The World Development Report 2022: Finance for an Equitable Recovery in the Context of the International Debt Crisis

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q1 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Robert H. Wade
{"title":"The World Development Report 2022: Finance for an Equitable Recovery in the Context of the International Debt Crisis","authors":"Robert H. Wade","doi":"10.1111/dech.12796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><b>World Bank Group, <i>World Development Report 2022: Finance for an Equitable Recovery</i>. Washington, DC: World Bank Group, 2022. xix + 248 pp</b>. www.worldbank/org/en/publication/wdr2022</p><p>As if the climate crisis was not enough, the world's economic system is now in a full-blown development crisis, with debt distress at its core. It threatens another ‘lost decade’, with economic insecurity, political instability and further erosion of democratic institutions for much of the world's population. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) projects the weakest global medium-term growth prospects in more than 30 years. Developing countries have amassed enormous debts dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, and face high food and energy costs, exacerbated by a high US dollar. A slowing global economy, rising interest rates and depreciating currencies have come together to tip at least 60 countries into debt distress or close to it — more than twice as many as there were in 2015. The Institute of International Finance (IIF) estimates that total developing world debt rose to a record of US$ 98 trillion at the end of 2022.</p><p>Global debt relative to global output was already at unusually high levels before the pandemic. Moreover, global growth had slowed down in 2011‒21, compared to the previous decade. In the later period, 80 per cent of developed countries experienced slower growth than in 2000–10, as did 75 per cent of developing countries. Then came the exogenous event of the global COVID-19 shock which began in early 2020. As the World Bank's <i>World Development Report 2022: Finance for an Equitable Recovery</i> states, ‘The COVID-19 pandemic is possibly the largest shock to the global economy in over a century’ (p. 20). In 2020, the first year of the pandemic, the global economy shrank by 3 per cent; economic activity contracted in about 90 per cent of countries. This is a higher percentage of countries experiencing negative growth in per capita GDP than in any year since 1901, when the data started — a higher proportion even than during two World Wars, the Great Depression of the 1930s, the emerging markets debt crisis of the 1980s, and the 2007‒10 North Atlantic financial crisis.</p><p>Major economies administered the largest double dose of fiscal and monetary expansion in history, and major firms exploited the uncertainty of the pandemic to mark up their prices far above the cost of labour and non-labour inputs, making a combined demand- and sellers-inflation at the highest rate in decades. Central banks are now frantically trying to rein it in. Governments and private entities were forced to borrow even more than before in order to stay afloat as business activity ground to a halt; and they deferred payments on existing debt while borrowing more.</p><p>In 2020, the average total debt burden (both public and private) of low- and middle-income countries leapt by 9 percentage points, compared with an annual increase of 1.9 per cent in the previous decade. In the same year, 51 countries, including 44 emerging economies, experienced a downgrade in their sovereign debt rating, making borrowing more expensive. Then came exogenous shock number two in the form of Russia's war on Ukraine which began in early 2022 and continues at the time of writing (mid-2023), creating upheaval in global markets for food, fuel and fertilizer. The dramatic shrinkage of supply of these essentials has caused high prices, hurting many developing countries dependent on imports of these basics even more deeply than they had already been hurt by the COVID-19 pandemic. The two shocks together compounded inflation and multiplied public and private debt. The IIF reported that government debt in 30 large low- and middle-income countries hit almost 65 per cent of GDP by the end of 2022 — an increase of 10 percentage points over pre-pandemic levels and the highest ever year-end total. From the start of 2020 to the end of 2022, the debt of more than 100 developing countries ballooned by almost US$ 2 trillion (excluding China), as social spending soared while incomes froze.</p><p>These trends caused shock number three (this one endogenous), which, like shock two, also started in early 2022, as the US Federal Reserve and other central banks raised interest rates rapidly and synchronously to curb high inflation after decades of low inflation and low interest rates; monetary tightening in the past two years has been the fastest in the past four decades. Thanks to the deep integration of both developed and developing countries’ into Western financial markets (with free capital mobility and flexible exchange rates strongly promoted by the IMF and World Bank), the rising interest rates in safe-haven US and other Western markets caused investors to pull capital from developing countries and the latters’ currencies to depreciate. Currency depreciation produced higher import prices, higher inflation and higher borrowing costs (Grynspan, <span>2023</span>; Wheatley, <span>2023</span>). Both changes — the rise in interest rates and the rise of the dollar — had a knock-on impact on the cost of meeting existing debt obligations and current borrowing because most international debt obligations are contracted in US dollars and at variable, rather than fixed, interest rates.</p><p>The surge in debt service costs drains resources from public goods like food subsidies, health, education, social assistance and physical infrastructure, at the same time that costs of food and other basic necessities soar. Consumers are hit by inflation especially in products of inelastic demand (including healthcare, housing, pharmaceuticals) and by the erosion of public services. It is a fair guess that the global ‘hardship index’ (number of hours it takes an unskilled male labourer to earn the equivalent of 100 kg of the basic food grain) is now higher than it has been for several decades.</p><p>Private creditors — those who lent to developing countries to get high returns justified by high risk — are faced with very low visibility in terms of the location of losses. At the same time, they are faced with demands for large-scale debt renegotiation. They have responded by rushing to their governments and to the IMF to say ‘make them pay’, as though they should get the high returns <i>without</i> bearing the cost of risk. This is a blatant version of the long-established game of private finance in dealing with public financiers: ‘heads I win, tails you lose’; or in other words, ‘you (public creditors) have to take the hit so we can be made whole’.</p><p>The upshot is that many developing countries and their governments today face an acute dilemma. On the one hand, they have to meet the continuing high costs of handling the pandemic and its aftermath, plus the high and rising ‘cost of living’ (amplified by Russia's invasion of Ukraine), plus the rising interest rates. On the other hand, they face the high costs of the debt they have already borrowed and the debt they now want to borrow to meet those high recurrent expenditures. Their creditors, public and private, press the governments to implement drastic rises in taxes and cuts in public spending, which implies severe cuts to investment and future growth, leading to more ‘income divergence big time’ between developing and developed countries.</p><p>The World Bank's World Development Report 2022 (hereafter WDR 2022, or the Report) provides valuable information about the economic aspects of the pandemic and economic recovery from it. It also lays out a broad-gauge set of policy priorities for governments of developing countries to pursue. What follows is a summary of these policy priorities.</p><p>The WDR 2022 identifies five broad policy priorities for governments to set their countries on a path to a more equitable and sustained economic recovery after the pandemic (see Ch. 6: ‘Policy Priorities for the Recovery’). First, the many governments with dangerously high levels of sovereign debt have to give top priority to improved debt management. Second, many governments face elevated levels of financial sector risks and must focus on resolving these risks to ensure the continued supply of credit. Third, governments have to scale back support for the more resilient households and firms first, leaving relatively more for the poor in order to counter the strongly regressive impacts of the pandemic. Fourth, governments must set national policy in the context of heightened global economic risks, especially interest rate and currency risks caused by advanced economies scaling back stimulus policies and raising interest rates to fight inflation. Fifth, recovery policies should particularly target support at green sectors and business models.