Speevr |

The Delta Variant Driven COVID Wave Should Ebb

som-Weekly-Commentary-aug-20-2021 … Become a member to read the rest of this article Username or E-mail Password Remember Me Forgot Password

20210820 AP Douglas A. Rediker

[Even if the Taliban could get money from the IMF…the process] would take, I think, months at the earliest, if at all. […] The U.S. still retains a lot of political heft in the global, political and economic systems to twist some arms. The Taliban are not going to be popular.

The COVID boom we could do without

Before Covid-19, the value of mergers and acquisitions in Australia hit its peak during the global financial crisis. More than $348 billion of deals were made in a single year as struggling companies were snapped up by their rivals.
The trend has shown no signs of declining since the pandemic set in, with the 2020 figure topping $372 billion. Correcting for inflation, the annual value of mergers and acquisitions each year in Australia is a whopping eight times bigger than it was back in 1990.
Should we be worried? Mergers and acquisitions have benefits and costs, and if the former are greater than the latter then they should be welcomed. But a growing body of research shows that their benefits, while large in theory, are not so big in practice. The costs, on the other hand, appear to be bigger and more persistent than ever.
Mergers and acquisitions have two main benefits. Bigger businesses benefit from economies of scale: their size and improved efficiencies mean they can produce more goods and services at a lower cost, boosting productivity. And bigger businesses can generate greater economies of scope, saving on costs a bit like a petrol station that also sells milk.
Mergers are an easy way for a business to gain these benefits by expanding into new markets, new locations and even new countries. They allow a business to expand from retail into wholesale, from wholesale into manufacturing, and from manufacturing into distribution and logistics. They can also be a way to save a failing business.
But mergers can create problems, and many of them relate to competition. When competing firms merge, we lose a competitor. This is not necessarily a problem if lots of other competitors exist or if new ones can enter the market quickly. But when a merger reduces competition, it causes all the things we are struggling with in Australia: high mark-ups, low wages growth, low investment and low innovation, all contributing to greater inequality.
Problems can arise even when a merger doesn’t involve competing firms. When mergers result in a business becoming vertically integrated, new competitors find it hard to compete with an incumbent that has its own manufacturing, wholesale, retail and distribution networks. When mergers allow businesses to sell bundled products or services, it becomes harder for customers to change from one supplier to another, reducing competition.
The most common argument in favour of mergers and acquisitions is a fallacious one: that Australia needs big businesses to compete internationally. Most of Australia’s economy isn’t “trade exposed,” and even the parts that are exposed to international competition don’t benefit from being allowed to become dominant — and often inefficient — in the Australian market.
The reason our athletes won so many medals in Tokyo isn’t that they were wrapped in cotton wool back home. They did well because they’ve spent many years competing fiercely against other Australians. The same is true for businesses. Allowing them to get big and lazy at home doesn’t make them more competitive overseas; indeed, it makes them less competitive. Competitiveness overseas first requires competitiveness at home.
The productivity benefits of mergers may also be overstated. Bruce Blonigen at the University of Oregon and Justin Pierce at the US Federal Reserve used detailed firm-level data to study the impact of mergers and acquisitions on productivity and market power across all US manufacturing industries. They found that mergers were associated with increases in average price mark-ups but did little to boost productivity.
The two economists also found little evidence of other claimed efficiency gains from mergers, such as reallocation of activity across plants and scale efficiencies in non-productive units of the firm.
Some studies question whether mergers provide much value to the acquiring company, too. Recent studies found that companies that make lots of small acquisitions tend to increase in value while big, one-off mega-deals tend to be riskier. Mergers might also be bad news for startups. The Economist reported that the FAANGs — Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix and Google — are surrounded by a “kill zone” in which companies are either acquired or quashed.
Mike Driscoll, a partner at investment firm Data Collective, says that technology conferences increasingly “send shock waves of fear through entrepreneurs… Venture capitalists attend to see which of their companies are going to get killed next.” This has made some venture capitalists more reluctant to invest in customer-focused startups.
So what, if anything, should we do about the Covid boom in mergers and acquisitions?
As a first step, we should be more cautious about mergers in industries where there are already too few competitors. More than half of Australia’s markets are concentrated — meaning the four biggest firms control a third of the market or more. Mergers in these industries should logically attract more scrutiny than mergers in less-concentrated industries. Imposing a public interest test on mergers in concentrated industries, having more post-merger reviews, and making more firm-level data available for public scrutiny would lead to better decision-making.
Such measures are important because mergers are hard, if not impossible, to reverse. It would be unwise to allow a one-off pandemic to result in long-term structural changes that weaken the competitiveness of Australia’s markets. This would worsen all the economic problems we have been struggling with for decades.
Covid-19 will have many long-term consequences for Australia. Weakened competition shouldn’t be one of them. •

