01
de Febrer
de
2017 - 01:38
Teresa Garcia-Milà (Barcelona, 1955) is the head of the Barcelona Graduate School of Economics (BGSE) at the UPF and the UAB and in December became the first female vice president of the Cercle d'Economia. When asked about the subject, she plays it down: "I think that the media have gone a little over the top," while at the same time she expresses her pride about this new challenge. The economist is hopeful that with the change of generation this type of news will no longer deserve headlines. In this interview with VIA Empresa she also covers the new role for economists in the post-crisis society and one of her main lines of research: economic solidarity between regions.
You have just become the first female vice president of the Cercle d'Economia. Is it good news or bad news that it took until 2016?
It is a good thing that women are getting into top jobs, I am very proud and I hope it becomes the norm. But I also feel strong ties to the Cercle, which I have been part of for many years, and it is natural that I could become vice president. Why have there been no women before? There could have been, but perhaps the right person was not available at the right time. There are fewer women than men in the Cercle, but if we look at it from the point of view of age, there are increasingly more.
The debate about the lack of women in top jobs never goes away...
I am fairly optimistic; I feel we have made a spectacular qualitative leap forward. I look at my mother and then my daughters. The progress made between my mother and me is spectacular, and I trust that what my daughters will see when they are my age will be a progression. I don't think that it will be as large a leap as the one we have already made. Perhaps not at all social levels or qualifications. The whole of society has to help in balancing the option of having children, which is the main difficulty. It is not an issue of companies or women, it is a social issue. That when a child's father has to leave a meeting at five in the evening it is not seen as a bad thing, while the mother just accepts it because she is the mother. We still have a little way to go.
Is it a generational issue?
There is normalisation. I have been the first woman in plenty of things, such as the first woman professor in the UPF's economics faculty, and now there are quite a few of us. I didn't feel that access to professorship was held back because I was a woman. And the same goes for boards. There is more awareness and effort, but it is not about there being more of a female culture, but rather it is about diversity. That there is a change in the traditional pattern of who is in charge of companies and that this diversity has been incorporated is what has made us more competitive and more like other more advanced countries. We have taken a significant step forward and we must not lose this tendency towards improvement. I am optimistic because I see young women in class who no longer question whether they will have relevant roles or not; they expect it. And those in charge, those at the head of companies or universities, also value this diversity.
In a roundtable debate at the Cercle d'Economia on this issue, there were almost only women among the audience. Are men not interested in it?
When we talk about these issues I want the group to be diverse. It is not a women's issue; everyone has to be involved. Men are increasingly aware and organisations, too. That is why we are moving in the right direction. If it is only for women and it is done defensively, we will not get anywhere. We have to show facts.
A change of subject. Economists have become more visible during the crisis. Are you listened to more now?
While at the start of the crisis it seemed that economists had made a lot of mistakes, it has been shown during this period that economic knowledge has helped for us to talk about recession rather than depression. Some public policy measures have been designed based on the knowledge acquired by economists over a long time, such as the coordination of monetary policy. The ECB, the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England coordinated action on monetary policy because they realised if they didn't, the crisis could have been much tougher. They developed these actions according to research by economists. That is sometimes not recognised because it is always remembered that economists did not predict the crisis, but some had already sounded the alarm. We have now realised that we need to think about a different economy and the economists are very much at the centre of this discussion. In the end, we are the ones who know more about the weak and strong aspects of the economy, even though everyone has their opinion.
So, in the realm of education the crisis has been a great help...
Totally! I give the Introduction to Macroeconomics in the International Business Economics degree and the crisis, which has been terrible for many people, for teachers and researchers has been a spectacular laboratory. Every year there is something new and doing classes is a lot more fun, creative and interesting for the students than before the crisis.
One of the BGSE's main functions is to nourish economic knowledge among institutions and administrations. Has the crisis meant that they listen to you more?
