Steil responds to Paul Krugman's "Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession."
Benn Steil is Senior Research Fellow for the International Economics Programme, The Royal Institute of International Affairs.
The view that nations compete against each other like big corporations has become pervasive among Western elites, many of whom are in the Clinton administration. As a practical matter, however, the doctrine of "competitiveness" is flatly wrong. The world's leading nations are not, to any important degree, in economic competition with each other. Nor can their major economic woes be attributed to "losing" on world markets. This is particularly true in the case of the United States. Yet Clinton's theorists of competitiveness, from Laura D. Andrea Tyson to Robert Reich to Ira Magaziner, make seemingly sophisticated arguments, most of which are supported by careless arithmetic and sloppy research. Competitiveness is a seductive idea, promising easy answers to complex problems. But the result of this obsession is misallocated resources, trade frictions and bad domestic economic policies.
Paul Krugman has done everyone a service in warning against the dangers of making policy on the basis of facile analogies, such as those between countries and corporations. Yet while he justifiably accuses others of "careless arithmetic" in making their case, he shows little concern with immunizing himself from the charge. With regard to European labor costs, he cites Sam Brittan (Financial Times, June 1, 1993) in asserting that they "have not risen in relative terms when the exchange rate adjustment is made." Thus he concludes that European firms have not suffered a decline in competitiveness, as British Prime Minister John Major had claimed. In fact, Brittan's statistics show that between 1987 and 1993 European Community unit labor costs in manufacturing rose approximately 19 percent as compared with only 5 percent in the United States, both before and after the exchange rate adjustment. How Krugman could have missed this point, as he put it, "cries out for an explanation."
Related
The view that nations compete against each other like big corporations has become pervasive among Western elites, many of whom are in the Clinton administration. As a practical matter, however, the doctrine of "competitiveness" is flatly wrong. The world's leading nations are not, to any important degree, in economic competition with each other. Nor can their major economic woes be attributed to "losing" on world markets. This is particularly true in the case of the United States. Yet Clinton's theorists of competitiveness, from Laura D. Andrea Tyson to Robert Reich to Ira Magaziner, make seemingly sophisticated arguments, most of which are supported by careless arithmetic and sloppy research. Competitiveness is a seductive idea, promising easy answers to complex problems. But the result of this obsession is misallocated resources, trade frictions and bad domestic economic policies.
Prestowitz responds to Paul Krugman's "Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession."
Scharping responds to Paul Krugman's "Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession."
