• Commentary
  • Research
  • Experts
  • Events
Carnegie China logoCarnegie lettermark logo
{
  "authors": [],
  "type": "pressRelease",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Economy",
    "Trade"
  ]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

Press Release

Global rebalancing is a dangerous obsession

The idea of global rebalancing—which aims to reduce trade deficits and surpluses—receives a great deal of attention and is a main agenda item at this weekend’s G20 finance ministers meeting. In a new policy brief, however, Uri Dadush writes that this focus is misguided.

Link Copied
Published on Feb 17, 2011

WASHINGTON, February 17—The idea of global rebalancing—which aims to reduce trade deficits and surpluses—receives a great deal of attention and is a main agenda item at this weekend’s G20 finance ministers meeting. In a new policy brief, however, Uri Dadush writes that this focus is misguided. Obsessing over global rebalancing stokes currency and protectionist tensions and diverts attention from what is really needed—reforms at home.

Key Conclusions:

  • Further global rebalancing is unlikely. Trade deficits and surpluses narrowed significantly during the Great Recession and with emerging markets in danger of overheating are unlikely to shrink further. The deficits and surpluses can be financed and eased over time and are largely the result of domestic forces. In many instances, further narrowing may not actually be desirable.
  • Exchange rates can’t rebalance economies on their own. While exchange rates are the main instrument governments have to directly affect external imbalances, both logic and experience indicate that they cannot correct external imbalances without simultaneous changes in underlying domestic savings and investment patterns.
  • Domestic reforms are most important. Countries should concentrate on fixing their domestic problems, for example, the large fiscal deficit in the United States and artificial impediments to growth in domestic consumption in China. Instead of focusing on trade deficits and surpluses, they should aim to expand domestic demand at the maximum sustainable rate.

"The rebalancing dispute rages on," writes Dadush. "The G20, beginning with the United States, may soon have to make a choice: deal decisively with the profound domestic vulnerabilities that the global financial crisis exposed, or put at risk the open, rules-based trading system that has underpinned postwar prosperity."

###

NOTES

Click here to read the policy brief online.

Uri Dadush is senior associate and director in Carnegie's International Economics Program. His work currently focuses on trends in the global economy, the global financial crisis, and the euro crisis. Dadush previously served as the World Bank’s director of international trade and director of economic policy. He has also served concurrently as the director of the Bank’s world economy group. Prior to joining the World Bank, he was president and CEO of the Economist Intelligence Unit and Business International.

The Carnegie International Economics Program monitors and analyzes short- and long-term trends in the global economy, including macroeconomic developments, trade, commodities, and capital flows, and draws out policy implications. The current focus of the Program is the global financial crisis and the policy issues raised. Among other research, the Program examines the ramifications of the rising weight of developing countries in the global economy.

Press Contact: Karly Schledwitz, 202-939-2233, pressoffice@ceip.org

EconomyTradeNorth America

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie China

  • Commentary
    Today’s Rare Earths Conflict Echoes the 1973 Oil Crisis — But It’s Not the Same

    Regulation, not embargo, allows Beijing to shape how other countries and firms adapt to its terms.

      Alvin Camba

  • Commentary
    How China’s Growth Model Determines Its Climate Performance

    Rather than climate ambitions, compatibility with investment and exports is why China supports both green and high-emission technologies.

      Mathias Larsen

  • Overproduction in China
    Commentary
    What’s New about Involution?

    “Involution” is a new word for an old problem, and without a very different set of policies to rein it in, it is a problem that is likely to persist.

      Michael Pettis

  • Commentary
    The Chinese Investment Riddle: What Cities Reveal

    While China's investment story seems contradictory from the outside, the real answers to Beijing's high-quality growth ambitions are hiding in plain sight across the nation's cities.

      Yuhan Zhang

  • Commentary
    Using China’s Central Government Balance Sheet to “Clean up” Local Government Debt Is a Bad Idea

    China's stimulus addiction cannot go on forever. Beijing still has policy space to clean up the country's massive debt issue, but time is running short.

      Michael Pettis

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
Carnegie China logo, white
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.