Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-7drxs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T16:56:36.075Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Open Issues On the Implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2020

Bertrand Martinot
Affiliation:
Economic and Financial Affairs, European Commission

Abstract

Now that the budget deficits in the Euro Area are approaching balance, the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) looks like a largely non-constraining institutional framework with little impact on national fiscal policies. This article challenges this view and argues that the implementation of the SGP ‘at cruising speed’ is faced with a number of outstanding issues: safeguarding the automatic stabilisers under the SGP; coping with the consequences of the asymmetric nature of the SGP for the co-ordination of macroeconomic policies; and ensuring the long-run sustainability of public finances. It concludes that enlarging the scope and enhancing the credibility of the stability and convergence programmes to become a true instrument of fiscal policy coordination in the Euro Area would be a first step in lifting the uncertainties surrounding the implementation of the SGP.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 National Institute of Economic and Social Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The authors would like to thank Andr6 Sapir for useful discussions. The opinions expressed in this article belong to the authors and should not be attributed to the European Commission or its services.

References

Allsopp, C., McKibbin, W. and Vines, D. (1999), ‘Fiscal consolidation in Europe: some empirical issues’, in Hughes Hallett, A., Hutchison, M.M. and Hougaard Jensen, S.E. (eds), Fiscal Aspects of European Monetary Integration, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Allsopp, C. and Vines, D. (1996), ‘Fiscal policy and EMU’, National Institute Economic Review, 158, pp. 91107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
-(1998), ‘The assessment: macroeconomic policy after EMU’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 14 (3), Autumn, pp. 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Artis, M.J. and Buti, M. (2000), “‘Close to balance or in surplus”- a policy maker's guide to the implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact’, Journal of Common Market Studies, forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrell, R. and Pina, A. (2000), ‘How important are automatic stabilisers in Europe ?’, EUI Working Papers, ECO. No 2000/2.Google Scholar
Blanchard, O.J. (1985). ‘Debts, deficits and finite horizons’, Journal of Political Economy, 93 (2), April, pp. 223–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bean, C. (1998), ‘Discussion’, Economic Policy, 26, pp. 104–7.Google Scholar
Buti, M. (2000), ‘Policy issues - links with the Stability and Growth Pact’, proceedings of the Banca d'Italia seminar on Long-Term Sustainability of Public Finances, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Buti, M., Franco, D. and Ongena, H. (1997), ‘Budgetary policies during recessions: retrospective application of the “Stability and Growth Pact” to the post-war period’, Recherches Economiques de Louvain, 63 (4), pp. 321–66.Google Scholar
-(1998), ‘Fiscal discipline and flexibility in EMU: the implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 14 (3), pp. 8197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buti, M. and Sapir, A. (eds) (1998), Economic Policy in EMU - A Study by the European Commission Services, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dalsgaard, T. and de Serres, A. (1999), ‘Estimating prudent budgetary margins for 11 EU countries: a simulated SVAR model approach’, OECD Economics Department Working Papers no. 216.Google Scholar
Dury, K. and Pina, A. (2000), ‘European fiscal policy after EMU: simulating the operation of the Stability Pact’, EUI Working Papers, ECO. No 2000/3.Google Scholar
Eichengreen, B. (1996), ‘Saving Europe's automatic stabilisers’, National Institute Economic Review, 159, pp. 92–8.Google Scholar
Eichengreen, B. and Wyplosz, C. (1998), ‘Stability pact - more than a minor nuisance?’, Economic Policy, 26, pp. 65114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission (1999), ‘Budgetary surveillance in EMU: the new stability and convergence programmes’, European Economy, Supplement A, no 2/3.Google Scholar
-(2000). ‘Public Finances in EMU - 2000’, European Economy Reports and Studies, 3.Google Scholar
Franco, D. and Munzi, T. (1997), ‘Ageing and fiscal policies in the European Union’, European Economy Reports and Studies, 4, reprinted in Buti, M., Franco, D. and Pench, L.R. (eds), The Welfare State in Europe - Challenges and Reforms, London, Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Hughes Hallett and McAdam, P. (1999), ‘Implications of the Stability and Growth Pact: why the “growth” element is important’, in Hughes Hallett, A., Hutchison, M.M. and Hougaard Jensen, S.E. (eds), Fiscal Aspects of European Monetary Integration, Cambridge University Press. IMF (1998), World Economic Outlook, October.Google Scholar
Martinot, B. (2000), ‘Pacte de stabilité et efficacité de la politique budgétaire’, Document de travail, Ministère de l'Économie, des Finances et de l'Industrie.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mélitz, J. (1997), ‘Some cross-country evidence about debt, deficits and the behaviour of monetary and fiscal authorities’, Centre for Economic Policy Research discussion paper no. 1653.Google Scholar
-(2000), ‘Some cross-country evidence about fiscal policy behaviour and consequences for EMU’, mimeo. OECD (1997), OECD Economic Outlook, December.Google Scholar
Van den Noord, P. (2000), ‘The size and role of automatic fiscal stabilisers in the 1990s and beyond’, OECD Economics Department Working Papers, no. 230.Google Scholar
von Hagen, J., Hughes Hallett, A. and Strauch, R. (2000), Budgetary Consolidation in EMU, a study for the European Commission, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Wyplosz, C. (1999), ‘Economic policy coordination in EMU: strategies and institutions’, ZEI Policy Paper, B 11.Google Scholar