Blog Post

Germany’s super competitiveness: A helping hand from Eastern Europe

Discussions about the current-account imbalance within the Eurozone have focused on the under-competitive periphery and super-competitive Germany. This column suggests that the argument ignores one powerful way that Germany lowered its relative unit labour costs. German firms offshored parts of their production to the new member states in Eastern Europe, Russia, and the Ukraine. Discussions […]

By: Date: June 19, 2010 Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy

Discussions about the current-account imbalance within the Eurozone have focused on the under-competitive periphery and super-competitive Germany. This column suggests that the argument ignores one powerful way that Germany lowered its relative unit labour costs. German firms offshored parts of their production to the new member states in Eastern Europe, Russia, and the Ukraine.

Discussions about the current-account imbalance within the Eurozone have focused on the under-competitive periphery and super-competitive Germany. This column suggests that the argument ignores one powerful way that Germany lowered its relative unit labour costs. German firms offshored parts of their production to the new member states in Eastern Europe, Russia, and the Ukraine.
Germany‟s substantial trade surplus with its southern neighbours is in the spotlight (Wyplosz 2010). Many economists argue that Germany‟s trade imbalance with its southern Eurozone neighbours has contributed to their woes. German industry has boosted the competitiveness of its exports over the past decade by keeping wages flat.
As a result, German wage restraint has led to a real depreciation of Germany‟s fixed nominal exchange rate vis-à-vis its Eurozone members, helping Germany to win market shares at the expense of Southern Europe. The numbers give support to this argument. In fact, Germany‟s real effective devaluation in terms of relative unit labour costs compared with the EU27 during 1994-2009 is about 20%. This is indeed substantial.
But the argument hides another powerful way by which Germany lowered its relative unit labour costs. German firms‟ offshored part of production to the new member states in Eastern Europe, Russia and Ukraine.
At first, Germany was slow in exploiting the opportunities offered by the opening up of Eastern Europe after the fall of communism compared to its neighbour, Austria. In 1999 Austria‟s outgoing foreign direct investment to Eastern Europe accounted for almost 90% of total investment leaving the country, Germany invested a meagre 4% in Eastern Europe. As a result, offshoring as measured by the share of trade between German parent firms and their subsidiaries in Eastern Europe – also called intra-firm trade – accounted for only about 20% of total German imports from Eastern Europe, while it reached almost 70% of total Austrian imports from the same region (Marin 2009).
In the second half of the 1990s Germany shifted its strategy and started to invest heavily in Eastern Europe. Its share of outgoing foreign investment to the region increased to almost 30% in 2004-2006.
This new way of organising production by slicing up the value chain has been more important for Germany‟s lower unit labour costs than German workers‟ wage restraint. According to estimates, German offshoring to Eastern Europe boosted not only the productivity of its subsidiaries in Eastern Europe by almost threefold compared to local firms, but it also increased the productivity of the parent companies in Germany by more than 20% (Hansen 2010 and Marin 2010).
As a result, relocating production to Eastern Europe made globally competing German firms leaner and more efficient helping them to win market shares in a growingly competitive world market. The efficiency gains from reorganising production were particularly pronounced after 2004 leading to a sharp fall in Germany‟s relative unit labour costs from 2004 to 2008.
Productivity gains from offshoring are also the main reasons why Germany and Austria experienced only minor job losses as a result of the opening up of Eastern Europe. By finding this new way of producing, German and Austrian firms were able to cut costs and to take advantage of the pool of skilled workers available there. It seems that the fall of communism and the opening up of Eastern Europe happened just at the right time. It allowed German firms to cut costs at the time when globalisation intensified competition and it allowed Germany to cope with the scarcity of human capital which became particularly pronounced in the 1990s.
Due to Germany‟s skill shortage, offshoring to Eastern Europe has led also to lower wages for skilled workers in Germany. German firms offshored the skill intensive part of the value chain to exploit the low cost skilled labour available in Eastern Europe. As a result, the demand for this type of labour in Germany was lower, putting downward pressure on skilled wages in Germany. Hence, offshoring improved Germany‟s competitiveness by increasing German firms‟ productivity and by lowering its skilled wages.
What follows from this for southern Europe?
Germany and Austria adjusted to eastern enlargement by changing the way they do business. It is often argued that the Eurozone‟s problem is that, contrary to the US, it lacks labour mobility and fiscal centralisation. But the evidence for Austria and Germany suggests that Europe has invented a new adjustment mechanism based on firms‟ slicing up of the value chain. As a result, while country boundaries have become less important for the competitiveness of Europe as a whole, firm boundaries are now more important.

