This article is about the economic phenomenon. For the disease affecting elm trees, see Dutch elm disease.
In economics, Dutch disease is the apparent causal relationship between the increase in the economic development of a specific sector (for example natural resources) and a decline in other sectors (like the manufacturing sector or agriculture).
The presumed mechanism is that while revenues increase in a growing sector (or inflows of foreign aid), the given economy's currency becomes stronger ("appreciates") compared to foreign currencies (manifested in the exchange rate). This results in the country's other exports becoming more expensive for other countries to buy, while imports become cheaper, altogether rendering those sectors less competitive.
While it most often refers to natural resource discovery, it can also refer to "any development that results in a large inflow of foreign currency, including a sharp surge in natural resource prices, foreign assistance, and foreign direct investment".[2]
Model
Natural gas concessions in the Netherlands (June 2008) accounted for more than 25% of all natural gas reserves in the European Union
The classic economic model describing Dutch disease was developed by the economists W. Max Corden and J. Peter Neary in 1982. In the model, there is a non-tradable sector (which includes services) and two tradable sectors: the booming sector, and the lagging (or non-booming) tradable sector. The booming sector is usually the extraction of natural resources such as oil, natural gas, gold, copper, diamonds or bauxite, or the production of crops, such as coffee or cocoa. The lagging sector is usually manufacturing or agriculture.
In the "resource movement effect", the resource boom increases demand for labor, which causes production to shift toward the booming sector, away from the lagging sector. This shift in labor from the lagging sector to the booming sector is called direct deindustrialization. However, this effect can be negligible, since the hydrocarbon and mineral sectors tend to employ few people.[3]
The "spending effect" occurs as a result of the extra revenue brought in by the resource boom. It increases demand for labor in the non-tradable sector (services), at the expense of the lagging sector. This shift from the lagging sector to the non-tradable sector is called indirect deindustrialization.[3] The increased demand for non-traded goods increases their price. However, prices in the traded good sector are set internationally, so they cannot change. This amounts to an increase in the real exchange rate.[4]
Simple trade models suggest that a country should specialize in industries in which it has a comparative advantage; thus a country rich in some natural resources would be better off specializing in the extraction of those natural resources.
However, other theories suggest that this can be detrimental, for example when the natural resources deplete. Also, prices may decrease and competitive manufacturing cannot return as quickly as it left. This may happen because technological growth is smaller in the booming sector and the non-tradable sector than the non-booming tradable sector.[5] Because that economy had smaller technological growth than did other countries, its comparative advantage in non-booming tradable goods will have shrunk, thus leading firms not to invest in the tradables sector.[6]
Also, volatility in the price of natural resources, and thus the real exchange rate, limits investment by private firms, because firms will not invest if they are not sure what the future economic conditions will be.[7] Commodity exports such as raw materials drive up the value of the currency. This is what leads to the lack of competition in the other sectors of the economy. The extraction of natural resources is also extremely capital intensive, resulting in few new jobs being created.[8]
Minimization
There are three basic ways to reduce the threat of Dutch disease: (1) slowing the appreciation of the real exchange rate, (2) boosting the competitiveness of the adversely affected sectors, and (3) demographic adaptation. One approach is to withhold the boom revenues, that is, not to bring all the revenues into the country all at once, and to save some of the revenues abroad in special funds and bring them in slowly. In developing countries, this can be politically difficult as there is often pressure to spend the boom revenues immediately to alleviate poverty, but this ignores broader macroeconomic implications.
Another strategy for avoiding real exchange rate appreciation is to increase saving in the economy in order to reduce large capital inflows which may appreciate the real exchange rate. This can be done if the country runs a budget surplus. A country can encourage individuals and firms to save more by reducing income and profit taxes. By increasing saving, a country can reduce the need for loans to finance government deficits and foreign direct investment.
