European Economy - An Overview

           Today while I was browsing over the net on European Economy; I found a document titled “European Economic Forecast”. This report gives us a detailed study about status of European economy and International Environment. I also browsed some other materials where I found some information on EU and Euro Economy. The GDP growth rate have been forecasted to 1.7% and 2% for 2011 and 2012 respectively within EU and 1.5% and 1.8% for 2011 and 2012 in Euro Area.

       

          Inflation is projected to average 2% in the EU this year and next, easing to around 1.75% in 2012. For the euro area, a rate of 1.75% is expected in both 2011 and 2012. In forecast a modest improvement is expected with employment growth of almost 0.50% and around 0.75% is in 2011 and 2012, respectively. The unemployment rate is projected to gradually fall, from some 9.50% this year to about 9% by 2012.

         It is expected that (EU as a whole) a deficit of slightly above 5% of GDP in 2011 and 1 percentage point in 2012 as the recovery gains ground.

Is Europe Following India's Footstep?

The term "Flagship" normally denotes a lead ship.  The term has originated from the custom of the commanding officer in Naval who have right to fly a distinguished flag. The term Flagship scheme means the schemes which drive the economy towards faster growth. India is the first country to have flagship schemes. In India, (whoever follows the budget will know that) we have 8 flagship schemes. They are 1. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) 2. Mid-Day Meal (MDM) 3. National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) 4. Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS) 5. National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) 6. Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) 7. National Rural Drinking Water programme(NRDWP) 8. Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC).

Now, the Europe has announced an initiative called “Europe 2020 flagship initiative”. They have seven flagship initiatives and they are:

1. Innovation Union: to improve framework conditions and access to finance for research and innovation so as to ensure that innovative ideas can be turned into products and services that create growth and jobs.

2. Youth on the move: to enhance the performance of education systems and to facilitate the entry of young people to the labour market.

3. A digital agenda for Europe: to speed up the roll-out of high-speed internet and reap the benefits of a digital single market for households and firms.

4. Resource efficient Europe: to help decouple economic growth from the use of resources, support the shift towards a low carbon economy, increase the use of renewable energy sources, modernise our transport sector and promote energy efficiency.

5. An industrial policy for the globalisation era: to improve the business environment, notably for SMEs, and to support the development of a strong and sustainable industrial base able to compete globally.

6. An agenda for new skills and jobs: to modernise labour markets and empower people by developing their of skills throughout the lifecycle with a view to increase labour participation and better match labour supply and demand, including through labour mobility.

7. European platform against poverty: to ensure social and territorial cohesion such that the benefits of growth and jobs are widely shared and people experiencing poverty and social exclusion are enabled to live in dignity and take an active part in society. (Source: Europe Commission website)

These seven flagship initiatives will commit both the EU and the Member States. In order to achieve the goals of Seven Flagship Initiatives within the stipulated timeframe i.e. 2020, the Europe Union and Member countries need stronger governance and also need to strengthen the coordination within economic and monetary union. No doubt, Europe is following India’s footstep on flagship schemes/ initiative. But, the success of their Flagship initiative mostly depends on the effectiveness of the governance and coordination within the union.

Should World be Open to do Business with China?

Yesterday, I have read an article from Economist titled "China buys up the world - And the world should stay open for business" Here are few excerpts from it "Chinese buyers—mostly opaque, often run by the Communist Party and sometimes driven by politics as well as profit—have accounted for a tenth of cross-border deals by value this year, bidding for everything from American gas and Brazilian electricity grids to a Swedish car company, Volvo"


The article says that there is opposition for this trend; it states that "The notion that capitalists should allow communists to buy their companies is, some argue, taking economic liberalism to an absurd extreme. But that is just what they should do, for the spread of Chinese capital should bring benefits to its recipients, and the world as a whole."


The article also talks about the rise of mercantalist, it states that "

The rich world has tolerated the rise of mercantilist economies before: think of South Korea’s state-led development or Singapore’s state-controlled firms, which are active acquirers abroad. Yet China is different. It is already the world’s second-biggest economy, and in time is likely to overtake America. Its firms are giants that until now have been inward-looking but are starting to use their vast resources abroad."

It also talks about the investment made by the chinese firms "

Chinese firms own just 6% of global investment in international business. Historically, top dogs have had a far bigger share than that. Both Britain and America peaked with a share of about 50%, in 1914 and 1967 respectively. China’s natural rise could be turbocharged by its vast pool of savings. Today this is largely invested in rich countries’ government bonds; tomorrow it could be used to buy companies and protect China against rich countries’ devaluations and possible defaults. "

The article questions about the domination of china over global capitalism, it further states that "Chinese firms are going global for the usual reasons: to acquire raw materials, get technical know-how and gain access to foreign markets. But they are under the guidance of a state that many countries consider a strategic competitor, not an ally................." 

"The idea that an opaque government might come to dominate global capitalism is unappealing. Resources would be allocated by officials, not the market. Politics, not profit, might drive decisions. Such concerns are being voiced with increasing fervour. Australia and Canada, once open markets for takeovers, are creating hurdles for China’s state-backed firms, particularly in natural resources, and it is easy to see other countries becoming less welcoming too."

The article further states that "That would be a Mistake. China is miles away from posing this kind of threat: most of its firms are only just finding their feet abroad. Even in natural resources, where it has been most active in dealmaking, it is not close to controlling enough supply to rig the market for most commodities."

"Nor is China’s system as monolithic as foreigners often assume. State companies compete at home and their decision-making is consensual rather than dictatorial. When abroad they may have mixed motives, and some sectors—defence and strategic infrastructure, for instance—are too sensitive to allow them in. But such areas are relatively few."


The article takes a stance that "China’s advance may bring benefits beyond the narrowly commercial. As it invests in the global economy, so its interests will become increasingly aligned with the rest of the world’s; and as that happens its enthusiasm for international co-operation may grow. To reject China’s advances would thus be a disservice to future generations, as well as a deeply pessimistic statement about capitalism’s confidence in itself."


I felt this a worth article to read; so I thought of sharing it here.