Advertisement

Economic Advisory and Planning Systems

  • Hubertus Müller-Groeling
  • Yukio Noguchi
Part of the St Antony’s/Macmillan Series book series

Abstract

This section will attempt to sketch the planning and advisory system in West Germany, in a narrow rather than broad sense of the term, and reflect on its role in policy formation. Thus the formal system alone will be described, while informal advice-giving, as well as the representation of special interests in policy formation processes, for both theoretical and practical reasons, will be excluded from our discussion. Even for the formal system, only the major components of the advisory system will be described and their influence evaluated in any detail. Likewise, and notwithstanding the ubiquitous nature of planning, attention will be focused on the presence or absence of a formal planning system. There would be little of real significance in the discovery that, even in a market economy like West Germany’s, households, individual ministries and the government as a whole all plan.

Keywords

Planning System Economic Change Economic Advisory Economic Plan Advisory Council 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 3.
    OECD, Social Sciences in Policy Making (Paris: OECD, 1979) (OECD Publication, No. 410 93). This is less often the case in West Germany than in the US. where competing parties have their own pools of economic advisers to draw on — e.g., the Brookings Institution, Washington, DC and the Hoover Institution, Stanford.Google Scholar
  2. 4.
    Although generalizations are problematical, the most important advisory bodies in West Germany are generally held in high public esteem, and there is not much fear among social scientists that their reputation may suffer if they are appointed to such councils and advise policy-makers, as seems to be the case in Japan. See OECD, Social Sciences Policy: Japan (Paris: OECD, 1977).Google Scholar
  3. 5.
    Jürgen Habermas, Technik und Wissenschaft als Ideologie (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1970).Google Scholar
  4. 7.
    Der Wissenschaftliche Beirat beim Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft, Sammelband der Gutachten von 1948 bis 1972 (Göttingen: Schwartz, 1973).Google Scholar
  5. 11.
    For example, see the Kiel Institute’s report by Gerhard Fels, Klaus-Dieter Schmidt et al., Die deutsche Wirtschaft im Strukturwandel. Kieler Studien, 166 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1980.Google Scholar
  6. 11a.
    Next reports were published in 1984. See, for example, Klaus-Dieter Schmitt et al., Im Anpassungsprozess Zurückgeworfen. Kieler Studien, 185 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1984.Google Scholar
  7. 15.
    Olaf Sievert, ‘Die wirtschaftspolitische Beratung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland’, in Hans K. Schneider (ed.), Grundsatzprobleme wirtschaftspolitischer Beratung: Das Beispiel der Stabilisierungspolitik (Schriften des Vereins für Sozialpolitik, Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, 49) (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1968).Google Scholar
  8. 19.
    Egon Sohmen, ‘Von der Entwicklung bestätigt’, in Regina Molitor (ed.), Zehn Jahre Sachverständigenrat (Frankfurt: Athenäum Verlag, 1973).Google Scholar
  9. 20.
    Several so-called alternative reports have been published, but they are interesting more for political than for professional reasons despite the numerous signatures they bear, mainly of economists associated with labour unions and fringe groups. For a discussion of one of these reports, see Roland Vaubel, ‘Alternativen der Wirtschaftspolitik?’ Das Memorandum der 130: Eine Widerlegung. Kiel Discussion Paper, No. 56, July 1978.Google Scholar
  10. 22.
    Helmut Kohn, Zur Vergabe wirtschafts- und sozialwissenschaftlicher Forschungsaufträge (Erfahrungen mit dem Forschungsprogramm der Kommission für wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Wandel) (Göttingen: Schwartz, 1976).Google Scholar
  11. 36.
    For a succinct discussion of the economic considerations, see Herbert Giersch, Growth, Cycles, and Exchange Rates: The Experience of West Germany. Wicksell Lecures 1970 (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1970) pp. 30ff.Google Scholar
  12. 41.
    Theo Horstmann, Die Diskussion um die DM-Aufwertung 1968–69. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, History Department, University of Bochum, 13 October 1980), p. 27.Google Scholar
  13. 52.
    Gerhard Fels, et al., Die deutsche Wirtschaft im Strukturwandel (Kieler Studien 166) (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1980), pp. 19–23.Google Scholar
  14. 55.
    Hubertus Müller-Groeling (ed.), Beiträge und Stellungnahmen zu Problemen der Währungspolitik (Kiel Discussion Paper, No. 10), June 1971, p. 11.Google Scholar
  15. 57.
    For the Kiel Institute, see also Dietmar Gebert and Hubertus Müller-Groeling, ‘Zur konjunkturellen und währungspolitischen Lage in den westlichen Industrieländern’, Die Weltwirtschaft, 1972, especially the section entitled ‘Auf dem Wege in den Währungsdirigismus’.Google Scholar
  16. 67.
    Claus Wegner, Möglichkeiten und Grenzen wirtschaftswissenschaftlicher Politikberatung durch den Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der Gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung (unpublished dissertation, Universität Aachen, 1974) p. 163.Google Scholar
  17. 68.
    Reimut Jochimsen and Peter Treuner, ‘Staatliche Planung in der Bundesrepublik’, in Politik und Zeitgeschichte, Beilage zu Das Parlament, Vol. 9 (Bundeszentrale für Politische Bildung, Bonn, 1974) p. 44.Google Scholar
  18. 69.
    Eberhard Wille, ‘Die mehrjährige Finanzplanung. Chancen und Grenzen einer ausgabeorientierten öffentlichen Planung’, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliches Stadium, Zeitschrift für Ausbildung und Hochschulkontakt, Vol. 8, No. 4 (1979) p. 167.Google Scholar
  19. 72.
    See R. M. Cyert and J. G. March, A Behavioral Theory of the Firm (New York: Prentice-Hall, 1963);Google Scholar
  20. 72a.
    Graham T. Allison, Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis (Boston: Little, Brown, 1971);Google Scholar
  21. 72b.
    and Aaron Wildavsky, The Politics of the Budget Process (Boston: Little, Brown, 1964). For example, most theoretical models of a foreign exchange market greatly oversimplify its property and behavior in order to facilitate analytical exercises. The operations of a real market are affected by numerous government regulations and by complex tax systems. Since most scholars are not interested in such details, their theoretical analysis and advice tend to be far removed from the contingencies of the real world.Google Scholar
  22. 73.
    For a more detailed discussion of this subject, see Eisuke Sakakibara and Yukio Noguchi, ‘Dissecting the Finance Ministry-Bank of Japan Dynasty: End of the Wartime System of Total Economic Mobilization’, Japan Echo, Vol. 4, No. 4 (1977), pp. 100–21.Google Scholar
  23. 76.
    See Yukio Noguchi, ‘Decision Rules in the Japanese Budgetary Process’, Japanese Economic Studies, Vol. 7 (Summer 1979), pp. 51–75.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Haruhiro Fukui and Peter H. Merkl 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hubertus Müller-Groeling
  • Yukio Noguchi

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations