by Kenneth Rogoff
FRANKFURT – A systematic and
broad failure of regulation is the elephant in the room when it comes to
reforming today’s Western capitalism. Yes, much has been said about the
unhealthy political-regulatory-financial dynamic that led to the global
economy’s heart attack in 2008 (initiating what Carmen Reinhart and I call “The
Second Great Contraction”). But is the problem unique to the financial
industry, or does it exemplify a deeper flaw in Western capitalism?
Consider the food industry, particularly its
sometimes-malign influence on nutrition and health. Obesity rates are soaring
around the entire world, though, among large countries, the problem is perhaps
most severe in the United States.
According the US Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, roughly one-third of US adults are obese (indicated by a body
mass index above 30). Even more shockingly, more than one in six children and
adolescents are obese, a rate that has tripled since 1980. (Full disclosure: my
spouse produces a television and Web show, called kickinkitchen.tv, aimed at combating
childhood obesity.)
Of course, the problems of the food industry
have been vigorously highlighted by experts on nutrition and health, including Michael Pollan andDavid Katz, and certainly by many
economists as well. And there are numerous other examples, across a wide
variety of goods and services, where one could find similar issues. Here,
though, I want to focus on the food industry’s link to broader problems with
contemporary capitalism (which has certainly facilitated the worldwide obesity
explosion), and on why the US political system has devoted remarkably little
attention to the issue (though First Lady Michelle Obama has made important
efforts to raise awareness).
Obesity affects life expectancy in numerous ways, ranging from
cardiovascular disease to some types of cancer. Moreover, obesity – certainly
in its morbid manifestations – can affect quality of life. The costs are borne
not only by the individual, but also by society – directly, through the
health-care system, and indirectly, through lost productivity, for example, and
higher transport costs (more jet fuel, larger seats, etc.).
But the obesity epidemic hardly looks like a growth killer. Highly
processed corn-based food products, with lots of chemical additives, are well
known to be a major driver of weight gain, but, from a conventional
growth-accounting perspective, they are great stuff. Big agriculture gets paid
for growing the corn (often subsidized by the government), and the food
processors get paid for adding tons of chemicals to create a habit-forming –
and thus irresistible – product. Along the way, scientists get paid for finding
just the right mix of salt, sugar, and chemicals to make the latest instant
food maximally addictive; advertisers get paid for peddling it; and, in the
end, the health-care industry makes a fortune treating the disease that
inevitably results.
Coronary capitalism is fantastic for the stock market, which includes
companies in all of these industries. Highly processed food is also good for
jobs, including high-end employment in research, advertising, and health care.
So, who could complain? Certainly not politicians, who get re-elected when
jobs are plentiful and stock prices are up – and get donations from all of the
industries that participate in the production of processed food. Indeed, in the
US, politicians who dared to talk about the health, environmental, or
sustainability implications of processed food would in many cases find
themselves starved of campaign funds.
True, market forces have spurred innovation, which has continually driven
down the price of processed food, even as the price of plain old fruits and
vegetables has gone up. That is a fair point, but it overlooks the huge market
failure here.
Consumers are provided with precious little information through schools,
libraries, or health campaigns; instead, they are swamped with disinformation
through advertising. Conditions for children are particularly alarming. With
few resources for high-quality public television in most countries, children
are co-opted by channels paid for by advertisements, including by food
industry.
Beyond disinformation, producers have few incentives to internalize the
costs of the environmental damage that they cause. Likewise, consumers have
little incentive to internalize the health-care costs of their food choices.
If our only problems were the food industry causing physical heart attacks
and the financial industry facilitating their economic equivalent, that would
be bad enough. But the pathological regulatory-political-economic dynamic that
characterizes these industries is far broader. We need to develop new and much
better institutions to protect society’s long-run interests.
Of course, the balance between consumer sovereignty and paternalism is
always delicate. But we could certainly begin to strike a healthier balance
than the one we have by giving the public far better information across a range
of platforms, so that people could begin to make more informed consumption
choices and political decisions.
Kenneth Rogoff is Professor of Economics and
Public Policy at Harvard University, and was formerly chief economist at the
IMF.
Copyright:
Project Syndicate, 2012.
www.project-syndicate.org
www.project-syndicate.org

Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου