IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The sustainability of Australia's current account deficits--A reappraisal after the global financial crisis

Listed author(s):
  • Karunaratne, Neil Dias
Registered author(s):

    The heated debate over the sustainability of Australia's high current account deficit that raged over most of the fixed and floating exchange period was due to the failure of policymakers to shift from the Keynesian Mundell Fleming (KMF) paradigm which has been rendered obsolete by the floating of the Australian in 1983q4 to the Intertemporal Optimization (ITO) paradigm which was more appropriate under the floating exchange rate as advocated by a number of Australian economists in the Pitchford thesis. The Pitchford thesis contended that after the floating of the exchange rate the current account deficit was the residual outcome of rational optimizing decisions of private agents and if there was fiscal balance then the policy of targeting the reduction of the current account deficit based on the KMF paradigm was misconceived. Empirical tests based on the application of the net present value criterion using vector autoregressions, unit root and cointegration econometrics reveals that Australia's current account deficit revealed that the current account deficits were unsustainable during the fixed exchange period and over the whole study period 1960q3-2007q4, but not during the floating exchange rate period post-1983q4. Therefore the empirical results gave credibility to the Pitchford thesis but Australian policymakers continued to target the reduction of the current account deficit because their failure to make the paradigm shift from KMF to ITO to be consistent with the regime shift from a fixed to a floating exchange rate. However, in 2004 after more than two decades feuding Australian policymakers accepted the Pitchford thesis and abandon the policy of targeting the reduction of the current account deficit. But the global financial crisis and global recession has delivered a death blow to the Pitchford thesis by undermining the key assumptions of fiscal balance and rationality that underpins it. The fiscal stimulus package that has been implemented to combat the fall in aggregate demand and restore consumer confidence due to the global recession has resulted in massive fiscal imbalance and the credit crunch has undermined rational behavior and consumer confidence. Therefore, the Pitchford thesis no longer rules the policy roost after the global financial crisis. In this study we draw on the conflicting policy perspectives on the unsustainability of high US current account deficits that tender a malign prognosis based on Salvatore's twin deficit hypothesis and a benign prognosis based on Bernanke's global savings glut hypothesis to identify some key policy challenges that confront Australian policymakers to navigate the Australian economy out of the global financial crisis and recession into a robust recovery phase in the near future.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161-8938(09)00086-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Policy Modeling.

    Volume (Year): 32 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 1 (January)
    Pages: 81-97

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:jpolmo:v:32:y::i:1:p:81-97
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505735

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as
    in new window


    1. Hall, Robert E, 1978. "Stochastic Implications of the Life Cycle-Permanent Income Hypothesis: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 86(6), pages 971-987, December.
    2. Obstfeld, Maurice & Rogoff, Kenneth, 1995. "The intertemporal approach to the current account," Handbook of International Economics,in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 34, pages 1731-1799 Elsevier.
    3. Edwards, Sebastian, 2006. "The U.S. current account deficit: Gradual correction or abrupt adjustment?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 629-643, September.
    4. Ricardo Hausmann & Federico Sturzenegger, 2007. "The missing dark matter in the wealth of nations and its implications for global imbalances," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 22, pages 469-518, 07.
    5. A. J. Makin, 1989. "Is the Current Account Deficit Sustainable?," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 22(2), pages 29-33.
    6. Milton Friedman, 1957. "Introduction to "A Theory of the Consumption Function"," NBER Chapters,in: A Theory of the Consumption Function, pages 1-6 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Johansen, Soren & Juselius, Katarina, 1990. "Maximum Likelihood Estimation and Inference on Cointegration--With Applications to the Demand for Money," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 52(2), pages 169-210, May.
    8. Milesi-Ferreti, Gian Maria & Razin, Assaf, 1996. "Current account sustainability," Sede de la CEPAL en Santiago (Estudios e Investigaciones) 34294, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    9. Zivot, Eric & Andrews, Donald W K, 2002. "Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 25-44, January.
    10. Kasa, Kenneth, 2003. "Testing present value models of the current account: a cautionary note," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 557-569, August.
    11. Perron, Pierre, 1989. "The Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1361-1401, November.
    12. Trehan, Bharat & Walsh, Carl E, 1991. "Testing Intertemporal Budget Constraints: Theory and Applications to U.S. Federal Budget and Current Account Deficits," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 23(2), pages 206-223, May.
    13. Cooper, Richard N., 2006. "Living with global imbalances: A contrarian view," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 615-627, September.
    14. Bergin, Paul R & Sheffrin, Steven M, 2000. "Interest Rates, Exchange Rates and Present Value Models of the Current Account," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 535-558, April.
    15. Eichengreen, Barry, 2006. "Global imbalances: The new economy, the dark matter, the savvy investor, and the standard analysis," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 645-652, September.
    16. Cashin, Paul & McDermott, C John, 1998. "Are Australia's Current Account Deficits Excessive?," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 74(227), pages 346-361, December.
    17. Milbourne, Ross & Otto, Glenn, 1992. "Consumption Smoothing and the Current Account," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(59), pages 369-384, December.
    18. Gregory, Allan W. & Hansen, Bruce E., 1996. "Residual-based tests for cointegration in models with regime shifts," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 99-126, January.
    19. Rogoff, Kenneth, 2007. "Global imbalances and exchange rate adjustment," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 705-709.
    20. Campbell, John Y & Shiller, Robert J, 1987. "Cointegration and Tests of Present Value Models," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(5), pages 1062-1088, October.
    21. Rochelle Belkar & Lynne Cockerell & Christopher Kent, 2007. "Current Account Deficits: The Australian Debate," RBA Research Discussion Papers rdp2007-02, Reserve Bank of Australia.
    22. Gregory, Allan W. & Hansen, Bruce E., 1996. "Residual-based tests for cointegration in models with regime shifts," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 99-126, January.
    23. Glenn Otto, 2003. "Can an Intertemporal Model Explain Australia's Current Account Deficit?," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 36(3), pages 350-359.
    24. Milton Friedman, 1957. "A Theory of the Consumption Function," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number frie57-1, December.
    25. Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas & Hélène Rey, 2007. "From World Banker to World Venture Capitalist: U.S. External Adjustment and the Exorbitant Privilege," NBER Chapters,in: G7 Current Account Imbalances: Sustainability and Adjustment, pages 11-66 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    26. Rochelle Belkar & Lynne Cockerell & Christopher Kent, 2007. "Current Account Deficits: The Australian Debate," Working Papers Central Bank of Chile 450, Central Bank of Chile.
    27. Paul Krugman, 2007. "Will there be a dollar crisis?," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 22, pages 435-467, 07.
    28. Sachs, Jeffrey, 1982. " The Current Account in the Macroeconomic Adjustment Process," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 84(2), pages 147-159.
    29. Jacques A Miniane & Benoît Mercereau, 2004. "Challenging the Empirical Evidence From Present Value Models of the Current Account," IMF Working Papers 04/106, International Monetary Fund.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jpolmo:v:32:y::i:1:p:81-97. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.