© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
Tilman Altenburg
Governance and institutional design of industrial policy
OECD / European Commission Workshop:
„Competitiveness and New Industrial Policy“
Paris, 19 September, 2013
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
2
1. Industrial policy: What are the remaining controversies?
2. Governance and institutional design
3. Some lessons for latecomer development
4. Industrial policy challenges derived from a „green“ European agenda
5. Conclusions
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
3
1. Industrial policy:
What are the remaining controversies?
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
4
Starting point: Market failure justifies industrial policy …
– Coordination failure
– Dynamic scale economies & knowlege spillovers
– Information failure
– Environmental externalities
But also risks of government failure …
– Information: „Governments not better informed than markets“
– Rent-seeking: Self-interested governments, bureaucracies and industries
Question is not whether IP, but what institutional design in a particular context.
Industrial policy: Remaining controversies
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
5
Remaining dissent:
Primacy of politics (transform structure of economies on the basis of societal consensus) or economics (achieve Pareto optimality)?
Right balance between doing too little and intervening too much
Favouring sectors? Regions? Firm sizes?
„Latent comparative advantage“ (Lin) & short-term subsidies for ‚searchers‘ (Hausmann/Rodrik) widely accepted. But are long-term interventions justified to develop new activities with potential future knowledge spillovers? (defying comparative advantages, addressing systemic failures)
Industrial policy: Remaining controversies
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
6
Level of state interference in markets
Strict non-intervention
Market-enhancing policies
Non-targeted supply-side policies Targeted supply-side policies
Privatisation of public enterprises,Reduction and equalisation of remaining trade barriersLabor market deregulationSimplification of firm entry & exit
Anti-trust policiesProvision of business information systemsDemand-side subsidies for the development of service markets (e.g. vouchers) Trouble-shooting for investors
General export promotionIncentives for R&D, innovationEntrepreneurship developmentPromotion of resource-efficiency
Promotion of particular activities or technologies (e.g. leather industry; solar energy), clusters or value chains; dedicated labs, skills development centres
Experimental design, perfor-mance-based, private service providers, com-petitive bidding
Top-down selection; services delivered by public providers
Experimental design, perfor-mance-based, private service providers, com-petitive bidding
Top-down selection; services delivered by public providers
Source: own
Not whether IP or not ... But a continuum of potential interventions
Industrial policy: Remaining controversies
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
7
2. Governance and
institutional design
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
8
Three governance capabilities crucial:
1. Strategic capability
2. Political capability (to create or remove protection when needed while avoiding political capture)
3. Capability to deliver services effectively
Governance and institutional design
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
9
(1) Strategic capability
Vision matters ! Need to identify viable „corridors“ for inclusive and sustainable growth (specific technologies, value chain options ..)
• building on existing and gradually extending comparative advantages
• identifying the right pace for reform: providing the protection needed while allowing for technological learning
Governance and institutional design
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
10
– Tools to develop visions/ viable corridors: • Velasco/Hausmann/Rodrik analysis, „most binding constraints“
• Lin analyis of „latent comparative advantages“ …
• Value chain /subsector analysis
• Technology foresight
• Encourage search for new business models, diversity
• Private sector dialogue …
– Lead agency important !!!
– Ensure coherence of micro, meso, and macro policies
Governance and institutional design
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
11
(2) Political capability
…to build societal consensus on a „national project of productive transformation“
… to create / remove protection when needed while avoiding political capture
– Collaborate closely with firms => good understanding of industries, market options & appropriate support
– … without being captured by interest groups („embedded autonomy“)• Tenders, • Build industry groups including multiple interest groups• Strong checks and balances !
Governance and institutional design
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
12
(3) Implementation capability
… to translate strategies into efficient and effective action.
– Select appropriate forms of governance „between markets and hierarchies“
– Use market-based services whenever possible (BDS)
– Make incentive systems of public service providers business-like and customer-oriented
– Encourage competition among service providers
– Separate policy formulation, funding, implementation, M&E
– Clearly define timelines and exit options
Governance and institutional design
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
13
(3) Implementation capability
– Make co-financing by beneficiaries compulsory …
– Feed evaluation results back into next round of planning
In sum: organise IP as an experimental and systematic learning process !!!
Governance and institutional design
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
14
3. Some lessons for latecomer
development
Lessons for latecomer development
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
15
Key challenges and how to cope
1. Overcome fragmentation of production systems
2. Upgrading in Global Value Chains
3. Exploit new channels for technological learning
Lessons for latecomer development
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
16
(1) Fragmented production systems – Few links between modern large-scale enterprises and micro/SMEs
– FDI delinked from national business community
– Sometimes powerful SOE /industry groups with special political connections
SOE
MSME
FDI
Larger national
firms
Lessons for latecomer development
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
17
Highly uneven access to policy
… likely to produce anti-poor outcomes
Political decision-makers
Medium & large firms
Business Associations
SOE, MNE, politically connected firms
MSME
Lessons for latecomer development
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
18
Integration of „fragments“ rarely recognised in strategies
Separation of „industrial policy“ from „SME policy“ … may lead to inefficient resource allocation => lower
productivity
… deepens fragmentation, reduces synergies & learning opportunities => lower productivity
Technology transfer & linkage programmes !!!
