Social Europe/Peter Bofinger: Industrial policy: is there a paradigm shift in Germany and what does this imply for Europe?

Social Europe

Politics, Economy and Employment & Labour
Site Links
Home ・ Economy ・ Industrial policy: is there a paradigm shift in Germany and what does this imply for Europe?
Industrial policy: is there a paradigm shift in Germany and what does this imply for Europe?

by Peter Bofinger on 27th May 2019
TwitterFacebookLinkedinE-mail

A paper from the German economy minister on a national industrial policy has gone down like a lead balloon. Peter Bofinger argues it needs to be reflated—and coloured green—at a European level.
industrial policy

Peter Bofinger

Industrial policy has a notoriously bad reputation in Germany. The prevailing opinion among its economists is nicely reflected in the most recent report of the German Council of Economic Experts (to which I formulated a dissenting opinion):

    In order to be sustainably successful, however, an innovation location should refrain from a guiding industrial policy, which sees it as a state task to identify future markets and technologies as strategically important … It is unlikely that policymakers have sufficient knowledge and understanding of future technological developments or changes in demand to make this a meaningful long-term strategy. If the government is concerned about sustainable progress, it should rather rely on the decentralized knowledge and the individual actions of various actors of the national economy … The potential for failure is greater the more fragmented and targeted the policy is.

In view of this, it was all the more surprising that Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, the current chair of the Christian Democratic Union and potential successor as chancellor to Angela Merkel, had announced a ‘real paradigm shift’ in industrial policy in an interview with the Frankfurter Allgemeinen Sonntagszeitung in September 2018. No less so was the fact that in February 2019 the CDU economics minister, Peter Altmaier, presented a ‘National Industrial Strategy 2030’, in which he formulated strategic guidelines for a German and European industrial policy. As expected, the reaction of German economists and business associations was almost unanimously negative.
Join our almost 30.000 subscribers!

"Social Europe publishes thought-provoking articles on the big political and economic issues of our time analysed from a European viewpoint. Indispensable reading!"
Polly Toynbee

Columnist for The Guardian
Powered by ConvertKit
Diagnosis

The paper starts with the following diagnosis: ‘Industrial policy strategies are experiencing a renaissance in many parts of the world; there is hardly a successful country that relies exclusively and without exception on market forces to accomplish its tasks.’ The strategy includes the following ‘points of orientation’:

    The share of German manufacturing in gross value added is to be increased from currently 23.2 per cent to 25 per cent. In the EU, the manufacturing share is to rise to 20 per cent by 2030.
    National and European champions—‘size matters’—are needed In order to be internationally successful.
    The long-term survival of existing German champions (Siemens, Thysssen-Krupp, the German automobile manufacturers and Deutsche Bank) is in the national political and economic interest.
    In the context of foreign takeovers of German companies, ‘in very important cases’ the state itself should become active by acquiring shares in the company. For this purpose, a national participation facility is to be created.
    In the case of battery cells, which are regarded as very important in terms of value chains, state support, including support for the formation of consortia, would make sense.
    Direct state participation is necessary and justified in the case of extremely important issues (the platform economy, artificial intelligence, autonomous driving).

With this catalogue Altmaier has made himself very vulnerable. The idea of a quantitative target for the value-added manufacturing share is just as questionable as a survival guarantee for large corporations. With the very general plea for national champions, the paper has also upset the smaller and medium-sized companies, which fear they would be disadvantaged in the process.

In the general outrage, the fundamental question of how Germany can arm itself against China’s aggressive industrial policy in international competition has hardly been discussed. It is interesting to see with what simple arguments this fundamental question is wiped off the table by the Scientific Advisory Board of the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology, which includes leading German economists:

    Chinese industrial policy led to the preservation of a highly subsidised heavy industry.
    It was financed by the banking system, in which the first signs of an overload were seen, with loss-making industrial loans.
    It remains to be seen whether Chinese industrial policy will still be successful once the race to catch up with the west has been completed.
    China’s politics have had nothing to do with a social-market economy.

