It was not too many months ago that Latin American
governments and financial analysts generally were confident that the quality of
the region’s economic management and its solid pace of growth in recent years
would enable most countries to withstand a U.S. recession without suffering
much damage to their own economies. Today, Latin America faces the
prospect of severe and widespread economic setbacks—because the slumping U.S. economy and international financial turmoil
has led to a fall in international credit, diminished foreign investment,
slowing remittance flows, weaker export markets in the U.S. and
elsewhere, sharply depreciating currencies across the region, and plunging
commodity prices. Instead of demonstrating Latin America’s economic resilience,
the financial crisis has, ironically, highlighted the interdependence and
vulnerability of Latin American economies to events in the U.S. and
internationally.
Clearly, different countries will be affected in distinct
ways. Chile is in the best
position to confront the financial crisis because, unlike other nations of Latin America, it built up savings during the past five
years and has the resources to finance, at least for a time, a counter-cyclical
fiscal stimulus. Mexico and Brazil have both managed their economies
prudently, but Mexico is
more vulnerable because it relies so heavily on U.S. markets and remittances, and
because oil revenues are so vital to its economy and make up a large share of
government revenues. Falling commodity prices will cut painfully into Brazil’s
exports, but affect its fiscal situation much less. Like Mexico, Central American and Caribbean countries
will be hard hit because of their dependence on the U.S., but they will gain from the
drop in food and fuel prices. Venezuela
and Argentina
are particularly at risk because commodity exports and prices are so critical
to their finances and because they have managed their economies badly and
alienated their creditors and investors.
Still, these differences aside, growth will diminish sharply
in almost every Latin American country in 2009—resulting in increased
unemployment and poverty, reduced government revenues, falling reserves,
growing official debt, and deteriorating public services. What we don’t know is
how steep the drop in growth will be or how long it will last—or what the
social and political repercussions will be. That will depend principally on
four factors.
The first is the depth
and duration of the U.S. and
European recessions, and the slowdown in growth in Japan,
China and India. The
optimistic view is that the U.S.
economy should recover in six to nine months, but that is largely based on
historical precedent. There is no good way to predict the particular trajectory
of today’s unique complex of circumstances. One forecast after another on
financial and economic activity has turned out to be overly optimistic, in the U.S. and almost everywhere else in the world
(including China,
where annualized growth this quarter may fall almost to one half its 2007
pace). And the massive stimulus and bailout packages fashioned by the U.S. and
European countries appear consistently to be falling short in their aims to
rebuild consumer and investor confidence and get credit flowing again.
Forecasts have been off the mark
because of the complexity of today’s financial instruments and the immense
difficulties economic analysts and officials have had in uncovering the full
range of risks and vulnerabilities that countries confront. In the U.S. and
everywhere else, governments and markets have been surprised and confounded by
unanticipated exposure. Hugely leveraged assets and high risk investments are
regularly discovered in unexpected places. No one, for example, was aware that
private companies in Brazil
and Mexico
had put large sums into derivatives, essentially gambling against currency
depreciation. Nor is it well known that some 40 percent of the reserves
accumulated since 2007 by several of Latin America’s
largest countries are effectively offset by increased private sector
liabilities. And new risks and vulnerabilities will almost certainly continue
to emerge in unforeseen ways. All this suggests that Latin American nations
should be prepared for outcomes that are worse than are now being projected. It
should certainly not be assumed that the region will again experience a “V”
shape downturn and recovery as it has so often in the past. This time, we
may see a protracted period of low growth and a slower pace of recovery,
perhaps like the “L” shaped debt crisis of the 1980s.
A second factor at play is how the U.S., Europe,
and the Asian nations respond to the crisis. To what extent will they move
toward more internationally cooperative approaches that will consider the
interests of other countries—or will they yield to domestic political pressures
and focus narrowly on their own needs? Will they keep their economies open, or
are we likely to see an increase in protectionism, as Council of Foreign
Relations President Richard Haass predicts, along with efforts to keep
investment capital at home? At recent international conferences, participating
world leaders pledged to avoid protectionist measures, but—if the crisis deepens—domestic
political pressures could be difficult to withstand. And how will governments
deal with immigration and remittances issues? To what extent will the U.S., Europe, and Japan
make new resources available for the multilateral financial institutions—or for
direct lending to Latin America?