</p><p>The Report elaborates by saying governments should recognize that different sectors of the economy are interconnected, such that risks can spill over from one sector to another. Therefore, it is necessary to prioritize recovery resources where the risks to the economy are greatest and where policy action is likely to be most effective at reducing economic fragilities. Well-designed fiscal, monetary and financial policies can take advantage of sector interconnectedness and generate positive outcomes in support of economic recovery (p. 250).</p><p>Governments should rapidly scale back financial support (such as debt moratoria and credit guarantee schemes) to firms and industries that have access to private finance and avoid giving support based on pre-crisis size, because that could easily cause resources to be trapped — inefficiently — in firms and sectors that are less viable due to the crisis. Likewise, they should rapidly scale back support (such as cash transfers) for financially viable households, and concentrate the remaining support on vulnerable populations that have been hardest hit by the pandemic recession.</p><p>In middle-income countries with fairly well-developed financial sectors, households and small businesses typically take on debt. Income losses due to the pandemic (as well as the later shocks) have raised the risks of a sharp rise in loan defaults once government support measures are withdrawn. That in turn means governments must establish frameworks for quick and comprehensive recognition of financial sector fragility and default, and scale back support in a targeted and predictable way in line with economic recovery, to avoid a wave of insolvencies and defaults. In the longer term, an important tool for resolving high levels of private debt is a legal insolvency framework. The Report notes, ‘Even in countries where institutional capacity is limited, small improvements in the bankruptcy code can make a difference’ (p. 254).</p><p>According to the Report, governments should mobilize new sources of revenue to pay off debts incurred for crisis recovery. Most emerging economies rely on consumption taxes and lack the institutions for raising income taxes. Consumption taxes burden the poor disproportionately, which sets a limit on their revenue potential. For example, Mexico, which relies on consumption taxes, raised only 18 per cent of its GDP in taxes in 2020, as compared with 41 per cent on average for countries of the European Union, which rely on income taxes (p. 254). The pandemic response should include building up institutions for raising income taxes as a long-term project.</p><p>Governments also have to grapple with risks from the economy's interdependencies with other economies via credit markets, international trade and foreign aid that may threaten the robust, equitable recovery in their own economies. In particular, they must shape domestic policy in the light of high and rising global interest rates as the central banks of ‘advanced economies’ act to slow inflation. Those high external interest rates raise the cost of servicing domestic public and private debt — and higher debt service costs make debt defaults more likely, potentially cumulating into a national debt crisis. Moreover, high interest rates go with additional external risks in the form of exchange rate risks. High advanced-country interest rates tend to cause currency appreciation in those countries, as investors sell other currencies and buy those of the advanced countries — depreciating the currencies of many emerging economies, raising the cost of their imports and the cost of debt service. The WDR 2022 is careful not to identify the leading role of institutions such as the US Federal Reserve in raising US domestic interest rates without regard for impacts on the rest of the world; indeed, the Fed's mandate from Congress is to focus on only two objectives: full employment and price stability.</p><p>Finally, the Report emphasizes throughout that the COVID-19 crisis should be seized as an opportunity for national governments to accelerate the transition to a sustainable world economy, above all, with fast-falling carbon emissions. Governments should introduce carbon taxes, and revise the tax code to incentivize green investment, while central banks should mandate higher risk provisioning for loans for activities that are anti-green, notably activities that use fossil fuels.</p><p>The full 267-page document is as bland as the foregoing summary of policy priorities suggests, though it is lifted by some useful statistics. It is a depoliticized technical analysis that steers clear of power and inequality, and especially steers clear of how the geo-economic structure of the world-system — and its dominance by a small set of high-income countries led by the US, which have long coordinated amongst themselves to sustain their continued dominance — affects pandemics, financial crises and financial resolutions (Wade, <span>2019, 2020</span>). The remainder of this Assessment focuses on these political economy issues. The next main section puts the COVID-19 economic crisis in the context of earlier economic crises; outlines the economic effects of the pandemic; and suggests how China's bilateral rather than multilateral approach to rescheduling debts of its Belt and Road borrowers is complicating the larger project of rescheduling the debts of developing countries. The following section then focuses on directions for progressive reforms at global and national levels, especially to reduce debt distress in developing countries now and in the future. The conclusion adds the COVID-19 crisis to the other elements of the more than run-of-the-mill weirdness of today's world system.</p><p>We know that the global debt problem is a lot more acute than it was a decade ago. It bears repeating that as of early 2023, the average debt to GDP ratio across developing countries was around 65 per cent. Five years ago, it was 50 per cent. Looking five years ahead, to 2028, it is likely to be 75‒80 per cent and in several large countries, as much as 100 per cent. So, over the course of only a decade, the ratio is likely to rise by 25‒30 per cent of GDP. This magnifies financial fragility in economies which do not issue hard currencies but have to repay in hard currencies and face exchange rate depreciation, and which have shifted their production structure from smallholder agriculture and industry towards (low-skill) services and commodities.</p><p>Despite the far-reaching disruptions in the more than three years since the pandemic hit, the world has made dismayingly little progress on preparing for the next pandemic. China's refusal to cooperate with investigations into the origins of COVID-19 is a sign of a wider breakdown in inter-state cooperation to build pandemic warning systems, and deepens fears that China will again be late in alerting the world to the next virus outbreak. But the pandemic risk and the debt risk are only two ingredients of the new epoch of polycrisis facing the global community. They join risks including climate change, an ageing labour force, the wild card of artificial intelligence, dramatic slowdown in China, and geopolitical-economic tensions particularly between China and the US, with other states under pressure to take sides and separate blocs emerging. Edward Luce of the <i>Financial Times</i> argues, ‘The cost of Covid can also be measured in damage to global psychology, including a form of diplomatic long Covid. The world's superpower and its rising great power are now working from home and nourishing paranoia about each other. When we look back on Covid that may be its biggest cost’ (Luce, <span>2023</span>).</p><p>In March 2023, the World Bank (<span>2023</span>) issued a report called <i>Falling Long-term Growth Prospects</i>. Its message can be summarized in the context of this essay by saying that not only the developing world but the whole world faces the real prospect of a ‘lost decade’. Yet in the months following the publication of that report, evidence has come to light which suggests that the 25 largest developing countries are beating growth forecasts. Their growth is less tightly linked to China's and their median inflation rate is no higher than in developed countries, which has not happened in four decades (Sharma, <span>2023</span>). These are certainly ‘interesting’ times.</p>","PeriodicalId":48194,"journal":{"name":"Development and Change","volume":"54 5","pages":"1354-1373"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dech.12796","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development and Change","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dech.12796","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

