Trade and Development Report 2013

OVERVIEW
U n i t e d N a t i o n s C o n f e r e n c e o n T r a d e A n d D e v e l o p m e n t
TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT
REPORT, 2013
EMBARGO
The contents of this Report must not be
quoted or summarized in the print,
broadcast or electronic media before
12 September 2013, 17:00 hours GMT

UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT
Geneva
TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT
REPORT, 2013
OVERVIEW
UNITED NATIONS
New York and Geneva, 2013

• SymbolsofUnitedNationsdocumentsarecomposed
of capital letters combined with figures. Mention of
such a symbol indicates a reference to a United
Nations document.
• The designations employed and the presentation
of the material in this publication do not imply the
expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part
of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning
the legal status of any country, territory, city or area,
or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation
of its frontiers or boundaries.
• Material in this publication may be freely quoted
or reprinted, but acknowledgement is requested,
together with a reference to the document number.
Acopy of the publication containing the quotation or
reprint should be sent to the UNCTAD secretariat.
• The Overview contained herein is also issued as
part of the Trade and Development Report, 2013
(UNCTAD/TDR/2013, sales number E.13.II.D.3).
Note
UNCTAD/TDR/2013 (Overview)

OVERVIEW
Five years after the onset of the global financial crisis the world
economy remains in a state of disarray. Strong expansionary
monetary policies in the major developed economies have
not succeeded in fostering credit creation and strengthening
aggregate demand. Fiscal austerity and wage compression in
many developed countries are further darkening the outlook, not
only for the short term, but also for the medium term. The burden
of adjustment of the global imbalances that contributed to the
outbreak of the financial crisis remains with the deficit countries,
thus strengthening deflationary forces in the world economy.
The dominance of finance over real economic activities persists,
and may even have increased further. Yet financial reforms
at the national level have been timid at best, advancing very
slowly, if at all. In 2008 and 2009, policymakers of several
economically powerful countries had called for urgent reforms
of the international monetary and financial system. However,
since then, the momentum in pushing for reform has all but
disappeared from the international agenda. Consequently, the
outlook for the world economy and for the global environment
for development continues to be highly uncertain.
Some developing and transition economies have been able to
mitigate the impact of the financial and economic crises in the
developed countries by means of expansionary macroeconomic
policies. But with the effects of such a response petering out
and the external economic environment showing few signs of
improvement, these economies are struggling to regain their
growth momentum.
Prior to the Great Recession, exports from developing and
transition economies grew rapidly owing to buoyant consumer
demand in the developed countries, mainly the United States.

2
This seemed to justify the adoption of an export-oriented
growth model. But the expansion of the world economy,
though favourable for many developing countries, was built
on unsustainable global demand and financing patterns. Thus,
reverting to pre-crisis growth strategies cannot be an option.
Rather, in order to adjust to what now appears to be a structural
shift in the world economy, many developing and transition
economies are obliged to review their development strategies
that have been overly dependent on exports for growth.
It is not a new insight that growth strategies that rely primarily
on exports must sooner or later reach their limits when many
countries pursue them simultaneously: competition among
economies based on low unit labour costs and taxes leads to a
race to the bottom, with few development gains but potentially
disastrous social consequences. At the present juncture, where
growth of demand from developed countries is expected to
remain weak for a protracted period of time, the limitations
of such a growth strategy are becoming even more obvious.
Therefore, a rebalancing of the drivers of growth, with greater
weight given to domestic demand, is indispensable. This will
be a formidable challenge for all developing countries, though
more difficult for some than for others. In any case, it will require
a new perspective on the role of wages and the public sector
in the development process. Distinct from export-led growth,
development strategies that give a greater role than in the past
to domestic demand for growth can be pursued by all countries
simultaneously without beggar-thy-neighbour effects, and
without counterproductive wage and tax competition. Moreover,
if many trade partners in the developing world manage to
expand their domestic demand simultaneously, they can spur
South-South trade.

3
No sustained recovery of the world economy in sight
The global economy is still struggling to return to a strong and
sustained growth path. The rate of world output, which was 2.2 per cent
in 2012, is forecast to grow at a similar rate in 2013.As in previous years,
developed countries are expected to show the poorest performance, with
around 1 per cent increase in gross domestic product (GDP). Developing
and transition economies are likely to grow by almost 5 per cent and
3 per cent respectively.
Economic activity in many developed countries and a number
of emerging market economies is still suffering from the impacts
of the financial and economic crisis that started in 2008, and from
the unsustainable financial processes and domestic and international
imbalances that led to it. However, continuing weak growth in several
countries may also be partly due to their current macroeconomic policy
stance.
In the European Union (EU), GDP is expected to shrink for the
second consecutive year. Economic contraction is likely to be more
severe in the euro area than in other EU countries. Private demand
remains subdued, especially in the periphery economies, due to high
unemployment, wage compression, low consumer confidence and
the still incomplete process of balance sheet consolidation. Given the
ongoing process of deleveraging, expansionary monetary policies have
failed to induce banks to provide much-needed new credit to the private
sector that could reinvigorate demand. In this context, the increased
tendency towards fiscal tightening makes a quick return to a higher
growth trajectory highly unlikely. Indeed, attempts to resolve the crisis
in the euro area through fiscal austerity may backfire badly, as it adds
a deflationary impulse to already weak private demand. The countries

4
in the euro zone that have been suffering the most from the crisis
continue to operate under extremely adverse conditions, while growth
in the surplus countries has largely relied on strong exports. Since
governments in the latter countries have been reluctant to stimulate
domestic demand by other means than monetary policy, disequilibrium
within the zone persists.
At the global level, it is notable that Japan is bucking the current
austerity trend by providing strong fiscal stimulus and monetary
expansion that are aimed at reviving economic growth and curbing
deflationary trends. These measures could help maintain its GDPgrowth
at close to 2 per cent in 2013. The United States is expected to grow
at a similar rate, but based on a different set of factors. Partly owing
to significant progress made in the consolidation of its banking sector,
private domestic demand has begun to recover. On the other hand, cuts
in public spending, including for needed investment in infrastructure, are
having a contractionary effect. Since the net outcome of these opposing
tendencies is unclear, there is also considerable uncertainty about
whether the expansionary monetary policy stance will be maintained.
Growth in many developing countries
driven by domestic demand
Developing countries are expected to grow by between 4.5 and
5 per cent in 2013, similar to 2012. In many of them, growth has been
driven more by domestic demand than by exports, as external demand
from developed economies has remained weak. In addition, short-term
capital inflows, attracted by higher interest rates than in the major
developed countries, have been exerting appreciation pressure on the
currencies of several emerging market economies, thus weakening
their export sectors.
As before, in 2012 output growth was strong in East, South and
South-EastAsia, at 5.3 per cent, but recently there has been a slowdown,
reflecting weak demand from some of the major export markets. In

