BRICs, MINTs and a disordered world economy

Jim O’Neill, famous as the inventor of the idea of the BRICs, has moved on to MINTs – Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria and Turkey. He has a series on BBC Radio 4 starting today on these countries.

We’ve become very familiar with the idea of the rising economic powers, and enmeshed in debate about whether their growth rates can be sustained, and where the next growth stories are – hence the interest in MINTs, and the recent ‘Africa rising’ theme in so much comment. So it’s easy to forget the dramatic impact of Jim O’Neill’s original report over a decade ago, capturing the idea of a shift in economic power in the memorable acronym. What is still overlooked – and this is one of the themes of his new book, [amazon_link id=”1907994130″ target=”_blank” ]The BRIC Road To Growth[/amazon_link] – is that this shift has already happened. Many of us commenting from the West still talk about it as something that is going to happen. But as Danny Quah of the LSE has mapped very carefully (and he is writing about the Great Shift East in his own forthcoming book), the world centre of economic gravity is in Asia *now* – here is his map.

This makes the other theme of Jim O’Neill’s book all the more relevant. He argues passionately that the structures of global economic governance need to change. A world economy whose governing institutions reflect patterns of growth and trade that no longer exist is going to be a disordered world economy. It’s an important message, and my impression is that nobody is doing anything about it.

[amazon_image id=”1907994130″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]The BRIC Road to Growth (Perspectives)[/amazon_image]

Science fiction economics

Gavin Kelly of the Resolution Foundation has written a very informative and balanced article in today’s Observer about technology and jobs – it’s more balanced than the headline (“The Robots Are Coming!”). He discusses the gloom about the hollowing out of good, ordinary, middle income jobs as featured in Tyler Cowen’s fascinating [amazon_link id=”0525953736″ target=”_blank” ]Average is Over[/amazon_link] and the forthcoming [amazon_link id=”0393239357″ target=”_blank” ]The Second Machine Age[/amazon_link] by Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee; but also some of the reasons for not assuming we’re heading straight for the dystopia of a society divided between a minority of highly skilled, high earners and a lumpenproletariat earning minimum wage for service sector jobs the machines can’t quite do yet.

[amazon_image id=”0393239357″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies[/amazon_image]

I’m in the latter camp, although not at all sanguine about the social and institutional adjustments that will need to be made as we glide into the Age of Robots. These adjustments are everything: technology drives prosperity and progress (old fashioned idea, I know), but society determines how the benefits are shared.

In the article Alan Manning (author of a book with one of the best titles ever, [amazon_link id=”0691123284″ target=”_blank” ]Monopsony in Motion[/amazon_link]) refers to ‘science fiction economics’, a marvellous concept. [amazon_link id=”1857988124″ target=”_blank” ]Blade Runner[/amazon_link] is the obvious reference for the robots-are-coming thesis, but Bruce Sterling’s [amazon_link id=”0441374239″ target=”_blank” ]Islands in the Net[/amazon_link] leapt to my mind as the best example. Some of William Gibson’s recent novels, of course, such as [amazon_link id=”0399149864″ target=”_blank” ]Pattern Recognition[/amazon_link].

Any other suggestions for the best economic analysis through the medium of science fiction?

[amazon_image id=”0441374239″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]Islands in the Net[/amazon_image]

Housing word association

The week between Christmas and New Year is always a wonderful time for reading, both books and catching up on the wealth of articles bookmarked in the busy weeks before the holidays. So I’ve had time to read a new London Review of Books essay by James Meek about housing in the UK. Or rather, the housing crisis, as the title has it, in what has become the automatic word association.

As the chart in the article makes perfectly plain, there is a crisis of inadequate supply, on a scale that in the past was addressed by some substantial policy interventions. I am absolutely not a political expert, but it does seem to me that housing is one of the basics that voters will care about – something Margaret Thatcher as well as Aneurin Bevan understood perfectly well.

The Meek article ends with a quote from Julia Unwin of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation: ‘At the turn of the 20th century, the free market had provided squalid slums. We undoubtedly face the re-creation of slums, the enrichment of bad landlords, the risk of people being destitute. Beveridge had soup kitchens. We have food banks. We’ve got something that does take us back full circle, a deep divide in way of life between people who are reasonably well off and those who are poor. There’s always been a difference, but the distinction seems to be more stark now.’

Julia is one of my Perspectives authors, and I highly commend her new book [amazon_link id=”1907994165″ target=”_blank” ]Why Fight Poverty?[/amazon_link] It seems to me spot on in identifying the emotion of fear – fear of becoming poor, fear of poor people – as a barrier to doing anything about poverty.

As it happens, I’ve also commissioned Kate Barker to write a Perspective on the housing crisis, due out later this year. Kate was the author of two authoritative reports on planning and housing a few years ago, and her recommendations in the run up to a UK general election campaign will be essential reading.

[amazon_image id=”1907994165″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]Why Fight Poverty? (Perspectives)[/amazon_image]

There are a few other books around about housing. I’ve read Neil Monnery’s Safe As Houses which gives a very useful historical and also cross-country overview. A bit old now, but excellent on the economic analysis, is David Miles’s [amazon_link id=”0471952109″ target=”_blank” ]Housing, Financial Markets and the Wider Economy[/amazon_link]. David is on the Monetary Policy Committee and no doubt paying close attention to the current house price surge and mortgage conditions.There are some excellent blogs too – Alex Marsh writes one, Jules Birch another.

[amazon_image id=”B00FOU4GLA” link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]Safe as Houses: A Historical Analysis of Property Prices (Paperback) – Common[/amazon_image]

Economics books in 2014 – continued

A couple of days ago I posted a list of forthcoming titles in economics that looked intriguing.

Inevitably, I missed some things. Cardiff Garcia expanded the list and added some descriptions. Of the extra ones he spotted, [amazon_link id=”0393239357″ target=”_blank” ]The Second Machine Age[/amazon_link] by Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee, [amazon_link id=”0465064736″ target=”_blank” ]The Upside of Down[/amazon_link] by Charles Kenny, and [amazon_link id=”1451651201″ target=”_blank” ]The Leading Indicators: A Short History of the Numbers That Rule Our World[/amazon_link], by Zachary Karabell stand out.

[amazon_image id=”0465064736″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]Upside of Down[/amazon_image]

Robert Went, among others on Twitter, flagged up Ha-Joon Chang’s forthcoming book, [amazon_link id=”0718197038″ target=”_blank” ]Economics: The User’s Guide[/amazon_link]. John Saunders in comments added [amazon_link id=”0691152098″ target=”_blank” ]Complexity and the Art of Public Policy: Solving Society’s Problems from the Bottom Up[/amazon_link] by David Colander & Roland Kupers.

Happy New Year from me and Thomas Hobbes

A very Happy New Year and warmest wishes for 2014 to all readers of this blog.

A thought from Thomas Hobbes to keep us all aware of our own cognitive biases as vigorous discussions about the economy continue:

“[Those] who commonly … call for right reason to decide any controversy, do mean their own.”

This is from [amazon_link id=”019283682X” target=”_blank” ]The Elements of Law, Natural and Political[/amazon_link], and is quoted in my current reading, Anthony Pagden’s [amazon_link id=”019966093X” target=”_blank” ]The Enlightenment and Why It Still Matters[/amazon_link].

Here’s to a year of thoroughly reasonable and evidence-based debate.

[amazon_image id=”019966093X” link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]The Enlightenment: And Why it Still Matters[/amazon_image]