World Bank Group, World Development Report 2022: Finance for an Equitable Recovery. Washington, DC: World Bank Group, 2022. xix + 248 pp. www.worldbank/org/en/publication/wdr2022

As if the climate crisis was not enough, the world's economic system is now in a full-blown development crisis, with debt distress at its core. It threatens another ‘lost decade’, with economic insecurity, political instability and further erosion of democratic institutions for much of the world's population. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) projects the weakest global medium-term growth prospects in more than 30 years. Developing countries have amassed enormous debts dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, and face high food and energy costs, exacerbated by a high US dollar. A slowing global economy, rising interest rates and depreciating currencies have come together to tip at least 60 countries into debt distress or close to it — more than twice as many as there were in 2015. The Institute of International Finance (IIF) estimates that total developing world debt rose to a record of US$ 98 trillion at the end of 2022.

Global debt relative to global output was already at unusually high levels before the pandemic. Moreover, global growth had slowed down in 2011‒21, compared to the previous decade. In the later period, 80 per cent of developed countries experienced slower growth than in 2000–10, as did 75 per cent of developing countries. Then came the exogenous event of the global COVID-19 shock which began in early 2020. As the World Bank's World Development Report 2022: Finance for an Equitable Recovery states, ‘The COVID-19 pandemic is possibly the largest shock to the global economy in over a century’ (p. 20). In 2020, the first year of the pandemic, the global economy shrank by 3 per cent; economic activity contracted in about 90 per cent of countries. This is a higher percentage of countries experiencing negative growth in per capita GDP than in any year since 1901, when the data started — a higher proportion even than during two World Wars, the Great Depression of the 1930s, the emerging markets debt crisis of the 1980s, and the 2007‒10 North Atlantic financial crisis.

