Developing indicators to diagnose Dutch Disease

Inhaltsangabe:Introduction: The term Dutch Disease (abbreviated to DD throughout the paper), introduced in 1977, refers to the adverse effects on Dutch manufacturing of the natural gas discoveries of the 1960s. The crucial sub-period from 1974 to 1979 after the oil price shock in 1973 / 1974 was then marked by a consumption driven booming government sector in the context of a European stagnation, and though this process in itself did not bear a disease character, the strong real appreciation due to an overvaluation of the Dutch Guilder and an inflexible labour market were at least the clearest possible signs of a disease. It is actually doubted that the DD is Dutch, but the existence of the DD as a general phenomenon is widely accepted in the literature. The fascination of the DD arises from its paradoxical nature that something intuitively good develops a dark side. There is a good side of every boom, its initial impact is beneficial and amounts to Pareto-improvement for the economy as a whole. This implies a rise in real living standards due to higher levels of public and private consumption and higher levels of investment (and savings). Windfalls, the linked fiscal revenues, and easier domestic and foreign borrowing can finance core public goods. Especially regarding developing countries, windfalls principally allow breaking out of the poverty trap: poverty – lack of public finance – lack of public goods – lack of private investment – poverty. Approaching the dark side, a favourable shock like a discovery of oil is a mixed blessing to developing countries, and research does not show a clear outperformance of the oil nations as a whole. The DD can be formulated as a provoking dilemma: ‘Enjoy boom revenues to boost economic development while those revenues in fact turn out to be responsible for the economic stagnation through the deterioration of the tradeable sectors.” The provoking nature of the DD runs the risk of being misused in the media in the longing for exciting economical statements, and a healthy mistrust should always accompany an alleged DD even in the literature, as the real problem can lie somewhere else in the dynamic economy. For example, in many countries, the downward trend in the share of manufacturing in national output is dominated by other reasons than a favourable shock. In general, policy choices can exacerbate or mitigate the DD, so that there is a direct connection, but the majority of influences rather works [...]