Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is a measure of the total value of goods and services produced in the domestic economy. It gives us an idea about whether national output is growing or falling and by how much. A recession represents a period of 2 consecutive quarters where economic growth is negative. Following the quarters of declining growth, the UK economy slowly began to pick up, but in the final quarter of 2010, economic growth once again turned negative. Data first showed a decline of 0.5%, which was then revised down to 0.6%. However, the most recent data from the ONS has put the decline in economic growth back to just 0.5% and the snow we experienced is supposedly to blame. Still a decline, but not as much as previously thought.
What does this mean for the economy? It might be better than previously thought, but it does little to change the economic outlook for the economy. Furthermore, the UK’s position remains relatively weak compared to other nations. As Chris Williamson from Markit said:
“The decline [in growth] overstates the weakness in the economy, reflecting the bad weather at the end of last year, but is nevertheless still a dire reading compared to the UK’s peers.”
The UK also saw a declining trade balance in the final quarter of 2010 to £27bn, showing that the UK was importing more than it was exporting. This was the second biggest deficit since the second quarter of 2009. Whilst the data for growth is a little better, the key for the UK economy will be what happens in Q1 of 2011, especially given that inflation is so far above the target. In order to get inflation back to its 2% target, interest rates need to rise, but this may put the economic recovery in jeopardy. The key is likely to be confidence. If confidence returns to the economy, aggregate demand may begin to rise and put the economy back on track to achieve its 1.5% forecast rate of growth.
UK GDP less bad than forecast at end-2010, Q1 key Reuters (29/3/11)
UK GDP figures show smaller fall BBC News (29/3/11)
UK GDP shrinks by less than expected: reaction Telegraph (29/3/11)
UK growth figures: what the economists say Guardian (29/3/11)
Disposable income falls by 0.8% The Press Association (29/3/11)
British economy shrank 0.5% in fourth quarter Associated Press (29/3/11)
UK GDP figures revised higher The Economy News (29/3/11)
Questions
- What is GDP? Is it a good measure of the standard of living in a country?
- To what extent does the revised figure change the economic outlook for the UK economy?
- How do you think the Monetary Policy Committee will be affected in their decision on changing interest rates, given this new GDP data?
- What factors are worsening the UK’s relative to other countries who also suffered from the recession?
- How were financial and currency markets affected by the revised GDP data? Was it expected?
In March 2009, the Bank of England’s base rate was slashed to 0.5% in a bid to boost aggregate demand and stimulate the UK economy. Since then it has remained at the same level. Interest rates are used by the Bank of England, which aims to keep inflation at the 2% target within a 1% gap either side. However, inflation has been above 3% for some 15 months and the latest figures for February 2011 show that inflation is rising. In January, it was 4%, but data for February calculates an inflation rate of 4.4% – significantly above the Bank of England’s target rate of 2% and above the forecast rate for the month.
One of the causes of such high inflation is the price of fuel, food and clothing. No-one can have failed to notice that petrol prices are higher than ever and this is one of the factors contributing to an increase in the level of prices throughout the economy. Clothing and footwear costs, which rose by 3.6% after the January sales have also contributed to this rising figure and will put increasing pressure on the MPC to raise interest rates in the not so distant future.
In the February 2011 meeting of the Monetary Policy Committee, interest rates were kept at 0.5%, despite markets pricing the chance of a rate rise at 20%. The negative growth experienced in the final quarter of 2010 is likely to have influenced this decision, but will the inflation data we’re now seeing influence the next meeting of the MPC. This undoubtedly puts pressure on the central bank to increase interest rates to try to get inflation back on target. The cost? It could put the recovery in jeopardy and create the possibility of a double-dip recession. There is a conflict here and whatever happens to interest rates, some groups will say it’s the wrong decision. As David Kern said:
“The MPC must be careful before it takes action that may threaten the fragile recovery, particularly in the face of a tough austerity plan.”
Perhaps the Budget will provide us with some more information about how the government intends to cut the hole in public finances, ensure that the economy does not fall back into recession and keep inflation under control.
UK inflation revives talk of early interest rate rise Reuters, David Milliken and Christina Fincher (22/3/11)
How to inflation-proof your savings Telegraph, Emma Simon (22/3/11)
UK inflation rate rises to 4.4% in February BBC News (22/3/11)
Interest rates: What the economists say Guardian (10/2/11)
Q&A: Impact of rising inflation Guardian, Phillip Inman (22/3/11)
Inflation soars to over double target rate Sky News, Hazel Baker (22/3/11)
Inflation and public borrowing add to budget 2011 headaches Guardian, Larry Elliott (22/3/11)
Inflation cutting savers’ options BBC News, Kevin Peachey (22/3/11)
Inflation: What the economists say Guardian (22/3/11)
Questions
- Is inflation likely to continue going up? What might stop the rise?
