Why don’t economists care more about rising resource prices?

resource price levelThis post was first published on The Huffington Post.

Britain faces many economic challenges: the need to restore macroeconomic stability, improve competitiveness, protect living standards and address rising inequality. These challenges have spurred much creative thinking by economists in areas such as monetary policy, taxation, labour market reform and education and training. Yet far less prominence has been given to an issue that affects all of these economic challenges: the impact of rising resource prices.

Resource prices are significantly affecting our economy
Over the past decade world food prices have doubled, metals prices have trebled and energy prices have quadrupled, all driven by strong growth in emerging markets. This has raised UK prices and made the job of controlling inflation harder for the Bank of England. Inflation excluding energy and unprocessed food prices has averaged 2.1 per cent over the last decade, almost exactly in line with the Bank’s target of two per cent. By contrast, once these energy and food prices are included, average inflation rises to 2.6 per cent and has more frequently breached the three per cent threshold which triggers an explanatory letter from the Bank’s governor. And, in the latter years’ of Mervyn King’s tenure, he penned no fewer than 14 of these letters, all of them citing rising resource costs as a key driver of above target inflation.

Rising resource prices have also played a pivotal role in declining living standards in the UK. Without the faster price rises for energy and food, real wages could have actually risen rather than fallen over the last decade. And the average household could have saved as much as £1,000 a year on its household food and energy bills. It is those on lower incomes who have been most affected, as energy and food make up nearly a quarter of their spending, compared with just 12 per cent for the most well off.

As the UK now runs hefty trade deficits on energy, food and other commodities, rising prices are having increasingly adverse economic impacts. The extra we have to pay for energy and food is money we cannot spend on other goods and services or use to pay down personal debts. This can only slow our ability to recover from the financial crisis.

UK businesses also risk being held back by rising resource costs and concerns about security of supplies. To remain competitive, they will have to pay increasingly close attention to reducing resource costs and ensuring that supply disruptions do not curtail their operations.

Yet, despite the profound economic consequences, few macroeconomists see rising resource costs as a central issue. Some assume the market will deal with the problem, with high commodity prices providing sufficient incentive to find new supplies. Although this is happening, new sources of supply can be more expensive to extract. And once the world economy finally emerges from the financial crisis, stronger global growth should push up demand again. Throw into this mix the supply risks coming from unstable geopolitics – such as the unfolding crisis in the Ukraine – and you have a recipe for uncertainty and volatility in the future.

We need to get serious about resource efficiency
Perhaps the obstacle is simply that many of the solutions to the resources problem do not involve the usual economic policy levers. Instead, if we are to control our resource bills when we cannot control world markets, then we need to get much more serious about resource efficiency. This means that there is a need for a diverse range of practical initiatives across the economy.

For instance, according to analysis by McKinsey, we can save 36 per cent of our electricity demand by 2030. Examples of what we need to do include, new ecodesign regulations for lighting and appliances, and regulation or incentives to use the best available technology in commercial buildings. And on raw materials, there is huge scope to bring resource recovery and recycling up to international best practice and lower the cost inputs for UK industry. The challenge is to build a coherent strategy around the many diverse initiatives that are needed to achieve this.

And this calls for more industrial policy
Some of this will require strengthening our industrial policy to address market failures relating to information and co-ordination, that can hamper the emergence of a more resource efficient economy. Unfortunately, after the discredited industrial policies of the 1970s, this still remains a problematic area for many economists. However, instead of looking to our past, we should consider what we can learn from examples of successful modern industrial policies, such as those of Germany and Singapore.

Economists need to pay more attention to resources as there is a clear and pressing need to develop greater resilience to commodity price shocks. While this will not solve all our economic problems, it can make an important contribution to many of them. For this reason, the careful management of resources should be right at the heart of economic policy.

@julianbmorgan

Read our policy insight The great resource price shock by Julian Morgan and see our infographic showing the impact of resource prices on the cost of living in the UK.

6 comments

  • Spot on. But a further reason for the rising resource prices is the increased demand from a larger and wealthier world population. And restraining population growth is a potato too hot for nearly all politicians, and .hardly susceptible to conventional economic nostrums.

  • Quite so, efficiency has long been referred to as the forgotten energy source. I very much agree that industrial policy should be strengthened – in fact there is a greater than ever requirement for augmenting and integrating strategy from different areas that meet in the energy/food/water nexus – because of their causal links and dependencies. The ability to do so will provide competitive advantage to companies and countries able to progress performance on these issues.
    My work with companies have provided much hope (at times) when they see their long-term future and sustainability (in all senses) linked with dealing with resource issues and cost volatility of raw materials, energy and water. In many ways they often do so as a reaction to their competitive environment – much as any forward looking business does. While this enlightened self-interest appears to help drive change I’d be interested to hear your thoughts as an economist as to how policy levers can accelerate change without succumbing to the previous pitfalls you allude to.
    ~ solchap – there are clearly different points of view here. Restraining population is a hot potato, and rightly so. The effective policy means/instruments to do so tend to range from the highly distasteful to genocide. However, we do know that increasing wealth, removing dire poverty and improving health provide very effective means to control population and many now estimate that for the first time in (human) history population will plateau at around 2050.
    I and many others would contend it’s consumption and not population that’s the problem per se. The biomass of Antarctic Krill has been estimated to be about the same as that of humans (http://bit.ly/1nMWkMY) – but they are not exceeding planetary resource boundaries. We need to start designing and planning a future where we can welcome 9 billion people rather than fear their arrival http://bit.ly/17PvMlh

  • Efficiency could be defined as – not being stupid

  • I would appreciate it if someone could explain who is causing those extreme peaks and troughs………

    • Commodity markets are often volatile. Supply can be difficult to expand in the short run – e.g. it may take some time to find new supplies of fossil fuels or minerals – and can be reduced by ‘events’ -e.g. a bad harvest or geo-politics. So changes in demand, for instance due to the economic cycle, can not readily be met by changes in supply leading to price spikes and troughs. I included some discussion on this in The Great Resource Price Shock paper, which you may want to look at – http://www.green-alliance.org.uk/grea_p.aspx?id=7355

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s