5
China, the contribution of net exports to GDP growth declined further,
while fixed investment and private consumption, as a result of faster
wage growth, continued to drive output expansion. Domestic demand,
encouraged by various incomes policy measures in a number of other
countries in the region, such as India, Indonesia, the Philippines and
Thailand, is also supporting output growth, which may therefore
accelerate moderately in the region as a whole in 2013.
Economic growth in West Asia slowed down dramatically, from
7.1 per cent in 2011 to 3.2 per cent in 2012, a level that is expected to be
maintained in 2013. Weaker external demand, especially from Europe,
affected the entire region, most prominently Turkey, whose growth rate
dropped sharply from around 9 per cent in 2010 and 2011 to 2.2 per cent
in 2012. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries maintained
large public spending programmes to support domestic demand and
growth, despite scaling back their oil production during the last quarter
of 2012 to support oil prices.
Growth in Africa is expected to slow down in 2013, owing to
weaker performance in NorthAfrica, where political instability in some
countries has been mirrored in recent years by strong fluctuations in
growth. In sub-Saharan Africa, by contrast, GDP growth has remained
stable, at above 5 per cent, owing to continued high earnings from
exports of primary commodities and relatively strong public and private
investment in some countries. However, the two largest economies of
the region, Nigeria and SouthAfrica, face considerable downside risks
due to faltering external demand and some weaknesses on the supply
side. In addition, several least developed countries (LDCs) of the region
remain vulnerable to sudden and drastic swings in demand for certain
commodities.
Growth is also expected to remain relatively stable in LatinAmerica
and the Caribbean, at around 3 per cent, on average, as a slowdown in
some countries, including Mexico, is likely to be offset by faster growth
in Argentina and Brazil. Overall, growth in the region is being driven
by domestic demand, based on public and private consumption.

6
The transition economies have experienced a downward trend in
their economic performance. Under the impact of the continuing crisis
in much of Western Europe, most of the transition economies of South-
Eastern Europe entered into recession in 2012. The members of the
Commonwealth of Independent State (CIS) maintained a growth rate
of over 3 per cent in 2012 based on sustained domestic demand, but this
is expected to slow down slightly in 2013. The economic outlook for
the region remains closely linked to the performance of the economy
of the Russian Federation and to commodity price developments.
As the rapid expansion of developing economies as a group has
further increased their weight in the world economy, a new pattern of
global growth seems to be emerging. While developed countries remain
the main export markets for developing countries, the share of the latter’s
contribution to growth in the world economy has increased, from 28 per
cent in the 1990s to about 40 per cent in the period 2003–2007, and to
close to 75 per cent since 2008. However, more recently, growth in these
economies has decelerated. If developing countries can increase the
role of domestic demand and South-South trade in their development
strategies, they may continue to grow at a relatively fast pace, with
increasing potential to rely on each other for the expansion of aggregate
demand. However, they cannot be expected to lift developed countries
out of their sluggish growth pattern through higher imports from them.
Global trade expansion has virtually ground to a halt
International trade in goods and services has not returned to the
rapid growth rate of the years preceding the crisis. After a sharp fall in
2008–2009 and a quick recovery in 2010, the volume of trade in goods
expanded by only 5 per cent in 2011 and by less than 2 per cent in 2012,
and it affected developed, developing and transition economies alike.
Sluggish economic activity in developed economies accounted
for most of the slowdown in international trade. In 2012, European
imports of goods shrank by almost 3 per cent in volume and by 5 per

7
cent in value. Extremely weak intra-European trade was responsible for
almost 90 per cent of the decline in European exports in 2012. Japan’s
exports have not yet recovered from their sharp fall caused by the
earthquake of 2011, while the volume of its imports has continued to
grow at a moderate pace.Among the major developed economies, only
the United States maintained a positive growth rate in its international
trade, although this appears to be slowing down in 2013.
Trade also decelerated considerably in developing and transition
economies. Both exports and imports grew sluggishly in 2012 and the
first months of 2013 in most developing regions. The sole exception
was Africa, where exports recovered in countries previously affected
by civil conflict. Export growth declined to 4 per cent in the developing
countries as a whole. This slowdown includedAsian countries that had
previously played a major role in boosting international trade.
The rate of growth of China’s exports, by volume, declined from
an average annual rate of 27 per cent during the period 2002–2007 to
13 per cent in 2011 and to 7 per cent in 2012, a lower rate than its GDP
growth. Concomitantly, China’s imports, by volume, decelerated to 6 per
cent in 2012 from 19 per cent, on average, between 2002 and 2007. Only
regions exporting a large proportion of primary commodities (i.e.Africa,
West Asia and, to a lesser extent, Latin America) saw a significant
increase in their exports to China. Several exporters of manufactures in
Asia registered a sizeable slowdown of growth in their external trade.
This was the result not only of lower imports from Europe, but also of
slower growth in some developing regions, in particular in East Asia.
The crisis of 2008–2009 has altered trade patterns in both
developed and developing countries. Imports by all developed regions
remain below their pre-crisis level, and only the United States has
managed to increase its exports to a higher level than their previous
peak of August 2008. On the other hand, exports from the group of
emerging market economies were 22 per cent above their pre-crisis
peaks, while the corresponding figure for their imports was 26 per
cent higher. However, the pace of growth of trade of these economies

8
has slowed down significantly: during the pre-crisis years, between
2002 and 2007, their export volume grew at an average annual rate of
11.3 per cent, but fell to only 3.5 per cent between January 2011 and
April 2013. Growth in the volume of their imports also slowed down
from 12.4 per cent to 5.5 per cent over the same period.
Overall, this general downward trend in international trade
highlights the vulnerabilities developing countries continue to face at
a time of lacklustre growth in developed countries. It is also indicative
of a probably less favourable external trade environment over the next
few years.
The particularities of a protracted downturn
in developed countries
The difficulties of the developed countries as a group to find their
way towards a path of sustained recovery following the recession of
2008–2009 suggests that the latest crisis is of quite a different nature
than the cyclical crises of the past. From 2008 to 2012, global output
growth averaged just 1.7 per cent. This is much slower than during any
of the five-year periods that followed recessions in the global economy
since the 1970s.
In this situation, expansionary policies would be needed to spur
domestic demand and restore the confidence of households and firms.
However, policymakers have instead been focusing their attention on
restoring the confidence of financial markets. A central element of this
strategy in developed countries has been fiscal austerity, based on the
belief that high public debt ratios may eventually trigger a general
aversion to sovereign debt, which could increase the risk premium and
thereby impose a heavier debt burden on public finances. This strategy
has not yielded the expected results. The outcome of fiscal contraction
has negatively affected growth and job creation, as the expected
increase in private demand has not materialized to compensate, or
overcompensate, for the cuts in public spending. In addition, the fact