References
Thorsten Hansen (2010), “Tariff Rates, Offshoring and Productivity: Evidence from German and Austrian Firm-Level Data”, Munich Discussion Paper 2010-21, University of Munich.
Dalia Marin (2009), “The New Corporation in Europe”, BRUEGEL Policy Brief, Brussels, September.
Dalia Marin (2010), “The Opening Up of Eastern Europe at 20: Jobs, Skills, and „Reverse Maquiladoras‟ in Austria and Germany”, Munich Discussion Paper 2010-14, University of Munich.
Wyplosz, Charles (2010), “Germany, current accounts and competitiveness”, VoxEU.org, 31 March.

A version of this op-ed was published by VOX.eu


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Podcast

Podcast

Are robots taking our jobs?

What will be the impact of automation on the economy? Bruegel's own Giuseppe Porcaro discusses with Aaron Benanav, Laura Nurski, and Alexis Moraitis.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: July 20, 2021
Read article
 

Blog Post

Will European Union recovery spending be enough to fill digital investment gaps?

The recovery facility will boost digital transformation, but questions remain whether it will be sufficient to achieve Europe’s digital ambitions.

By: Zsolt Darvas, J. Scott Marcus and Alkiviadis Tzaras Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Date: July 20, 2021
Read article Download PDF
 

Policy Contribution

A new direction for the European Union’s half-hearted semiconductor strategy

The EU needs a more targeted strategy to increase its presence in this strategic and thriving sector, building on its existing strengths, while accommodating its relatively low domestic needs.

By: Niclas Poitiers and Pauline Weil Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Date: July 15, 2021
Read about event More on this topic
 

Upcoming Event

Sep
2
14:30

Brave new digital industrial policy

Bruegel Annual Meetings, Day 2 - In this session our speakers will dicuss innovation and digitalisation.

Speakers: Francesca Bria, Kerstin Jorna, Marietje Schaake and Reinhilde Veugelers Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Location: Palais des Académies, Rue Ducale 1, Brussels
Read about event More on this topic
 

Upcoming Event

Sep
3
11:45

Academic lecture: International technology competition

Bruegel Annual Meetings, Day 3 - On the final day of the Annual Meetings, our Director Guntram Wolf sits with Keyu Jin to discuss international competition policy.

Speakers: Keyu Jin, J. Scott Marcus and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Location: Palais des Académies, Rue Ducale 1, Brussels
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Blog Post

Designing a hybrid work organisation

Post-pandemic hybrid work models should be carefully planned, taking into account individual and organisational needs.

By: Laura Nurski Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: July 5, 2021
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

Workers can unlock the artificial intelligence revolution

Employers and artificial intelligence developers should ensure new technologies work for workers by making them trustworthy, easy to use and valuable in day-to-day work.

By: Mia Hoffmann and Laura Nurski Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: June 30, 2021
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Podcast

Podcast

The skills of the future

What challenges and opportunities does technology bring to the labour market?

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: June 23, 2021
Read article Download PDF More on this topic
 

Working Paper

Platform mergers and antitrust

This paper sets out a framework for addressing competition concerns arising from acquisitions in big platform ecosystems. This is a June 2021 update of the same paper published in January 2021.

By: Geoffrey Parker, Georgios Petropoulos and Marshall Van Alstyne Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: June 15, 2021
Read article Download PDF More on this topic
 

Working Paper

Stability of collusion and quality differentiation: a Nash bargaining approach

How do incentives to collude depend on how asymmetric firms are? For low levels of differentiation, an increase in quality difference makes collusion less stable. The opposite holds for high levels of differentiation.

By: Thanos Athanasopoulos, Burak Dindaroglu and Georgios Petropoulos Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: June 15, 2021
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

The coming productivity boom

AI and other digital technologies have been surprisingly slow to improve economic growth. But that could be about to change.

By: Erik Brynjolfsson and Georgios Petropoulos Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: June 10, 2021
Read article Download PDF More on this topic
 

Policy Contribution

Blending the physical and virtual: a hybrid model for the future of work

The pandemic has shown that many workers can efficiently work remotely, with benefits for wellbeing and even productivity. The European Union should develop a framework to facilitate hybrid work.

By: Monika Grzegorczyk, Mario Mariniello, Laura Nurski and Tom Schraepen Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: June 9, 2021
Load more posts