The Pros And Cons Of Structural Reform

1932 Words4 Pages

In its essence, Structural Reform is simply changing the way the Government does things. It is the change of the policies that they enforce in order to become more economical. In countries where governments are more developed, structural reform is subtle. They are usually small changes of minimal costs which will give a greater return in the future. Italy for example has made the labour force slightly more accessible. Firms can now “hire up to 20% of their workforces on fixed-term contracts of up to three years” (C.W., 2014) It is easier to implement small structural reforms when an economy is doing well or even thriving.
The real task is implementing reforms to a struggling economy. This is where the structural reforms are put to …show more content…

(Praet, 2105) This is clearly shown in the Peter Praet paper on Structural reforms and long-run growth in the euro area. It is virtually impossible for any structure to be applicable to each individual economy. Each country has their own unique financial difficulties and cultures. Structural reform should be a basis of which each individual economy manufactures what suits them best. For structural reform to be successful it must be tailored to National conditions. In the EU, there is considerable spill over for countries who do not participate in continental structural reform. It results in the EU being slower to unexpected shocks – big or small – and therefore once again stunts growth across the entirety of the organisations. (Rubio, 2014) The stability and growth pact is the initiative to reinvigorate growth in the economy. Yet, it fails to fully recognise the issues each individual country has in implementing these rules and regulations. (Rubio, …show more content…

By doing this it allows the economies to become more reliable and better able to deal with shocks. Increasing the rate of recovery in output will allow economies to reallocate resources quicker which in the long run will mean less time wasted and more money put into the expansion of growth in said economy. The euro as a whole does not have an independent monetary policy or an independent exchange rate. This is a crucial issue which needs to be looked upon by the government in the near future. Due to this lack of independent structure, it is of vital import that the euro becomes more susceptible to shocks – whether they be large or small – to ensure that the economy remains stable throughout tough economic times. Being a member of the monetary union ensures a “higher degree of resilience” for each participating country. (Praet, 2105) By countries in the EU opting out of this monetary policy it weakens the economy as a whole. It makes countries who participate in this policy more vulnerable to a severe economic downturn due to the fact that they cannot adjust to shocks as quickly. This is due to the “spill over” of unemployment and lack of investments of countries not enforcing said polices. (Praet, 2105)
When looking at the long-run growth of an economy, fixed wages has been proved to be negative overall. Fixed wages in an economic downturn leads to a higher rate of unemployment. (Praet,

Open Document