9
that several countries that had strong trade relations with each other have
been following austerity regimes at the same time has amplified their
deflationary impact in the same way as simultaneous fiscal stimulus in
2009 generated very positive results. Moreover, monetary policies have
proved ineffective in the sense that strong monetary expansion has not
translated into an increase in loans to the private sector. This shows that,
without the prospect of a growth in demand, the increasing availability
of credit is not enough to stimulate private investment and create jobs.
Experience has shown that an expansionary fiscal policy can have a
much stronger impact in such a situation, because this is precisely when
it has a particularly strong multiplier effect. The legitimate objective
of improving fiscal balances is more likely to be achieved through an
expansion of aggregate demand, and thus the tax base, than by fiscal
contraction which reduces income and employment growth. In addition,
central bank operations that focus on reducing the risk of sovereign debt
and maintaining low interest rates would enable a reduction in public
debt servicing, and thereby lower medium- to long-term public debt
ratios that are considered too high.
Structural reforms are needed, but what kinds?
Despite marked differences in economic performance across
regions, in general, policies pursued over the past three years have
not succeeded in resolving the crisis. There can be little doubt that, in
addition to demand-enhancing policies, structural reforms are needed in
many countries to lead their national economies and the global economy
back to a path of sustained growth. Several proposals for reform have
been made, in particular relating to the financial sector, the labour
market, public finances and central banking, but not all of them have
adequately addressed the causes of the crisis.
A major reason for the crisis has been the dominance of the
financial sector over the real sector. Financial liberalization has resulted
in governments being increasingly influenced by the belief that they

10
need to maintain or regain the “confidence” of financial markets. The
reforms adopted since 2008, which aim at improving supervision and
capitalization of the banking system, are helpful but are unlikely to
be sufficient to prevent activities of the financial markets from posing
a threat to economic stability. Governments need to control financial
markets more resolutely than in the past and limit the power of those
markets over national, regional and global economies.
For many years preceding the financial and economic crisis,
structural reform was virtually synonymous with introducing greater
flexibility into the labour market, especially wage flexibility, and such
reform is again suggested as a way out of the crisis. But a strategy
aimed at strengthening the competitiveness of economies by reducing
labour costs completely neglects the fact that wages are usually a
major source of domestic demand. Moreover, when such a strategy
is pursued by many countries at the same time, it leads to a race to
the bottom, worsens income distribution and poses a threat to social
cohesion. And greater inequality of income distribution was one of the
factors that led to the crisis in the first place. Instead, an incomes policy
aimed at accelerating consumption growth could contribute decisively
to restoring national economies, and the global economy, to a stronger
but also more balanced growth path.
Reforms aimed at fiscal consolidation may be necessary in many
countries, but they need to consider the overall macroeconomic context.
Public finances cannot be managed like the finances of a household
because they inevitably have an impact on the entire economy and the
spending behaviour of the private sector. Attempts to achieve fiscal
consolidation in the short run have been unsuccessful at best, and
counterproductive and procyclical at worst. Such consolidation can
only be achieved after several years of sustained economic growth, and
should not be considered a prerequisite for economic recovery.
Central banks of many developed countries have responded to
the financial crisis, and, in the euro zone, to the crisis in some member
States’ public finances, with a number of unorthodox measures. But

11
they may also have to find new ways of making credit available to
non-financial agents to use in a way that generates demand, income
and employment.
These various national reforms also require more determined
international cooperation, including long overdue reform of the
international monetary system, in order to achieve greater symmetry of
adjustment efforts among deficit and surplus economies. In the present
situation, several countries with large current account surpluses could
probably do much more to help revive the world economy.
Developing and transition economies:
better performance but continued vulnerability
One of the most significant changes in the shape of the world
economy has been the increase in the share of developing countries
in global GDP. The onset of the global economic and financial crisis
initially reinforced this trend, as growth in developing countries
in 2008–2009 decelerated less and recovered more rapidly than in
developed countries. As a result, the share of developed countries in
global GDP declined from 79 per cent in 1990 to about 60 per cent
in 2012, while that of developing countries more than doubled, from
17 per cent to 36 per cent, over the same period. Most of this change
occurred from 2004 onwards.
Nevertheless, economic developments in developed countries
remain crucial for growth in developing countries. Indeed, the
growth acceleration in the latter set of countries during the 1990s,
and especially during the period 2003–2007, was associated with a
larger proportion of international trade in the composition of their
aggregate demand. Combined with the generally favourable external
economic environment, such as growing imports by developed countries
(especially the United States) and historically high commodity prices,
particularly during the five years prior to the onset of the current crisis,

12
the greater outward orientation of developing countries contributed to
their growth.
However, an export-oriented growth strategy also implies greater
vulnerability to a deterioration of the external environment, as has
occurred since 2008. The international price and demand shocks
during 2008–2009 had a severe impact on both exporters of primary
commodities and exporters of manufactures. The subsequent rebound
was more rapid and its beneficial impact greater on countries whose
exports comprise a large proportion of primary commodities than for
countries that export mainly manufactures.
Weaker demand from developed countries suggests that South-
South trade may need to play a greater role in developing countries’
growth strategy. In this respect, it offers greater potential than in the past,
given that the share of South-South trade in total world trade increased
from slightly less than 30 per cent in 1995 to slightly more than 40 per
cent in 2012. Moreover, the share of manufactures in a developing
country’s exports to other developing countries and the value added
in such trade are usually much higher than they are in its exports to
developed countries, which is testimony to the potential developmental
role of South-South trade.
Commodity price trends and outlook
Up to the financial crisis and the Great Recession of 2008–2009,
rapid output growth in many developing and transition economies
was the result of their strong increase in exports of manufactures
to developed countries. This in turn contributed to higher export
earnings of other developing countries that relied on exports of primary
commodities. Since the turn of the millennium, these latter countries
have also benefited from a trend change in the terms of trade. This
change reflected not only an upward movement in the medium-term
commodity price trend, interrupted only briefly in 2008–2009, but also

13
a decline in world prices of certain manufactures, especially labour-
intensive manufactures.
The increasing demand for commodities in rapidly growing
developing countries, notably China, and the resulting higher price
levels of many primary commodities, signifies a structural shift in
physical market fundamentals. The upward trend in prices has also been
supported by a slow supply response, as historically low price levels
in the 1990s had led to a long period of underinvestment in production
capacity for several key commodities, especially in the mineral and
mining sectors. At the same time, the increasing presence of financial
investors in commodity markets has accentuated the problem of price
volatility. Projections about the further evolution of commodity prices
are particularly difficult in the current uncertain global economic
environment, but there is little doubt that the growth outlook for
developing countries will have a significant impact on future commodity
demand trends.
Continuing fast population growth and rising income in developing
countries should lead to greater demand for several food items.
Moreover, as production is unlikely to increase in line with the growing
demand, including for biofuels, agricultural commodity prices could
remain high over the next decade.
Demand conditions in the markets of many primary commodities
that are used as inputs for the production of manufactures and for
construction are determined by a number of factors. One factor is
whether China succeeds in rebalancing its growth through an increase in
domestic consumption. Another is whether other highly populated and
rapidly growing developing countries will move to a more commodity-
intensive phase of economic growth and industrialization. Even if
China’s GDP growth slows down, resulting in a lower use of some
commodities, its ongoing industrialization and per capita income growth
could continue to have a considerable impact on global markets, given
the size of its economy. If, in addition, other large and highly populated
developing countries also pursue a path of rapid industrialization, the