Major economies administered the largest double dose of fiscal and monetary expansion in history, and major firms exploited the uncertainty of the pandemic to mark up their prices far above the cost of labour and non-labour inputs, making a combined demand- and sellers-inflation at the highest rate in decades. Central banks are now frantically trying to rein it in. Governments and private entities were forced to borrow even more than before in order to stay afloat as business activity ground to a halt; and they deferred payments on existing debt while borrowing more.

In 2020, the average total debt burden (both public and private) of low- and middle-income countries leapt by 9 percentage points, compared with an annual increase of 1.9 per cent in the previous decade. In the same year, 51 countries, including 44 emerging economies, experienced a downgrade in their sovereign debt rating, making borrowing more expensive. Then came exogenous shock number two in the form of Russia's war on Ukraine which began in early 2022 and continues at the time of writing (mid-2023), creating upheaval in global markets for food, fuel and fertilizer. The dramatic shrinkage of supply of these essentials has caused high prices, hurting many developing countries dependent on imports of these basics even more deeply than they had already been hurt by the COVID-19 pandemic. The two shocks together compounded inflation and multiplied public and private debt. The IIF reported that government debt in 30 large low- and middle-income countries hit almost 65 per cent of GDP by the end of 2022 — an increase of 10 percentage points over pre-pandemic levels and the highest ever year-end total. From the start of 2020 to the end of 2022, the debt of more than 100 developing countries ballooned by almost US$ 2 trillion (excluding China), as social spending soared while incomes froze.

These trends caused shock number three (this one endogenous), which, like shock two, also started in early 2022, as the US Federal Reserve and other central banks raised interest rates rapidly and synchronously to curb high inflation after decades of low inflation and low interest rates; monetary tightening in the past two years has been the fastest in the past four decades. Thanks to the deep integration of both developed and developing countries’ into Western financial markets (with free capital mobility and flexible exchange rates strongly promoted by the IMF and World Bank), the rising interest rates in safe-haven US and other Western markets caused investors to pull capital from developing countries and the latters’ currencies to depreciate. Currency depreciation produced higher import prices, higher inflation and higher borrowing costs (Grynspan, 2023; Wheatley, 2023). Both changes — the rise in interest rates and the rise of the dollar — had a knock-on impact on the cost of meeting existing debt obligations and current borrowing because most international debt obligations are contracted in US dollars and at variable, rather than fixed, interest rates.

The surge in debt service costs drains resources from public goods like food subsidies, health, education, social assistance and physical infrastructure, at the same time that costs of food and other basic necessities soar. Consumers are hit by inflation especially in products of inelastic demand (including healthcare, housing, pharmaceuticals) and by the erosion of public services. It is a fair guess that the global ‘hardship index’ (number of hours it takes an unskilled male labourer to earn the equivalent of 100 kg of the basic food grain) is now higher than it has been for several decades.

Private creditors — those who lent to developing countries to get high returns justified by high risk — are faced with very low visibility in terms of the location of losses. At the same time, they are faced with demands for large-scale debt renegotiation. They have responded by rushing to their governments and to the IMF to say ‘make them pay’, as though they should get the high returns without bearing the cost of risk. This is a blatant version of the long-established game of private finance in dealing with public financiers: ‘heads I win, tails you lose’; or in other words, ‘you (public creditors) have to take the hit so we can be made whole’.

The upshot is that many developing countries and their governments today face an acute dilemma. On the one hand, they have to meet the continuing high costs of handling the pandemic and its aftermath, plus the high and rising ‘cost of living’ (amplified by Russia's invasion of Ukraine), plus the rising interest rates. On the other hand, they face the high costs of the debt they have already borrowed and the debt they now want to borrow to meet those high recurrent expenditures. Their creditors, public and private, press the governments to implement drastic rises in taxes and cuts in public spending, which implies severe cuts to investment and future growth, leading to more ‘income divergence big time’ between developing and developed countries.

The World Bank's World Development Report 2022 (hereafter WDR 2022, or the Report) provides valuable information about the economic aspects of the pandemic and economic recovery from it. It also lays out a broad-gauge set of policy priorities for governments of developing countries to pursue. What follows is a summary of these policy priorities.

The WDR 2022 identifies five broad policy priorities for governments to set their countries on a path to a more equitable and sustained economic recovery after the pandemic (see Ch. 6: ‘Policy Priorities for the Recovery’). First, the many governments with dangerously high levels of sovereign debt have to give top priority to improved debt management. Second, many governments face elevated levels of financial sector risks and must focus on resolving these risks to ensure the continued supply of credit. Third, governments have to scale back support for the more resilient households and firms first, leaving relatively more for the poor in order to counter the strongly regressive impacts of the pandemic. Fourth, governments must set national policy in the context of heightened global economic risks, especially interest rate and currency risks caused by advanced economies scaling back stimulus policies and raising interest rates to fight inflation. Fifth, recovery policies should particularly target support at green sectors and business models.

