Introduction

The Single European Market ( SEM ) programme was established with the ‘aim of extinguishing all barriers to the motion of goods, people and capital within the European Community ‘ ( Baldwin, 1992 ) thereby furthering European integrating. Integration affects growing via its consequence on physical capital, human capital and cognition capital. This essay seeks to analyze the effects of the individual market programme on some of the European Union ‘s ( EU ) poorer members since their accession to the EU. This is done in visible radiation of Robert Solow ‘s growing theoretical account. The essay examines the growing rates of these economic systems since their accession.

Growth Effect can be divided into two: Medium-term consequence and Long-run consequence. The average term consequence is better known as induced capital formation harmonizing to Solow ‘s analysis. Harold Badinger in his 2005 paper suggests that a closer European integrating consequences in significant medium-term growing consequence. The extent to which this is true in relation to states such as Spain, Portugal, Greece and Ireland is the concern of this essay.

Analysis of Solow ‘s Growth Model

The Solow Growth theoretical account assumes that the size of the work force is fixed and people save a proportion of their income. The nest eggs is so invested. Our nonsubjective utilizing this theoretical account is to see if integrating by the SEM programme induced houses to increase the degree of capital per worker employed. The theoretical account is illustrated below. The size of capital stock per worker is on the horizontal axis and the degree of national income per worker is measured on the perpendicular axis.

Now we examine what happens when the capital/labour ratio in the economic system is increased. As the capital/labour stock additions end product besides increases but at a decreasing rate.

The green curve shows the end product per worker which is upward inclining and concave. The black line shows depreciation per worker. It is assumed in the theoretical account that a changeless fraction of the capital stock depreciates at a given rate ?. Baldwin and Wyplosz ( 2006 ) suggest that ? is about 12 % in Europe. The ruddy curve shows the influx of capital curve. Increased end product will intend increased economy and hence increased investing. Depreciation is outflow of capital per worker while investing is inflow of capital per worker. Equilibrium is where depreciation peers investing that is, indicate A and point B is the steady-state degree of national income.

Solow pointed out in his diagram that accretion of capital is non a beginning of long-term growing. Capital stock will increase up to indicate K/L* and so halt unless something else alterations. He goes on to demo that the account for the uninterrupted growing we see in the modern universe is technological advancement. Technological advancement has the consequence of increasing the end product from a given sum of investing.

Medium-term growing fillip

Average term growing on the other manus can be explained with the Solow diagram and we can utilize the diagram to demo how integrating in Europe led to medium growing for European states. Integration has two phases. In phase one ; integrating improves the efficiency of the European economic system by promoting a more efficient allotment of European resources when for illustration houses merge and there is greater competition. The individual market programme was expected to cut down unit costs by 2 % and accordingly raise end product by 2 % ( Baldwin 1992 ) . This efficiency addition of integrating has the side-effect of doing Europe more attractive to investing. Thus there will be more investing beyond what it otherwise would hold been.

Harmonizing to Solow ‘s Model, we know this increased investing causes output/worker to lift faster than it would hold done otherwise. While this ‘above-normal capital formation ‘ is happening, these economic systems are sing medium-term growing. It is medium-term because the higher growing will shortly vanish one time a new equilibrium is attained. The diagram below describes the medium-term growing fillip in item.

The diagram shows that as integrating leads to fewer and more efficient houses, at a national degree this implies that more end product can be produced utilizing the same sum of capital and labor. Integration hence leads to an upward displacement in the end product curve to GDP/L ‘ ( the green curve ) . Since there is a changeless nest egg rate this would take to an upward displacement in the influx of capital curve to s ( GDP/L ) ‘ . The allotment consequence is the addition in end product that would happen without any alteration in capital-labour ratio. Motion from point C to E is the rise in end product per worker. This growing is faster than normal growing until the economic system reaches point E. As the capital-labour ratio rises towards the new steady-state degree, there would be a knock-on addition in GDP per capita ( Balwin 1994 ) . This knock-on consequence is the induced capital formation that is the medium-term growing. This is the difference between Y/L ‘ and Y/L c. It can be implied that medium-term growing reflects that improved efficiency stimulates investing. Thus integrating which leads to improved efficiency should ensue in medium-term growing.

Now we study the impact that EU rank had on the four comparatively hapless entrants that joined the EU between 1960 and 1995 in footings of economic growing. These states are Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Greece. The consequences we expect to see since their accession to the EU and the start of the individual market programme would associate to the undermentioned ‘footprints ‘ ( Baldwin 2006 ) :

Stock market monetary values should increase

The aggregative investing to GDP ratio should lift

The net foreign direct investing should better

The current history should deteriorate as more capital flows in.

We expect these consequences because their being buttresses the point made above that these states should so hold experienced medium-term growing.

Portugal and Spain

Both states applied to fall in the EU in 1977. They both joined in 1986. Following the application, growing in Portugal picked up quickly and stayed high during the dialogues and after the accession. Between 1977 and 1992, Lusitanian economic system expanded by 13 % more than the Gallic economic system. Most of this rapid growing was as a consequence of a higher rate of capital formation. Baldwin and Seghezza ( 1998 ) informations panel showed that Portugal ‘s investing rate responded strongly and rapidly to its EU rank. The panel on investment-GDP ratio for Portugal besides shows that the investing ratio was still high after 1992 when the individual market programme started. This rapid growing in Portugal may hold been a consequence of decreased uncertainness refering the state ‘s stableness and the chances of improved market entree.