14
demand prospects for industrial commodities, particularly metals,
could remain robust. Infrastructure development associated with
rapid urbanization also offers strong potential to increase demand for
commodities.
In addition, rising living standards in many developing countries
may boost demand for energy commodities in the medium term, despite
improvements in energy efficiency that could contribute to a decline in
energy use per unit of GDP. Oil prices could remain historically high,
even if they fall slightly compared with their 2011–2012 levels, as
demand from some of the rapidly growing developing countries will
continue to rise and because the exploitation costs of new supplies are
higher than those from conventional sources.
Overall, commodity prices may not rise as fast as they have over
the past decade, but, following some downward adjustments in the short
term, they should stabilize at a relatively high level in comparison with
the early 2000s. However, this should not lead to complacency in the
design of development strategies in natural-resource-rich countries.
Their main challenge remains that of appropriating a fair share of the
resource rents and channelling revenues towards investment in the
real economy in order to spur the diversification and upgrading of
production and exports.
Export-led growth strategies are reaching their limits
A key problem for policymakers in the developing and transition
economies that have a large share of manufactures in their exports is
that growth of exports and incomes in their countries is likely to be
adversely affected by continued slow growth in developed countries’
final expenditure for several years to come. In a number of these
countries, production of manufactured goods for the world market has
driven the expansion of their formal modern sectors, but in most of them
domestic demand has not increased apace. This has been partly due to
weak linkages between the export sector and the rest of the economy,

15
and partly to the strategy of their firms and governments to strengthen
the international competitiveness of their domestic producers by keeping
wages low. Such a strategy will eventually reach its limit, as low wages
dampen domestic demand growth, especially when many other countries
pursue the same strategy simultaneously. Since the growth of demand
in developed countries is likely to remain weak for an extended period
of time, the limitations of such a strategy become even more acute.
In these circumstances, continuing with export-led growth strategies
through wage and tax competition would exacerbate the harm caused
by slower growth in export markets and reduce any overall benefits.
The adoption of countercyclical macroeconomic policies can
compensate for resulting growth shortfalls for some time. Indeed,
most developing countries reacted to the decline in their net exports
by increasing the share of government expenditure in GDP. There was
also an increase of private consumption as a share of GDP in some
of these countries, and of gross fixed capital formation as a share of
GDP in some others. However, beyond such short-term responses,
developing countries may need to take a more comprehensive and
longer term perspective, involving a shift in development strategies that
gives greater weight to domestic demand as an engine of growth. Such
a move towards a more balanced growth path could compensate for
the adverse impact of slower growing exports to developed countries.
Moreover, this more balanced growth strategy could be pursued by all
developing countries simultaneously without beggar-thy-neighbour
effects. However, there are many challenges involved in moving towards
a more balanced growth strategy. These include boosting domestic
purchasing power, managing domestic demand expansion in a way
that avoids an excessive increase in import demand, and nurturing
the interrelationship between household and government expenditure,
on the one hand, and investment on the other, to enable the sectoral
composition of domestic production to adjust to new demand patterns,
including through increased regional and South-South trade.
Hence, shifting the focus of development strategies to domestic
markets does not mean minimizing the importance of the role of exports.

16
Indeed, exports could expand further if several trade partners were to
achieve higher economic growth at the same time.
Rebalancing domestic and external forces of growth
In seeking greater integration into a rapidly globalizing economy,
the critical importance of domestic demand as a major impetus for
industrialization is often overlooked. Growth of domestic demand
accounts for about three quarters of the increase in domestic industrial
output in large economies, and slightly more than half in small
economies. Accelerating domestic demand growth could therefore be
highly beneficial for output growth and industrialization, particularly
in a context of weakening external demand growth. The possibility of
changing rapidly towards a more domestic-demand-oriented growth
strategy will depend largely on how closely the sectoral structure
of domestic production is linked to the pattern of domestic demand.
This linkage will be particularly weak in countries that export a
large proportion of primary commodities. It therefore remains very
important for these countries to use their resource-related revenues to
diversify their sectoral structure of production by increasing the shares
of manufactures and modern services, both public and private. By
developing the linkages between the exporting sectors and the rest of
the economy, this diversification would generate new employment and
income opportunities, and strengthen the domestic market.
A strategy that places greater emphasis on domestic demand will
need to aim at an appropriate balance between increases in household
consumption, private investment and public expenditure. There is a
strong interrelationship between these three components of domestic
demand. Increased consumption of goods and services that can be
produced domestically makes producers of those goods and services
more willing to invest in their productive capacity. Higher investment
is not only itself a source of domestic demand (even if a large share of
the capital goods may have to be imported), but it is also a precondition

17
for the creation of employment and for productivity gains that allow
wages to grow along with the purchasing power of domestic consumers.
Moreover, higher incomes of households and firms raise tax revenues,
which can then be spent by the government for enhancing public services
and infrastructure development, even at unchanged tax rates. Higher
public spending, in turn, can create additional income for households
and firms, and improve the conditions for private investment. Such
investment is indispensable for increasing domestic supply capacity, and
thus for reducing leakages of domestic demand growth through imports.
Increasing domestic consumption
Labour income is the most important source of household
consumption, which generally accounts for between half and three
quarters of aggregate demand, even in relatively poor countries and
countries with a relatively large export sector. Thus fostering the
purchasing power of the population in general, and of wage earners in
particular, should be the main ingredient of a domestic-demand-driven
growth strategy.
While export-led strategies focus on the cost aspect of wages,
a domestic-demand-oriented strategy would focus primarily on the
income aspect of wages, as it is based on household spending as the
largest component of effective demand. If wage growth follows the path
of productivity growth, it will create a sufficient amount of domestic
demand to fully employ the growing productive capacities of the
economy without having to rely on continued export growth.
In economies with fairly large formal sectors, the functioning of
such an incomes policy could be enhanced by building institutions for
collective bargaining and the introduction of legal minimum wages.
In countries where informal employment and self-employment are
widespread, targeted social transfers and public sector employment
schemes can play an important complementary role. In countries

18
with a large rural sector with many small producers, introducing
mechanisms that ensure fair prices for agricultural producers – for
instance by linking those prices to the overall productivity growth of the
economy – would be another element of a strategy to increase domestic
consumption, strengthen social cohesion and at the same time induce
more productivity-enhancing investments. Moreover, the layers of the
population that will primarily benefit from such an incomes policy
would be likely to spend most of their income on locally produced
goods and services. In addition, governments can take discretionary
fiscal actions, such as providing tax rebates on certain consumer goods
that are, or can be, produced domestically.
Spurring domestic demand by facilitating access to consumer
credit for the acquisition of durable consumer goods tends to be risky,
as amply demonstrated by recent experiences in a number of developed
countries. The debt servicing burden of households may rapidly become
excessive if interest rates rise, growth of household incomes stalls or
the prices of assets used as collateral fall.
Increasing domestic investment
Domestic investment, both private and public, plays a crucial role
in any growth strategy, regardless of whether it is oriented towards
exports or domestic demand. The expectation that future demand will
be high enough to fully utilize additional productive capacity is the
main incentive for entrepreneurs to invest in expanding that capacity.
Since exports are unlikely to grow at the same pace as in the past, given
the current state of the world economy, domestic demand growth will
become more important in forming the demand expectations of potential
investors. A key determinant of their ability to strengthen productive
capacity is the availability of long-term finance at an affordable cost and
a competitive exchange rate. This in turn depends, to a large extent, on
central bank policy and the structure and functioning of the domestic
financial system.