The Report elaborates by saying governments should recognize that different sectors of the economy are interconnected, such that risks can spill over from one sector to another. Therefore, it is necessary to prioritize recovery resources where the risks to the economy are greatest and where policy action is likely to be most effective at reducing economic fragilities. Well-designed fiscal, monetary and financial policies can take advantage of sector interconnectedness and generate positive outcomes in support of economic recovery (p. 250).

Governments should rapidly scale back financial support (such as debt moratoria and credit guarantee schemes) to firms and industries that have access to private finance and avoid giving support based on pre-crisis size, because that could easily cause resources to be trapped — inefficiently — in firms and sectors that are less viable due to the crisis. Likewise, they should rapidly scale back support (such as cash transfers) for financially viable households, and concentrate the remaining support on vulnerable populations that have been hardest hit by the pandemic recession.

In middle-income countries with fairly well-developed financial sectors, households and small businesses typically take on debt. Income losses due to the pandemic (as well as the later shocks) have raised the risks of a sharp rise in loan defaults once government support measures are withdrawn. That in turn means governments must establish frameworks for quick and comprehensive recognition of financial sector fragility and default, and scale back support in a targeted and predictable way in line with economic recovery, to avoid a wave of insolvencies and defaults. In the longer term, an important tool for resolving high levels of private debt is a legal insolvency framework. The Report notes, ‘Even in countries where institutional capacity is limited, small improvements in the bankruptcy code can make a difference’ (p. 254).

According to the Report, governments should mobilize new sources of revenue to pay off debts incurred for crisis recovery. Most emerging economies rely on consumption taxes and lack the institutions for raising income taxes. Consumption taxes burden the poor disproportionately, which sets a limit on their revenue potential. For example, Mexico, which relies on consumption taxes, raised only 18 per cent of its GDP in taxes in 2020, as compared with 41 per cent on average for countries of the European Union, which rely on income taxes (p. 254). The pandemic response should include building up institutions for raising income taxes as a long-term project.

Governments also have to grapple with risks from the economy's interdependencies with other economies via credit markets, international trade and foreign aid that may threaten the robust, equitable recovery in their own economies. In particular, they must shape domestic policy in the light of high and rising global interest rates as the central banks of ‘advanced economies’ act to slow inflation. Those high external interest rates raise the cost of servicing domestic public and private debt — and higher debt service costs make debt defaults more likely, potentially cumulating into a national debt crisis. Moreover, high interest rates go with additional external risks in the form of exchange rate risks. High advanced-country interest rates tend to cause currency appreciation in those countries, as investors sell other currencies and buy those of the advanced countries — depreciating the currencies of many emerging economies, raising the cost of their imports and the cost of debt service. The WDR 2022 is careful not to identify the leading role of institutions such as the US Federal Reserve in raising US domestic interest rates without regard for impacts on the rest of the world; indeed, the Fed's mandate from Congress is to focus on only two objectives: full employment and price stability.

Finally, the Report emphasizes throughout that the COVID-19 crisis should be seized as an opportunity for national governments to accelerate the transition to a sustainable world economy, above all, with fast-falling carbon emissions. Governments should introduce carbon taxes, and revise the tax code to incentivize green investment, while central banks should mandate higher risk provisioning for loans for activities that are anti-green, notably activities that use fossil fuels.

The full 267-page document is as bland as the foregoing summary of policy priorities suggests, though it is lifted by some useful statistics. It is a depoliticized technical analysis that steers clear of power and inequality, and especially steers clear of how the geo-economic structure of the world-system — and its dominance by a small set of high-income countries led by the US, which have long coordinated amongst themselves to sustain their continued dominance — affects pandemics, financial crises and financial resolutions (Wade, 2019, 2020). The remainder of this Assessment focuses on these political economy issues. The next main section puts the COVID-19 economic crisis in the context of earlier economic crises; outlines the economic effects of the pandemic; and suggests how China's bilateral rather than multilateral approach to rescheduling debts of its Belt and Road borrowers is complicating the larger project of rescheduling the debts of developing countries. The following section then focuses on directions for progressive reforms at global and national levels, especially to reduce debt distress in developing countries now and in the future. The conclusion adds the COVID-19 crisis to the other elements of the more than run-of-the-mill weirdness of today's world system.

We know that the global debt problem is a lot more acute than it was a decade ago. It bears repeating that as of early 2023, the average debt to GDP ratio across developing countries was around 65 per cent. Five years ago, it was 50 per cent. Looking five years ahead, to 2028, it is likely to be 75‒80 per cent and in several large countries, as much as 100 per cent. So, over the course of only a decade, the ratio is likely to rise by 25‒30 per cent of GDP. This magnifies financial fragility in economies which do not issue hard currencies but have to repay in hard currencies and face exchange rate depreciation, and which have shifted their production structure from smallholder agriculture and industry towards (low-skill) services and commodities.