A proposal for long-term COVID-19 control

Introduction
Four successive waves of COVID-19 have buffeted the United States for the past year and a half. With each wave, we have bet on different measures to push us through: First, public health measures, then drugs and treatments, and now, with our fifth wave, we hold out hope for vaccine-led recovery. But from the outset, we have underestimated this virus and its ability to maneuver the public health battleground; it is escaping the best defenses we are able to muster and finding new avenues of attack.

In this paper, I propose a multimodal strategy for long-term COVID control, one that sets up multiple barriers of protection so that we are able to not only contain SARS-CoV-2 and eliminate COVID-19 as a major life-threatening disease, but also return to a new social and economic life. The strategy uses the best of what we have on hand today—a rapidly growing arsenal of vaccines and antiviral drugs and public health measures— with an eye towards future improvements and developments.
The most immediate priority should be supporting additional research on the molecular biology of SARS-CoV-2, of which we still know surprisingly little. This is particularly important since there is great likelihood that COVID-19 will become endemic. Unlike the viruses that cause smallpox or polio, SARS-CoV-2 has demonstrated an impressive ability to adapt and thrive in both humans and animals, including our much-loved pet, cats and dogs. Even if we can eliminate the disease from our own communities, it is unlikely we can do the same across the globe and for all our animal populations at the same time.

Figure of the week: Potential for youth and female employment in industries without smokestacks

Africa’s youth population continues to grow rapidly: In fact, the World Bank predicts that people under the age of 25 are set to comprise 50 percent of the population of sub-Saharan Africa by 2050. Such growth has created now-urgent demand for employment that must be met for Africa to reduce poverty. To examine new strategies for job creation for the region’s youth, the Brookings Africa Growth Initiative (AGI) and its partner think tanks on the continent have been conducting research on how to support promising industries to grow and absorb low-skilled labor.

While export-led manufacturing has historically led to job creation, factors like technological progress and the evolving global marketplace have meant that Africa has not been able to capitalize on the gains from manufacturing that other developing regions have. In response, AGI researchers have identified other sectors, termed “industries without smokestacks” (IWOSS), that share characteristics with traditional manufacturing and thus might play a similar role in driving economic growth and job creation. In short, IWOSS are sectors that are tradable, have high value added per worker relative to average economywide productivity, exhibit capacity for technological change and productivity growth, and show some evidence of scale or agglomeration economies. IWOSS include high-value agribusiness, horticulture, tourism, business services, ICT (information and communication technologies)-enabled services, transport, and logistics—all sectors that are growing at a faster pace and have higher labor productivity than non-IWOSS sectors like agriculture. Notably, different sectors of IWOSS can cater to Africa’s youth, whose education and skills vary widely, with tourism and horticulture largely relying on low-skilled labor while sectors like logistics and ICT require more training.
The case studies for Ghana, Kenya, Senegal, South Africa, and Uganda were published earlier this year, and the recent paper “Addressing youth unemployment in Africa through industries without smokestacks” synthesizes the major findings and trends from those case studies.

