Graph of the week

This week I look at the Heritage 2012 Index of Economic Freedom. (click on the graph to get a better view)

Source: 2012 Index of Economic Freedom, Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal
The current index shows an apparent worldwide decrease in business freedom and government spending, for obvious reasons. Ever since the start of the financial crisis, the total World average has decreased from 60.3 to 57.9, mostly due to the growing levels of government spending, rising accumulation of debt, unsustainable fiscal deficits of more and more countries and rising constraints in banking and business regulation. 

The traditionally low average scores are still investment freedom, financial freedom and in particular freedom from corruption. The problem of corruption is what is making all the dark red and orange countries remain in relatively unfree or repressed regimes. The 'heat map' in Europe shows particularly worrying signs where Italy and Greece have ended up in the mostly unfree (orange) category (in both countries the downturn is due to low scores in government spending, property rights, freedom from corruption and labour freedom), Ukraine has turned into a repressed state, and France, Spain, Portugal and Belgium have ended up in the moderately free category (again government spending, labour freedom, fiscal freedom and somewhat corruption seem to be the main culprits). 

What is also interesting to notice is the change in the average freedom score from the US and the UK during the financial crisis and the subsequent recovery. In the figure below, I compare the US and UK yearly scores with the World average and the score of Mauritius, one country that has experienced a significant rise in economic freedom over the past few years. Now it is ranked higher (no.8) than both the US (no.10) and the UK (no.14), with a point above the US, and three points above the UK (77, compared to 76.3 to 74.1, respectfully). They are both still ranked high enough, but the fiscal stimuli and high budget deficits have hurt their positions in fiscal freedom and government spending. 

Source: 2012 Index of Economic Freedom, Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal

You can play with all sort of data between and within each country, region or category of freedom.
Go and check it out at http://www.heritage.org/Index/

Comments

  1. kyle814 January 2012 at 13:39

    I would debate the relative economic freedom of the United States right now. We have a Treasury, who along with the Fed is daily manipulating both currency and markets. We have an ongoing nationalization of the health insurance industry and a partial nationalization of the auto industry. We have a growing army of new business regulations, particularly in the energy sector.

    Increasingly, political connections are the only way to make or grow a business.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Vuk Vukovic14 January 2012 at 16:26

      I agree, the level of freedom in America is rapidly decreasing, which shows in the index - maybe not yet, but the consequences of the current situation, as you described it, will show themselves soon enough..if nothing changes, that is.

      btw, have a look at this video, I think you'll like it

      Delete
  2. kyle816 January 2012 at 22:47

    Dr. Vukovic, I noticed that you frequent many of the same blogs I lurk in. Have you ever been to Newmark's Door?

    http://newmarksdoor.typepad.com/mainblog/economics/

    Craig Newmark has been very friendly to me for some years now, and has helped me in my research.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Vuk Vukovic17 January 2012 at 00:20

      No, I haven't seen it yet, thank you for letting me know.
      It seems very interesting. I'll keep an eye on it from now on


      And, btw, I don't hold a phd yet, but thank you very much for the compliment :)

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Short-selling explained (case study: movie "Trading Places")

Image
After seeing the movie "Trading Places" (1983), starring Eddie Murphy and Dan Aykroyd, for the thousandth time during the holiday season, I decided to write a quick post explaining what happened at the end of this movie that gets so many people puzzled (including me for the first couple of times I've seen it). This entertaining 80s comedy can actually teach you more about finance and trading than any other Hollywood movie (not counting documentaries), including the infamous "Wall Street" (1987), starring Michael Douglas as the ruthless Gordon Gecko, and especially the latest Scorsese film "The Wolf of Wall Street" (2013). Anyway, we all know the story from Trading Places. Dan Aykroyd plays a snobbish investor Louis Winthorpe ("the Third"), while Eddie Murphy plays a street con artist Billy Ray Valentine whose lives get reversed as a result of a bet between two cruel millionaires, the Duke brothers. The Dukes own a commodities bro
Read more

Economic history: mercantilism and international trade

Image
All too often during poor economic times many debunked economic fallacies of the past get reinvented. The reason is simple: a search for ideas and solutions alternative to the "mainstream" (however we define it) allows those who succumb to these fallacies to repeat the ancient errors classical economics was hoping to get rid of. The short-termism of politics plays a crucial role in the process of persistent perpetuation of such fallacies. This is why in times like these it is essential to go back in economic history and debunk some of the ideas that tend to surface repeatedly. In the following couple of posts, I attempt to do just that.  Misunderstanding trade  One of the most misunderstood areas of economics is international trade. More precisely, the idea that if we were to boost net exports - by subsidizing exports and constraining imports - we can achieve higher GDP growth. If one looks at the simple arithmetic of a standard Keynesian macro model: Y=C+I+G+NX, the
Read more

Rent-seeking explained: Removing barriers to entry in the taxi market

Image
The taxi market is undoubtedly one of the best examples of something economists like to call rent-seeking . What does this phenomenon stand for and why do economists (particularly political economists) devote a lot of attention to it?  The classical definition was given by Gordon Tullock back in his  1967  seminal paper "The welfare cost of tariffs, monopolies and theft" , even though the phrase itself was coined by Anne Krueger in 1974 .  Rent-seeking is a process of gaining private benefits through the political process (by lobbying or logrolling for example). It implies gaining protection for a certain privileged group, which in return promises political support, large campaign contributions, or even bribes. This protection varies from giving a monopoly status to a certain company, regulating market entry than hampers competition (such as introducing licences to specific occupations), imposing tariffs to import goods to protect the domestic industry, handing out su
Read more

Graphs (images) of the week: Separated by a border

Image
Usually comparing countries or regions requires looking at GDP growth data, GDP per capita, living standards, relative income or even the happiness index. But even a simple areal glimpse at the borders separating two systems can be more than enough to conclude which country is richer, healthier, more educated and on average more prosperous. It tells us that the causes of between-country differences have to be more than just climate, geography, culture or mentality. Particularly when the same nation is separated by nothing more than a border depicting the striking differences in political systems of the two countries (a classical example here are East and West Germany, but an equally good example can be North or South Korea).  As a result I found that the following set of images paint a better  picture  on between-country differences   than any existing data on global inequality.  The first one is from a  blog post I encountered on the Why Nations Fail blog, comparing the citi
Read more