19
Direct and indirect demand effects of public expenditure
The possibility of strengthening domestic demand by increasing
public sector spending depends on the initial conditions of the public
finances in each country, but also on the effects of increased public
expenditure on public revenue. Public spending and taxation are
potentially key instruments for shaping the distribution of purchasing
power in an economy. Beyond its direct effects on aggregate demand,
public investment in infrastructure and/or public services to specific
industrial clusters are often a precondition for the viability of private
investment, for enhancing the productivity of private capital, and for
complementing the market mechanism by facilitating the creation of
linkages between export industries and the rest of the economy. In
addition, public expenditure on education and training can influence
the potential of labour to contribute to productivity growth. Moreover,
countercyclical fiscal policy can stabilize domestic demand during
periods of slow growth or recession, and thus prevent a lowering of the
demand expectations of domestic investors. This stabilization potential
will be greater, the larger the share of the public sector in GDP.
Income redistribution through the taxation structure and transfers
to households can strengthen the purchasing power of those income
groups that spend a larger share of their income on consumption in
general, and on domestically produced goods and services, in particular,
than higher income groups.
Raising public revenues
The “fiscal space” for strengthening domestic demand, directly or
indirectly, through increased public spending in developing countries,
especially in low-income and least developed countries, tends to be
more limited than in developed countries. This is not only because their
tax base is smaller, but also their capacity to administer and enforce tax
legislation is often weak. Moreover, in many of these countries public
finances are strongly influenced by factors that are beyond the control

20
of their governments, such as fluctuations in commodity prices and in
interest rates on their external debt. But to a large extent fiscal space is
also determined endogenously, since spending of public revenue creates
income, and thus additional spending in the private sector, thereby
enlarging the tax base. These income effects vary, depending on how
the tax burden is distributed and public revenue is spent. Taking account
of such compositional effects of both the revenue and the expenditure
side implies that the scope for using taxation and government spending
for strengthening domestic forces of growth may be greater than is
often assumed.
In many developing and transition economies, there appears to be
scope for more progressive taxation and for taxing wealth and inheritance,
as well as for raising additional revenue by imposing higher taxes on
multinational corporations. The latter would require that developing
countries, in their efforts to attract foreign direct investment (FDI),
avoid engaging in tax competition with each other. Such competition,
like international wage competition, is at the expense of all the countries
concerned. These considerations are of particular relevance for countries
that are rich in mineral resources, where often only a very small share
of the resource rents remains in the respective countries in the form of
private income or public revenue.
In several low-income and least developed countries multilateral
financial institutions and bilateral donors would need to help by
providing additional resources for social spending, as well as support
for improving the administrative capacities needed to strengthen the
role of public finances in development strategies.
The rationale for debt-financed public spending
Rebalancing domestic and external forces of growth may also
require a different approach to debt financing of public expenditure. It
can be a strategic instrument not only in the context of a countercyclical
fiscal policy, but also for stretching the fiscal burden of large public

21
infrastructure projects. Such projects typically help to increase the
productivity of the economy at large and generate benefits for households
and firms in the future, by which time economic growth would help
service the initially incurred debt.
While it may be preferable for governments to pay all public
expenditure out of current revenue, a rational approach in a fast-growing
developing economy could also be based on the principle that current
expenditure, including social expenditure, should be financed by
taxation and other current revenues, whereas public investment may
be financed by borrowing, since such investment has a pay-off in the
form of additional tax receipts from an enlarged tax base in the future.
Governments should consider borrowing in foreign currency only to
the extent that public investments or government support to private
investments require importing capital goods, materials and know-how.
Where there is a sufficient possibility for public sector borrowing for
these purposes, an increase in credit-financed public expenditure may be
considered a way to boost not only domestic demand but also domestic
supply capacities.
Changing composition of consumption
with rising personal incomes
Consumption patterns are changing with rising income levels. Once
the income of individual consumers crosses a certain threshold, they will
use a smaller share of that income for satisfying their basic or subsistence
needs. The thresholds which trigger an acceleration of demand for other
consumption items typically cluster at a level of per capita income at
which an individual is considered to enter the “middle class” (i.e. those
segments of the population in any society that have a certain amount of
discretionary income at their disposal, which allows them to engage in
consumption patterns beyond just the satisfaction of their basic needs).
The future evolution of consumption patterns therefore depends on the
number of people that are at around the entry level of the middle class,
where the new spending patterns start emerging.

22
Based on a number of projections, it has been estimated that
the proportion of the middle class in the total world population will
increase from 26 per cent in 2009 to 41 per cent in 2020 and 58 per
cent in 2030, and that this proportion will grow more than fourfold in
developing countries. Asia will account for the bulk of this increase,
with the number of people belonging to the middle class in this region
estimated to grow sixfold; in Central and South America the number is
expected to grow by a factor of 2.5, and in sub-SaharanAfrica it should
triple.Astrategy that gives greater emphasis to domestic-demand-driven
growth, if successful, might well accelerate these trends, as it would
be associated with faster wage increases and a more equal income
distribution than in the past. Therefore, many developing and transition
economies could achieve a rapid acceleration of consumption of durable
consumer goods in the medium term.
An enlarged middle class may be the most important source of
buying power for domestic manufacturers, because it will eventually
determine the extent of horizontal complementarities across all
industries of the economy. And to the extent that the purchasing power
of income groups below the level of the middle class also grows, there
may be additional productivity gains in sectors and firms that produce
primarily for the domestic market, as the lower income groups tend to
spend their incomes on a greater share of locally produced or producible
goods and services.
Domestic demand growth and its implications
for the development of productive capacities
The import intensity of the three components of domestic demand
(i.e. household consumption, government expenditure and investment)
varies widely. Imports tend to be strongly correlated, on average,
with investment and production for export, but less with consumption
(especially consumption by households in the lower income brackets)
and public expenditure. Still, if domestic productive capacity is not
upgraded in accordance with the changing pattern of demand in a

