Neste curso, você conhecerá os princípios fundamentais da macroeconomia geralmente ensinados em cursos trimestrais ou semestrais para alunos de graduação ou MBA. E, talvez mais importante ainda, você também aprenderá a aplicar esses princípios a uma grande variedade de situações, tanto de sua vida particular quanto profissional. Assim, o Poder da Macroeconomia vai ajudá-lo a ser bem-sucedido em um ambiente globalizado e cada vez mais competitivo. This is a translated version. To join the original English version, please visit this page https://www.coursera.org/learn/principles-of-macroeconomics
"Por que alguns países prosperam", o ciclo da pobreza e nove políticas para promover o crescimento
Loading...
来自 University of California, Irvine 的课程
宏观经济学的力量：真实世界中的经济学原理（葡萄牙语）
184 个评分
从本节课中
A economia dos países em desenvolvimento
与讲师见面
Dr. Peter NavarroProfessor
Paul Merage School of Business
[MUSIC]
Having discussed the four major elements of
growth and development, lets now come to better
understand why some developing countries like Chili,
Costa Rica and the Philippines enjoy relative prosperity.
While others like Chad, Senegal and Gabon stagnate.
Basic problem is the vicious circle of poverty that
some countries fall prey to, as illustrated in this figure.
The center of this circle is rapid population growth.
This leads to low per capital income that leads to both
a low level of savings and a low level of aggregate demand.
This in turn leads to low levels
of investment in both physical and human capital.
The result is low productivity and low per capital income and the circle continues.
Other elements of poverty are likewise
reinforcing because poverty is accompanied by
low levels of education, literacy and skill.
These in turn prevent the adoption of new and improved technologies.
Over coming the barriers of poverty often
requires a concerted effort on many fronts.
And some development economist recommend a big
push forward to break the vicious circle.
If a country is fortunate,
simultaneous steps to invest more improve health
and education, develop skills and curb population growth.
Can break the vicious cycle of poverty.
And stimulate a virtuous circle of rapid economic development.
But, which countries will be the fortunate ones and why?
Economists, historians and social scientists have
long been fascinated by these questions.
And the obvious differences in the pace of
economic growth among nations.
Some early theories stressed a hospitable climate noting that
all advanced countries lie in the earth's temperate zone.
Others have pointed to custom, culture or religion as a key factor.
Max Weber, for example, emphasized the Protestant
ethic as a driving force behind capitalism.
More recently, Mancur Olson has argued that nations
begin to decline when their decision structure becomes brittle
and interest groups or oligarchies prevent social and economic change.
No doubt, each of these theories has some validity for a particular time
and place but they do not hold
up as universal explanations of economic development.
Faber's theory leaves unexplained why the cradle of civilization appeared in
the near East and Greece while the later dominant
Europeans lived in caves, worshiped trolls and wore bear skins.
Where do we find the Protestant ethic in bustling Hong Kong?
How can we explain that a country like Japan with a rigid social
structure and powerful lobbies has become
one of the world's most productive economies?
The failure of these early theories to fully explain economic development
has spawned more modern views.
Here's just a sampling of the debate over what the best strategy is for a country to
break out of the vicious cycle of poverty
and begin to mobilize the factors of economic development.
Let's begin with the issue of relying upon an industrial or agricultural economy.
One of the most important choices the leaders of
a developing country can make is whether to pursue a
strategy of rapid industrialization to achieve growth as
opposed to simply expanding and improving their agricultural base.
In the past, such a choice was typically resolved in favor of industrialization as
developing countries sought to mimic the successes of the industrialized nations.
Today however, the lesson of decades of
attempt to accelerate industrialization at the expense of
agriculture has led many analysts to rethink the role of farming.
Here's the problem.
Industrialization is captial intensive.
It attracts workers into crowded cities and
it often produces high levels of unemployment.
On the other hand, raising productivity on farms typically requires
far less capital while providing productive employment for surplus labor.
Indeed, if Bangladesh
could increase the productivity of its farming by just 20%.
That advance would do more to release resources for the production of comforts.
Then we're trying to construct a domestic steel industry to displace imports.
The second major issue in development strategy is whether a
country is better off relying upon a state-run versus market-oriented economy.
The important elements of
a market oriented policy include, an outward orientation and trade policy.
