Search

Begin New Search Topic Liberalization Publishing Institution Bruegel

1. Navigating the treacherous political economy of structural reform

Author:
Davide Furceri, Jonathan Ostry, and Chris Papageorgiou
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
We examine the economic and electoral effects of liberalisation measures using newly-constructed databases on structural economic reforms and the outcome of democratic elections since the 1970s. The data shows a remarkable slowdown in the pace of liberalisation in both advanced and emerging market and developing countries since the 1990s. A debate has emerged about the causes of this slowdown, including the possibility that reforms do not deliver the economic benefits that advocates, including the multilateral financial institutions, trumpeted. Some have pointed to the fact that the current and previous United States administrations have abandoned neoliberal policies in favour of more government intervention in the economy, and the effect has been globally contagious. Our empirical analysis suggests that the growth dividend from liberalisation is economically and statistically significant, but it emerges only slowly over time. Because of this delay, liberalising reforms are costly to democratic incumbents when they are implemented close to elections. Reforms may generate immediate concentrated losses, which elicit an electoral backlash, especially when the aggregate gains are only visible several years after the reform’s implementation. The electoral penalty is also sensitive to overall business-cycle conditions, being much larger when an economy is in recession. Electoral effects also differ depending on the type of reform. Notably, financial reforms generate more perceptible growth-equity trade-offs than real-economy reforms, especially when implemented during weak economic conditions. The political economy of reform is treacherous. To avoid adverse electoral effects, timing reform early in the electoral term and when business-cycle conditions are favourable is critical. So too is avoiding reforms that generate large distributional costs in the face of small aggregate gains (an adverse growth-equity trade-off). Focusing on these considerations is critical to reinvigorate support for structural reform.
Topic:
Economics, Political Economy, Reform, Elections, and Liberalization
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. Is the European Union’s investment agreement with China underrated?

Author:
Uri Dadush and André Sapir
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The European Union is very open to foreign direct investment. By comparison, despite considerable liberalisation in the past two decades, foreign investors in China’s markets still face significant restrictions, especially in services sectors. Given this imbalance, the EU has long sought to improve the situation for its companies operating or wanting to operate in China. After eight years of negotiations, the EU and China concluded in December 2020 a bilateral Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI). The text awaiting ratification aims to give foreign investors greater market access, enforceable via state-to-state dispute settlement. It does not yet, however, cover investor protection (such as against expropriation). Meanwhile, investor protection is covered by bilateral investment treaties between EU countries and China, which remain in force. The CAI has been met in some quarters with scepticism on economic and geopolitical grounds. The main criticism is that it provides little new market access in China, and that this small economic gain for the EU comes at the price of breaking ranks with its main political ally, the United States. Our assessment, which focuses on the economic implications, is different. It is true the CAI provides only modest new market access in China, but this is because China has already made progress in recent years in liberalising its foreign investment regulations unilaterally. The CAI binds this progress under an international treaty, marking an improvement for EU firms insofar as their market access rights can be effectively enforced. Most important, the CAI includes new rules on subsidies, state-owned enterprises, technology transfer and transparency, which will improve effective market access for EU firms operating in China. These bilateral new rules could also pave the way for reform of the multilateral rules under the World Trade Organisation, with the aim of better integrating China into the international trading and investment system – a goal shared by the EU, the United States and other like-minded countries. From an economic viewpoint therefore, the CAI is an important agreement, and one worth having. However, its ratification by the European Parliament is unlikely while China continues to apply sanctions against some members of the European Parliament and other critics of China’s human rights record.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Bilateral Relations, European Union, Investment, and Liberalization
Political Geography:
China and Europe