Lecture 23: Sustainability Sustainability in Economics • In economics, an economy is “sustainable” if future generations will be able to enjoy the same standard of living as the current generation. • Work by Hartwick (1977), a Queen’s natural resource economist, and others has identified a necessary condition for economic sustainability: that a nation’s capital be kept intact. “Capital” here refers not only to physical capital but to any stock from which services flow. • The intuition behind keeping capital intact is that, in order to have a constant stream of income into the future, you need to have a constant amount of wealth from which to earn income. If you want to keep drawing interest out of your bank account, you must not dig into the principal. • If population grows, national wealth or national capital must actually increase so that the capital:labour ratio is kept intact. The Basic Model • In the 1960s and beyond, economic growth was a hot topic, and economists used a highly simplified model of the economy, based on the aggregate production function Y = GDP = F(K,L). This is called the neoclassical production function. All inputs are essential Even at very high prices, all inputs will be used Inputs can drop very low; there is no threshold level of input necessary (Daly criticizes) All inputs are substitutable to some degree. (Daly criticizes) Inputs engage multiplicatively: synergies Constant Returns to Scale. • In these growth models, part of Y is eaten, and the part not consumed is invested in K. So we have another equation: I = Y – C. • Robert Solow (1974) used Y = F(K,L,R), where R is an exhaustible resource like oil. S is the total stock of oil, and S falls every year by amount R(t). • Solow showed that, if there were no population growth, and if there were no depreciation of K, then a constant level of consumption (or consumption per person) could be sustained indefinitely. • John Hartwick (1977) showed what was going on in the math. The amount being invested (not consumed) is equal to the “rents” from resource extraction. • “Hotelling rent” is the difference between the price of the marginal ton of oil extracted, and its marginal extraction cost. • Hartwick has shown that if I = Hotelling rent * R = total Hotelling rent (THR), then the value of K + R is being held intact, and consumption is sustainable. S ↓ K↑ • This is known as “Hartwick’s Rule • • Hartwick showed that, if resource rents were reinvested in physical capital according to Hartwick’s rule, consumption could be sustained. • As recently as this year, it has been shown that, if more than resource rents were reinvested in physical capital, consumption could grow. In fact, for every extra amount reinvested implies a level of population growth that would be manageable at a constant per capita consumption level. The population growth is not geometric, however. It is quasi-geometric. N(t) = {a + b(t) } • Unfortunately, to get their sustainability result, the math still requires that there be no physical depreciation of capital, which is completely unrealistic. • However, if there is enough exogenous technical change, then physical depreciation of capital is not a problem. • Of course, if there is enough exogenous technical change, you don’t even need to invest resource rents. Different kinds of capital 1) 2) 3) 4) Physical capital. Declines due to depreciation and due to shallowing (when population grows). Neither is a problem so long as a sufficient amount is saved. Output per worker can be kept intact. However, if the population growth rate increases, more must be saved, so consumption per worker falls. Exhaustible Resources. The stock of an exhaustible resource like oil declines as it is used. Output per worker can be maintained if THR is invested. If more than THR is invested, arithmetic population growth can be tolerated. If either depreciation occurs or population growth occurs at a constant rate, output per worker cannot be maintained. Renewable Resources. Renewable resources can be harvested sustainably. The optimal amount to harvest each year depends on demand, supply, the interest rate, and the biological growth rate of the resource. However, renewable resources are often over-harvested for lack of oversight and ownership. We may also be ignorant of some of the biological factors needed to determine the biological growth rate. As the population grows, demand will grow, and the maximum sustainable yield will be reached. At that point we may have to make up for declining harvest-per-person by investing in physical capital à la Hartwick’s rule. (see point 2 for results). Environmental Capital. Pigouvian taxes – politically unpopular – can in theory prevent the deterioration of environmental capital. However, environmental capital typically does not grow. There is a finite amount of clean water and air. To make up for environmental shallowing due to population growth, Hartwick’s Rule-type investing will be needed. See point 2 for results). Is any nation using Hartwick’s Rule? (you do not need to know this for exam). Ref. Martin Skancke, Workshop on petroleum revenue management, 2006 • • • • • • • Alberta taxes private owners of mineral deposits, and collects “royalties” very similar to taxes from those working Crown deposits. The royalties depend on price and volumje (gas & oil) or profits (oil sands). From 1976-1983, 30% of government revenues from the energy sector were placed in the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund. That shrunk to 15%, then ceased in about 1988. Recently, the Fund has been restructured, but I’m not aware of any dedication of energy sector earnings to the fund. Recently, $400 was paid to each Albertan to represent their share of oil and gas revenues from Crown land. This kind of payment is not scheduled or required by law. Albertans are now considering a regular citizen’s dividend from moneys placed in the Fund. According to the Norwegian Ministry of Finance, several oil-producing countries have some kind of fund paid for by taxes on oil and gas revenues or a share of the government’s budget surplus. Chile and Venezuela use the money to stabilize the government budget, which is very sensitive to variations in oil and gas tax revenues. There are not necessarily any public savings over the long run. Alaska and Kuwait have savings funds which are separate from the government budget. Alaska gives about half the interest earned on the fund back to the citizens in the form of a yearly cheque. Kuwait, East Timor, and Norway have financing funds which pay for government deficits. Here it is obvious when the net savings of the country are positive or negative. According to the CIA World Factbook, Norway’s “Government Petroleum Fund” is currently valued at $250 billion, which is equivalent to about 1 year’s GDP. Norway uses part of its fund to buy foreign exchange so that Norway’s krone will not appreciate too much due to demand for Norwegian oil and gas. When demand for your major export commodity causes your currency to appreciate, your other export sectors are injured. This is known as Dutch Disease. • • • • • • • Hartwick’s rule is that resource rents must be reinvested in physical capital. Ignoring the depreciation of physical capital for a moment, there must be investment I > THR, else total capital is declining due to the running down of the exhaustible resource. I – THR is called economic depreciation. There is a similar number that can be calculated for countries which exceed their optimal harvest of renewable resources. Normally, statisticians collect data on GDP or GNP each year. They also calculate NDP or NNP, which subtracts physical capital depreciation from GDP or GNP. Green NDP or NNP would go one step further and subtract economic depreciation from NDP or NNP. So we see that a nation’s capital base can be run-down (depreciated) or built up (“savings”/investment). A country may be investing a lot, but its resource base may be depreciating even faster. An economy needs “genuine savings” in order to be sustainable. Genuine Savings • Genuine Savings was calculated for various nations in a 2006 publication of the United Nations titled “Where is the Wealth of Nations? Measuring Capial for the 21st Century”. Gross National Saving = (GNI – C – G ), where GNI is approximately equal to GDP minus the depreciation of physical capital = Net National Saving Net National Saving plus current spending on education minus an approximation to Total Hotelling Rent minus health and other damages from pollution (the authors included a charge of $20 per ton for CO2 emissions) = “Genuine Savings” Genuine Savings, 2000, As % of GNP USA, Canada Australia Denmark, Norway Ireland Romania Kuwait, Saudi Arabia Mexico, Bolivia Haiti, Dominican Rep Kenya 8.2, 12.7 4.3 14.8, 18.5 22.7 3.3 -12.9, -26.5 8.4, -0.6 26.1, 14.2 10.9