Overall, so far Altmaier’s paper has unfortunately not yet succeeded in initiating a constructive discussion on how to shape a successful industrial policy. Rather, there is a danger that the short spring of German industrial policy has already come to an end. Despite some of the paper’s weaknesses, it would be fatal, however, if one were to fall back into the market-loving paradigm of most German economists, which they describe with the strange slogan of Ordnungspolitik.
Listen to the latest episode of Social Europe Podcast

Social Europe Podcast

#42: Colin Mayer: The Future of the Corporation - Why Businesses need to rediscover their historic purpose
Broader discussion

It should rather be a matter of using the impulse Altmaier has provided for a broader discussion of industrial policy—not only in Germany but throughout the European Union. At the European level, the debate on industrial policy has not been particularly passionate either.

The industrial policy of the EU is essentially characterised by a horizontal approach. It aims to create a favourable framework for innovation but it avoids the targeted promotion of certain technologies. This approach differs fundamentally from the vertical dynamic of ‘Made in China 2025’, in which individual industries and technologies are specifically promoted.

How can the Altmaier paper be seen from a European perspective? Here, even the title, ‘National Industrial Strategy 2030’, is questionable. Can it still be sensible today for the individual member states of the EU to respond to the Chinese challenge with national strategies for industrial policy? And is it the right approach, as suggested in the paper, to derive the European strategy from given national strategies?

Furthermore, it does not seem optimal to concentrate on individual links in value chains—the promotion of battery cells—instead of advancing the whole  ecosystem. In October 2017, within the framework of the EU Battery Alliance, the EU explicitly spoke out in favour of a joint approach, which is showing initial success. But to promote electromobility further, it would be helpful if an appropriate network of charging stations were available throughout the union.

So far, this only applies to northern and central Europe. While China is aiming for five million charging stations in 2020, there were only around 155,000 in the EU in 2018—a study by the Association of European Automobile Manufactures claims that at least two million will be needed by 2025. A holistic approach would also consider the energy system that is required for a stronger promotion of electromobility, the potential for autonomous driving and the implications for infrastructure of cities.

A joint European approach is also suitable for the promotion of artificial intelligence. This is the only way to make appropriate use of synergies in research and industrial applications. In the case of digital platforms, such as payment systems, unilateral national approaches are ruled out from the outset.

Altmaier’s strategy does not however suffer only from an inadequate European dimension and a partial focus on value chains. It is also too one-dimensionally oriented towards the goal of preserving industrial jobs. Nothing expresses this more clearly than the statement ‘The false distinction between “old dirty” industries and “clean new” industries is misleading’.
Green industrial policy

The goal should be a ‘green industrial policy’ for Europe, which aims to achieve a balance between competitiveness and the most ambitious decarbonisation possible. A stimulating proposal was recently made in this regard by Michel Barnier. He called for a ‘sustainability pact’ for the EU’s new policy cycle, as important in some respects as the stability and growth pact. As Barnier put it, ‘Our ecological debts are no less a cause for concern than our fiscal debts.’

The pact would require concerted action on climate, trade, tax, agriculture and innovation—and massive investments. According to European Commission estimates, quoted by Barnier, the EU will need €180 billion ($203 billion) in additional investment each year to meet its commitments under the Paris agreement.

An interesting proposal for financing ambitious green policies was recently made by Paul de Grauwe. He proffered a model in which the European Investment Bank is entitled to finance environmental investments. The EIB would issue bonds refinancing these investments. The European Central Bank could buy these bonds at a pace dictated by the expiry of the old bonds on its balance sheet. The ECB could thereby create ‘green money’ without fuelling inflation.

In a nutshell, Altmaier’s paper is important because for the first time it has led to a lively discussion on industrial policy in Germany. Since it is to be feared that this impulse will sink into the German mainstream, it is of crucial importance to raise the discussion to the European level. And this does not primarily require national industrial policies, from which a European strategy is derived.

On the contrary, Europe’s entire potential must be identified to derive options for action at the national level. And it cannot primarily be a question of securing industrial jobs at any price. It must be about shaping the inevitable ecological transformation in such a way that it does not adversely affect the international competitiveness of Europe and its member states. But a green industrial policy could even have a beneficial effect on jobs and growth.