Despite the far-reaching disruptions in the more than three years since the pandemic hit, the world has made dismayingly little progress on preparing for the next pandemic. China's refusal to cooperate with investigations into the origins of COVID-19 is a sign of a wider breakdown in inter-state cooperation to build pandemic warning systems, and deepens fears that China will again be late in alerting the world to the next virus outbreak. But the pandemic risk and the debt risk are only two ingredients of the new epoch of polycrisis facing the global community. They join risks including climate change, an ageing labour force, the wild card of artificial intelligence, dramatic slowdown in China, and geopolitical-economic tensions particularly between China and the US, with other states under pressure to take sides and separate blocs emerging. Edward Luce of the Financial Times argues, ‘The cost of Covid can also be measured in damage to global psychology, including a form of diplomatic long Covid. The world's superpower and its rising great power are now working from home and nourishing paranoia about each other. When we look back on Covid that may be its biggest cost’ (Luce, 2023).

In March 2023, the World Bank (2023) issued a report called Falling Long-term Growth Prospects. Its message can be summarized in the context of this essay by saying that not only the developing world but the whole world faces the real prospect of a ‘lost decade’. Yet in the months following the publication of that report, evidence has come to light which suggests that the 25 largest developing countries are beating growth forecasts. Their growth is less tightly linked to China's and their median inflation rate is no higher than in developed countries, which has not happened in four decades (Sharma, 2023). These are certainly ‘interesting’ times.

