Loomnie

• My years as Gaddafi’s nurse - Oksana Balinskaya
• ‘…what will ultimately replace today’s dollar-centric international monetary and financial system is a tripolar system organized around the dollar, the euro, and the Chinese renminbi’ - Barry Eichengreen
• ‘The left love being provoked by me … they think I’m a reactionary imperialist scumbag’ Niall Ferguson
• Why about 75% of Iceland’s voters reject the government’s proposal to pay $5.2 billion to the British and Dutch bank insurance agencies - Michael Hudson
• Has NGO advertising gone too far? – Alanna Shaikh

From WSJ:

Foreign consumer-goods companies including Coca-Cola Co., Nestlé SA and Unilever PLC have been in Africa for decades without much competition from local players. Now, home-grown companies are expanding aggressively across the continent, eager to accommodate a growing middle-class among the billion-person population.

Examples?

Among the most prominent of these consumer upstarts: African retailers such as Nakumatt Holdings Ltd. of Kenya, the top supermarket chain in East Africa, MTN Group Ltd., Africa’s largest cellphone provider, and South African restaurant chain Spur Corp. Nakumatt has expanded into three neighboring countries while 348-restaurant chain Spur has opened in seven other African countries.

And:

Aiding Nakumatt and others’ cross-border expansion is an African gross domestic product expected to grow 4.3% this year from just under $1.5 trillion in 2009, according to the International Monetary Fund, a clip that trails only China and India among the world’s massive emerging markets. The growing investment and trade, from African companies in African countries, has helped cushion the continent from the shocks of the global economic crisis.

Commercial growth also is being fueled in part by the rise of young African banks that have opened branches across the continent, providing much-needed capital to local companies. Ecobank, from Togo, now has branches in 27 African countries and $9 billion in assets. In Nigeria, 10-year-old Guaranty Trust Bank PLC operates in five English-speaking West African countries.

I can think of others…. but I would presume that one gets the picture with these examples. The whole article, which is on the whole pretty upbeat, is here.

1. Ignoring Africa’s present or the West’s past? – Wronging Rights

2. London faces battle to stop trading shift to eurozone – Financial Times

3. Europe agrees on Greek safety net with IMF role – Reuters

4. Scouring blogs for useful information – The Economist

5. Winner of the world’s oddest book title award – Guardian

6. What is the world’s most bizarre terror threat? – FP Passport

is the title of a Reuters report on Africa. Read this excerpt:

The International Monetary Fund believes growth in sub-Saharan Africa will be 1 percentage point above the global average, and puts eight African countries in its top 20 fastest-expanding economies in 2010. Oil-rich Angola and Congo Republic will lead the charge with growth rates of more than 9 and 12 percent respectively, both beating China, according to the IMF’s most recent projections.

According to the report, China is an important part of the mix:

Massive Chinese investment, in return for resources to fuel its own economic boom, has helped drag the awful roads in many parts of Africa into the 21st century. Trade with China now tops $100 billion a year, and China has overtaken the United States as Africa’s main partner.

In giving the countries where the resources lie an economic boost, China’s need for oil and raw materials has transformed them into an investment proxy for the Asian giant’s growth, and handed the continent as a whole unprecedented negotiating clout.

China last year promised $10 billion in infrastructure funding over three years, amid talk by Chinese officials that Africa can experience a boom like the one in their country. But the challenges — or opportunities — are still vast.

And:

“Not investing in Africa is like missing out on Japan and Germany in the 1950s, Southeast Asia in the 1980s and emerging markets in the 1990s,” said Francis Beddington, head of research at emerging market investment house Insparo Capital.

He believes that in the long term, Africa has the potential to be home to a sizeable chunk of the factories and warehouses of tomorrow’s world.

The Africa of old — aid-dependent, and with large tracts of the economy controlled by corrupt and capricious governments — has not disappeared.

But for all the previous false dawns, there is a growing belief that the continent — home to 53 countries, a rapidly urbanizing young population of a billion people and as much as a third of the world’s natural resources — is changing.

The full report. The future might just be that bright.

