Japan Forfeits 30 Years to the Gyrations of the Yen

Economy

Tsuchiya Hideo [Profile]

Did Public Works Spending Make Things Worse?

The failed policies and aimless wandering from the collapse of the speculative bubble to the financial crisis have been written about in dozens of books. Here I will focus on the relationship between the gyrations of the yen and macroeconomic policy.

I begin with the Mundell-Fleming model. This model, developed by Robert Mundell, winner of the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences in 1999, and Marcus Fleming, explains that fiscal policies are effective under a fixed exchange rate regime and that monetary policies are effective under a floating exchange rate regime.

Under a floating rate regime, higher fiscal expenditures funded by the increased issuance of government bonds would invite the appreciation of the domestic currency and reduce exports through higher interest rates and the inflow of capital from abroad. As a result, the effects of higher fiscal spending would be offset by currency appreciation. The reason the yen surged upward immediately after the Great East Japan Earthquake was market participants’ anticipation that fiscal expenditures would be increased to fund reconstruction efforts.

During Japan’s lost years, monetary policy that should have been effective became less so due to poor timing and half-baked measures, while lavish public works spending with doubtful effects resulted in the massive accumulation of government debt.

Slow-Footed Monetary Policies

As noted above, the excessively long period of monetary easing during the years that Sumita was BOJ governor gave rise to a speculative bubble. When the BOJ turned to tighten monetary policy in May 1989, Sumita and his successor, Governor Mieno Yasushi, raised interest rates five times in just 15 months. Rapid tightening followed by a delay in loosening monetary policy quickly crushed the bubble and deepened the economic wounds. Monetary policy proved to be effective in loosening and tightening, but adversely so.

Insufficient monetary easing after the collapse of the bubble prolonged deflationary conditions, which is typified by BOJ Governor Hayami Masaru’s precipitous August 2000 reversal of a zero interest rate policy reinstated half a year later, in March 2001. Also, following the subprime mortgage crisis and the demise of Lehman Brothers, Japan’s accommodative monetary policies could not keep up with the aggressive quantitative easing by the Federal Reserve in the United States, which served to sustain the appreciation of the yen and deflation.

Government efforts to address the strong yen through increased fiscal spending began with the emergency economic measures decided by the administration of Prime Minister Nakasone Yasuhiro in 1987, with total outlays of ¥6 trillion. Following the collapse of the bubble, emergency measures exceeding ¥10 trillion centering on public works spending were repeated by the administrations of Prime Ministers Miyazawa Kiichi, Hosokawa Morihiro, and Murayama Tomiichi, regardless of the ruling political party.

During this period, there was also pressure from the United States to increase domestic demand. In the Structural Impediments Initiative, Japan promised to establish a basic plan for public investment with total outlays of ¥430 trillion over 10 years from 1991. This plan was expanded by the Murayama administration to outlays of ¥630 trillion over 10 years from 1995.

If the Mundell-Fleming model is correct, it is reasonable to think that Japan’s expansion of fiscal expenditures due to fears of a strong yen contributed to the further appreciation of the yen. But other factors were also likely at play. Public works spending was viewed as a vote-getter and had great appeal for politicians. Moreover, fiscal authorities who disliked the issue of deficit-financing bonds are thought to have prioritized public works spending that could be financed with construction bonds, instead.

In an article titled “Japan’s Road to Deep Deficit Is Paved with Public Works” appearing in the March 1, 1997, edition of the New York Times, Japan’s wasteful public works spending was reported with amazement, citing the example of a futile “agricultural airport” way out in the sticks.

Japan’s overreliance on public works spending resulted in the mass production of nonessential and non-urgent social overhead capital and became a factor increasing the public debt to more than ¥1 quadrillion. The number of construction workers climbed from 5.3 million in 1985 to 6.85 million in 1997. Their sharp decline in subsequent years meant that many workers lost their jobs.

Government Policies to Blame for Persistent Deflation

Japan was not the only nation where a speculative bubble burst. By examining the situation in Sweden, where a bubble deflated around the same time, and the situation in the United States following the subprime mortgage crisis, we can identify how they were able to overcome postbubble slumps.

First of all, their governments intervened to accelerate the disposal of bad debts and to inject public capital into banks so as to restore confidence in the financial system. Then, to circumvent deflation, they undertook decisive monetary easing and the depreciation of the currency.

Japan was slow to act in disposing of bad debts, and financial system turmoil throttled economic activity. Insufficient monetary easing failed to correct the excessively strong yen, and companies losing international competitiveness sought to reduce costs, thereby enabling deflation to take hold. The belated monetary easing “of a different dimension” by BOJ Governor Kuroda Haruhiko did achieve the depreciation of the yen, but the dislocations of the global economy since the start of 2016 have diminished its effect.

Macroeconomic policies must come together with growth strategies. Japan’s successful experience as an industrial nation is interfering with its adaptation to globalization and the spread of information technology. A potential growth rate of less than 1% and the massive savings surplus of the corporate sector speak to Japan’s inability to plan its future.

The Davos forum of 2016 was organized around the theme of the fourth industrial revolution. The gathering was guided by an awareness that all industries and nations are being swept up in revolutionary changes driven by such technological innovations as artificial intelligence, robots, and the Internet of Things. This is nothing other than a knowledge revolution broadly understood.

The error Japan made 30 years ago of confusing the value of land for the value of knowledge must not be repeated.

(Originally published in Japanese on February 16, 2016. Banner photo: A strong yen and deflation held sway in Japan for 30 years. © Jiji Press.)

Related Tags

deflation currency Plaza Accord Lost Decade bubble monetary easing exchange rate

Tsuchiya HideoView article list

Journalist. Born in Wakayama in 1948. Graduated from Sophia University with a degree in economics. Worked as columnist and senior feature writer at Nikkei and served on the paper’s editorial board. His works include 1971 nen shijōka to nettoka no kigen (1971, the Era of Commercialization and Rise of the Internet). Member of the Nippon.com editorial board.

Other articles in this report