Our graduates have always found good outlets, but perhaps now we have incorporated into the management of the BGSE a professionalisation of the management to help with that. We are now 10 years old, and at the beginning the main thing was to offer good classes. We now have that under control and we want to help our students to find good jobs. And yes, there is a lot of demand for economists at all levels. Here we provide training in economics, we are not a business school, and our graduates go to many European institutions, think tanks, research centres, etc. We have more demand and with higher quality jobs.
We often hear some business associations lamenting that universities exist with their backs to companies. In your case, with a foot in both camps, how do you see it?
I think that in this respect both sides have improved a lot. It is not that universities turn their backs on companies while the latter look to the universities. It is an attitude from both sides, which for a long time have lived separately. However, in recent years, even before the crisis, they have come together a lot. To be competitive and to survive, companies need to be much more involved in the progress of technology and knowledge. And the universities, who have seen that during a time of crisis it is not so easy for their graduates to find work, worry about these people becoming as well educated as possible. There have been reforms in education and universities now talk to companies more.
The paradox of the Catalan and Spanish market is that there are high school and university drop-out rates, which has led to a lack of technicians...
It is true that we have a system with two large blocs and almost nothing in between. Professional Training (FP, in Catalan) was something that almost no one wanted. That has got better and above all in Catalonia efforts have been made to strengthen this sphere. The pupils who do not do university entrance exams are left out of it a bit because standard FP was not of high quality. Moreover, drop-out rates have now fallen, albeit for a bad reason: that there are not enough jobs. It is not the reason we want for a fall in the school drop-out rate. This sector in the middle has a lot of room to improve and in the universities we have to be demanding. It is not necessary for everyone to have a university qualification if there are other useful ways of training that end in finding work. In the university we have to raise the level a little and train more qualified people.
In your research you have dealt with regional economics and solidarity between regions. Is genuine solidarity possible in which everyone will be satisfied?
The first thing we need is political agreement on how far we want this solidarity to go. A large majority of people and regions in Spain would agree that the Spanish territorial model is not well-designed. The model of solidarity is badly-designed because the richest areas do not necessarily contribute to the poorest. We know that after the funds are redistributed, the order from most to least is left distorted. Moreover, that means that the solidarity is not recognised. Once the level of solidarity required is agreed by all, there are ways of designing a funding model that is more efficient than the one we have.
What does this new design need?
For starters, transparency. The current model is unnecessarily complex and non-transparent. And then we need each of the autonomous regions to have room to manage revenue. Today there is very little margin. If as an autonomous region I make an effort to come up with a tax system that tries to collect more revenue, I am left with a very little margin and the rest goes into the large pot to be redistributed. That is bad because it creates perverse incentives in those who give and those who receive. Therefore, I would favour a model in which the autonomous communities could design their own tax system, with power over it (as happens in the United States with no problem) and to contribute to the pot was has been agreed. In this way we would have much more autonomy and responsibility. Letting each region collect its own taxes would also help to encourage responsibility and for the public to see the level of the administration that sets the tax and offers the services.
In the long run, what is the effectiveness of these transfers from richer to less well-developed areas? It is a system that is questioned in Spain, Italy and within the EU...
This is the point at which a limit and responsibility has to be set. It is good that everyone has a minimum level in basic services like education and health and, if we are wealthier, for us to contribute to the collective we belong to. Who makes up this collective is a political decision: Spain? Europe? Catalonia? The Barcelona area? That is not for me to say, but once the territorial limit is defined in which there is solidarity, it is good to guarantee services that provide opportunities to the public. What we are doing today is not efficient and, moreover, it creates disincentives. As there is no responsibility or transparency, people take what they have for granted.
In terms of this funding, what should we do about regional development aid?
A part of the investment in infrastructure in Spain is motivated by territorial balance and we have to be careful with this. Sometimes it leads to huge mistakes. You cannot make a major investment in infrastructure in a undeveloped area and hope it creates activity, because that is not necessarily how it works. A poorer area that is well-connected to a wealthy area can move production to the wealthy area because it is easy to come and go. It has to be very carefully evaluated. Sometimes this aid does not help the area where the money is spent, but rather helps to keep it dependent.
