Akshada Porje
• Literature Review:
1. Italy
The Great Recession affected family dynamics and fertility behavior. A study found a permanent positive effect on childlessness in the US, but it’s unclear if this applies to Italy. Using the difference-in-difference method, this study found that the Great Recession did not increase permanent childlessness among Italian women except for mid-educated women. (Caltabiano & Etol, 2017)
2. Nordic countries
The Nordic region experienced a decline in fertility rates during the 2010s, with the Great Recession of 2008-2009 seemingly linked to the onset of the decline. However, subsequent economic changes cannot be easily linked to the continuation of this decline. The study shows a high degree of heterogeneity in fertility trends across countries after the 1990s economic crises, but more similar trends after 2008. The reversal from heterogeneity to homogeneity in fertility response calls for an expansion of theories on the cyclicality of fertility in relation to uncertainty and economic and social change, considering factors such as the state, crisis management, and perceptions of economic and welfare uncertainty.( Comolli & Etol,2021)
3. European country’s
This paper examines the impact of the global financial crisis on seventeen economic and financial variables in the European Union. The study finds that there were significant differences in the performance of EU economies during the crisis, with euro countries, especially those that joined after 1999, being the most affected. The paper highlights a growing divergence in the macroeconomic performance of euro countries, which was amplified during the Great Recession. (Ferreiro & Etos, 2016)
4. Spain
This study investigates the impact of the Great Recession on the migration of graduates in Spain, a country with low international mobility for graduates. The study uses a gravity model to estimate the macro-level impact of the crisis on graduate migration to 20 OECD countries, as well as individual data from surveys of Catalan graduates and Ph.D. holders to identify the drivers and impacts of changing migration behavior. The study suggests that increased unemployment and poor job matches in the Spanish labor market have led recent graduates to shift from internal to international migration, seeking better job opportunities abroad. ( Ramos & Royuela, 2016)
5. China & India
The study examines the impact of the 2008-09 global recession and the 2010-12 Eurozone debt crisis on China and India’s exports to the US and Eurozone. It finds that both economies were negatively affected, with major exporting sectors displaying negative growth rates. Economic activity levels in the US and Eurozone significantly and positively affect exports to these destinations from China and India. Overall, the study highlights the importance of the US and Eurozone as key drivers of demand for these emerging market economies’ exports. (Dua & Tuteja, 2015)
6. Germany and Ukraine
The low willingness of Ukrainians to take risks is not surprising given the poor performance of the Ukrainian economy, political system, and state during the transition period. The capture of the state by oligarchs has led to widespread rent-seeking, dominant oligarchic interests in parliament, and corruption at all levels of the state. These factors likely contribute to the risk-averse attitudes of Ukrainian citizens. Reforms are necessary to eliminate or reduce these distortions if Ukraine wants to move past its post-Soviet legacy, as risk aversion may make this process more difficult. (Dolmen, Lehmann & Pignatti, 2015)
7. Croatia
In this paper it is documented that in the economic activities dominated by the public sector, employment mildly increased since the start of the recession, while the remainder of the economy registered a reduction in the employment of around 250 thousand in the same period. In contrast to several Member States which decided to reduce the number of public sector servants as part of their fiscal consolidation efforts, the Croatian government has not implemented such measures and almost entire employment destruction was felt by the private sector. (Brkic, 2015)
8. Finland
In the face of persistent or permanent shocks, labor market flexibility and mobility are necessary for adjustment. Fiscal expansion may actually slow down this adjustment process. Finland needs significant labor market flexibility, including a fundamental reform of wage formation, to perform well in the monetary union. However, wage flexibility alone is insufficient, and resilience in other dimensions is needed as well.
9. Greece
The recession impacted Greece’s economic geography, with a moderate increase in the income gap during the expansion phase and a rapid reduction in recent years. Poor and marginal regions may be more resistant to external shocks in the short-term. Further investigation is needed to verify the impact of changes in regional production and redistribution policies on the country’s competitiveness. (Grigoriadis & Salvati, 2015).
10. Japan
The analysis here suggests that flexible, more stable employment, and more stable financing in Japan have moderated the impact of recessions on Japanese GNP by stabilizing consumption and investment spending during cyclical downturns. However, the explanations for milder recessions offered in this Weekly Letter are not exhaustive. ( Moreno, 1992).
Conclusion:
The impact of the Great Recession varied across different regions and countries, with some experiencing more severe effects than others. Factors such as the state, crisis management, and perceptions of economic and welfare uncertainty played a role in shaping the response to the recession. Labor market flexibility and resilience in other dimensions were identified as important for adjustment in the face of economic shocks.
References:
1. C. L. Comolli & G. Neyer & G. Andersson & L. Dommermuth & P. Fallesen & M. Jalovaara & A. Klængur Jónsson & M. Kolk & T. Lappegård, 2021. “Beyond the Economic Gaze: Childbearing During and After Recessions in the Nordic Countries,” European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 37(2), pages 473-520, April.
2. Efstathios Grigoriadis & Luca Salvati, 2015. “Recession In Action: Exploring The Spatial Divergence Of Percapita Income In Greece,” Romanian Journal of Regional Science, Romanian Regional Science Association, vol. 9(2), pages 68-83, DECEMBER.
3. Jesus Ferreiro & Catalina Galvez & Carmen Gomez & Ana Gonzalez, 2016. “The impact of the Great Recession on the European Union countries,” Working papers wpaper150, Financialisation, Economy, Society & Sustainable Development (FESSUD) Project.
4. Marcantonio Caltabiano & Chiara Ludovica Comolli & Alessandro Rosina, 2017. “The effect of the Great Recession on permanent childlessness in Italy,” Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 37(20), pages 635-668.
5. Mislav Brkic, 2015. “Labor Market Duality and the Impact of Prolonged Recession on Employment in Croatia,” Croatian Economic Survey, The Institute of Economics, Zagreb, vol. 17(1), pages 5-45, June.
6. Pami Dua & Divya Tuteja, 2015. “Global Recession And Eurozone Debt Crisis – Impact On Exports Of China And India,” Working papers 242, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
7. Ramon Moreno, 1992. “Japan’s recessions,” FRBSF Economic Letter, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue mar6.
8. Raul Ramos & Vicente Royuela, 2016. ““Graduate migration in Spain: the impact of the great recession on a low mobility country”,” AQR Working Papers 201608, University of Barcelona, Regional Quantitative Analysis Group, revised Apr 2016.
9. Suni, Paavo & Vihriälä, Vesa, 2016. “Finland and Its Northern Peers in the Great Recession,” ETLA Reports 49, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
10. Thomas Dohmen & Hartmut Lehmann & Norberto Pignatti, 2015. “Time-Varying Individual Risk Attitudes over the Great Recession: A Comparison of Germany and Ukraine,” SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 793, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
.