Sunday, March 25, 2007

The (Over)-Importance of Institutions...

I have come across the word "Institutions" several times over the last month and a half, in the context of sound macroeconomics. The only parameter that economists find has a positive correlation with a nation's economic health is the existence of strong institutions.

Geography does not matter. Natural resouces, perhaps counter-intuitively do not matter either. Indeed, natural resources in a country with weak institutions often leaves the country worse off. It breeds corruption, an over-reliance on the wealth generated from the resources and a consequent neglect of more sustainable sources of growth. Two cases in point: Saudi Arabia v Singapore. One sits on the largest known supplies of oil reserves and the other has...well...trees. I wont pain you with the economics of it...you get the picture.

Another theory is that the further you go from the equator, the more prosperous the countries become. Norway and Sweden are amongst the most properous of nations, while sub-Saharan afica and parts of Asia are the poorest. Hmmm....seemingly outrageous in that there is no underlying logic. Yet, it largely holds true. Does one buy it? NO! It is merely a reflective rather than a causal realtionship.

All of this raises the question: what are good institutions? OK, so this comprises of a strong & independent Central Bank and Judiciary, an efficient & incorruptible civil service, growth driven government policies, strong basic & professional educational institutes, sound financial markets, competitive product/service sectors, etc, etc. Seriously though, for the develoing world, targeting this "wish-list" will consume all output in itself.

Perhaps a more sensible approach for the government is to start with the 'no-brainer' stuff, such as cutting down on licence requirements to set-up an industry, speed up procedures to import valuable raw materials and tax breaks to export-based industries, etc. Do this and your industry and entrepreneurs will be free from their shackles. It needs a few strong, practical leaders at the top to set the ball rolling. The wish-list can be followed up with later. Keep things simple and simple things will be done right, they say. Perhaps...just perhaps this applies here too.

2 Comments:

At 5:04 AM, April 02, 2007, Blogger sudeep said...

In fact I read in one of the books, that Nokia was a friggin' lumber and rubber manufacturer. One of the CEO's changed the strategy of the company from "Trees" to "People"....

To think abt it, even Finland has scanty resources...Yet it has Nokia.

But regarding this part :-
Perhaps a more sensible approach for the government is to start with the 'no-brainer' stuff, such as cutting down on licence requirements to set-up an industry, speed up procedures to import valuable raw materials and tax breaks to export-based industries, etc.

things are not so easy in India...You may be aware of the hue and cry for setting up SEZs and the impact of WalMart on the Indian retail landscape etc.

 
At 5:26 AM, April 03, 2007, Blogger Milan said...

Sudeep, politics alas is a way of life in India. The coalition govt in the center does make things complicated, but these are the simplest of the steps that have to be taken.

Walmart entering India probably will hurt your nearby general store in the short-run but if properly managed, has the potential to push our economy's productive capacity up several notches. Several studies have shown that efficient, well-organized retail players deliver higher quality products at lower prices. This increases the efficiency with which goods, capital and indeed humans operate and benefit the consumer via lower prices.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home