We must keep trade from falling off a cliff

Barry Eichengreen

(Originally published in the San Francisco Chronicle, Feb. 16, 2009.)

Americans may not realize it, but the biggest threat to economic stability is not falling home prices and retail spending but collapsing world trade. The value of global merchandise exports was down fully 45 percent in November 2008 from 12 months before. This is a terrifying number.

Nothing remotely comparable has ever happened before - not even in the Great Depression of the 1930s.

This is a body blow to an already staggering U.S. economy. U.S. exports in the fourth quarter of last year fell by more than 25 percent in constant dollars. California is being hit especially hard: outbound container traffic from the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles was down 30 percent in December 2008 from a year earlier.

It’s not surprising that when global growth slows, trade growth slows. But this trade implosion is unprecedented even for a major recession.

The explanation is the disruption to the financial system. Exporters need bank credit to transport their goods and insure them while in transit. And trade credit has dried up completely in the financial crisis. Banks desperate for liquidity are unwilling or unable to extend it to exporters.

The irony is that trade credit is virtually without risk; it is collateralized by the goods whose export it finances. But this also means that there is a solution.

The International Monetary Fund and World Bank could quickly establish a Global Export-Import Bank. They could float, say, $2 trillion of bonds making use of their AAA-credit rating and extend credit directly to exporters.

This is something they should have done yesterday.

Barry Eichengreen is Professor of Economics and Political Science at UC Berkeley.

How to Prevent Future Crises: Create a World Financial Organization

Barry Eichengreen

(originally published in Swiss Business Week, Nov. 24, 2008)

In the wake of the “Second Bretton Woods Conference,” expectations have fallen to earth. It should now be possible to discard overheated rhetoric about the end of Anglo-Saxon capitalism and get to work. The work in question should center on strengthening the financial system. The G20 summit on November 15th and even more the crisis that caused that summit to be convened remind us that purely national regulation is inadequate. The cross-border spillovers and negative externalities thrown off by subpar (one is tempted to say “subprime”) regulation are simply too great. At the same time there is no appetite for a global regulator, as President Bush and a series of “unnamed Treasury officials” reminded us in the run-up to November 15th. We will get a global regulator at about the same time we get a global army and a global police force.

Given that neither national nor supranational regulation is feasible, the challenge is to carve out something in between. This is where the intellectual challenge and interesting issues lie. What has been done along these lines to date – the Basel Committee of Banking Supervisors and the Financial Stability Forum – is not enough or we wouldn’t be in the current mess. Nor is it obvious that a College of Supervisors along the lines suggested by the members of the European Union will differ significantly from the status quo. The idea and its name will make the academics among us think of department meetings in our own colleges where every member of the faculty gets a say and at the end of which nothing much is decided. Read the rest of this entry »