Balance of payments adjustment problems — the case of West Germany

Author(s):  
Otmar Issing
1974 ◽  
Vol 68 ◽  
pp. 46-64

We remarked in our last issue : ‘It is not often that a government finds itself confronted with the possibility of a simultaneous failure to achieve all four main policy objectives—of adequate economic growth, full employment, a satisfactory balance of payments and reasonably stable prices.’ In the context this applied specifically to the United Kingdom, but the possibility is becoming increasingly real for the greater part of Western Europe, with West Germany the most obvious exception, and even for Japan it is less remote than it might quite recently have seemed.


1989 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 543-584 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Reich

The United States faces a formidable and growing economic challenge from Japan. Over the last decade, the American state has characteristically responded to the loss of domestic market dominance in the manufacturing sector to foreign firms by invoking the principles of free and fair trade in order to delegitimate this foreign competition and legitimate the imposition of trade barriers designed to encourage the investment of multinational corporations (MNCs) in the United States. These tactics have largely succeeded in attracting investment and thus aided domestic employment and the balance of trade. The short-term benefits, however, have been achieved at long-term, unforeseen, undesirable economic and political costs in terms of both the balance of payments and state autonomy. Alternative state responses to the threat posed by Japanese MNCs, while consistent with principles of free trade, challenge the traditional liberal conception of the scope and domain of state behavior and provide more effective policies in achieving both short- and long-term objectives. This article draws on data relating to the treatment of subsidiaries of American automobile manufacturers by European governments with competing indigenous producers in specifying two variables critical to identifying policy alternatives: first, the degree of access granted by the state to foreign firms (limited or unlimited access) and, second, the type of support provided by the state to domestic firms (discriminatory or nondiscriminatory intervention). The analysis suggests that there are four possible policy combinations, which generally reflect the four different postwar state policies pursued by West Germany, France, Britain, and the United States. Of these four, the combination employed by West Germany has proved most effective in pursuing policies consistent with liberal trade principles while reconciling short-term employment and fiscal goals with the broader long-term objectives of sustaining state autonomy and balance-of-payments surpluses in the face of foreign competition. British policies, which have consistently proved the most ineffective, have sacrificed long-term objectives for short-term ones. As a result of structural changes during the 1970s, the American state's chosen policy combination was altered and now replicates the traditional British formula. The United States therefore risks comparable economic and political consequences.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Stephen G. Gross

This article explores the economic context behind Germany’s decision to impose sanctions on Russia in 2014 in response to the Ukraine crisis, through the lens of energy and natural gas. It does so by comparing 2014 with another moment in German-Russian relations when questions of energy, economics, sanctions, and transatlantic politics converged—the Yamal natural gas pipeline in 1982. Then, West Germany had little economic latitude to disrupt trade with Russia because of its high unemployment rate, its balance of payments problems, and the large investments major German corporations had made in Yamal. Consequently, Bonn broke with the United States over the question of sanctions. In 2014, by contrast, Germany’s strong economy, robust balance of payments, and the absence of a united business front opposing sanctions gave Berlin the space to pursue a non-economic agenda and support the United States in imposing sanctions. The article concludes that these cases illustrate how Germany should not be characterized as a “geo-economic power,” insofar as Berlin still has the space to prioritize goals such as the advancement of democracy and human rights over its need to promote exports and secure imports of raw materials.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-60
Author(s):  
Zbigniew Klimiuk

The 1950s in Germany, especially the period 1953–1958, were later recognised as the ‘golden years of the post-war period’. By the end of this period, most of the war damage had been removed and the economy was in a state of dynamic growth. In the period 1949–59, the average real GDP growth rate was about 7.4% with an average investment rate of 24.2% (in current prices). In the years (1950–53), a massive housing construction programme was carried out that was financed almost in half from public funds. Germany’s economic growth in 1950–60 mainly influenced by investment activities and the growth of exports. During this period, state expenditure did not play a major role in the growth of the West German economy (its share in national income steadily declined during the period in question). A the same time, the share of exports in national income was very high and showed a continuously increasing trend. A long-term growth of exports — affecting constantly the expansion of demand — became an important factor stimulating investment activity, which is the main lever of economic growth. At the same time, unusually strong export activity improved the balance of payments, which showed systematic surpluses. It should also be stressed that private consumption was not a factor driving economic prosperity in West Germany in this period. The share of consumption in Germany’s national income showed a declining trend in favour of investment.


1998 ◽  
Vol 138 (2) ◽  
pp. 376-376
Author(s):  
Schäfer ◽  
Krämer ◽  
Vieluf ◽  
Behrendt ◽  
Ring

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Katja Corcoran ◽  
Michael Häfner ◽  
Mathias Kauff ◽  
Stefan Stürmer

Abstract. In this article, we reflect on 50 years of the journal Social Psychology. We interviewed colleagues who have witnessed the history of the journal. Based on these interviews, we identified three crucial periods in Social Psychology’s history, that are (a) the early development and further professionalization of the journal, (b) the reunification of East and West Germany, and (c) the internationalization of the journal and its transformation from the Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie to Social Psychology. We end our reflection with a discussion of changes that occurred during these periods and their implication for the future of our field.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document