Social Europe

politics, economy and employment & labour

  • Themes
    • Europe 2025
    • The Crisis Of Globalisation
    • The Future of Work
    • What is inequality?
    • Inequality In Europe
    • Europe’s Refugee Crisis
    • Where Now After Brexit?
    • Understanding PEGIDA in Context
  • Podcast
  • Videos
    • Video Podcasts
    • Social Europe Talk
  • Books
  • Papers
    • Brexit Paper Series
    • Occasional Papers
    • Research Essays
  • Advertise
  • Newsletter

The Biggest Economic Policy Mistake Of The Last Decade Had Nothing To Do With Academic Economists

by Simon Wren-Lewis on 3rd September 2018 @sjwrenlewis

Simon Wren-Lewis

Simon Wren-Lewis

“The biggest policy mistake of the last decade” is the title of an article by Ryan Cooper, and the mistake is of course austerity (it is a very US focussed piece, so Brexit is not on the map). Cooper goes through all the academics who gave reasons why austerity was necessary and how their analysis later fell to bits. How much they fell to bits is still a matter of dispute as far as these authors are concerned.

Here is his concluding paragraph:

As we have seen, the evidence for the Keynesian position is overwhelming. And that means the decade of pointless austerity has severely harmed the American economy — leaving us perhaps $3 trillion below the previous growth trend. Through a combination of bad faith, motivated reasoning, and sheer incompetence, austerians have directly created the problem their entire program was supposed to avoid. Good riddance.

There is a lot I could say about the details of the article, but this conclusion is essentially correct, and it applies at least as much to the UK and to the countries of the Eurozone. With Trump’s large tax cuts for the rich paid for in large part by borrowing, the Republicans can no longer credibly tell everyone austerity is essential. In contrast, the political right’s enthusiasm for austerity in Europe remains strong.

Join our growing community newsletter!

"Social Europe publishes thought-provoking articles on the big political and economic issues of our time analysed from a European viewpoint. Indispensable reading!"

Polly Toynbee

Columnist for The Guardian

Thank you very much for your interest! Now please check your email to confirm your subscription.

There was an error submitting your subscription. Please try again.

Powered by ConvertKit

Anti-austerians

Reading the article brought back memories of my first year or two writing this blog, where I became part of a mainly US blog scene of mainstream academics opposed to austerity, lead by Paul Krugman and Brad DeLong. We were trying to take down the academic arguments for austerity, and we succeeded. As Cooper’s article suggests it was not a very difficult task. Sometimes very senior economists who should have known better made simple mistakes of the kind I discussed here. On other occasions, like the predictions of massive inflation from Quantitative Easing that Cooper discussed, events quickly proved the Keynesians correct. Only in the case of the studies from the two pairs of Alesina & Ardagna and Reinhart & Rogoff was additional research required to challenge their conclusions.

As far as us Keynesians were concerned, the intellectual battles were won by the end of 2012, if not before. In particular Paul De Grauwe’s influential analysis of why Eurozone countries were experiencing a debt crisis, pointing to the lack of a sovereign lender of last resort, put an end to the academic credibility of ‘we are going to become like Greece’ stories. When the ECB introduced OMT in September 2012 and the Eurozone debt crisis came to an end, De Grauwe was proved right. In 2013 Krugman wrote of austerity:

Its predictions have proved utterly wrong; its founding academic documents haven’t just lost their canonized status, they’ve become the objects of much ridicule.

What we didn’t know for sure then was the lasting damage that austerity would bring, and which Cooper notes.

Watch the latest Social Europe Video Podcast

Blinkered media

I want to add two important points that Cooper’s article does not cover. The first is that although by 2013 most academics had become convinced about the austerity mistake (it was always a minority view anyway), economic journalists in the non-partisan media could not recognise that because the politicians were continuing to implement the policy. Here is Robert Peston in 2015:

And before I am savaged (as I always am) by the Krugman crew of Keynesian economists for even allowing George Osborne’s argument an airing, I am not saying that the net negative impact on our national income and living standards of cutting the deficit faster is less than their alternative route of slower so called fiscal consolidation. I am simply pointing out that there is a debate here (though Krugman, Wren-Lewis and Portes are utterly persuaded they’ve won this match – and take the somewhat patronising view that voters who think differently are ignorant sheep led astray by a malign or blinkered media).

We now know that voters were indeed being led astray by a malign or blinkered media, or at least a media that did not have the courage to call the result of the academic debate.

The second point is that this academic debate had zero impact on politicians. In that sense Cooper’s article is of purely academic concern. Austerity was not begun because politicians chose the wrong academic macroeconomists to take advice from, and the fact that the Keynesians won the debate therefore had no impact on what they did. The academic debate was in this sense a complete sideshow. I think many Keynesian academics understood that: it was a fight we had to win but we were under no illusions it would change anything. I wrote in 2012 that if all academics were united we might have an impact on public opinion, but that illusion did not last very long and Brexit showed it was indeed an illusion.

Without influence

I think this lack of influence that academic economics can have is not understood by many. It often suits some heterodox economists to pretend otherwise. Economists can be influential, but only when politicians want to listen, or the media is prepared to confront them with academic knowledge. For example politicians have not done nearly enough to ensure another financial crisis does not happen, but that isn’t because economists have told them not to or have not shown them how to do so. It is because politics prevents it from happening.