《2022年世界发展报告:在国际债务危机背景下为公平复苏融资》
世界银行集团,《2022年世界发展报告:为公平复苏融资》。华盛顿:世界银行集团,2022年。如果气候危机还不够,世界经济体系现在正处于全面的发展危机中,债务危机是其核心。它威胁着另一个“失去的十年”,经济不安全,政治不稳定,世界上大部分人口的民主制度进一步受到侵蚀。国际货币基金组织(IMF)预测,全球中期增长前景将是30多年来最疲弱的。发展中国家在应对新冠肺炎疫情期间积累了巨额债务,面临高企的粮食和能源成本,而美元走高又加剧了这些问题。全球经济放缓、利率上升和货币贬值共同导致至少60个国家陷入或接近陷入债务困境,是2015年的两倍多。国际金融协会(IIF)估计,到2022年底,发展中国家的债务总额升至创纪录的98万亿美元。在大流行之前,全球债务与全球产出的比例已经处于异常高的水平。此外,与前十年相比,2011-21年全球经济增长有所放缓。在2000年至2010年期间,80%的发达国家经历了较低的增长,75%的发展中国家也是如此。然后是2020年初开始的全球COVID-19冲击的外生事件。正如世界银行《2022年世界发展报告:为公平复苏融资》指出的那样,“2019冠状病毒病大流行可能是一个多世纪以来对全球经济的最大冲击”(第20页)。2020年,即大流行的第一年,全球经济萎缩了3%;大约90%的国家的经济活动收缩。这是自1901年开始统计该数据以来,人均GDP出现负增长的国家所占比例最高的一年,甚至高于两次世界大战、上世纪30年代的大萧条、上世纪80年代的新兴市场债务危机和2007 - 2010年的北大西洋金融危机。主要经济体实施了历史上最大规模的财政和货币双重扩张,大公司利用疫情的不确定性将价格提高到远高于劳动力和非劳动力投入成本的水平,使需求和卖方的综合通货膨胀率达到几十年来的最高水平。各国央行现在正疯狂地试图控制它。随着商业活动陷入停滞,政府和私人实体被迫借入比以往更多的资金以维持运营;他们还推迟偿还现有债务,同时增加借贷。2020年,低收入和中等收入国家的平均总债务负担(包括公共债务和私人债务)跃升了9个百分点,而前10年的年均增幅为1.9%。同年,包括44个新兴经济体在内的51个国家的主权债务评级遭到下调,导致借款成本上升。其次是外部冲击,即俄罗斯对乌克兰的战争,这场战争始于2022年初,一直持续到本文撰写之时(2023年年中),给全球食品、燃料和化肥市场带来了动荡。这些必需品供应的急剧减少造成了高价格,对许多依赖这些基本必需品进口的发展中国家的伤害比COVID-19大流行已经造成的伤害更严重。这两大冲击共同加剧了通胀,使公共和私人债务成倍增加。国际金融协会报告称,到2022年底,30个低收入和中等收入大国的政府债务达到了GDP的近65%——比疫情前的水平提高了10个百分点,是有史以来最高的年末总额。从2020年初到2022年底,由于社会支出飙升而收入冻结,100多个发展中国家(不包括中国)的债务激增了近2万亿美元。这些趋势引发了第三次冲击(这一次是内生的),与第二次冲击一样,第三次冲击也始于2022年初,当时美联储(fed)和其他央行在经历了数十年的低通胀和低利率之后,迅速同步上调利率,以抑制高通胀;过去两年的货币紧缩是过去40年来最快的。由于发达国家和发展中国家与西方金融市场的深度融合(国际货币基金组织和世界银行大力推动资本自由流动和灵活的汇率),避险的美国和其他西方市场利率上升,导致投资者从发展中国家撤资,发展中国家货币贬值。货币贬值导致更高的进口价格、更高的通货膨胀和更高的借贷成本(Grynspan, 2023;惠特利,2023)。 这两种变化——利率上升和美元升值——对偿还现有债务和当前借款的成本产生了连锁影响,因为大多数国际债务是以美元签约的,而且利率是可变的,而不是固定的。偿债成本的飙升耗尽了粮食补贴、保健、教育、社会援助和有形基础设施等公共产品的资源,同时粮食和其他基本必需品的成本飙升。消费者受到通货膨胀的打击,特别是在非弹性需求产品(包括医疗保健、住房、药品)和公共服务的侵蚀。合理的猜测是,全球“艰苦指数”(一名不熟练的男性工人赚取相当于100公斤基本粮食所需的小时数)现在比几十年来都要高。私人债权人——那些向发展中国家提供贷款以获得高回报的人——在损失的地点方面面临着非常低的能见度。与此同时,它们还面临着大规模债务重新谈判的要求。他们的回应是,急匆匆地向本国政府和国际货币基金组织要求“让他们付出代价”,似乎他们应该在不承担风险成本的情况下获得高回报。这是私人金融与公共金融家之间由来已久的游戏的公然版本:“正面我赢,反面你输”;或者换句话说,‘你们(公共债权人)必须承受打击,这样我们才能完整’。其结果是,许多发展中国家及其政府如今面临着严峻的困境。一方面,他们必须承担应对疫情及其后果的持续高成本,再加上高昂且不断上升的“生活成本”(俄罗斯入侵乌克兰放大了这一点),再加上不断上升的利率。另一方面,它们面临着已经借的债务和现在想借的债务的高成本,以满足这些高经常性支出。他们的公共和私人债权人向政府施压,要求政府大幅增加税收,削减公共支出,这意味着投资和未来增长的严重削减,导致发展中国家和发达国家之间出现更多的“收入差距”。世界银行的《2022年世界发展报告》(以下简称《2022年世界发展报告》)提供了有关大流行的经济方面和经济复苏的宝贵信息。它还为发展中国家政府制定了一套广泛的政策优先事项。以下是对这些政策重点的总结。《2022年世界发展报告》为各国政府确定了五项广泛的政策重点,以使其国家在大流行后走上更加公平和持续的经济复苏之路(见第六章:“复苏的政策重点”)。首先,许多主权债务处于危险高位的政府必须优先考虑改善债务管理。其次,许多国家的政府面临着较高水平的金融部门风险,必须集中精力解决这些风险,以确保信贷的持续供应。第三,各国政府必须首先减少对抵御能力较强的家庭和企业的支持,为穷人留下相对更多的支持,以应对疫情的严重倒退影响。第四,各国政府必须在全球经济风险加剧的背景下制定国家政策,尤其是发达经济体缩减刺激政策、提高利率以抗击通胀所带来的利率和货币风险。第五,复苏政策应特别针对绿色行业和商业模式提供支持。报告指出,各国政府应该认识到,不同的经济部门是相互关联的,因此风险可能从一个部门溢出到另一个部门。因此,有必要优先考虑经济风险最大和政策行动可能最有效地减少经济脆弱性的恢复资源。精心设计的财政、货币和金融政策可以利用部门之间的相互联系,产生积极的结果,支持经济复苏(第250页)。各国政府应迅速缩减对能够获得私人融资的企业和行业的财政支持(如债务暂缓和信用担保计划),并避免根据危机前的规模提供支持,因为这很容易导致资源被低效地困在因危机而生存能力较差的企业和部门。同样,它们应迅速缩减对经济上可行的家庭的支持(如现金转移支付),并将剩余的支持集中在受大流行衰退打击最严重的弱势群体身上。在金融部门相当发达的中等收入国家,家庭和小企业通常会负债。 大流行(以及后来的冲击)造成的收入损失增加了一旦政府撤销支持措施后贷款违约急剧上升的风险。