Lessons for latecomer development
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
19
(2) Upgrading in Global Value Chains
• Integration in GVC provides opportunities.
• Usually continuum of ugrading options:
Lessons for latecomer development
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
20
Lessons for latecomer development
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
21
(2) Upgrading in Global Value Chains
• … but upgrading is no automatism
• Strategic attraction of „developmental firms“
• Nudging lead firms and supporting suppliers: Linkage policies (Singapore, Penang, Ireland)
• Supporting meso-institutions
• „Walk on two legs“: domestic and global markets offer complementary learning opportunities
Lessons for latecomer development
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
22
(2) Upgrading in Global Value Chains
• Assess pros and cons from a dynamic perspective
• E.g. retail liberalization:
Pro: • additional investment• higher productivity• better quality, more
diverse products• Less loss in supply chain
Con:• Concentration in retailing,
crowding out of small stores
• Concentraton in supply chain, crowding out of small producers
=> Sequencing, according to initial conditions and learning rate
Lessons for latecomer development
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
23
(3) New forms of technological learning
• Recently, new forms of technology appropriation
– Attract & exploit R&D outsourcing
– Return migration
– Mergers & acquisistions
Lessons for latecomer development
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
24
4. Challenges derived from a „green“ European agenda
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
EU industrial development increasingly driven by environmental (low carbon) concerns
Even if neighbouring regions (e.g. Western Balkans, Turkey) may have other immediate priorities, accession processes & value chain partnerships with Europe will bring this agenda in.
Green Industrial Policy is different from ‘business as usual’ industrial policy, because of four challenges:
25
Challenges derived from green EU agenda
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
26
1. Mixed objectives=> balance economic and environmental targets
2. Unprecedented urgency of low carbon transformation => rapid replacement of carbon-intensive technologies
3. Additional and more severe market failure => environmental externalities plus coordination failures in managing systemic changes plus capital market failures
Þ Each one calls for specific policy responses
Þ Green transformation requires urgent, radical and systemic structural change in the economies
Challenges derived from green EU agenda
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
27
Competitive-ness/ jobs
Local air pollution
Energy security
Mitigation(1) Mixed objectives can have win-wins and trade-offs
Country A
Country B
Challenges derived from green EU agenda
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
28
Explicit discussion of synergies and trade-offs
Agreement on priorities
Rethinking growth model; consumption patterns; accounting practices
Primacy of politics, not markets
Challenges derived from green EU agenda
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
29
(2) Urgency, need to accelerate transformation: No time to wait for the market!
=> Much stronger role for governments than in ‚business as usual‘ IIP:
1. Proactively disrupt less sustainable incumbent technologies
2. Accelerate deployment of sustainable alternatives
Challenges derived from green EU agenda
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
30
(3) Today’s markets fail to provide the incentives for radical, systemic and fast transformation:
– The obvious: environmental externalities
– ... but other market failures also much more severe when radical systemic changes are needed: coordination / information, capital market failure
Challenges derived from green EU agenda
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
Environmental externalities: Cap and trade systems, charges and taxes important:
– tax bad things (environmental degradation) and allow to reduce e.g. statutory pension contributions (=> lower labor costs, more employment)
– Mostly neutral, market drives choice of technology
... but as prone to rent-seeking as other policies: allocation of quota, prices, charges subject to lobbying ...
... and insufficient to overcome all market failures (short-term behaviour, non-appropriability issues ...)
31
Challenges derived from green EU agenda
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
32
Coordination failure
Systemic change presupposes massive simultaneous investments. (E.g. electromobility: battery technology R&D, charging infrastructure, smart grids, new standards)
Þ Impossible without huge coordination effort by governments
Challenges derived from green EU agenda
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
6
4
2
0
-2
-4
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Differential costs of electricity: Renewable/fossil in Germany
Diff
eren
tial c
osts
, bi
llion
EU
R /
aCapital market failure
… mobilise enormous upfront investments … against environmental externalities, uncertainty, non-appropriability …
Challenges derived from green EU agenda
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
„Business-as-usual“ IP economic objectives
incremental development of latent comparative advantage
supports innovation, leaves diffusion to markets
takes demand as given
mainly builds on existing markets
mainly lets market select technologies …
34
Green IP complex system of objectives
partly radical path disruption
also subsidizes technology diffusion
tries to shape demand
creates markets for environmental goods
pushes for green solutions needed in future …
Don´t underestimate risks – but not doing enough is the largest one!
Challenges derived from green EU agenda
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
35
5. Conclusions
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
Conclusions
All countries pursue Industrial Policy to shape structural change in desirable ways
There are risks of misallocation and political capture
Question not why but how:
Design principles: Organise as a learning process !!
Strategic capability/ vision matters: National project of transformation !
Industrial latecomers face specific challenges => cannot simply „copy“ strategies
The green agenda will increasinly define rules of the game, even for latecomers … and it requires different approaches
36
© 2013 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
37
Thank you for your attention !
Top Related