23
growing economy, the increase in domestic consumption expenditure
will tend to induce higher imports. In order to prevent a deterioration
in the trade balance as a result of both faster growth and the changing
composition of domestic demand growth, coupled with lower export
growth, it will be essential to strengthen domestic investment and
innovation dynamics to bring about appropriate changes in the sectoral
composition of domestic production.
Efforts to orient domestic production to respond to the changing
level and composition of domestic demand will tend to be easier for
those countries which in the past have relied significantly on exports of
manufactures to developed countries, because they can build on their
considerable existing productive capacity and experience in manufacturing
activities. However, it will be more difficult if these activities have been
geared mainly to the production of sophisticated goods for affluent
consumers in developed countries, which few domestic consumers can
afford. A rapid shift from an export-driven growth strategy to one that
gives greater emphasis to an expansion of domestic demand to drive
growth will be even more difficult in countries that have been relying
on the production and export of primary commodities.
On the other hand, while developing countries should still seek to
develop or adapt new technologies according to their specific needs, an
advantage for producers in developing and transition economies that
focus more on domestic than on global markets is that technological
lagging tends to be less of a constraining factor.
Advantages of proximity to markets
and regional integration
Another advantage for producers in developing countries is their
proximity to their domestic market and, where applicable, their regional
market. Changes in market conditions arising from the expansion and
changing composition of domestic demand necessitate the identification
of “latent demand” and the “steering” of firms to meet requirements

24
specific to those new markets. In this regard, the local knowledge
of domestic firms for the development of appropriate new products,
distribution networks and marketing strategies may become a valuable
asset in competing with foreign suppliers of similar goods. In addition,
to the extent that developing and transition economies assume a greater
weight in global consumption growth, the resulting changes in the
pattern of global demand are likely to influence market opportunities
for all these economies in areas of production that are more aligned
than in the past to the patterns of demand prevailing in developing
countries. This in turn will lead to changes in the sectoral allocation of
investments in a way that better corresponds to the pattern of domestic
demand in those countries.
Moreover, if many trade partners in the developing world were
to expand their domestic demand simultaneously, they could become
markets for each other’s goods and services. The resulting increase in
exports would help reduce the balance-of-payments constraints that
arise from a slowdown of exports to developed countries. Consequently,
strengthened regional integration and, more generally, intensified efforts
to strengthen South-South trade, may be important complements to
domestic-demand-led growth strategies.
Industrial policies in support of investment
and structural change
Experience in developed and developing countries has shown
that governments, in addition to market forces, can play an important
role in support of industrialization. In the past, industrial policies have
often focused on strengthening export capacities and establishing an
export-investment nexus. However, a change in the respective weights
of foreign and domestic demand may require an adaptation of industrial
policy, with a greater emphasis on strengthening the competitiveness
of domestic producers in domestic markets and gearing production
structures to the changing composition of domestic demand as per
capita income grows. Such adaptation may need to fully utilize the

25
policy space still available to these countries following the Uruguay
Round trade agreements and various regional and bilateral trade and
investment agreements. Furthermore, some of these agreements may
need to be revised to take better account of the interests of developing
countries, for example by allowing them a greater degree of temporary
protection of certain industries that are at an early stage of development.
Capital formation that responds to changing demand patterns may
be supported by helping private firms to identify the product groups that
show the greatest dynamism as an increasing share of the population
enters the middle class. Public support measures may also facilitate
coordination of production along the value-added chain, including fiscal
and financial support for new production activities that are considered
strategically important for domestic production networks. A proactive
industrial policy may be especially important − and have the greatest
impact − in economies that are still dependent on natural resources and
where there is an urgent need for diversification of production.
Challenges for financial policies in
developing countries
Theadjustmentofproductivecapacitiestochangesinthecomposition
of aggregate demand in developing and transition economies requires
reliable and low-cost access of their producers to financial resources for
productive investment. In the current global context, although there is
ample liquidity in the banking systems of the major developed countries,
uncertainty in financial markets is particularly high. This increases the
risk of emerging markets being affected by disturbances emanating
from the behaviour of international capital markets, since a volatile
international financial environment, fragile national banking systems
and weak domestic financial institutions have often hindered investment
in many countries.
This presents a number of challenges for financial policy in
developing and transition economies: first, they need to protect their

26
national financial systems against the vagaries of international finance;
second, policymakers should draw the right lessons from past financial
crises, in particular, that an unregulated financial sector tends to generate
economic instability and resource misallocation; and third, they should
aim to make their domestic financial systems, especially their banking
systems, more supportive of investment in real productive capacity.
Atypical behaviour of international
capital flows since 2008
Over the past three decades emerging market economies experienced
frequent waves of international capital flows. Such waves typically started
when growth was slow, liquidity was abundant and interest rates were
low in the developed countries. This made emerging markets seem
attractive destinations for private international capital flows. However,
those waves ebbed when interest rates rose in the developed countries
or when financial market participants deemed external deficits or the
foreign indebtedness of the destination countries to have become
unsustainable.
At present, monetary and financial conditions in major developed
countries resemble those that in the past proved to be conducive to
surges of capital flows to emerging market economies. In developed
countries, interest rates have fallen to almost zero in an effort to tackle
both the protracted crisis and the difficulties in their financial sectors.
Their central banks have also injected large amounts of liquidity into
the financial system. However, these measures have not succeeded in
inducing banks to increase their lending to the private sector. Moreover,
there are fairly large interest rate differentials in favour of emerging
markets. So far, these conditions have not resulted in strong and
sustained capital outflows from developed to developing countries;
rather, where such outflows have occurred, they have been very volatile.
Prior to the eruption of the financial crisis, there were large
capital flows from developed countries to emerging market economies,

27
which ended abruptly in 2008. But, distinct from past episodes, this
“sudden stop” was not triggered either by an increase in interest rates
in the developed countries, or by excessive current account deficits or
debt servicing problems in the emerging market economies. Rather,
they appear to have been motivated by uncertainty about the possible
repercussions of the financial crisis on the latter economies, and attempts
by international investors to minimize their overall risk exposure. When
private capital flows to emerging market economies surged again in
2010 and 2011, this too was atypical, because sudden stops are usually
followed by a prolonged period of stagnation of inflows or even outflows
from these countries. Faced with low profit-making opportunities in
the major financial centres, it may have been expected that investors
would be encouraged by the rapid resumption of GDP growth in the
emerging market economies and the perception that their financial
systems were more stable than those of developed countries. However,
newly worsening prospects in developed countries in the second half of
2011, including higher perceived risks related to the sovereign debt of
some of them, again curtailed capital flows towards the emerging market
economies as investors sought to reduce their overall portfolio risks.
The vagaries of international finance remain a threat
Emerging market economies have been relatively resilient in the
face of the destabilizing effects of the latest waves of capital flows
on their national financial systems. This observation does not mean,
however, that they have become structurally less vulnerable. Rather, it
shows the merits of their policy reorientation with respect to external
finance since the turn of the millennium. An increasing number of
developing-country governments have adopted a more cautious attitude
towards large capital inflows. Some of them were able to prevent or
at least mitigate currency appreciation through intervention in the
foreign exchange market, along with associated reserve accumulation.
Others also resorted to capital controls. Another factor explaining how
several of them were able to cope with the adverse financial events was

