Objective. To identify and discuss the issues and determinants of comparative economic development models as they relate to the United States, Europe, and Japan. To a lesser extent, we may consider other nations and regions.

Background. Although the economic models of these countries and regions are quite different because of their historical, cultural, and resource attributes, there is growing evidence that these economies may be forced to converge. To what extent this will occur, if at all, is the focus of this session. While there is mounting sentiment that the new economic model will be an adaptation of the Anglo-Saxon Model, there is also potential for a modified model to be adapted and some reason to believe that the model will be rejected completely. The participants will use their expertise to consider the institutions and economic requirements that will influence the type of model applied. For a full perspective, we require participation from academics, government analysts, and US multinational corporations.

1. Some analysts have set the Anglo-Saxon Model as the new standard for economic growth in the next century. The United States, Europe, and Japan all face similar problems associated with maturing economies and yet employ different methodologies for economic growth. Is it inevitable that these three players will be driven to a similar economic model (convergence to a common economic structure, forced by both endogenous and exogenous factors), or will there be a new hybrid of the Anglo-Saxon?   This question will address at the minimum the following:
           
1. Widespread restructuring of the social burden and deregulation in Europe to accommodate higher economic growth.
   
2. Japan’s accomplishing significant banking reform, financial restructuring, and changing cultural mindset to accept the industry attrition that would accompany acceptance of the Anglo-Saxon Model.  
   
3. American ability to maintain desirable growth conditions within the Anglo-Saxon model given the constraints of an increasing social burden vs. a push toward greater fiscal austerity and lower taxes; increasing reliance on imports and cost shifting to maintain world economic preeminence; labor crunch vs. growing resistance to relaxation of immigration laws; and other factors?

2. Will Western Europe move from a Rhineland Model to a Dutch Model? What issues would be faced? Is this type of restructuring the answer (an acceptable answer) for much of Europe?
1. The Rhineland Model is a regulated market economy where the participants (stakeholders) create a highly collaborative environment between government, labor unions, and business. The primary purpose of this type of economy is sustainable, stable growth with a comprehensive social security system.
2. The Dutch Model can be viewed as an extension or evolution of the Rhineland. Primarily it entails improving state financial balance by reducing taxes and fiscal austerity, breaking the connection between wage increases and social security increases, liberalizing labor markets, and reducing the social security net in other words, making the economy more competitive.

4. Strategically (in the long run), is it in the best interests of the United States to encourage Europe and Japan to incorporate the Anglo-Saxon Model given that it may produce both major upheavals in international markets (during the process) and very strong competitors with their own specific advantages (after restructuring)
5. Can the Anglo-Saxon model coexist, and in fact flourish, in the presence of other models?