这反过来意味着,政府必须建立框架,迅速全面地认识到金融部门的脆弱性和违约,并根据经济复苏以有针对性和可预测的方式缩减支持力度,以避免出现一波破产和违约潮。从长期来看,解决高水平私人债务的一个重要工具是法律破产框架。报告指出,“即使在制度能力有限的国家,破产法的微小改进也会产生影响”(第254页)。报告指出,各国政府应调动新的收入来源,以偿还为恢复危机而产生的债务。大多数新兴经济体依赖于消费税,缺乏提高所得税的制度。消费税给穷人造成了不成比例的负担,这限制了他们的收入潜力。例如,依赖消费税的墨西哥在2020年的税收收入仅占其GDP的18%,而依赖所得税的欧盟国家的平均水平为41%(第254页)。大流行应对措施应包括建立提高所得税的机构,这是一项长期项目。各国政府还必须努力应对经济通过信贷市场、国际贸易和外国援助与其他经济体相互依赖所带来的风险,这些风险可能会威胁到本国经济的强劲、公平复苏。特别是,随着“发达经济体”央行采取行动减缓通胀,它们必须根据全球利率居高不下且不断上升的情况来制定国内政策。高企的外部利率提高了偿还国内公共和私人债务的成本,而更高的债务偿还成本增加了债务违约的可能性,可能累积成一场国家债务危机。此外,高利率伴随着额外的外部风险,即汇率风险。发达国家的高利率往往会导致这些国家的货币升值,因为投资者会卖出其他国家的货币,买入发达国家的货币——这使得许多新兴经济体的货币贬值,提高了它们的进口成本和偿债成本。《2022年世界发展报告》小心翼翼地没有指出美联储(fed)等机构在提高美国国内利率方面的主导作用,而不考虑对世界其他地区的影响;事实上,美联储从国会得到的授权只关注两个目标:充分就业和价格稳定。最后,报告强调,各国政府应抓住2019冠状病毒病危机的机会,加速向可持续的世界经济过渡,尤其是在碳排放迅速下降的情况下。政府应该引入碳税,并修改税法以激励绿色投资,而央行应该要求对反绿色活动(尤其是使用化石燃料的活动)的贷款提供更高的风险准备金。尽管有一些有用的统计数据提振了这份长达267页的文件,但它和前面对政策重点的总结一样平淡无奇。这是一种非政治化的技术分析,避开了权力和不平等,特别是避开了世界体系的地缘经济结构——以及以美国为首的少数高收入国家的主导地位,这些国家长期以来相互协调以维持其持续的主导地位——如何影响流行病、金融危机和金融决议(Wade, 2019, 2020)。本评估的其余部分侧重于这些政治经济问题。下一个主要部分将新冠肺炎经济危机置于早期经济危机的背景下;概述该流行病的经济影响;并指出,中国对“一带一路”债务国债务重新安排的双边而非多边方式,正在使发展中国家债务重新安排的更大项目复杂化。然后,下一节侧重于全球和国家两级渐进改革的方向,特别是减少发展中国家现在和将来的债务困境。这一结论将COVID-19危机添加到当今世界体系中非同寻常的怪异因素中。我们知道,全球债务问题比十年前严重得多。值得重申的是,截至2023年初,发展中国家的平均债务与GDP之比约为65%。5年前,这一比例为50%。展望到2028年的5年,这一比例可能达到75%至80%,在几个大国,这一比例可能高达100%。因此,在短短10年的时间里,这一比例可能会上升25%至30%。 这加剧了不发行硬通货但必须以硬通货偿还并面临汇率贬值的经济体的金融脆弱性,这些经济体的生产结构已从小农农业和工业转向(低技能)服务和商品。尽管自大流行爆发以来的三年多时间里出现了影响深远的中断,但令人沮丧的是,世界在为下一次大流行做准备方面取得的进展甚微。中国拒绝配合对COVID-19起源的调查,表明国家间建立大流行预警系统的合作出现了更广泛的破裂,并加深了人们的担忧,即中国将再次在下一次病毒爆发时向世界发出警告。但大流行风险和债务风险只是国际社会面临多重危机新时代的两个因素。它们面临的风险包括气候变化、劳动力老龄化、人工智能的不确定因素、中国经济急剧放缓,以及地缘政治经济紧张局势(尤其是中美之间),其他国家面临选边站队的压力,不同的集团正在形成。英国《金融时报》的爱德华•卢斯(Edward Luce)认为,“新冠肺炎的成本也可以用对全球心理的损害来衡量,包括一种外交上的长冠肺炎。”这个世界超级大国和它正在崛起的大国现在都在国内工作,并助长了对彼此的偏执。当我们回顾Covid时,这可能是其最大的成本”(Luce, 2023)。2023年3月,世界银行(2023)发布了一份名为《长期增长前景下降》的报告。在这篇文章的背景下,它的信息可以总结为,不仅发展中国家,而且整个世界都面临着“失去的十年”的真正前景。然而,在该报告发表后的几个月里,有证据表明,25个最大的发展中国家的增长超出了预期。他们的增长与中国的联系不那么紧密,他们的通货膨胀率中位数并不高于发达国家,这在四十年来从未发生过(Sharma, 2023)。这当然是“有趣”的时代。 中国采用严格的双边方式,拒绝参与这些国家的多边债务解决方案,尽管中国是IMF成员国。虽然中国的“一带一路”贷款主要是美元,但2021年超过90%的紧急贷款是人民币,这进一步推动了北京方面限制对美元依赖的雄心,并拉近了各国与中国的关系,因为除了购买中国的商品和服务外,人民币很难用于消费(Bradsher, 2023)。安娜
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Development and Change
Development and Change DEVELOPMENT STUDIES-
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
3.30%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Development and Change is essential reading for anyone interested in development studies and social change. It publishes articles from a wide range of authors, both well-established specialists and young scholars, and is an important resource for: - social science faculties and research institutions - international development agencies and NGOs - graduate teachers and researchers - all those with a serious interest in the dynamics of development, from reflective activists to analytical practitioners
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信