Investments in education and infrastructure can increase the competitiveness of the lagging manufacturing or agriculture sector. Another approach is to protect the lagging sector by increasing subsidies or tariffs. However, this could worsen the effects of Dutch disease, as large inflows of foreign capital are usually provided by the export sector and bought up by the import sector. Imposing tariffs on imported goods will artificially reduce that sector's demand for foreign currency, leading to further appreciation of the real exchange rate.[10]
Diagnosis
It is usually difficult to be certain that a country has Dutch disease because it is difficult to prove the relationship between an increase in natural resource revenues, the real-exchange rate, and a decline in the lagging sector. An appreciation in the real exchange rate could be caused by other things such as productivity increases in the Balassa-Samuelson effect, changes in the terms of trade and large capital inflows.[11] Often these capital inflows are caused by foreign direct investment or to finance a country's debt. However, evidence does exist suggesting that unexpected and very large oil and gas discoveries do cause the appreciation of the real exchange rate and the decline of the lagging sector across affected countries on average.[12]
Examples
Gold and other wealth imported to Spain and Portugal during the 16th century from the Americas.[13][14]
Analysts have argued that the United Kingdom's increasing reliance on the financial sector since the 'Big Bang' in 1986 prevented manufacturing growth.[18][19][20] A similar argument has been made regarding London's booming property market.[21] Concentrated almost exclusively on the City of London, this financial sector growth has exacerbated regional economic differences such as the North–South divide despite the North's historically strong industrial and manufacturing base. Paul Krugman (among others) has written about the effect of a strong financial sector on UK manufacturing and a potential readjustment following Brexit, should the financial sector reduce its reliance on London.[22][23][24]
Nigeria and other post-colonial African states in the 1990s.[25]
Venezuelan oil for certain periods throughout its history. A notable case occurred during the first presidency of Carlos Andrés Pérez when he established Venezuela as a rentier state.[26]
Post-disaster booms accompanied by inflation following the provision of large amounts of relief and recovery assistance such as occurred in some places in Asia following the Asian tsunami in 2004.[27]
Canada's rising dollar due to foreign demand for natural resources, with the Athabasca oil sands becoming increasingly dominant, hampered its manufacturing sector from the early 2000s until the oil price crash in late 2014/early 2015.[28][29]
Nauru's heavy reliance on phosphate mining, combined with a lack of taxes and large government expenses, caused issues after the depletion of much of its reserves. The country came close to bankruptcy in 2000, and the unemployment rate rose to 90% in 2004. Nauru was for a time the world's richest country (GDP per capita), but has since fallen in ranking to 117th place (Worldbank, 2022).[40][41][42][43]
↑ Ebrahim-zadeh, Christine (March 2003). "Back to Basics – Dutch Disease: Too much wealth managed unwisely". Finance and Development, A quarterly magazine of the IMF. IMF. Archived from the original on 4 July 2008. Retrieved 17 June 2008. This syndrome has come to be known as "Dutch disease". Although the disease is generally associated with a natural resource discovery, it can occur from any development that results in a large inflow of foreign currency, including a sharp surge in natural resource prices, foreign assistance, and foreign direct investment. Economists have used the Dutch disease model to examine such episodes, including the impact of the flow of American treasures into sixteenth-century Spain and gold discoveries in Australia in the 1850s.
↑ Krugman, Paul (1987). "The Narrow Moving Band, the Dutch Disease, and the Competitive Consequences of Mrs. Thatcher". Journal of Development Economics. 27 (1–2): 50. doi:10.1016/0304-3878(87)90005-8.
↑ Karl, Terry Lynn (1997). The paradox of plenty: oil booms and petro-states. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN9780520918696. OCLC42855014.
↑ Armstrong, Angus (14 October 2016). "Pound in your pocket". National Institute of Economic and Social Research. Archived from the original on 1 July 2020. Retrieved 26 March 2017.
↑ "Our Continent, Our Future"Archived 16 April 2007 at the Wayback Machine , Mkandawire, T. and C. Soludo. "In most recent attempts to explain Africa's performance with growth and investment regressions, studies find that inaccessible location, poor port facilities, and the 'Dutch Disease' syndrome, caused by large natural-resource endowments, constitute serious impediments to investment and growth".
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.