It’s Hysteresis: Why the World Might Be Forever Poorer Thanks to the Great Recession

A blog about business and economics.
June 13 2014 10:09 AM

It’s Hysteresis: Why the World Might Be Forever Poorer Thanks to the Great Recession  

135075153-man-walks-past-graffiti-displayed-on-a-building-on
Graffiti in Athens, Greece.

Photo by Milos Bicanski/Getty Images

The word hysteresis sounds as if it should refer to some sort of 19th-century quack medical diagnosis—a recurring version of female hysteria, perhaps. I can just imagine a mustachioed doctor striding into his waiting room to counsel some perspiring husband. “Sir, your wife is suffering from hysteresis,” he would gravely intone. “And the treatment, I am afraid, is quite expensive.”

But no. Hysteresis is, supposedly, an economic malady—the idea that “a deep recession can cause irreparable damage to the economy,” as the Washington Post’s Matt O’Brien has succinctly put it. With America’s recovery still plodding, more economists seem to believe that we’re suffering an acute case of the illness.

Advertisement

Typically, we expect economies to fully heal after a recession. But if a downturn is powerful enough, and its effects are allowed to linger long enough, the thinking goes, a country can end up permanently scarred. The unemployed drift from the workforce for good. Companies cut back on investing in new tools or research, which makes them less productive and innovative in the future. Ultimately, the economy’s potential—its size if everything were functioning normally, judged by fundamentals like labor availability and capital stock—simply shrinks. Hysteresis sets in.

And Americans aren't the only ones supposedly suffering. Most of the developed world appears to be infected, too. Recently, Johns Hopkins economist Laurence Ball released a working paper looking for signs of hysteresis across 23 countries in the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Based on forecasts for 2015, he finds that the loss of potential economic output comes out to about $4.3 trillion. “The total damage from the Great Recession," he writes, "is slightly larger than the loss if Germany’s entire economy disappeared."

Here, for reference, is how the U.S. evolution looks over time. The green circles show the growth trend for our potential output prerecession. The red line shows the lower-postrecession trend. The black line is what the economy is actually producing. As you might notice, we're still failing to grab that lower bar.

Now here’s how much potential output each of the 23 countries may have lost, in percent terms. Greece, of course, has it worst, because it’s Greece—by 2015, 35 percent of its economic potential will have evaporated. Only Switzerland came out completely unscathed.

The big question economists are now debating, as Ball writes, is whether hysteresis can be reversed. Some believe that once an economy falls off its old track, it can never really return. For instance, they would argue that a giant recession will cause labor force participation to shrink more than a hiring boom will cause it to grow. We’re going to be poorer, forever more—and no amount of stimulus from Congress or from the Fed will help. 

Others believe this is quack analysis. As Paul Krugman has written, the common models used to forecast potential GDP take it for granted that if an economy doesn't bounce back quickly from a recession, it's because something has been fundamentally damaged, rather than because the government offered up an insufficient policy response. So stats showing our lost potential might just be the product of bad assumptions and self-fulfilling prophecy. Even if the recession did damage our economy's foundations, Jared Bernstein argues we still might be able to fix them with enough stimulus. “If you can bend the [growth] trend you can mend the trend,” he writes.  

Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem like our policy makers are ready to try any experimental cures. For now, we seem destined to plod along.

Jordan Weissmann is Slate's senior business and economics correspondent.

TODAY IN SLATE

Medical Examiner

Here’s Where We Stand With Ebola

Even experienced international disaster responders are shocked at how bad it’s gotten.

It’s Legal for Obama to Bomb Syria Because He Says It Is

Divestment Is Fine but Mostly Symbolic. There’s a Better Way for Universities to Fight Climate Change.

I Stand With Emma Watson on Women’s Rights

Even though I know I’m going to get flak for it.

It Is Very Stupid to Compare Hope Solo to Ray Rice

Building a Better Workplace

In Defense of HR

Startups and small businesses shouldn’t skip over a human resources department.

Why Are Lighter-Skinned Latinos and Asians More Likely to Vote Republican?

How Ted Cruz and Scott Brown Misunderstand What It Means to Be an American Citizen

  News & Politics
Politics
Sept. 23 2014 12:43 PM Occupy Wall Street How can Hillary Clinton be both a limousine liberal and a Saul Alinsky radical?
  Business
Moneybox
Sept. 23 2014 2:08 PM Home Depot’s Former Head of Security Had a Legacy of Sabotage
  Life
Outward
Sept. 23 2014 1:57 PM Would A Second Sarkozy Presidency End Marriage Equality in France?
  Double X
The XX Factor
Sept. 23 2014 11:13 AM Why Is This Mother in Prison for Helping Her Daughter Get an Abortion?
  Slate Plus
Slate Plus
Sept. 22 2014 1:52 PM Tell Us What You Think About Slate Plus Help us improve our new membership program.
  Arts
Brow Beat
Sept. 23 2014 11:48 AM Punky Brewster, the Feminist Punk Icon Who Wasn’t
  Technology
Future Tense
Sept. 23 2014 1:50 PM Oh, the Futility! Frogs Try to Catch Worms Off of an iPhone Video.
  Health & Science
Science
Sept. 23 2014 1:38 PM Why Is Fall Red in America but Yellow in Europe? A possible explanation, 35 million years in the making.
  Sports
Sports Nut
Sept. 18 2014 11:42 AM Grandmaster Clash One of the most amazing feats in chess history just happened, and no one noticed.