28
their lower levels of external debt and its more favourable currency
composition compared with earlier episodes.
However, since global financial assets amount to more than three
times the value of global output, even minor portfolio adjustments
oriented towards developing countries can lead to an increase in such
flows at a rate that has the potential to destabilize the economies of
these countries in the future. In the current situation of high uncertainty,
investor sentiment, rather than macroeconomic fundamentals, is tending
to drive capital movements, as has frequently been the case in the past.
But there is also uncertainty with regard to the fundamentals. On the one
hand, an extended period of low interest rates in the developed countries,
combined with stronger growth and a tendency towards higher interest
rates in emerging market economies could lead to a new surge of capital
flows to the latter. On the other hand, a tightening of monetary policy
in the major reserve currency countries could cause a drastic reduction
or reversal of net private capital flows from them.
Reducing exposure to international financial markets
As long as the international community fails to agree on fundamental
reforms of the international financial and monetary system, developing
and transition economies need to design national strategies and, where
possible, regional strategies, aimed at reducing their vulnerability to global
financial shocks. In the current situation, this means that these economies
need to exercise extreme caution towards cross-border capital flows,
bearing in mind that the seeds of a future crisis are sown in the phase
of euphoria, when a wave of financial inflows is in the making.
For many years, the prevalent view considered almost any kind of
foreign capital flows to developing countries as beneficial. This view
was based on the assumption that “foreign savings” would complement
the national savings of the recipient countries and lead to higher
rates of investment there. However, both theoretical considerations
and empirical evidence show that even huge capital inflows can be

29
accompanied by stagnating investment rates, because the link between
capital inflows and the financing of new fixed investment tends to be
very weak. For the same reason, substantial increases in fixed investment
can be accompanied by strong capital outflows.
External financing of developing and transition economies has
repeatedly proved to be a double-edged sword. On the one hand,
it can be a way of alleviating balance-of-payments constraints on
growth and investment. On the other hand, a large proportion of
foreign capital inflows has often been directed to private banks for
financing consumption or speculative financial investments that have
generated asset price bubbles. Moreover, when capital inflows are
not used for financing imports of goods and services, they often lead
to a strong currency appreciation that makes domestic industries less
price competitive in international markets. Financial inflows and
outflows, and their instability, have often led to lending booms and
busts, inflationary pressures and the build-up of foreign liabilities
without contributing to an economy’s capacity to grow and service
such obligations. A drying up or reversal of inflows exerts pressure on
the balance of payments and on the financing of both the private and
public sectors.Areliance on private capital inflows has therefore tended
to increase macroeconomic and financial instability and hamper, rather
than support, long-term growth. Moreover, private capital flows have
been mostly procyclical. For both these reasons, they have played a
major role in balance-of-payments and financial crises in the developing
world over the last three decades.
Greater reliance on domestic capital markets for the financing of
government expenditure helps reduce vulnerability to credit crunches
and exchange-rate instability. Debt denominated in local currency also
allows monetary authorities to counter external shocks or growing
trade deficits with a devaluation of the nominal exchange rate without
increasing the domestic currency value of that debt. Finally, debt
denominated in local currency allows the government a last-resort
option of using debt monetization in a time of crisis, thereby reducing
the insolvency risk and lowering the risk premium on the debt. On the

30
other hand, the amount and direction of foreign capital flows are largely
determined by factors that are often unrelated to the investment and
trade-financing needs of the receiving countries and are beyond the
control of their authorities.
Protective measures against external disturbances
Pragmatic exchange-rate management aimed at preventing
currency overvaluation can limit the destabilizing effects of speculative
capital flows. In addition, interest rate differentials, which often attract
carry-trade speculation, can be limited when inflation is kept under
control. This can be done not primarily by means of a restrictive
monetary policy and high policy interest rates, but with the help of other
instruments, such as an incomes policy that aims at keeping average
wage increases in line with, and not exceeding, productivity growth
and the inflation target of the central bank.
Destabilizing effects of capital flows can also be prevented, or at
least mitigated, by resorting to capital controls, which are permitted
under the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF)Articles ofAgreement,
and for which there is extensive experience in both developed and
developing countries. While the IMF has recently recognized that capital
controls are legitimate instruments, it recommends resorting to them
only in situations when a balance-of-payments crisis is already evident,
and after all other measures (e.g. monetary and fiscal adjustment) have
failed. The problem with such an approach is that it does not recognize
the macroprudential role that control of capital inflows can play in
preventing such a crisis from occurring in the first place.
Reconsidering regulation of the financial system
The hypothesis that deregulated financial markets are efficient
because actors in these markets possess all the information necessary
to anticipate future outcomes, and will use this information rationally

31
so that the financial system can regulate itself, has been refuted by
the present crisis. This should prompt policymakers in developing
and transition economies to draw their own lessons for shaping their
countries’ financial systems.
Certain regulatory measures that are now envisaged in developed
countries may also be relevant and important to developing countries.
Such measures include, in particular, those aimed at improving the
governance of banks, reducing incentives for highly risky behaviour
of market participants, and resolution mechanisms allowing authorities
to wind down bad banks and recapitalize institutions through public
ownership. The separation of commercial retail banking (receiving
deposits, delivering loans and managing payments) from risky
investment banking activities is a principle that should also guide bank
regulations in developing countries. This would help prevent individual
financial institutions from growing excessively large and assuming such
a diversity of activities that their performance becomes systemically
important. Such measures may be easier to implement in countries
where financial systems are still in the process of taking shape, and
where the financial sector is still relatively small but bound to expand
as their economies grow.
International standards and rules relating to capital requirements
and liquidity under the Basel accords, which aim at reducing the risk
of bank failure and the need for public bailouts by containing excessive
leveraging, may not always be suited to the specific circumstances
and requirements of developing countries. Relatively small banks
in developing countries may require different rules than large,
internationally operating banks in developed countries. But it also
needs to be recognized that in many of the developing countries which
have experienced serious banking crises since the 1980s, capital and
liquidity requirements were much higher than those prescribed by the
Basel rules, and that the application of those rules led to a restriction of
bank lending, especially to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
These countries should therefore be allowed to adapt prudential rules
to their specific situation and needs.

