1 Rise and Fall of the Celtic Tiger See BPEA by Honahan and Walsh – commentary/journals/ bpea_macro/papers/ 200204_honohan.pdf

1

Rise and Fall of the Celtic Tiger

• See BPEA by Honahan and Walsh– http://www.brook.edu/es

/ commentary/journals/ bpea_macro/papers/ 200204_honohan.pdf

• Short-loan PC 18940

• Chapter 24 of Walsh and Leddin

http://www.brook.edu/es/commentary/journals/



2

Outline• The nature of the Irish economic boom• Not a productivity ‘miracle’

– But the growth of employment was ‘miraculous’

• The rising employment/population ratio the key to understanding the speed with which we caught up with the leaders

• No ‘magic bullet’• Several factors – including luck – came

together in the 1990s

3

Belated real convergence

• When Ireland began to catch up, it moved very rapidly

• like a hare• Rapid spurt in 1990s

• By the end of the 1990s we had gone ahead of the average and, by some measures, were one of the richest countries in the world– See the graphs

4

Real GDP PC

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

Year

US

$ IRL

ITA

5

Figure 2: Real convergence

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

66

Ireland closed the gap with rest of EU in the 1990s

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

1986

1987

1988

1998

919

9019

9119

9219

9319

9419

9519

9619

9719

9819

99

Ireland

Spain

Greece

Portugal

EU15 GDP per person at PPS=100

7

Real GDP growth rate

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

1960

1963

1966

1969

1972

1975

1978

1981

1984

1987

1990

1993

1996

1999

8

Employment growth rate

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

1960

1963

1966

1969

1972

1975

1978

1981

1984

1987

1990

1993

1996

1999

9

Basic Idea• Convergence postponed

– By policy errors prior to 1987

• Convergence achieved– By return to traditional, sound policies– By removal of obstacles– By rapid rise in ratio of non-agricultural

employment to population– No productivity miracle

• No magic bullet• Alternative Q:

– Why did it take so long?

10

Two Questions

1. Where did the growth come from?• Accounting Question

2. Why did we grow?• Lessons for the future• Lessons for other countries

11

Real convergenceNote that “real convergence” usually refers to

the level of GDP per person, that is

GDP/Population

We can see that this is made of two elements,

(GDP/person at work)

x

(Persons at work/population)

12

Sources of growth in GDP/person

GDP/person at work = productivity

Persons at work/population = employment rate

Rate of growth of GDP per person Rate of growth of productivity

+

rate of growth of employment rate

13

Where did the economic growth come from in the 1990s?

38%

62%

Productivity Employment growth

14

Where did the employment growth come from in the 1990s?

32%

68%

Working age population Employment rate

15

Output and productivty growth, 1993-2000annual average growth rates

0

1

23

4

5

67

8

9

%

Productivity Employment Output

16

Answer to Q of Where Growth came from

Convergence due to

1. Rapid rise in ratio of non-agricultural employment to population

• This in turn due – Demographic factors

• Decline in proportion aged under 15

– Exceptional growth in numbers at work outside agriculture

2. Reasonable growth in productivity • High by some standards• But no miracle

17

Sources of growth in GDP/person, 1985-2000

The employment/population ratio rose from

24% to 41%

With no change in the level of productivity

this alone would have raised GDP/Person by

over 60%

18

Non-agricultural employment as share of population

20

25

30

35

40

45

60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 00

19

What actually happened was much less smooth

• Drastic set-backs between 1973 and mid-1980s– Shrinking productive base– Growing burden of dependency

• 224 dependants per 100 employed in 1986

• Rapid recovery and catch up from late 1980s– 124 dependants per 100 employed in 2001

20

Summary

• Prior to 1987: depression (negative growth), high unemployment (18%), high inflation (16%), public finances in crisis (deficit of 15.1%) , balance of payments deficit (14.6% of GNP) and depreciating exchange rate. Mass emigration, rising poverty. “Basket Case” economy.

• 1994 to 2001: 7 years of spectacular growth (average 9%), low unemployment (3.6%), low inflation (1.4%), surpluses on fiscal budget (3.5%) and balance of payments (3.7%). The “Celtic Tiger” economy.

• 2001+: Return to more normal economic performance• See Economist covers

Leddin and Walsh Macroeconomy of the Eurozone, 2003

21

From 1960 to 2000

• One huge macroeconomic loop in terms of unemployment

– We ended up in 2000 much where we started from in 1961• Path was not smooth

– Policy errors after1973– Led to enormous fiscal and balance of payment deficits – Painful correction during 1980s– Steady rise in the tax burden until 1986– This trend reversed as spending was brought under control

• The correction became self-reinforcing by the late 1980s– Virtuous circle of declining burden of debt and taxation

22

Why Did We Grow?

