Search

• The causes presented in the literature of the middle-income trap are generic, emphasizing the quality of the legal institutions of the country, demographic problems, the lack of social infrastructure, poor macroeconomic policies, etc. were already present in developing countries when they were growing fast. Besides, the income interval used on the studies on the trap was too large. • Instead of promoting the growth, the liberalizing reforms, which were more radical in Latin America than in Asia, caused an increase in the interest rate and dismantled the mechanism that neutralized the Dutch disease – both facts leading to the chronic overvaluation of the exchange rate, which represented a competitive disadvantage of the companies utilizing the best technology available. • In the economic literature, it is well established that the currencies of the commodity-focused economies tend to be appreciated in the long run because they face the Dutch disease. On the other hand, central banks in the region tend to define a high interest rate around which they organize their monetary policy so as to attract foreign capital and "grow with external savings" – this representing a second major cause of overvaluation of the national currencies of Latin American countries. • The main conclusion of the research is that, in the period of 1980–2016, the Latin American countries didn't fall into middle-income but a liberalization trap; the reason why they have fallen into quasi-stagnation while Asian countries did not lie in the liberal reforms. Opening trade in countries that have the Dutch disease meant dismantling the pragmatic mechanisms that neutralized it; financial liberalization limited the ability of countries to control distorted flows of capital and created conditions for the increase in the interest rate. • The instrument to neutralize the Dutch disease on the domestic market side were import tariffs on manufactured goods. To the extent that they were just neutralizing the Dutch disease, they were not protectionist – they were just giving the local manufacturing industry equal conditions of competition with the companies of other countries. If the import tariffs on manufactured goods were higher than what was required to neutralize the Dutch disease, they would be also protectionist. This paper offers an alternative explanation to the slow-down observed in the growth of developing countries. Instead of a middle-income trap what happened was a liberalization trap. Growth didn't happen because countries turned middle-income, but happened in a given period, around the 1980s, when these countries faced a serious foreign debt crisis and were constrained to open their economies. The studies on the middle-income trap have adopted a broad income interval and were unable to offer new historical facts that explained why these countries stop growing fast. Differently, this paper shows that the trade liberalization and the financial liberalization that started in the 1980s involved the dismantling of the mechanism that neutralized the Dutch disease and the change from low to high interest rates – both facts leading to a long-term or chronic overvaluation of the exchange rate that made the manufacturing industry non-competitive and caused deindustrialization and low growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article present a project proposal to the Ford Foundation which analyzes the financial instability and overvaluation of the exchange rate in Latin America, particularly Brazil. It mentions that the main objectives of the project is to explore the changes in the world economy and Latin America in consequence of the global financial crisis and the nature of financial crises. The relationship between financial instability, exchange rate an deindustrialization in Brazil is also tackled.

Structuralist development macroeconomics. This paper presents some basic ideas and models of a structuralist development macroeconomics (the tendencies to the overvaluation of the exchange rate and the tendency of wages to grow below productivity, the critique of growth with foreign savings, and a new model of the Dutch disease) that complement and actualize the thought of the Latin-American structuralist school that developed around ECLAC from the late 1940s to the 1960s. On the other hand, it suggests that a new national development strategy based on the experience of fast growing Asian countries is emerging; and argues that only the countries that adopt such strategy based on growth with domestic savings, fiscal and foreign trade responsibility and a competitive exchange rate will be able to catch up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Latin America has a long history of attempts to achieve regional integration, yet success has been modest. This paper contends that this is essentially due not so much to protectionist practices in the various countries, but to the lack of a common currency or, at least, of a tightly managed exchange rate band. We reviewed the optimum currency area criteria that indicate it is prudent to increase economic integration before attempting to establish exchange rates coordination. It seems fair to say that diminishing exchange rate instability could encourage trade and investment flows across Latin American economies. We also performed a very simplified exercise to understand how feasible efforts would be between policymakers in two large economies (Brazil and Argentina) to achieve exchange rate parity stability and step toward adopting a common currency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revue Tiers Monde is the property of Librairie Armand Colin and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

It took more than ten years for Latin America to overcome the debt crisis, which turned into a fiscal crisis of the state. Yet in the early 1990s, most of Latin America had undergone deep reforms (particularly trade liberalization and privatization), and, thanks to exchange rate devaluation and fiscal adjustment, they had reduced the foreign and the public debt. Yet growth was not resumed. The basic reason for that was the adoption of the growth cum foreign savings strategy coupled with financial opening (the "second" Washington Consensus). The huge capital inflows created serious solvency problems, as the foreign indebtedness threshold was exceeded. On the other hand, capital inflows appreciated the national currencies, artificially increasing wages and consumption, having as trade-offs the reduction of domestic savings and, again, the increase of foreign debt Despite sizable direct investments, the total investment rate remained constant, as growth did not resume. Only the foreign financial and patrimonial debt increased. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The following article has been withdrawn from publication in the Taylor & Francis journal. Challenge: Dr Luiz Carlos Bresser-Pereira, "Why Did Trade Liberalization Work for East Asian but Fail in Latin America?". DOI: . Version of Record published online: 06 December 2019. The Editors and Publishers are withdrawing the above article from publication in Challenge as this paper was previously published in Volume 62, Issue 4 of the same journal. Date of original publication: 16 July 2019; . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]