32
In any case, financial regulation should be conceived in such a
way that it is not inimical to growth. In particular, it should encourage
long-term bank lending to finance productive investment and discourage
lending for unproductive and speculative purposes. This is important
because of the interdependence between financial stability and growth:
financial stability supports growth because it reduces the uncertainty
that is inevitably involved in any financing operation, while stable
growth supports financial stability because it reduces the risk of loans
becoming non-performing.
Monetary versus financial stability
The current experience in major developed countries shows that
massive money creation by central banks has had little, if any, effect on
the expansion of credit to the private sector. This suggests that, contrary
to the monetarist approach, policymakers should focus more on the
volume of bank credit than on money creation for promoting financial
stability. Moreover, the purposes for which bank credit is used have an
impact on the level and composition of aggregate demand. In providing
credit, banks can play a key role in ensuring financial stability. They
have to discriminate between good and bad projects, and reliable and
unreliable borrowers, instead of behaving like passive intermediaries,
or losing interest in the economic performance of their borrowers after
securitizing their debt and transferring the risk to another entity.
The experience of the developed countries in the past few years has
shown that monetary stability, in the sense of consumer price stability,
can coexist with considerable financial instability. In the euro zone,
the elimination of exchange rate risk and low inflation even served to
generate financial instability: it favoured large capital flows from banks
in the core countries of the zone to countries in the periphery and the
virtual elimination of interest rate differentials between these two sets
of countries. However, those capital flows were not used for spurring
competitiveness and production capacities, but rather for feeding
bubbles and the financing of current account deficits. This amplified

33
intraregional disparities, instead of reducing them, and generated the
crisis in the deficit countries within the common currency area. This
outcome is similar to that of many developing and transition economies
in previous decades, particularly in LatinAmerica and South-EastAsia,
where monetary stability based on a fixed nominal exchange rate led
to financial crises.
Fostering the financing of domestic investment
The financial sector can play a key role in accelerating economic
growth through the financing of fixed capital formation that boosts
production and generates employment. Thus, in order to support
development strategies that promote domestic demand as a driver
of growth, it is essential for developing countries to strengthen their
financial systems.
Retained profits constitute the most important source for the
financing of investment in real productive capacity. At the same
time, rising demand is decisive for helping to meet expectations of
profitability of additional investment in productive capacity, and that
profitability in turn finances private investment, resulting in a strong
profit-investment nexus. In addition, bank credit is essential, although
its relative importance depends on country-specific circumstances.
Bank financing enables firms to accelerate their capital formation over
and above what is possible from retained profits. Therefore, growth
dynamics depend critically on the availability of sufficient amounts of
bank credit at a cost that is commensurate with the expected profitability
of investment projects. The banking system as a whole can provide
investment credit without the prior existence of a corresponding amount
of financial savings. The central bank can support the creation of such
credit through the provision of adequate liquidity to the banking system
and by keeping the policy interest rate as low as possible.
Beyond that, government intervention may facilitate access to
credit, especially for sectors and firms engaged in activities that are of

34
strategic importance for the structural transformation and growth of the
economy. One possibility may be the provision of interest subsidies for
the financing of investment in areas of activity that are considered to
be of strategic importance; another is influencing the behaviour of the
banking system in the way it allocates credit.
The banking system and credit orientation
Public intervention in the provision of bank credit will be especially
important in developing countries that are aiming at strengthening
domestic forces of growth, since long-term loans for investment
and innovation, as well as loans to micro, small and medium-sized
enterprises are extremely scarce even in good times. Commercial banks
in developing countries often prefer to grant short-term personal loans or
to buy government securities, because they consider the risks associated
with maturity transformation (i.e. providing long-term credits matched
by short-term deposits) to be too high.
A revised regulatory framework could include elements that
favour a different allocation of bank assets and credit portfolios. Banks
could be encouraged, or obliged, to undertake a more reasonable
degree of maturity transformation than in the past. Public guarantees
for commercial bank credit for the financing of private investment
projects, may encourage private commercial banks to provide more
lending for such purposes. Such arrangements would reduce the credit
default risk, and hence also the risk premium on long-term investment
loans. The resulting lower interest cost for investors would further
reduce the probability of loan losses and thus the likelihood of requiring
governments to cover such losses under a guarantee scheme.
Similarly, within the framework of a comprehensive industrial
policy, co-financing by private banks, which take a microeconomic
perspective, and public financial institutions that act in the interest of
society as a whole, could help to ensure that investment projects are

35
both commercially viable and support a strategy of structural change
in the economy at large.
There are many examples where credit policy has been implemented
with the help of various public, semi-public and cooperative specialized
institutions which have financed agricultural and industrial investment
by SMEs at preferential rates. National development banks may provide
financial services that private financial institutions are unable or unwilling
to provide to the extent desired. Such banks played an important
countercyclical role during the current crisis when they increased
lending just as many private banks were scaling back theirs. In addition,
smaller, more specialized sources of finance also have an important role
to play in the overall dynamics of the development process.
Changing views about the role of central banks
Strengthening the supportive role of the banking system may also
require reviewing the mandate of central banks, and even reconsidering
the principle of central bank independence. Indeed, the traditional role
of central banks only as defenders of price stability may be too narrow
when the requirements of development and the need to stabilize the
financial sector are taken into account.
Their use of monetary policy as the sole instrument for fighting
inflation has often led to high real interest rates that discouraged private
domestic investment and attracted foreign capital inflows of a speculative
nature. This tended to lead to currency overvaluation with a consequent
decrease in exports, and thus a lowering of demand expectations of
domestic producers. An incomes policy based on productivity-related
wage growth would facilitate the conduct of monetary policy, because
it would exclude, or at least significantly reduce, the risk of inflation
generated by rising unit labour costs. This would facilitate the task of
the central banks to gear their monetary policy more to the creation of
favourable financing conditions for domestic investment.

36
The need for reconsidering the role of central banks has never
been more evident than during the latest financial crisis. Central bank
independence did not prevent this crisis, but when it erupted these
banks had to take “unconventional” measures to stabilize financial
markets in the interests of the economy as a whole, rather than simply
maintaining price stability. The concerted action of central banks and
governments was indispensable in tackling the effects of the crisis,
including by bailing out institutions that were considered “too big to
fail”. This experience has led to a recognition that central banks can
make a major contribution to the stability of financial markets and the
banking system.
A further step would be to recognize that central banks can play
an active role in the implementation of a growth and development
strategy. Since financial stability depends on the performance of the
real sector of the economy, bolstering economic growth should also
be considered a major responsibility of these institutions. They can
support maturity transformation in the banking system through their
role as lenders of last resort and their provision of deposit insurance.
The latter reduces the risk of a sudden withdrawal of deposits, which
would cause liquidity constraints for banks, while the former could
respond to liquidity shortages, should they occur. But there are also
numerous examples from both developed and developing countries of
central bank involvement in directing credit, through, for example, direct
financing of non-financial firms, selective refinancing of commercial
loans at preferential rates, or exempting certain types of bank lending
from quantitative credit ceilings.
These schemes played a pivotal role in the rapid industrialization
of many countries. However, they did not always deliver the expected
outcomes. For example, in several countries where public banks
sometimes provided credit to other public entities for purposes that were
not related to productive investment, non-performing loans burdened
their balance sheets and undermined their lending capacities. But it
also needs to be recognized that it was the privatization of public banks
and the deregulation of financial systems that paved the way to major

37
financial crises in Latin America and in East and South-East Asia.
In light of these different experiences, developing countries need to
carefully weigh the pros and cons of government involvement in credit
allocation when shaping or reforming their domestic financial sectors.
They should also implement well-designed governance and control
mechanisms for both public and private financial institutions in order
to ensure that these institutions operate in the interests of the economy
and society as a whole.
Supachai Panitchpakdi
Secretary-General of UNCTAD

Trade and Development Report 2013

More Related Content

What's hot (16)

Viewers also liked (17)

Similar to Trade and Development Report 2013 (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Trade and Development Report 2013