SUMMARYInstead of a relapse into the depression of the 30's, as the stagnationists had foreseen, the end of the war marked the beginning of a quarter of a century of unprecedented growth. The saturation thesis, based on a misperception of human wants, turned out to be wrong, and with innovations and an opening of markets, the apprehended technological and spatial limits to growth were overcome. However, the extraordinary post‐war growth eventually met with supply side bottlenecks: excessive wage increases, higher energy and environmental costs, and an inflation‐induced waste of capital led to a relative stagnation in the 70's. The growth poles USA and East Asia have extricated themselves more quickly from this stagnation than Europe which suffers from more rigidities and still lacks sufficient downward flexibility of real wages. To revitalize its economy, Europe has to free its markets from state regulations and make them more accessible to domestic and international competition. With a swift trade liberalization, Europe ‐ and the world ‐ could tap a large source of productivity growth. Admittedly, this would go along with a process of creative destruction. In order to facilitate the import‐induced decline of old industries, free activity zones should be established in the affected regions.
Read full abstract