This article is a joint publication by Social Europe and IPS-Journal
TwitterFacebookLinkedinE-mail

About Peter Bofinger

Peter Bofinger is professor of economics at Würzburg University and a former member of the German Council of Economic Experts.
Partner Ads
Our Most Recent Posts
industrial policy
Industrial policy: is there a paradigm shift in Germany and what does this imply for Europe?
Peter Bofinger
feminism
It’s time for feminism at the European elections
Carmen Calvo, Helena Dalli and Franziska Giffey
attractive utppia
The free market is not the answer
Jochen Steinhilber
‘Gendering’ the EU budget
Firat Cengiz
democracy at work
It’s time to talk about democracy at work
Stan De Spiegelaere
Most Popular Posts
output gap
Output gap nonsense
Adam Tooze
populists
Populism and the embrace of complexity
Sheri Berman
income tax
Why top rates of income tax should be much higher
Simon Wren-Lewis
Joseph Stiglitz - Beyond GDP
Beyond GDP
Joseph Stiglitz
external instability
Migration Into Europe: A Long-Term Solution?
Branko Milanovic
Other Social Europe Publications
Austerity: 12 Myths Exposed
The Crisis of Globalisation
The Legitimacy of the Brexit Referendum and What We Can Learn from It
Still time to save the euro
Brexit Generation Game: How Conflict Between Old and Young Masks Welfare Challenges
Social Europe Edition Book

Zygmunt Bauman was a towering intellectual who saw and analysed – right up to his death in early 2017 – the great socio-political changes, often convulsive, in modern western society long before his peers. Here we highlight his prescient insights into what he dubbed ‘liquid modernity’ with 24 chapters on topics ranging from online loneliness via precarity/poverty/inequality to migration, fear of the ‘Other’ and the decline of the nation state. Chronicle of Crisis, 2011-16, written by one of the great chroniclers of our times, will be read and re-read for decades and more to come.

MORE INFO
Hans-Böckler-Stiftung Advertisement
Time for substantial minimum wage rises and a European minimum wage policy

Minimum wages in most European Union (EU) countries were increased at the start of 2019, with an median increase of 4.8 % compared with the previous year, continuing the recent trends towards faster minimum wage growth. Much of this is accounted for by substantial increases in Eastern Europe together with efforts to undertake permanent and structural increases in minimum wage levels in countries such as Spain. There is also a growing debate over the role of minimum wages for the concept of Social Europe, which is expected to play a significant role in the 2019 European Parliament elections. In this context, the German government has indicated that one of its priorities during its EU Council Presidency in the second half of 2020 will be elaborating a framework for a European minimum wage policy.

FREE DOWNLOAD
Social Europe Edition Book

Is an unconditional basic income without means-test or work-test compatible with social justice and individual self-worth? Does it open up the space for an end to demeaning labour and a resurgence of voluntary work and cultural life? Is it affordable? This collection of short but compelling essays, all previously published in Social Europe, allows both proponents and opponents to make their case and is designed to extend this vital discussion to a wider audience.

MORE INFO
ETUI Advertisement

‘Algorithm breakers’ are not a different ‘species’: attitudes towards trade unions of Deliveroo riders in Belgium

This working paper investigates a rare case of platform work performed in the realm of regulated employment and explores the attitudes of platform workers towards collective representation. Using a case study of Deliveroo, a food delivery platform, the paper argues that platform workers are not essentially different to their peers in their attitudes towards trade unions. The paper finds that the riders do not generally hold negative views towards unions, and do not consider unions incompatible with platform work. Instead, there has been a lack of union activity in reaching out to riders as a reason for their non-membership.

FREE DOWNLOAD
Eurofound Advertisement

Webinar: Flexible working in the digital age - Is everyone a winner?

On 13 June 2019 from 15.00 – 16.30 CET, Eurofound will host a webinar about its latest research findings on the growing number of ICT-based mobile workers, or workers who are not tied to a particular work location as they use a tablet, laptop or phone to connect the company network via Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). By registering for this webinar, attendees will be able to take part in the live Q&A session and send in questions and reactions via the live chat.

CLICK FOR MORE INFO
S&D Group Advertisement

A New Analytical Approach Towards Sustainable Development

Co-sponsored by the S&D through its Progressive Society Initiative, the Independent Annual Sustainable Economy Survey is an alternative vision of the Commission's Annual Growth Survey. In addition to its usual in-depth analyses of economic and social developments in Europe, the new iASES broadens its scope and addresses environmental sustainability. To this end, it provides the first ever evaluation of Europe's ‘climate debt’, i.e. a computation of the investments needed for EU Member States to achieve the climate targets set out in the COP 21 agreement.

FREE DOWNLOAD
About Social Europe

Mission Statement & Editorial Team

Article Submission

Social Europe ISSN 2628-7641
Legal & Privacy

Legal Disclosure

Privacy Policy

Copyright
Thought Leadership