Stock market monetary value indices besides showed marks of betterments. From the panel we can see that Portugal ‘s stock market index was above norm and higher than that of France from 1993 to 1996. If the increased foreign direct investing influxs to Portugal are to be attributed to the individual market so we can see the SEM had a strong positive impact on the Lusitanian economic system. The attraction of both Spain and Portugal was boosted by the SEM as industrial locations and as the 1996 study of the Economic and Social research Institute ( ESRI ) shows the SEM would hold increased the GDP of Portugal by 11.5 % by 2010 and that of Spain by 9 % .

Spain besides has similar consequences to that of Portugal though growing did non happen until after accession. Spanish investing rate form does follow the anticipations of integration-induced capital formation growing. Since the constitution of the individual market in 1992 boulder clay 1996 Spain ‘s investment-GDP ratio improved greatly. Spain and Portugal really witnessed growing as predicted by the Solow theoretical account until the recent 2008 recession. The capital history panel besides supports the position that most of Spain and Portugal ‘s high investing rates were financed by foreign capital influxs.

Figure 1: The panel informations for the medium-term growing consequence in Portugal and Spain.

Irish republic

Ireland joined the EU in 1973 and was therefore the first hapless state to fall in the brotherhood. The instance of Ireland is a reasonably clear one of integration-induced investing growing. The individual market has had a positive impact on Ireland at least before 2008. The Irish GDP as at 1996 was 9 % over what it would otherwise hold been. Baldwin and Seghezza ‘s work in 1998 showed that Ireland ‘s investing to GDP ratio picked up after 1977 and was higher than that of France.

Monti ( 1996 ) showed that the Single market programme consequence on Irish GDP was approximately 3.5 % by 2000. The development of the SEM led to increased investing of the US in the EU of which Ireland benefitted vastly. While foreign direct investing ( FDI ) flows comparative to GDP into Ireland were below those for EU in the 1980s, the influxs increased greatly in 1992 due to the completion of the SEM ( GO§rg et al, 1999 ) . The SEM was expected to adversely impact certain Irish sectors such as Clothing but the positive consequence on fabrication productiveness and fight led to an overall net benefit for the Irish economic system. The Irish stock market was dominated by the traditional industries ( vesture and footwear ) and so in the short-term suffered a diminution but was higher than that of France ( the control state ) afterwards.

The figure below shows informations on the four indexs of induced investment-led growing in Ireland.

Figure 2: Panel informations for medium-term growing consequence in Ireland.

Greece

Greece joined the EU in 1981 after a period of undemocratic authoritiess. But the Grecian authorities continued its insidious province controls. These province controls prevented the Grecian economic system from responding flexibly to any daze. The SEM is meant to promote productiveness and cut down costs but the Grecian economic system was unstable and so did n’t react favorably to the SEM programme. Despite the fact that the SEM programmed stimulated foreign investing in the EU the Grecian economic system did non bask increased investing because the hapless macroeconomic direction of the economic system farther harmed the investing clime.

The ESRI ( 1996 ) study estimated that the SEM would hold undistinguished effects on the Grecian economic system by twelvemonth 2010. The ground is that many of Greek autochthonal industries are deemed as uncompetitive by the European Commission and besides the flow of foreign direct investing into Greece remains low. These two grounds buttress the point of the hapless economic and political clime in Greece. For illustration, Grecian rising prices rate is high and unstable. It has fluctuated between 25 % and 20 % between 1981 and 1991.

The undermentioned figure 3 suggests that EU rank and the SEM barely had any impact on any of the four indexs for Greece.

Figure 3: Panel informations for medium-term growing consequence in Greece.

Decision

So far we have examined the impact of the Single market on EU ‘s peripheral states utilizing Solow ‘s growing theoretical account. As suggested by the theoretical account we would anticipate integrating and its enterprise such as SEM to ensue in average term growing for the states involved. But the consequences have varied greatly for EU states. It is observed that a programme like the individual market is merely favorable given positive macroeconomic policy and stable authoritiess in the several states. An illustration of this is the instance of Greece in which despite the SEM there has been no existent impact on the economic system. Greeks are slow to follow new engineerings, and defects in the instruction system mean that this is improbable to alter shortly. It shows that while integrating may better the investing clime in a state, this can be offset by other factors.

In add-on, it might non be precisely true that most of the growing experienced by states such as Ireland is due merely to the SEM. Other factors such as societal partnership understandings may hold contributed to the Irish success. Besides the fact that Ireland is an English speech production state may hold contributed to the high degree of investings by transnational companies from the US because this would hold reduced the dealing costs for these companies. This gave Ireland an advantage over the other fringe states. The above observation suggests that economic integrating and the individual market programme are a necessary but non surely a sufficient status for induced capital formation in a periphery state of the EU.