- Why are interest rates such an important tool of monetary policy?
- What is the relationship between interest rates and inflation?
- What are the costs of high inflation? Does anyone benefit?
- Who would gain and who would lose if interest rates are increased in the next MPC meeting?
- Which factors have contributed towards rising inflation in the UK? Is it cost-push or demand-pull inflation?
- Why does this pose a dilemma for the government in terms of public finances and the recession?
We’ve had numerous examples in recent years of the economic turmoil that natural disasters can have and unfortunately, we have another to add to the list: the Japanese earthquake and tsunami. As Japan tries to take stock of the damage and loss of life, the economic consequences of this disaster will also need considering. The previous Kobe earthquake cost the economy an estimated 2% of GDP, but this did hit a key industrial area. The economic consequences of the 2011 earthquake were originally not thought to be as bad, but the economy will undoubtedly suffer.
The Japanese economy, like the UK, shrank in the final quarter of 2010, but was expected to return to growth. The devastation of the earthquake and tsunami is now likely to delay this economic recovery. Many car companies are based in Japan and are expected to take some of the biggest hits. Nomura analysts suggested that annual operating profits of companies such as Toyota, Nissan and Honda would be dented by between 3% and 8%. You only have to look at some of the footage of the disaster to see why this is expected. Supply chains will undoubtedly be disrupted, many of whom are located in the exclusion zone and financial markets across the world have fallen, as the possibility of a nuclear disaster threatens. As Louise Armistead writes:
‘By lunchtime in Britain £32bn had been knocked off the value of the FTSE-100 dropped, which fell by more than 3pc in early trading but recovered later to close down 1.38pc at 5,695.28. Germany’s DAX plunged 3.19pc, recovering from a 4.8pc fall, and France’s CAC ended the day 3.9pc lower, while on Wall Street, the Dow Jones Industrial Index dropped 2pc shortly after opening.’
A key question will be whether Japanese reconstruction will push the economy out of its deflationary spiral or make it even worse.
GDP measures the value of output produced within the domestic economy, but it is by no means an accurate measure of a country’s standard of living. Whilst it will take into account new construction that will be required to rebuild the economy, it doesn’t take into account the initial destruction of it. As output and growth are expected to fall in the immediate aftermath, we may see a boost to growth, as reconstruction begins.
The problem of scarcity is becoming more and more apparent to many survivors, as they begin to run short of basic necessities, which has led to various rationing mechanisms being introduced. Despite the devastating conditions which survivors now find themselves in, when supplies are delivered, the efficiency of Japan is still very evident. As noted by BBC Radio 4 coverage, as soon as the supplies arrived, a line was in place to unload the van in minutes. Teams have been set up to help everyone get through the tragedy. Even in the most devastating of times, Japanese efficiency still shines through and undoubtedly this will be a massive aid in the huge re-construction projects that we will see over the coming months and even years. Analysts say that there will be short term pain, but that the investment in construction will boost the economy later in the year.
Japanese earthquake: Markets shed £1trillion amid nuclear fears Telegraph, Louise Armistead (16/3/11)
Panic over Japan triggers market turmoil Independent, Nikhil Kumar (16/3/11)
Japan quake: Economy ‘to rebound’ after short term pain BBC News (14/3/11)
Japan disaster: The cost of a crisis Guardian (16/3/11)
Global stock markets tumble in ‘perfect storm’ amid fears of nuclear disaster Mail Online, Hugo Duncan (16/3/11)
Japan’s earthquake will cause a global financial aftershock Guardian, Peter Hadfield (15/3/11)
Economists’ estimate of Japan quake impact Reuters (16/3/11)
Fukishima factor adds pressure to economic fallout from Japan’s crisis Guardian, Larry Elliott (15/3/11)
Questions
- What is the likely impact on Japan’s GDP?
- Why is the potential disruption to the supply chain important for a firm?
- How and why will this catastrophe affect global financial markets?
- What are some of the main problems of using GDP as a measurement for growth? Think about the impact on GDP of Japan’s destruction and their future re-construction.
- What types of production methods etc have Japan implemented to allow them to become so efficient in production?
- What are the arguments to suggest that this disaster might help the Japanese economy recover from its deflationary spiral? What are the arguments to suggest that it might make it worse?
- What are some other examples of natural disasters or human errors that have also had economic consequences?
