Savings and the Budget

The fall in the personal sector savings ratio to a record low last year has been a major factor behind the rapid growth of domestic demand in the past two years and the associated deterioration in the current account. It is also a major uncertainty in the Chancellor's Budget judgement. Existing econometric relationships for the consumption function have failed to predict the fall in personal savings over the past few years. Possible explanations include statistical error, the effects of financial deregulation, the housing boom, expectations of higher growth in incomes, and demographic influences. In this Viewpoint, we report on a new consumption function that successfully explains the decline in savings. It provides evidence of a major demographic influence resulting from the decline in the proportion of the population in the 45–64 age cohort, the main savers in society. Subsidiary effects arise from the boom in house prices, and statistical mis-measurement. The equation predicts an appreciable revival of savings over the next few years as the 45–64 age cohort grows again. These shifts in demographic structure reflect the after-effects of the Second World War. This new evidence suggests that the Chancellor has done quite enough to ensure a slowdown in consumption, and that he would be ill-advised to heed calls for special measures to boost savings. By contrast, well conceived tax changes that remove microeconomic distortions in the tax system (perhaps moving in the direction of an expenditure tax) would improve the tax structure, and may well increase the scope for tax cuts in future budgets. Our new consumption function also lends weight to the Chancellor's argument that the current account deficit is not a source of concern, insofar as it arises from a shift in savings associated with demographic changes that will be reversed in due course.     

ENDANGERED SPECIES CONSERVATION ON PRIVATE LAND

This paper analyzes the effect of alternative institutional arrangements on the conservation of endangered species and economic activity on private land. Because a landowner does not capture the full value of species conservation, her preferences on land use will not coincide with social preferences. Under current law, the landowner has incentives to invest in lowering conservation value and to deny access to regulators in order to prevent collection of information. Paying compensation corrects many of these perverse incentives. An alternative approach is to limit the ability of landowners to affect the regulatory outcome. Whether it is better to entice landowners to make socially efficient decisions by paying compensation or to limit the ability of landowners to affect outcomes through changes in the regulatory regime depends on both practical implementation difficulties and distributive justice considerations.     

Focus: Supply-Side Improvements in UK Exporting of Manufactures

The present difficulties with the UK current account deficit have breathed new life into longstanding doubts in some quarters about the fundamental state of UK manufacturing, despite the supply side reforms of the last ten years and the large increases in labour productivity. The deterioration in trade in manufactured goods from a small surplus of £2bn in 1982 to a deficit of £21bn in 1988, is taken to be the most stark illustration of this deep structural malaise.     

Control Theory and Macroeconomic Policy

This Briefing Paper examines the contribution that control theory can make to our understanding of macroeconomic policy. Control theory is an area of study, orginally developed in engineering, which has since been applied to a very wide range of problems not only in engineering but also in biology. ecology, physiology, space exploration and economics. The kinds of questions in economics which conrrol theory could help us to answer include: what objectives should the government be pursuing, infation or unemployment or both, and by what means? what instruments should be used and in what combinations? should the government adopt targets for the money supply or the exchange rate, or concentrate on unemployment and the balance of payments?     

Introducing the supply side into the LBS Model

This Briefing Paper describes a new version of the London Business School model, which incorporates our most recent research on the supply side. The changes reflect the desire to improve the specification of the supply-side of the model, and to capture the effects of taxes on the incentives to save, invest and to work, while still retaining the basic features of the income-expenditure framework. The main features of the new model are: - Gross domestic product is determined as the sum of the outputs of five sectors. Previously GDP was determined by the demand side as the sum of the expenditure components. - Domestic demand for the output of the private sector depends on domestic absorption and on the price of this output relative to import prices. Overseas demand for exports depends on world economic activity and on the price of exports relative to the world price of exports. - Supply depends on the capital stock, real unit labour costs and real raw material prices. In the short run, input prices are allowed to affect the mix between goods which are exported and those which are supplied to the domestic market. In the long run, however, the mix depends only on the price of exports relative to the price of domestically supplied goods (i.e., relative profitability). - In the short run, disequilibrium in the goods market is reflected in adjustments to prices, inventories and the external balance. - Since gross domestic product is determined by summing the output of each sector, output decisions are reconciled with expenditure decisions by making imports the difference between final expenditure and aggregate supply. - In the long run, increases in government expenditure crowd out private expenditure, but the effect takes several years to come through. - A cut in corporation taxes which is not financed by higher taxes elsewhere boosts the supply side by raising investment and the capital stock, but not by enough to raise revenues sufficiently to pay for the tax cut. Private sector saving increases but not by enough to fund higher public sector borrowing, so the current account goes into deficit. - In the short run, both supply and demand factors influence economic activity; in the long run, the path of the economy depends only on population growth, capital accumulation and technical progress.     

The Take‐Up of Multiple Means‐Tested Benefits by British Pensioners: Evidence from the Family Resources Survey

Non‐take‐up of means‐tested benefits among pensioners is of long‐standing concern. It has assumed increased importance from October 2003 with the introduction of the new means‐tested pension credit to which about half of pensioners are expected to be entitled. We use Family Resources Survey data from April 1997 to March 2000 to investigate patterns of pensioner take‐up of income support (IS) (subsequently renamed the minimum income guarantee and now subsumed in pension credit), housing benefit (HB) and council tax benefit (CTB). Although 36 per cent of pensioners in our sample failed to claim their entitlements to at least one of these benefits, only 16 per cent failed to claim amounts worth more than 10 per cent of their disposable income. Generally, take‐up is high where entitlement is high. But there are exceptions which may reflect the claims process and/or a greater degree of social stigma associated with IS than with HB or CTB.     

Briefing Paper

The conventional post-war wisdom was that unemployment was a consequence of inadequate economic growth, and economic growth was to be secured by macro-economic policy. Inflation, by contrast, was increasingly seen as a matter to be dealt with by microeconomic policy - the panoply of controls and subsidies associated with the era of incomes policy … But the proper role of each is precisely the opposite of that assigned to it by the conventional post-war wisdom. It is the conquest of inflation, and not the pursuit of growth and employment, which is or should be the objective of macro-economic policy. And it is the creation of conditions conducive to growth and employment… which is or should be the objective of micro-economic policy.—Nigel Lawson, Fifth Mais Lecture, 1984.