not address Europe’s deep-rooted woes: Experts moneycontrol.com (11/5/10)
An ever-closer Union? BBC News blogs: Stephanomics, Stephanie Flanders (10/5/10)
Eurozone crisis is ‘postponed’ BBC News blogs: Peston’s Picks, Robert Peston (10/5/10)
Multi-billion euro rescue buys time but no solution BBC News, Lucy Hooker (11/5/10)
No going back The Economist (13/5/10)
It is not Greece that worries EURO: It is China that teeters on a collapse Investing Contrarian, Shaily (11/5/10)

Data and official sources
For deficit and debt data see sections 16.3 and 18.1 in:
Ameco Online European Commision, Economic and Financial Affairs DG
For the ECB statement see:
10 May 2010 – ECB decides on measures to address severe tensions in financial markets ECB Press Release

Questions

  1. Why should the measures announced by the European finance ministers help to support the euro in the short term?
  2. Why should the ECB’s Securities Markets Programme not result in quantitative easing?
  3. Explain what is meant by sterlisation in the context of open market operations.
  4. What will determine whether the measures are a long-term success?
  5. Explain why there may be a moral hazard in coming to the rescue of ailing economies in the eurozone. How might such a moral hazard be minimised?
  6. Why should concerns about Greece lead to stock market declines around the world?
  7. What is the significance of China in the current context?