What is Abenomics?

Abenomics is the nickname for the economic policies set out for Japan in 2012 when prime minister Shinzo Abe came into power for a second time. Abenomics involved increasing the nation’s money supply, boosting government spending, and enacting reforms to make the Japanese economy more competitive. The Economist outlined the program as a “mix of reflation, government spending, and a growth strategy designed to jolt the economy out of suspended animation that has gripped it for more than two decades.”

Understanding Abenomics

Abenomics refers to the economic policies of a particular politician, in the same way, that Reaganomics or Clintonomics does. Abenomics was promoted as a way to shake Japan’s economy out of a period of minimal growth and overall deflation. Japan’s economic troubles dated back to the 90s, also known as the Lost Decade. It was a period of marked economic stagnation in Japan, following a massive real estate bubble burst in the 1980s, and Japan’s asset price bubble burst in the early 90s.

The Japanese government responded to the economic fallout by running massive budget deficits to fund pubic works projects. In 1998, economist Paul Krugman argued in a paper titled “Japan’s Trap” that Japan could raise inflation expectations by committing to an irresponsible monetary policy for a period of time, thereby cutting long-term interest rates and promoting the spending needed to break out of economic stagnation. 

Japan adopted some of Krugman’s recommendations, expanding the money supply domestically and keeping interest rates remarkably low. This facilitated an economic recovery, beginning in 2005, but it ultimately did not stop deflation. 

In July 2006, Japan ended its zero-rate policy as Abe took power in his first term as prime minister. Abe would resign as prime minister suddenly in 2007, but continued to serve in the ruling party. Though still having the lowest interest rates in the world, Japan could not stop deflation. The country saw the Nikkei 225 drop more than 50% between the end of 2007 and the beginning of 2009. In part due to the economic malaise Japan seemed unable to shake, Abe’s party, the Liberal Democratic Party of Japan (LDP), lost power to the Democratic Party of Japan.

Abenomics and the Three Arrows

Abe began a second term in December 2012. Soon after resuming office, he launched his Abenomics plan to bolster Japan’s stagnant economy. In a speech following his election, Abe announced that he and his cabinet would “implement bold monetary policy, flexible fiscal policy and a growth strategy that encourages private investment, and with these three pillars, achieve results.”

Abe’s program consisted of three “arrows.” The first was printing additional currency – between 60 trillion yen to 70 trillion yen – to make Japanese exports more attractive and generate modest inflation—roughly 2%. The second arrow was new government spending programs to stimulate demand and consumption—to stimulate short-term growth, and to achieve a budget surplus over the long term. 

The third component of Abenomics was more complex—a reform of various regulations to make Japanese industries more competitive and to encourage investment in and from the private sector. This included corporate governance reform, easing of restrictions on hiring foreign staff in special economic zones, making it easier for companies to fire ineffective workers, liberalizing the health sector, and implementing measures the help domestic and foreign entrepreneurs. The proposed legislation also aimed to restructure the utility and pharmaceutical industries and modernize the agricultural sector. Most important, perhaps, was the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which was described by economist Yoshizaki Tatsuhiko as potentially the “linchpin of Abe’s economic revitalization strategy,” by making Japan more competitive through free trade.

Did Abenomics Work?

Like all Japanese economic policy since the bubble burst, Abenomics has worked well at times and stalled at others. Inflation targets have been met and Japan’s unemployment rate is more than 2% lower than when Abe came to power for the second time. Similarly, nominal GDP has increased and corporate pre-tax profit and tax revenues have both seen significant rises. However, Japan’s periods of success have been halted at times by global economic forces and the country’s most significant economic problem – a rapidly aging population – has increasingly taken the forefront.

What is Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem?

Arrow’s impossibility theorem is a social-choice paradox illustrating the flaws of ranked voting systems. It states that a clear order of preferences cannot be determined while adhering to mandatory principles of fair voting procedures. Arrow’s impossibility theorem, named after economist Kenneth J. Arrow, is also known as the general impossibility theorem.

Understanding Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem

Democracy depends on people’s voices being heard. For example, when it is time for a new government to be formed, an election is called, and people head to the polls to vote. Millions of voting slips are then counted to determine who is the most popular candidate and the next elected official.

According to Arrow’s impossibility theorem, in all cases where preferences are ranked, it is impossible to formulate a social ordering without violating one of the following conditions:

• Nondictatorship: The wishes of multiple voters should be taken into consideration.
• Pareto Efficiency: Unanimous individual preferences must be respected: If every voter prefers candidate A over candidate B, candidate A should win.
• Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives: If a choice is removed, then the others’ order should not change: If candidate A ranks ahead of candidate B, candidate A should still be ahead of candidate B, even if a third candidate, candidate C, is removed from participation. 
• Unrestricted Domain: Voting must account for all individual preferences.
• Social Ordering: Each individual should be able to order the choices in any way and indicate ties.

Arrow’s impossibility theorem, part of social choice theory, an economic theory that considers whether a society can be ordered in a way that reflects individual preferences, was lauded as a major breakthrough. It went on to be widely used for analyzing problems in welfare economics. 

Example of Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem

Let’s look at an example illustrating the type of problems highlighted by Arrow’s impossibility theorem. Consider the following example, where voters are asked to rank their preference of three projects that the country’s annual tax dollars could be used for: A; B; and C. This country has 99 voters who are each asked to rank the order, from best to worst, for which of the three projects should receive the annual funding.

• 33 votes A > B > C (1/3 prefer A over B and prefer B over C)
• 33 votes B > C > A (1/3 prefer B over C and prefer C over A)
• 33 votes C > A > B (1/3 prefer C over A and prefer A over B)

Therefore,

• 66 voters prefer A over B
• 66 voters prefer B over C
• 66 voters prefer C over A

So a two-thirds majority of voters prefer A over B and B over C and C over A—a paradoxical result based on the requirement to rank order the preferences of the  three alternatives.

Arrow’s theorem indicates that if the conditions cited above in this article i.e. Non-dictatorship, Pareto efficiency, independence of irrelevant alternatives, unrestricted domain, and social ordering are to be part of the decision making criteria then it is impossible to formulate a social ordering on a problem such as indicated above without violating one of the following conditions.

History of Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem

The theorem is named after economist Kenneth J. Arrow. Arrow, who had a long teaching career at Harvard University and Stanford University, introduced the theorem in his doctoral thesis and later popularized it in his 1951 book Social Choice and Individual Values. The original paper, titled A Difficulty in the Concept of Social Welfare, earned him the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 1972.

Arrow’s research has also explored the social choice theory, endogenous growth theory, collective decision making, the economics of information, and the economics of racial discrimination, among other topics.