The reason why economists like Alesina or Rogoff featured so much in the early discussion of austerity is not because they were influential, but because they were useful to provide some intellectual credibility to the policy that politicians of the right wanted to pursue. The influence of their work did not last long among academics, who now largely accept that there is no such thing as expansionary austerity or some danger point for debt. In contrast, the damage done by austerity does not seem to have done the politicians who promoted it much harm, in part because most of the media will keep insisting that maybe these politicians were right, but mainly because they are still in power.

This post originally appeared on Mainly Macro

TwitterFacebookLinkedin
Home ・ Economy ・ The Biggest Economic Policy Mistake Of The Last Decade Had Nothing To Do With Academic Economists

Filed Under: Columns & Interviews, Economy

About Simon Wren-Lewis

Simon Wren-Lewis is Professor of Economics at Oxford University.

Partner Ads

Most Recent Posts

Access to social protection, for some Ane Fernandez de Aranguiz and Bartłomiej Bednarowicz
Economic growth versus social security—redeeming the EU’s original sin Roberta Ferrara and Valerio Alfonso Bruno
coal Why should just transition be an integral part of the European Green Deal? Béla Galgóczi
Just Transition Fund A Just Transition Fund: one step on a long march Ludovic Voet
climate strike Why we strike again Greta Thunberg, Luisa Neubauer and Angela Valenzuela

Most Popular Posts

election in Poland The parliamentary election in Poland—the future at stake Maria Skóra
radical right Why the radical right is no longer the exclusive domain of older, male voters Caroline Marie Lancaster
digital currencies Mario Draghi and the Germans Peter Bofinger
Manchester Could a progressive phoenix arise from the ashes of the UK’s political meltdown? Paul Mason
populism What’s driving populism? Dani Rodrik

Other Social Europe Publications

For a Europe with a Future
Europe 2025 – A New Agenda
OP 14: Changing the Game: EU Development Policy for Sustainable Equality
Austerity: 12 Myths Exposed
The Crisis of Globalisation

S&D Group Ad

At the beginning of the new EU legislative cycle, this occasional paper by Udo Bullmann (MEP and S&D Group coordinator in the European Parliament’s Development Committee) makes the case for an EU development policy that puts the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and a concern for human well-being front and centre. The paper argues that EU development policy must serve to fight inequalities in partner countries to enable successful transformations in the spirit of the SDGs. Weaving a concern for achieving greater equality into the process of EU development policy-making, including through ex-ante assessment tools, is key in this regard.


FREE DOWNLOAD

Social Europe Edition Book

Is an unconditional basic income without means-test or work-test compatible with social justice and individual self-worth? Does it open up the space for an end to demeaning labour and a resurgence of voluntary work and cultural life? Is it affordable? This collection of short but compelling essays, all previously published in Social Europe, allows both proponents and opponents to make their case and is designed to extend this vital discussion to a wider audience.


MORE INFO

Hans Böckler Stiftung Ad

The Blocked Completion of the European Monetary Union

The reform of the euro zone is stuck. Against the background of political blockades, this report examines from a combined economic and political science perspective how the Euro can be prepared for the next crisis. The report first identifies general requirements for the stabilization of economic and monetary union. Next, the report reconstructs the political logic of the euro crisis and shows that the prospects for realizing far-reaching reform proposals aiming at a fiscal union are poor. Subsequently, the report develops a proposal of how, under the given circumstances, the room for maneuver within the existing framework of economic and monetary union can be extended in a pragmatic way in order to strengthen national fiscal policy as an instrument of macroeconomic stabilization.


FREE DOWNLOAD

ETUI Advertisement

Migrant workers in Fortress Europe

The number of legally resident migrants stands at over 22 million, but the number of Europe’s “undocumented” migrants, whose status is precarious and whose rights in many areas are limited as a result, is much harder to determine. These migrants are often forced to tolerate adverse working conditions; since they are discriminated against in the labour market, both male and female migrant workers are pushed into low-skill industries and professions that are more hazardous to health and less well-paid than other jobs, a situation that is justified by racist stereotypes and assumptions. The goal of the HesaMag editorial team in compiling this report was to introduce readers to a number of real-life examples drawn from a variety of EU Member States.


FREE DOWNLOAD

Eurofound Advertisement

Challenges and prospects in the EU: Quality of life and public services

What have been the major developments in quality of life and public services in Europe in recent years? This flagship publication provides a synthesis of the main findings on several key topics, based, in part, on European Quality of Life Survey data. It maps developments and perceptions regarding the following: trust in institutions and social cohesion; access to and quality of health and care services; the impact of digitalisation on social services; access to services for young people; and measures aimed at integrating refugees. While the report highlights many challenges and emerging issues for public services, it also showcases a number of positive experiences with the involvement of client groups in the design of services and take-up of new technologies.


CLICK FOR MORE INFO

About Social Europe

Mission Statement & Editorial Team

Article Submission

Social Europe ISSN 2628-7641

Legal & Privacy

Legal Disclosure

Privacy Policy

Copyright

Thought Leadership

XThis website uses cookies to improve your experience and we assume you are ok with this. Do not use this website if you have objections. Read Our Full Privacy Policy RejectAccept
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.

Necessary
Always Enabled

This is an necessary category.

Analytics
Advertisement
Performance
Uncategorized
Save & Accept