Low tariffs and few quantitative trade restrictions, the
promotion of small business and the fostering of competition.
Moreover, markets work best in a stable macroeconomic environment.
One, in which taxes are predictable and inflation is low.
However, the problem
here is that the cultures of many developing
countries are hostile to the operation of markets.
Often competition among firms or profit seeking behavior is
contrary to traditional practices, religious beliefs or vested interest.
Yet decades of experience suggest that extensive reliance on markets provides
the most effective way of managing economy and promotoing rapid economic growth.
Still a third issue, development strategy has to do
with the openness of an economy to international trade.
For example, should a developing country pursue a strategy
of import substitution by replacing most imports with domestic production?
Or should a country pursue a strategy of openness or outward orientation?
That is, should it strives to pay for its imports by improving
efficiency and competitiveness, developing foreign
markets and keeping trade barriers low?
Historically policies of import substitution were often
popular in Latin America until the 1980s.
And indeed the policy most frequently used toward this end was to build high
tariff walls around manufacturing industries, so that
local firms could produce and sell goods that
would otherwise be imported.
In contrast, in age show countries like Taiwan,
South Korea and Singapore have preferred an openness strategy.
Such a policy keeps trade barriers as low as
practical by relying primarily on tariffs rather than quotas.
And other non-tariff barriers.
It minimizes the interference with capital flow and
allows supply and demand to operate in financial markets.
It avoids a state monopoly on exports and imports.
It keeps government regulation to bare necessities for an orderly market economy.
Above all, it relies primarily on a private
market system of profits and losses to guide
production, rather than depending on public ownership and
control or the commands of a government planning system.
Now, what is perhaps most interesting
here is that just a generation ago, Taiwan, South Korea and Singapore all had
per capital incomes one-quarter to one-third of
those in the wealthiest Latin American countries.
Yet, by saving large fractions of their national incomes and channeling these to
high-return export industries, these countries overtook every
Latin American country by the late 1980s.
Secret to
success was not a doctrinaire laissez-faire policy but the
government in fact engaged in selective planning and intervention.
Rather, the openness and outward orientation allowed the countries to
reap economies of scale and the benefits of international specialization.
And thus to increase employment, use domestic resources effectively, enjoy
rapid productivity growth and provide enormous gains in living standards.
This figure drives home the point that
open economies generally do better than closed ones.
You can see in the left-hand figure that
closed economies, like Angola, Mozambique and Ghana grow
slowly while in the right-hand figure, countries like
Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia have done much better.
So what's the bottom line for successful strategies of economic development.
Decades of experience in dozens of countries have lead many
development economists to this of nine suggstions to enhance economic growth.
These range from, establishing the rule
of law, opening economies to international trade.
And controlling population growth to establishing independent central
banks to avoid hyper inflation, establishing
realistic exchange rate policies to prevent
major currency shocks, and privatizing state
industries to improve efficiency and promote entrepreneurship.
At the same time it is clear that the industrialized nations of the
world can play a very constructive role in helping the developing countries grow.
One way is to provide more foreign capital,
both public and private.
And to better target such aid to the poorest developing countries.
In this regard, the United States and
many other industrialized nations already assist the
developing countries with substantial foreign aid in
the form of both loans and grants.
A second way for the industrialized nations to
spur economic development in the developing countries would
be to further reduce their own trade barriers.
This would allow developing countries to
expand their national incomes through increased trade.
But such a step can be politically
controversial because it raises the specter of industrialized
workers having to compete against people willing to
work for a dollar or less a day.
Still a third way the industrialized nations can help
is to provide debt relief.
The problem here is that the current debt
load of many developing countries is so large that
monies which would otherwise go to investment in the
countries has to be used for servicing these debts.
The fourth way the industrialized nations might help
is by addressing an issue we raised earlier.
The so called brain drain. The problem
here is that many of the best
and brightest workers int he developing countries come
to the industrialized nations temporarily to get and
education but wind up staying permanently to work.
Rather than returning to help build the economies of their homelands.
This brain drain contributes to the deterioration in the
overall skill level and productivity of labor forces often least
able to suffer such losses.
A final way to help developing countries grow is to discourage arms sales to them.
While such sales create jobs and profits in the industrialized nations, they
also divert precious public expenditures from infrastructure and education.
[MUSIC]
