Congratulations Nick!

Why even bother with long-run economic change & industrial policy if you don't get the chance to see it through?

Biden went all in on economic change, giving other progressives confidence to back things like industrial policy. But after the Democrats loss many are questioning whether it's worth it?

Great to contribute to Sam’s excellent Substack today, setting out some of the arguments from our recent working paper on Bidenomics and what it might mean for the U.K. 👇

Any recommendations on role of wealth effects in driving recent (post-2008) US growth?

Struck that average real consumption is up about a third (left) while real terms wealth is up about 80% since 2009 (right). Or $4trn extra C for $77bn extra wealth (all real)

Work from Deming, Ong and Summers late last year is also good on suggestive evidence for the US on tech driving wider creative destruction in the US: www.economicstrategygroup.org/wp-content/u...

Global turmoil makes Britain’s productivity predicament even worse The situation is dire and only active policymaking is going to make a difference

Great to see coverage of our new working paper in Martin Wolf's FT column today: www.ft.com/content/7c0c...

Full paper available here: www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcb...

11/ Finally—it’s impossible to do justice to the richness of the interviews in a thread, including from Cecelia Rouse,
@jasonfurman.bsky.social, @michaelrstrain.bsky.social, Alejandra Y Castillo, @jonasnahm.com and Jonah Wagner.

You can read each in full here: sites.harvard.edu/uk-regional-...

M-RCBG_Harvard The mission of the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government is to advance the state of knowledge and policy analysis concerning some of society’s most challenging problems at the interface ...

10/ Thanks to @harvardbizgov.bsky.social and
and @strandgroup.bsky.social for supporting the project—and for hosting us at our US launch (with
@stephanomics.bsky.social) and tonight’s UK launch at KCL with Martin Wolf, Andy Haldane, and Shriti Vadera.

US launch: www.youtube.com/channel/UCBI...

9/ That last point—communication—touches on the elephant in the room: if there’s lots to learn from Biden’s admin, can we also learn from the Dems’ failure to secure re-election?

8/ That gives us our “lessons for the UK on a slide”:

7/ Finally, we look at Biden’s supply-side agenda: lessons on industrial policy, place-based policy, protectionism, and paths not taken (like the early care economy push)—as Gene Sperling (L), @briancdeese.bsky.social, and @jaredb-econ.bsky.social set out in their interviews.

6/ Third, the US has long outperformed the UK/Europe on productivity—and that gap’s been growing since the mid-2010s. We cite Erixon, Guinea and du Roy, and Deming, Summers & Ong on the return of US TFP growth, and the UK’s tech gap (so far) relative to US.

5/ As
@adamposen.bsky.social (L) noted, many Dems and allies worried in early 2021 about the downsides of job churn. But @hboushey.bsky.social, @juliesulabor.bsky.social and others showed how supports (expanded UI, pro-worker orders) helped raise both wages and productivity.

4/ Second, we think the inflation debate can obscure the real lesson: the value of dynamism and flexibility when you “run the economy hot.” Job creation/destruction in the US pulled even further ahead of the UK post-pandemic.

3/ First, our interviewees differed on whether the political cost of the American Rescue Plan outweighed the economic gains (jobs, productivity). No one disputed that, at the margin, it nudged up inflation in ‘21/’22. See
@larrysummers.bsky.social (L) and Lael Brainard (R):

2/ Our paper is built around 4 conclusions—on inflation, dynamism, growth, and industrial policy—that my coauthors (@huwspencer.bsky.social, Vidit Doshi, @juliapamilih.bsky.social, @officialedballs.bsky.social) and I drew from the interviews. We apply them to Britain—an economy with v dif challenges

1/ Today, we publish a new working paper: what should the UK learn from Bidenomics?

At its core are 15 interviews—including 5 former Council of Economic Advisers members (3 of them Chairs), 4 former NEC Directors & 2 former Cabinet members.

www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcb...

Here is what I've been working on for the last few months: we are launching the Centre for British Progress to make the progressive case for growth.

Our founding essay describes how Britain once drove our collective progress, and how we must rediscover this dynamism.

This is mortifying. It's the kind of calculation you would normally make about a dictatorship.

open.substack.com/pub/christin...

OBR still leading the pack for optimism about real GDP in 2029, even after downward revisions; and RDEL growth path has become *more* front-loaded over the parliament - both should raise eyebrows about whether today's forecast will survive contact with (i) reality and (ii) politics

It's a very sad day. Just notified that @iza.org is closing its doors as of 31 December 2025. At a time when labor is under attack and technological change moves at an ever-faster pace, I can't help but think that this is a short-sighted decision. My heart goes out to those folks who work there.

EVENT: What next for devolution and regional growth?

Join us for the inaugural @faerfield.bsky.social lecture with Dr Nik Johnson, @officialedballs.bsky.social, Nora Senior CBE,
@dtturner.bsky.social & @bobbyduffy.bsky.social

Register your interest in attending ➡️ docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1F...

Great stuff Aveek - subscribed!

▶️ Here's a 1-minute summary of our new paper showing the places being left behind by English devolution.

📄 The Intersection of Productivity and Governance Capacity in Spatial Inequality: The Case of England’s Devolution Periphery

👥 Jack Newman & Charlotte Hoole

🖇️ doi.org/10.1080/2158...

Some notable absences (changes to voting system, so I guess they'll keep FPTP @jacknewman.bsky.social? And little on democracy/community engagement)...

And some issues deferred (pledges a local media strategy, a refrshed New Deal for Communities, and local gov-led public service reform)

Lots of emphasis on mayors’ popularity, but I think downplays the constitutional novelty of what’s being done here: move is towards a presidential model for English local gov with a weak local legislature (strategic authority boards). Like French-style prefects rather than old council mayors

(I'm not sure that will work. In South Yorks where there is no unanimity rule, still de facto unanimity because the board is still 80%+ local authorities, and LAs don't want to create norm of MCAs trumping LAs. I think only mayoral veto/defined mayoral powers would change dynamic)

And "mayors first" because the mayoral sections end up taking 80% of the white paper - despite overnight emphasis on local gov unitarisation.

There's also an emphasis on moving away from the consensus-based politics of mayors, with e.g. end to unanimity rule and more deputy mayors

(Pushing for UKRI to work with sub-regions and for Jobcentre co-commissioning plugs gaps that have been missing from English governance reform for a generation - no small feat, and testament to broader Cabinet support, esp from DWP).

Historic because it is properly trying to comprehensively tidy things up on rational principles, and will put political capital into doing so (unlike fluffed 1970s reforms); and puts innovation and labour markets more squarely into devolution than in the past