With the UK economy borrowing 11% of GDP, it is undeniable that spending cuts are needed. Of course, the big question is should they be occurring now or delayed until the recovery is more stable. However, another question is now being asked. Should taxes be cut to help the worse off? David Cameron says that this is out of the question. While he is a ‘tax-cutting Tory’ who ‘believes in tax cuts’, any significant cuts in taxes specifically aimed at the poor would simply make matters worse, especially as the Coalition government is already helping to move thousands of families out of taxation altogether, albeit by increasing taxes on the better off.
“It’s no good saying we’re going to deal with the deficit by cutting spending, but then we’re going to make things worse again by cutting taxes. I’m afraid it doesn’t add up.”
Those in favour of cutting taxes include John Redwood, the head of the Tory’s economic affairs committee, who argues that they would help to boost the economy, by ‘encouraging the wealth creators and the private sector’. By reducing the burden on residents, disposable income will increase, helping to stimulate consumption and investment, which should in turn boost aggregate demand. This would be a much needed stimulus following the latest data which showed: a shrinking economy once again in the last quarter of 2010, consumer confidence at its lowest level in the past 20 years, the possibility of unstable markets should the government be seen to ‘twitch’ on the austerity drive and 57% in a YouGov poll saying that the cuts are ‘being imposed unfairly’. Public approval for the Coalition’s budget deficit reduction strategy has fallen from 53% in June 2010 to 38% in February 2010. Add to this rising inflation and unemployment and the last thing people want to hear is surely ‘No big tax cuts’.
However, the budget deficit must be tackled: now or later. Whenever it happens and whichever party is in power, spending must be cut and/or tax revenues must rise and everyone will have to play their part.
Cameron: ‘Tax cuts impossible right now’ Sky News (6/2/11)
David Cameron says major tax cuts not possible BBC News (6/2/11)
Cameron vows ‘No to big tax cuts’ The Press Association (6/2/11)
David Cameron: Sorry, but we can’t afford tax cuts Telegraph, Patrick Hennessy (5/2/11)
George Osborne faces Conservative pressure for tax cuts BBC News (1/2/11)
Nick Clegg’s tax cuts will cost £4.3 billion, says IFS Telegraph, James Kirkup (2/2/11)
Doubts mount over Cameron’s austerity drive Associated Press (6/2/11)
Sorry it is so complicated BBC 2, Daily Politics, Stephanie Flanders (14/6/10)
Questions
- What is government borrowing? Who does the government borrow from?
- Analyse the impact of tax cuts on the economy. Think about which groups will be affected the most and in what ways.
- Which components of aggregate demand will be affected by cuts in spending and rising taxes?
- ’Cuts in taxation would boost the economy.’ To what extent do you agree with this statement?
- What will be the impact of tas cuts on the government’s macroeconomic objectives, given your answer to question 3?
- What are the arguments (a) for cutting the budget deficit now and (b) for cutting the budget deficit later?
Periodically, the BBC hosts debates on major global topics. The following links are to the January 2011 debate on the state of the world economy and on what policies governments and central banks should pursue.
Should governments be boosting aggregate demand by raising government expenditure and cutting taxes in order to stimulate growth and plan to bring down deficits over the long term once growth is established? Or should they embark on tough fiscal consolidation now by cutting government expenditure and/or raising taxes in order to stimulate confidence by international financiers, thereby keeping long-term interest rates down and creating the foundations for sustainable economic growth? The debate considers these two very different policy approaches.
The participants in the debate are Joseph Stiglitz (Professor of Economics, Columbia University), Christina Romer (Professor of Economics, University of California, Berkeley and Adviser to Barack Obama (2009–10)), George Papaconstantinou (Finance Minister of Greece), Dominique Strauss-Khan (Managing Director, IMF) and Zhou Xiaochuan (Governor, Chinese Central Bank). The debate is in five separate webcasts.
Webcasts
World debate on the global economy BBC World Service (20/1/11)
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Questions
- What are the arguments for maintaining economic stimulus, at least for the time being? What are the relative merits of fiscal and monetary stimulus? Explain whether such policies are consistent with Keynesian polcies.
- What are the arguments for tough fiscal consolidation? Explain whether such policies are consistent with new classical policies.
- How successful have US policies been in stimulating the US economy?
- What role can China play in the recovery and long-term growth of the global economy and are there any imbalances that need correcting?
- Why might countries’ domestic policies result in currency wars? Is currency realignment necessary for sustained global growth?
- How important are consumer and business confidence to short-term recovery and long-term growth and to what extent do government policies respond to swings in confidence?