Japan tries fiscal stimulus (again)

Japan's latest attempt at fiscal stimulus is heavy on infrastructure spending and disaster preparedness, and includes $117 billion in central government spending, Harris writes.

Shizuo Kambayashi/AP/File
Japan's new Finance and Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso speaks at a press conference at the prime minister's official residence in Tokyo in this December 2012 file photo. The Japanese cabinet claims their latest fiscal stimulus package will boost real GDP by 2 percent and create 600,000 new jobs, Harris writes.

Last week Japan announced a massive stimulus package designed to jumpstart its slumping economy, which is in the midst of its fifth recession in 15 years. The stimulus initiative, heavy on infrastructure spending and disaster preparedness, includes $117 billion in central government spending. Add in local government and private-sector support and spending could top $200 billion.  It’s a smart move if implemented quickly and effectively.

The Japanese cabinet claims the package will boost real GDP by 2 percent and create 600,000 new jobs; this sizable increase may be an understatement. In Japan’s $5.87 trillion economy, a $200 billion stimulus package could raise the short-run level of GDP by around 3 percent, assuming a dollar-for-dollar relationship between government spending and economic growth. (Government investment raises GDP when the outlay is made. Subsequent economic effects depend on the productivity of the investment—which can raise its net impact—and the effect on taxes and interest rates—which can reduce the net benefits.)

Moreover, research shows that when interest rates are at or near zero as is the case in Japan, the ability of government spending to stimulate economic growth is particularly acute. One economist estimated that each government dollar spent when interest rates are zero leads to over $3 in economic growth. If this is right, Japan’s stimulus will be a remarkable shot in the arm for a struggling economy. 

There are, of course, large caveats to the above statement. Foremost is the need for productive public investments that leverage private sector activity—for example, helping to rebuild the regions affected by the 2011 tsunami. Japan’s jawdroppingly high national debt—the IMF projects Japan’s gross public debt to reach 240 percent of GDP in 2013—is in part due to wasteful public works projects undertaken over a decade ago. (Japan made several mistakes during its “lost decade,” including jacking up its consumption tax in the midst of a recovery and overinvesting in unproductive public works projects.)

Also, there is a big difference between announcing a stimulus package and implementing one. Japan learned this lesson in the 1990’s, when it announced large stimulus programs but never followed through.  Lastly, it’s vital that the programs quickly release funds to the economy; a slow drip of stimulus payments won’t help.

Japan’s move has two important implications for the U.S. For starters, recovery in Japan would likely boost growth here at home: the U.S. exported over $100 billion to Japan last year and would benefit from stronger demand. One recent IMF study found that Japan’s fiscal stimulus during the U.S. financial crisis—estimated at 1.8 percent of GDP over two years—boosted U.S. GDP by a small amount in 2010. The effect on the U.S. economy could be larger if Japan’s latest stimulus package exceeds $200 billion.

Perhaps more importantly, success in Japan might bring the word “stimulus” out of our nation’s collective doghouse. The tepid economic recovery in the U.S., combined with desperately needed relief for regions affected by Hurricane Sandy, begs for higher infrastructure and disaster relief spending. These conditions, combined with near-zero interest rates, make the U.S. economy an ideal candidate for temporary infrastructure spending of its own.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Japan tries fiscal stimulus (again)
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today