Long way down
Why predicting the impact of a no-deal Brexit is so hard
路还长
为什么难以预测无协议脱欧的后果？
Estimates of the economic effects of no-deal on GDP are varied
无协议脱欧如何影响GDP 尚无一致结论
Print edition | Britain
Jul 25th 2019
Apart from Economists for Free Trade (eft), a pro-Brexit group, almost no wonks believe that leaving the EU without a deal would be good for the economy. The majority flinch when Boris Johnson, the new prime minister, promises that Britain will push off by October 31st “come what may”. Yet the question of just how bad a no-deal Brexit would be has many answers.
除了支持脱欧的自由贸易经济学家（EFT）以外，几乎没有一个专家相信，如果不达成协议就离开欧盟对经济有利。当新首相鲍里斯·约翰逊（Boris Johnson）承诺无论如何，英国将在10月31日前离开时，大多数人开始畏缩不前。然而，无协议脱欧到底有多糟糕的问题有很多答案。
On July 18th the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the fiscal watchdog, warned that a no-deal exit would “push the economy into recession”. The next day Oxford Economics argued that “no-deal Brexit might be bad, but not obr bad.” Capital Economics, another consultancy, wrote last year that in its central no-deal scenario “we don’t expect...a full-blown recession.” Estimates of the long-term effect on gdp are even more varied (see chart).
7月18日，财政监督机构预算责任办公室（OBR）警告说，不达成协议退出将“促使经济进入衰退”。第二天，牛津经济研究院（Oxford Economics）辩称，“不脱欧可能是糟糕的，但也不会像OBR 所说的那样。”另一家咨询公司Capital Economics去年写道，在其核心的“不脱欧方案”中，“我们预期不会出现全面衰退。”对GDP长期影响的估计甚至更加多样化。（见图表）。
If Britain leaves without a deal it will become a member of the World Trade Organisation on its own, not as part of the EU . Britain would generally have to charge the same tariffs on eu imports as on non-eu ones. Regulations governing everything from medicines to electricity connections to financial services could lapse.
如果英国没有达成协议就离开，它将独自成为世界贸易组织的一员，而不是作为欧盟的一部分。英国必须对欧盟进口商品征收与非欧盟进口商品相同的关税。从药品到通过电力连接的金融服务的所有管理法规都可能失效。
image.png
Three big judgments shape economists’ views of the eventual impact of this. The first is precisely what happens to tariffs. The EFT assumes that Britain unilaterally cuts all of them to zero, boosting trade and thus economic growth. Most economists think that too optimistic.
经济学家对最终影响的预期主要受到三个判断的影响。第一个就是关税问题。欧洲自由贸易联盟认为英国会单方面将它们全部削减到零，从而促进贸易，促进经济增长。但大多数经济学家认为这过于乐观。
The second issue is what happens to non-tariff barriers, such as regulations, between Britain and its trading partners. Plenty of academic work looks at the economic impact of entering a big trading bloc, but there is much less on countries leaving, since this rarely happens. Will the non-tariff barriers that were lowered during Britain’s membership of the EU rise again when it pushes off? The government estimate shown in the chart assumes that the majority will be. Others, including from Rabobank, use estimates of non-tariff barriers between the eu and America as a guide to what Britain could face.
第二个问题是英国与其贸易伙伴之间的非关税壁垒，如贸易管制。许多学术研究着眼于进入一个大型贸易集团对经济的影响，但对离开的影响研究极少，因为这种情况很少发生，。在英国加入欧盟期间降低的非关税壁垒会在其推动下再次上升吗？图表中所示的政府估计数假设大多数壁垒将会上升。其他国家，包括来自荷兰合作银行的国家，使用欧盟和美国之间的非关税壁垒估计值作为英国可能面临的问题的指南。
The third judgment concerns so-called “dynamic effects”. Economists often assume that a reduction in openness to trade will crimp long-term productivity growth, in part because specialisation is more difficult and in part because inward investment from abroad would be lower. One paper from the London School of Economics, which looks at the impact of Britain moving to WTO rules, finds that including these dynamic effects triples the estimate of lost GDP per person.
第三种判断关注“动态效应”。经济学家通常认为，贸易开放度的降低会抑制长期生产力的增长，因为专业化更加困难，而且来自国外的投资将减少。伦敦经济学院（LSE）的一篇研究英国加入世贸组织的影响的论文发现，包括这些动态效应在内，人均GDP损失估计值将达到三倍于静态估计的水平。
Brexiteers argue that most economists are too negative—just as they were about the impact of the vote to leave the EU in 2016. Following a chaotic exit, the Bank of England could radically loosen monetary policy, and the government could ramp up spending or slash taxes. Perhaps. But even the gloomiest economic forecasts only paint a partial picture of what could happen following a chaotic exit. Shortages of medicines, violence at the Irish border, shuttered farms and panicky immigrants might not affect the economy much. But there is more to life than GDP.
英国脱欧主义者认为，大多数经济学家都过于消极，正如他们对2016年退出欧盟投票的影响所持的态度一样。在混乱的退出之后，英格兰银行可以从根本上放松货币政策，政府可以增加支出或削减税收。也许会有不糟糕的事情发生。但即便是最悲观的经济预测也只能部分描绘出混乱退出后可能发生的情况。药品短缺、爱尔兰边境的暴力、关闭的农场和惊慌失措的移民可能对经济影响不大。但对生活的影响要大于GDP。
This article appeared in the Britain section of the print edition under the headline "How bad, exactly?"
网友评论