The results of the G-20 summit meeting in Washington, where the leaders of the world’s
major economies came together to coordinate approaches to the global
turbulence, were disappointing. Agreement was mainly reached on the reforms
needed to prevent the next crisis—with few concrete ideas for what to do now to
address the troubled global economy. Worse yet, the measures needed to stem
future crises (like higher capital requirements on financial institutions) may
hamper recovery from the present predicament.
Still, the U.S.
and EU, and emerging market countries, seem ready to pursue more cooperative
strategies; they are making efforts to coordinate their responses, and
proposing expanded support for the international financial institutions. The
Inter-American Development Bank and the Andean Development Corporation, for
instance, have set up a $10 billion fund to assist credit-starved companies in Latin America. The World Bank and IMF will almost
certainly be allotted substantial additional resources to assist developing
countries through the crisis. The U.S. Federal Reserve has already made
currency swaps of $30 billion each available to four countries (Mexico, Brazil,
Singapore, and Korea), to help
them to stem further currency devaluations and avoid growth-retarding higher
interest rates to curb inflationary pressures. But these efforts may be hard to
sustain over time if the crisis is prolonged and the U.S. and EU economies continue to
deteriorate.
A third question concerns how each of the Latin
American countries will respond to the crisis. The challenge will be to
maintain fiscal discipline and husband reserves at a time of diminishing public
sector revenues coupled with increased demands from many sectors for government
aid. There seems to be wide agreement among economists that, aside from Chile, Latin
American countries lack the fiscal capacity needed to expand government
spending very much and take other significant counter-cyclical measures. Unlike
the U.S.
or EU governments, they do not have the resources needed to stimulate their
economies, assist their banks and corporations, subsidize consumers, defend
their currencies, or protect vulnerable groups. In the view of most analysts,
pursuing such initiatives without external support is likely to be a misuse of
resources, which could end up jeopardizing subsequent economic recovery.
Fourth, we have very limited ability to foresee the
political changes that stagnant economies (and the growing poverty and unemployment,
declining government expenditures, and increasing frustration) may bring. In
some countries, demagoguery and populism could thrive—and the resulting
policies may worsen the economic damage. In others, mainstream economic
approaches, if they are perceived to have kept the economy on track, may reward
more economically orthodox governments. Still, political tensions, along with
more polarized politics, are likely to emerge in almost every country and make
economic decision making more contentious.
There is no way in short to accurately foretell how the
financial crisis will affect Latin America. It
is a mistake, however, to assume (1) that the region has already experienced
the worst of the external shocks or (2) that the impact of the shocks will be
largely restricted to a slowdown in growth, from which countries will move
steadily to resume their previous expansionary trajectories.
There is at least some possibility that Latin
America’s economic and political landscape may change in dramatic
ways. A deep or prolonged slump (particularly if coupled with a sharp fiscal
retrenchment) could undo the region’s impressive economic and social gains of
the past five years—accelerating economic expansion, expanding reserves and
lower debt, impressive reductions in poverty, a burgeoning middle class, and
progress toward a fairer distribution of income—with difficult to foresee
political repercussions. International confidence in the economic potential of Brazil, Chile,
Mexico,
and other Latin American countries could be set back, along with the
self-assurance of many of the region’s business, financial, and political
leaders, and of ordinary citizens. But it is also true that effective policy
responses could bolster confidence in some nations.
It is also possible that the crisis could lead to the
collapse or near-collapse of some of Latin America’s
most vulnerable and/or poorly run economies. An array of troubling consequences
would follow, and recovery could be slow and painful.
This crisis is different from the other crises that have
battered Latin American economies in recent years. It is a global affair, with
all of the world’s major economies suffering tight credit, shortages of
investment capital, shrinking markets, rising unemployment, and uncertain
futures. And Latin America today is thoroughly
globalized. More than ever before, its growth and prosperity depend on the
economies of the U.S.,
Europe, and Asia. It may be some time before
those nations once again have the capacity to offer Latin American nations the
export markets and capital (in the form of loans, investments, and remittances)
they will need to revive their economic fortunes.