Why did employment grow?

1. Demographic factors

– Sharp fall in birth rate after 1980

– led to fall in proportion of young dependents

in population

2. Economic Policy

– We saw some of this in the fiscal policy

section

23

Demographics

The fall in birth rate after 1980 could be regarded as– Ireland’s belated convergence to the

demographic norm for a developed country

• Facilitated by rising female educational levels and

• Changes in attitudes and laws concerning contraception

• Triggered by rise in unemployment in early 1980s?

24

Economic Policy in the Tiger

• Distinguish between pre-boom factors:• 1. Foreign direct investment (Industrial policy). • 2. External assistance. • 3. Investment in education. • Factors that combined to ignite the boom:• 4. Centralised wage bargaining.• 5. Fiscal policy.• 6. Upturn in World (US) economy.• 7. Achieving EMU entry criteria. • 8. Exchange rate policy.• 9. Small is beautiful.


25

1. Industrial Policy

• Success of IDA in attracting high-tech foreign multinational companies (MNCs): microelectronics, pharmaceuticals, medical instrumentation, computer software, financial services, telemarketing.

• However, the contribution of MNC’s can easily be exaggerated.

• Need to take into account their high level of imports (including payments for patents and royalties) and repatriated profits.

• Contribution to GNP in 1998 was only €4.8 billion. Considerably less than the sales figure.


26

2. External Assistance

• 1973-2001: • Total net receipts = €33,853.5 million.• Annual average of €1,167.4 million or 3.9 % of GNP.• The peak was 6.6% of GNP in 1991.• Paid under a variety of headings: agriculture, social,

regional and cohesion funds.• Money mostly spent on roads, railways,

telecommunications.• Greatly improved the country’s productive capacity.


27

3. Investment in Education

• The importance of “human capital formation” in the growth process.

• 2000: Primary €1,068 mSecondary €1,243 mThird level €838 m

• Well educated labour force acts as a magnet to foreign multinationals.

• Much of this investment took place in the 1970s and early 1980s.

• Note: Factors 1 to 3 were in place in the 1980s and do not explain the spurt in growth in the 1990s. Considered to be essential pre-conditions.


28

4. Wage Bargaining

• Wage moderation following a return to centralised wage bargaining.

• National wage agreements involving the trade unions, employers and government.

• In return for moderate increases in nominal wages, the government promised tax cuts at budget time.

• For a number of years, inflation was greater than the basic wage awards resulting in a fall in real earnings.

• Improved Ireland’s competitive advantage.• Only applies to workforce of 500,000 out of total

employment of 1.7 million.• May or may not have facilitated the IDA’s industrial

policy.


29

5. Fiscal Policy• Restoring oder to the public finances in late 1980s was a pre-

condition for a resumption of economic growth.• Improved investor confidence and reduced the outflow of

capital.• Tax rates cut from 35% and 58% in 1988 to 20% and 42% in

2002.• Difficult to disentangle cause and effect.• Tax cuts in recent budgets increased the supply of labour and

stimulated aggregate demand.• Government expenditure under the 1994 and 2000 National

Development Plans was €28 billion and €51 billion respectively.

• Expenditure went into improving infrastructure (road conjestion), environmental pollution, education and training, and housing.


30

6. World Economy• Ireland is very open to trade. • Non-EMU countries account for 80.4 % of

Irish trade.• Very dependent on the US economy. Exports

of €1.6 billion in 2001.• Economic performance in USA has been

major factor behind the growth in Ireland.• Current slowdown in Ireland is due in large

part to slowdown in US, terrorist attack 11th September and the foot and mouth disease.

• Tourism increased by 8% per annum throughout the 1990s.


31

7. EMU Entry Criteria

• To join EMU, Irish inflation had to drop to below 2.7 %. • Hence, EMU forced the government to adopt an anti-

inflationary stance.• EMU membership also entailed a fall in Irish interest

rates down to the low German rates. • By the late 1990s, negative real interest rates stimulated

the demand-side of the economy and fulled house price inflation.


32

8. Exchange Rate Policy• Over-valued exchange rate combined with high

interest rates can seriously curtail a country’s growth potential.

• Devaluations in August 1986 (8%) and January 1993 (10%) prevented over-valuation.

• Central Bank followed a policy of stabilising the effective exchange rate.

• Involved playing off the strength of sterling against the weakness of the DM. Middle ground.

• From August 1997, the DM rate was allowed to drift down to the EMU entry rate of 2.4834.


33

9. Small is Beautiful

• Obviously a lot easier to turn around a small country like Ireland than a very large country.

• The same level of foreign direct investment would have much less of an impact on, say, the Spanish economy.

• Factor number 10 was “luck”. Most of the above mentioned factors complemented each other in moving in the right direction at the right time.