From a policy brief from the United Nations University: We have already witnessed over the past year brave and even imaginative efforts by many developing countries in order to cope. Developing countries with the largest and strongest economies, such as China, India and Brazil, have shown encouraging early signs of recovery after implementing timely countercyclical policies. In many African countries governments have been proactively attempting to protect their economies. In many (including Botswana, Mauritius and South Africa) governments have increased their expenditure. Ghana, facing a large budget deficit, is negotiating assistance from the IMF. Kenya and Tanzania are carefully monitoring their economies. The African Development Bank reacted quickly by identifying the most vulnerable countries and making emergency finances available. Many longterm investment projects in Africa, many in critical infrastructure, seem to remain in place.

The fact that many developing countries can now act in this way is quite in contrast to their actions during previous global recessions, such as those in the early 1980s, 1990s and in 1998. Then, developing countries, especially those in Africa, were much less well-managed. Deficits were high and reserves were low. Consequently, when global growth declined, these economies shrunk substantially. This time around, with a few exceptions, developing countries have, on average, had more leeway: deficits are lower and reserve holding is much better. In Asia, valuable lessons were learnt after the 1998 financial crisis, the actions Developing countries should not expect too much assistance from the rich world implemented in response to this have resulted in their economies becoming less vulnerable to financial shocks. Many countries here, such as China and South Korea, accumulated large foreign exchange reserves in order to insure themselves against such crises. While this reflects on an international financial system that is not trusted by developing countries, it does show that developing countries can and will act in their own best interests.

It also needs to be pointed out that improvements in macro-economic management in many developing countries have resulted in improvements in governance – including improvements in many African countries. These improvements, including more robust democracies; more frequent elections; initiatives to reduce corruption and end conflicts; and to empower women, are largely home-grown. It would be very difficult to argue that they were the outcome of Western aid or pressure. This means that better governance, which leads to better resilience in the case of financial and economic shocks, have most often been achieved without, or even in spite of, Western aid.

If this crisis can ever be said to have a positive outcome, it may be that of developing countries showing that they can and should manage by themselves and collaborate with regional institutions and the UN development system. They still are – and this is another lesson from the crisis – very dependent on global economic growth, but unlike in the past, the extent of the rest of the world’s, in particular the West’s, dependence on developing countries is also becoming abundantly clear. Demand in the West will be low and sluggish for years to come. Global growth depends now more than ever on growing demand in developing countries. The days of the USA as a ‘consumer of last resort’ (as described by Joseph Stiglitz) are over.

The full document [pdf] is here

NYTimes A Balanced Global Diet: Global imbalances — roughly defined, the different emphasis the world’s leading economies place on savings, spending and debt — is a phrase much used and little acted upon.

Well before the current financial crisis began, world leaders pledged to address this disconnect. At an International Monetary Fund meeting in 2007, for instance, representatives of the United States and the European Union agreed they should change economic incentives to encourage more savings and less spending; officials speaking for China, Japan and Germany, meanwhile, pledged to take steps to encourage spending. At the end of the day, nothing much happened, and these imbalances helped grease the skids for the global decent toward the economic abyss.

This might not be readily apparent from current numbers; in fact, the financial crisis has contributed to a significant narrowing of global economic imbalances. Consumers in so-called “deficit countries” — states like the U.S., Britain, Spain and the countries of Eastern Europe that have huge trade deficits — are saving more as the crisis has exposed the dangerous extent of their indebtedness. Meanwhile, in China and other large export-driven economies, fiscal stimulus spending and some other policy moves have encouraged more domestic consumption.

The reduction in the U.S. current account deficit — the broadest measure of trade in goods and services — is particularly striking and serves as an example. This reduction holds true across other, less robust economies, too. Many of the emerging economies of Eastern Europe had easily financed wide deficits during the boom years. Now they find they are reducing private consumption in light of the lack of credit.

In more desperate cases like Ukraine and Kazakhstan, this has necessitated currency devaluation that boosts the costs of imports. Others, especially Eastern European countries in line for E.U. membership, have clung to their currency pegs. This leaves room for adjustment only via a sharp reduction in domestic demand.