Related Content

Overall, the case studies predict that IWOSS will account for 60 percent or more of new jobs in Ghana, Rwanda, Senegal, and South Africa; however, the share is lower for countries like Kenya and Uganda, which are projected to rely heavily on traditional, “smokestacks” industries to 2035 (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Projected share of new jobs created by 2035 by sectoral grouping

Source: Coulibaly, B. and Page, J. Addressing youth unemployment in Africa through industries without smokestacks: A synthesis on prospects, constraints, and policies. (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 2021).
More opportunities for women
Notably, IWOSS industries also offer more employment opportunities for women: In fact, the case studies reveal that most IWOSS subsectors employ a greater share of women than other sectors of the economy. Within IWOSS, tourism employs the greatest share of women (56.7 percent), while horticulture and export crops follow second at 53.2 percent (Figure 2). Female employees in ICT comprise only 31.7 percent of the sector; according to the authors, this finding indicates a greater need for training in digital skills for young girls and women.
Figure 2. Share of female employment by IWOSS sector

Source: Coulibaly, B. and Page, J. Addressing youth unemployment in Africa through industries without smokestacks: A synthesis on prospects, constraints, and policies. (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 2021).
Policy recommendations
While the job creation potential of IWOSS relies on the fact that most roles do not require higher-level skills, a persistent lack of skills at all levels still holds their promise back. More specifically, the authors find that, for IWOSS firms to grow and create jobs, potential workers must demonstrate soft, digital, and intrapersonal skills, which can be taught through postsecondary education but require input from employers and businesses, as each sector has different demands for the skills required. Countries in the case studies have at least a moderate deficit in all six subcategories of skills: basic, problem-solving, resource management, social, systems, and technical. Notably, Ghana, Kenya, Senegal, South Africa, and Uganda have a substantial deficit in all six skills for agro-processing and tourism, and in horticulture have only a moderate gap in social skills but a severe gap in the rest of the skill subcategories (Figure 3).
Figure 3. Skill gap by skill category and sector

Note: See the full paper for an extensive definition of each skill category.Source: Coulibaly, B. and Page, J. Addressing youth unemployment in Africa through industries without smokestacks: A synthesis on prospects, constraints, and policies. (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 2021).
At the same time, the authors point out that gaps in necessary skills are not the only constraint IWOSS face, as poor infrastructure—like unreliable power supply and lack of or poorly maintained roads—pose major challenges for IWOSS development. Lack of competition as well as regulatory coordination issues that do not allow for customs and standards to be implemented also pose challenges. Since IWOSS face constraints similar to those of traditional manufacturing, the authors argue that policymakers are not required to choose between promoting IWOSS and manufacturing, thus enabling them to focus on forming multifaceted policies. Key takeaways of the report include the necessity of prioritizing investment in infrastructure (particularly gaps in the reliable supply of electricity), addressing the skills deficit through a demand-led approach between postsecondary education and businesses, and encouraging a competitive business environment. The individual case studies also provide country-specific recommendations for supporting the growth of IWOSS.

Analysis – Do not draw false comfort from the IPCC report

Any serious decision-maker may hope for the best, but plans for a most realistic outcomeThe IPCC report has some scenarios in which temperature rise is contained to below 2 0 CBut the politics of China, the US, India, and Russia make such outcomes unlikelyA rise of 3 or even 4 d… Become a member […]

BRAZIL: Bolsonaro’s theatrics forcing chaotic activism from allies and foes

President Jair Bolsonaro’s recent campaign against the highly acclaimed electronic voting system elicited reactions from top leaders in Congress and the judiciary. The president may have succeeded in diminishing the attention devoted to the Senate inquiry into the pandemic in the… Become a member to read the rest of this article

Comparing minds and machines: implications for financial stability

Bank of England Working Papers by Marcus Buckmann, Andy Haldane and Anne-Caroline Hüser