The Mayekawa Lecture: Wall of Worries: Reflections on the Secular Stagnation Debate
Barry Eichengreen
Abstract
Open-access reader
Barry Eichengreen
Abstract
Open-access reader
This paper offers some reflections on the debate over secular stagnation. It expresses doubts about explanations for the secular decline in real interest rates and economic growth rates that emphasize the possibility of a global savings glut attributable to the rapid growth of emerging markets and increases in income inequality in the advanced economies. It invokes historical evidence to question whether the commercial potential of new advances in technology have been exhausted. The most convincing explanation for the observed excess of desired saving over desired investment and corresponding low level of real interest rates, it concludes, is probably a sharp, ongoing fall in the relative price of investment goods since the middle of the 20th century. Whether this decline will continue is uncertain. The bottom line is that the case for secular stagnation is at best unproven.
OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This paper offers some reflections on the debate over secular stagnation. It expresses doubts about explanations for the secular decline in real interest rates and economic growth rates that emphasize the possibility of a global savings glut attributable to the rapid growth of emerging markets and increases in income inequality in the advanced economies. It invokes historical evidence to question whether the commercial potential of new advances in technology have been exhausted. The most convincing explanation for the observed excess of desired saving over desired investment and corresponding low level of real interest rates, it concludes, is probably a sharp, ongoing fall in the relative price of investment goods since the middle of the 20th century. Whether this decline will continue is uncertain. The bottom line is that the case for secular stagnation is at best unproven.
Key concepts: Economic stagnation, Economics, Investment (military), Keynesian economics, Relative price, Inequality, Secular variation, Interest rate