34

How Did these Factors Influence Output?

• Examine how factors 1 to 9 impact on the demand-side (AD) and the supply-side (AS) of the economy.

• This analysis is subjective because:1. Some factors impact on both AS and AD.2. The factors interact with each other.3. It is virtually impossible to quantify the effect of

each factor on economic growth, unemployment and inflation.

35

LRAS• Long-run (natural real GNP) and short-run AS curves

are determined by:– A. The size of the labour force.– B. Physical and human capital.– C. Advances in technology.

• Some of the Policies affect AS1. Foreign direct investment Affects B and C.2. External assistance Affects B.3. Investment in education Affects B and C.4. Centralised wage bargaining Short-run AS curve.5. Fiscal policy Affects A, B and C.6. World economy Affects B and

C.

• Result: the long-run and short-run AS curves shift to the right.

36

AD• AD curve is determined by: Consumer

expenditure (C), Investment (I), Government expenditure (G) and Net exports (NX).

• 5. Fiscal policy affects C, I and G.

• 6. World economy I and NX. • 7. EMU entry criteria C, I and

NX.• 8. Exchange rate policy NX. • Result is a shift of the AD curve to the right.

37

Overall

• Equal movement of the AS and AD curves resulted in very fast real growth rates with little or no effect on inflation.

• 1994 – 2000.• Average real growth rate = 8%• Average inflation rate = 2%• If the shift in AD > shift in AS, inflation would have

increased by considerably more.• Employment increased from 1,118,300 in 1993 to

1,745,000 in 2002.• Unemployment rate fell from 14.5% to 3.6%.


38

AS1

1

Graphical Representation

AD1

AS2

AD2

Inflation

Real growth rate

Natural realGNP


39

• After 2000, the real growth rate fell significantly. – The era of the Celtic Tiger ended in 2000.

• Ireland suffered periodic adverse shocks:1. Downturn in the US and European economies.

2. Fall in equity markets due to unrealistic profit expectations and corporate accounting scandals.

3. Foot and mouth crisis in 2001.

4. September 11th terrorist attack in 2001.

5. Subdued domestic demand.

The End of the Celtic Tiger Era


40

The business cycle

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

%

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Rate of growth of real GNP

41

Slowing employment growth

01234567

%

1998q4

1999q2

1999q4

2000q2

2000q4

2001q2

2001q4

2002q2

Numbers at work (Quarterly growth rate : year on year)

42

Explanations for slow-down• Growth at the pace reached in the late

1990s not sustainable– Catch-up phase must come to an end

– By 2000 full employment had been reached

– Capacity constraints• Especially infrastructure, housing

– Inflationary pressures• Loss of “super competitiveness”

• Relatively high inflation could be seen as an inevitable part of the adjustment process under a fixed exchnage rate

43

External factors

• The US economy entered a recession early in 2001– Bursting of the great technology bubble

– Followed by 9/11

• The flow of FDI from the US slowed sharply

• The decline of the euro was reversed– Ireland loses competitiveness vis a vis UK, US

• Foot and Mouth Disease in 2001– Impact on Tourism

44

Composition of employment growth

• Since 2001 the numbers at work in

Industry have fallen by about 10%

– Over half of this fall was in the “high tech”

Electronics sector

• Forecasts of labour shortages a thing of the past!

• Illustrates hazards of “manpower forecasting”

45

Importance of service employment• Service employment has continued to grow

– But recently most of this growth has been in public sector services

• Health

• In modern, wealthy economies the service sector is the growth sector

• Breakdown of total employment– Services 66% Agriculture 6%, Industry 28%

– Manufacturing 17%

46

• Most of this period unemployment did not rise by

much

– Not much evidence of rise in hidden unemployment,

such as a fall in participation rates or an increase in the

numbers of “discouraged workers”

• May be changing now

47

Medium-term prospects

Remember that the growth of an

economy in the long term is

determined by two factors

• The rate of growth of employment

• The rate of growth of productivity –

output person at work

48

The rate of growth of employment

• Negative in 2008/9

• But in medium term (2012?) likely to be

fairly high for some year to come

– Due to demographic factors

– Some further increases in participation

– Immigration?

• Maybe 1% to 1.5% over the medium term

49

Productivity growth

Remember, there was no productivity

miracle in the 1990s

But we should be able to maintain a

2% to 2.5% growth in output per

person employed

50

Total growth

Labour force 1% - 1.5%

Productivity 2% - 2.5%

Total growth 3% - 4%

Remember we’re talking about real

GNP

Documents

1 Rise and Fall of the Celtic Tiger See BPEA by Honahan and Walsh – commentary/journals/ bpea_macro/papers/ 200204_honohan.pdf