Changing ingrained habits — whether the tendency is to be too thrifty, or too loose with money — is never easy. There is a powerful temptation to point at current trends and argue that rebalancing is taking place naturally. That would be a big mistake.

All evidence suggests that this rebalancing is temporary — the result of reactive policy measures among exporters and retrenchment among the profligate.

China, the world’s sovereign wealth machine over the past decade, is a case in point. My colleague, Rachel Ziemba, projects China’s current account surplus will likely narrow to $350-370 billion depending on the import trajectory, down from a record $420 billion in 2008. China’s trade surplus was just under $100 billion in the first half of 2009. A trade surplus of about $30 billion in the third quarter of this year is expected, which is well below 2008 levels. Increased spending at home rather than savings could further reduce the surplus. Yet with China reluctant to allow currency appreciation, reserve accumulation has resumed at a strong pace.

Although the export-oriented growth model has been shaken by the crisis, many countries seem reluctant to recalibrate. The beginning of inventory restocking has buoyed Asia significantly, as companies that cut back sharply have now increased output. Avoiding currency appreciation will exacerbate this trend, adding to reserve accumulation and distortions.

The most recent I.M.F. estimates — released in the October 2009 World Economic Outlook — suggest that imbalances could widen again but remain lower (as a share of G.D.P.) than their 2006 peak. Yet the dollar values of these imbalances could be very large.

In the I.M.F.’s forecast, China’s surplus will widen again in 2010, even as a retrenched U.S. consumer remains weak.

So who offsets the U.S. deficit? The I.M.F. suggests a diffusion of imbalances, where surpluses of Germany and Japan will remain in shrinking mode even in 2010, while the deficits of Canada and Australia, as well as emerging economies like Brazil, will offset the growth of China’s surplus.

However, the I.M.F. five-year projections also show a widening current account surplus for the entire world. This could suggest that some of the underlying export assumptions are too optimistic given the growth estimates.

Global imbalances are back on the policy agenda with the G-20 agreeing to create a peer review of macroeconomic policies including imbalances to avoid another crisis. The details are limited so far, but focus once again on an agreement that the U.S. will consume less and save more; Japan, Germany and China will spend more and will reallocate investment away from the export sector.

These are the right goals, to be sure. But a joint communiqué from a nascent international organization isn’t much to hang the world’s hat upon. The I.M.F. needs teeth, perhaps along the lines of the W.T.O.’s authority to prod member states toward “out of court” settlements, in order to enforce these difficult political and economic goals.

These imbalances represent serious misallocations of capital in domestic economies that, projected globally, raise the risks considerably of future financial crises and asset bubbles.

While imbalances did not cause the current financial crisis — I believe lax regulation bears a far greater onus — these imbalances certainly helped create the conditions for this crisis. Easy money and low long-term interest rates created an incentive to invest in seemingly-safe high-yield assets. An orderly unwinding of imbalances might put a lid on global growth during the adjustment, but is fundamental to achieve sustainable global growth.

Maybe a fallout of the current global crisis is a kindler, gentler IMF. The Fund just published a staff position note titled Fiscal Policy in Sub-Saharan Africa in Response to the Impact of the Global Crisis

The executive summary:

The global financial crisis poses significant challenges to fiscal policies in Sub-Saharan African countries. Growth will weaken considerably as export prices and volumes, remittances, tourism, and capital flows decline. The fiscal effects of the crisis are likely to be large and to operate mainly via revenue losses, with commodity-related revenues particularly hard hit.

Countries will need to weigh their options for fiscal policy responses. Countries with output gaps and sustainable debt and financing options have scope to implement expansionary policies, by letting automatic stabilizers work, accommodating declines in commodity-related revenues, and in some cases implementing discretionary fiscal stimulus. The main focus of fiscal stimulus should be on the expenditure side, particularly infrastructure and social spending given pressing needs, as reducing tax rates may be inequitable and the scope for doing so is limited given low revenue ratios. Other countries will have to adjust, in a way that will not affect critical spending. Additional donor support would reduce the need for adjustment. In all cases, countries should give priority to expanding social safety nets as needed to cushion the impact of the crisis on the poor.

Hat-Tip to Dani Rodrik. His comments on the policy note are here.