油價下跌將顯著提振世界經濟

The world economy will receive a significant boost from lower oil prices this year desPite fears of deflation and persistently weak spending, leading economists attending the World Economic Forum told the Financial Times.
Ahead of the gathering at the Swiss resort, which begins today, most economists had a more optimistic outlook than the International Monetary Fund, although they recognised that the recovery remained uneven and were less optimistic than a year ago.
But there were specific worries that advanced economies had lost the ability to share the proceeds of growth more widely across their populations, which could undermine future prospects.
In response to divergent prospects for the economies of the US and eurozone, the European Central Bank is tomorrow expected to unveil an ambitious programme of quantitative easing, while the US Federal Reserve is forecast to tighten monetary policy this year. However, a majority of economists, including four Nobel Prize winners, believed markets would take these potentially destabilising moves in their stride.
Since crude prices began to slide last year, most economists and policy makers have expected growth to accelerate because the boost cheaper energy would give to consumption in oil-importing countries would outweigh the negative impact on oil producing nations.
Yesterday, the IMF confounded some of these hopes, cutting its global growth forecasts for both 2015 and 2016 by 0.3 percentage points. The fund said deep underlying problems with the recovery would outweigh the “shot in the arm” from cheaper oil.
But many of the economists attending Davos are optimistic that, despite its troubles, the global economy can overcome these difficulties.
Michael Spence, economics professor at the Stern School of Business, New York University, agreed there were problems in parts of the global economy, but cheaper energy would boost economies with demand problems.
“With China still growing and the US improving . . . I doubt the [oil] price decline could be attributed to a sharply negative view of the global economy,” the 2001 Nobel laureate said.
Another Nobel winner, Professor Chris Pissarides from London School of Economics, was unconcerned about yesterday’s fall in China’s growth. “The slowdown was bound to happen and the Chinese are prepared for it,” he said.
Ian Goldin, professor of globalisation and development at Oxford university, said: “Global prospects of aggregate growth above 3 per cent remain good by historical standards.” The IMF’s forecasts still predicted 3.5 per cent growth in 2015, rising to 3.7 per cent in 2016.
Some economists, however, thought the boost would be modest and the bigger effect would be a redistribution of income from oil producers to consumers.
“The distributional effects may come to dominate the news,” said Ricardo Hausmann, director of the Harvard Center for International Development at the Kennedy School of Government. “We may see financial disruptions triggered by overleveraged oil exporting countries and corporations that could then spread in unanticipated ways.”
Meanwhile Edmund Phelps, director of the Center on Capitalism and Society at Columbia University, gave a gloomy assessment. “Europe has been imploding and Asia needs time to build a more innovative economy, so I do not expect appreciable global growth in the next couple of years,” he said. “The US may have got ahead of itself in the past year.”
In general, there was confidence that markets could cope with an expected loosening of monetary policy at the ECB at the same time as the Fed prepared to raise rates for the first time since 2006.
Lord Turner, former head of the UK financial regulator and now senior fellow at the Institute for New Economic Thinking, said there was “no reason why 2.5 per cent interest rates in the US and zero per cent in the eurozone would necessarily produce huge instability”.
Robert Shiller, professor of Economics at Yale University, who won the Nobel Prize in 2013, said there might not be that much divergence in wider financial markets even with the two central banks moving in opposite directions. “Despite anticipation of tightening, long-term US interest rates have been declining for the past year, to really low levels,” he said.
One area of widespread concern, however, was how advanced economies had found it difficult to ensure the benefits of growth were widely shared. The exception was Kenneth Rogoff, of Harvard University. “As the recovery continues in places such as the US and UK, wages should begin to strengthen notably in 2015,” he said.
But other economists said rising inequality was perhaps the biggest challenge facing industrialised economies.

出席世界經濟論壇(WEF)的一些知名經濟學家對英國《金融時報》表示，世界經濟今年將從油價下跌得到一個可觀的提振，儘管人們擔憂通縮和持續疲軟的支出。
論壇將從今日起在達沃斯這個瑞士度假勝地舉行。開幕前夕，大部分經濟學家對前景的看法比國際貨幣基金組織(IMF)更爲樂觀，儘管他們承認復甦仍是不平衡的，而且他們的樂觀程度不如一年前的此時。
但也有某些人擔心，發達經濟體已經失去了在國內不同人羣中間更廣泛分享經濟增長果實的能力，這可能破壞未來的發展前景。
針對美國和歐元區經濟前景的分化，預計歐洲央行(ECB)明日將推出一項雄心勃勃的量化寬鬆計劃，而美聯儲(Fed)今年將收緊貨幣政策。然而，大多數經濟學家（包括四名諾貝爾獎得主）相信，市場會很好地應對這些潛在有損穩定的舉措。
自原油價格去年開始下滑以來，多數經濟學家和政策制定者預期經濟增長將會加快，原因是更便宜的能源提振石油進口國消費的效果，將超出其對產油國的負面影響。
昨日，IMF給其中一些期待澆了冷水，將2015年和2016年全球經濟增長預測分別下調0.3個百分點。該組織表示，此輪復甦的深層次問題將壓倒更便宜石油帶來的“強心針”。
但是，參加達沃斯論壇的很多經濟學家樂觀地認爲，儘管面臨種種困擾，但全球經濟能夠克服這些困難。
紐約大學斯特恩商學院(Stern School of Business, New York University)經濟學教授邁克爾•斯彭斯(Michael Spence)承認，全球經濟的某些部分存在問題，但更便宜的能源將提振存在需求問題的經濟體。
“鑑於中國仍在增長，而美國不斷好轉……我懷疑（石油）價格下降可歸因於對全球經濟的一種強烈負面的看法，”這位2001年諾貝爾經濟學獎得主表示。
另一位諾貝爾獎得主，倫敦政治經濟學院(London School of Economics)的克里斯•皮薩里德斯(Chris Pissarides)教授對昨日中國增長數據下滑表示不擔心。“經濟放緩是必然要發生的，中國人做好了準備，”他說。
牛津大學(Oxford university)全球化和發展教授伊恩•戈爾丁(Ian Goldin)表示：“按照歷史標準，3%以上的全球經濟增長前景仍是不錯的。”IMF仍預計全球經濟2015年增長3.5%，2016年增長3.7%。
不過，一些經濟學家認爲，提振將是溫和的，更大的效應將是從石油生產者到消費者的收入再分配。
“分配效應可能會逐漸主導新聞，”哈佛大學(Harvard)肯尼迪政府學院的國際發展中心主任裏卡多•豪斯曼(Ricardo Hausmann)表示。“我們可能看到舉債過度的石油出口國和公司引發金融混亂，這種混亂隨即可能以意料之外的方式蔓延。”
與此同時，哥倫比亞大學(Columbia University)資本主義與社會中心主任埃德蒙•菲爾普斯(Edmund Phelps)作出了悲觀的評估。“歐洲已經開始內爆，亞洲需要時間來打造一個更具創新性的經濟體，因此我不期待全球經濟在未來兩年出現顯著增長，”他表示。“美國在過去一年可能超前了。”
總體而言，各方都有信心認爲，在美聯儲準備自2006年以來首次提高利率的同時，市場可以應對歐洲央行預計將出臺的貨幣政策放鬆措施。
英國金融監管機構前負責人、現任新經濟思維研究所(Institute for New Economic Thinking)高級研究員的特納勳爵(Lord Turner)表示：“2.5%的美國利率和百分之零的歐元區利率沒有理由一定會引發巨大動盪。”
耶魯大學(Yale University)經濟學教授、2013年諾貝爾獎得主羅伯特•席勒(Robert Shiller)表示，即使這兩個央行朝着相反的方向前進，廣泛金融市場也未必會出現太大分化。“儘管預期會收緊政策，但過去一年裏美國長期利率一直在下降，跌至非常低的水平，”他說。
然而，人們普遍擔憂的一個方面是，發達經濟體發現很難確保經濟增長的好處得到廣泛分享。唯一的例外是哈佛大學的肯尼斯•羅格夫(Kenneth Rogoff)。“隨着美國和英國等地的經濟復甦繼續，工資應當在2015年開始顯著上升，”他說。
但其他經濟學家表示，不斷加劇的不平等也許是工業化經濟體面臨的最大挑戰。