The wealthiest areas also call for infrastructure...
It is very important that they have what they need. In Catalonia we have examples, such as the Rodalies local rail network or the Mediterranean Corridor, which have a need for investment. At the same time we have investments in airports that do not work, without even going outside Catalonia...The public spending on infrastructure has to be rethought at all levels. It has to be well-planned, to see the cost/benefit, analysed and decided on. There is a part that is political decision, but it has to have a sound economic basis.
You have just become the first female vice president of the Cercle d'Economia. Is it good news or bad news that it took until 2016?
It is a good thing that women are getting into top jobs, I am very proud and I hope it becomes the norm. But I also feel strong ties to the Cercle, which I have been part of for many years, and it is natural that I could become vice president. Why have there been no women before? There could have been, but perhaps the right person was not available at the right time. There are fewer women than men in the Cercle, but if we look at it from the point of view of age, there are increasingly more.
The debate about the lack of women in top jobs never goes away...
I am fairly optimistic; I feel we have made a spectacular qualitative leap forward. I look at my mother and then my daughters. The progress made between my mother and me is spectacular, and I trust that what my daughters will see when they are my age will be a progression. I don't think that it will be as large a leap as the one we have already made. Perhaps not at all social levels or qualifications. The whole of society has to help in balancing the option of having children, which is the main difficulty. It is not an issue of companies or women, it is a social issue. That when a child's father has to leave a meeting at five in the evening it is not seen as a bad thing, while the mother just accepts it because she is the mother. We still have a little way to go.
Is it a generational issue?
There is normalisation. I have been the first woman in plenty of things, such as the first woman professor in the UPF's economics faculty, and now there are quite a few of us. I didn't feel that access to professorship was held back because I was a woman. And the same goes for boards. There is more awareness and effort, but it is not about there being more of a female culture, but rather it is about diversity. That there is a change in the traditional pattern of who is in charge of companies and that this diversity has been incorporated is what has made us more competitive and more like other more advanced countries. We have taken a significant step forward and we must not lose this tendency towards improvement. I am optimistic because I see young women in class who no longer question whether they will have relevant roles or not; they expect it. And those in charge, those at the head of companies or universities, also value this diversity.
In a roundtable debate at the Cercle d'Economia on this issue, there were almost only women among the audience. Are men not interested in it?
When we talk about these issues I want the group to be diverse. It is not a women's issue; everyone has to be involved. Men are increasingly aware and organisations, too. That is why we are moving in the right direction. If it is only for women and it is done defensively, we will not get anywhere. We have to show facts.
 |
| Photo: Lali Álvarez |
A change of subject. Economists have become more visible during the crisis. Are you listened to more now?
While at the start of the crisis it seemed that economists had made a lot of mistakes, it has been shown during this period that economic knowledge has helped for us to talk about recession rather than depression. Some public policy measures have been designed based on the knowledge acquired by economists over a long time, such as the coordination of monetary policy. The ECB, the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England coordinated action on monetary policy because they realised if they didn't, the crisis could have been much tougher. They developed these actions according to research by economists. That is sometimes not recognised because it is always remembered that economists did not predict the crisis, but some had already sounded the alarm. We have now realised that we need to think about a different economy and the economists are very much at the centre of this discussion. In the end, we are the ones who know more about the weak and strong aspects of the economy, even though everyone has their opinion.
So, in the realm of education the crisis has been a great help...
Totally! I give the Introduction to Macroeconomics in the International Business Economics degree and the crisis, which has been terrible for many people, for teachers and researchers has been a spectacular laboratory. Every year there is something new and doing classes is a lot more fun, creative and interesting for the students than before the crisis.
One of the BGSE's main functions is to nourish economic knowledge among institutions and administrations. Has the crisis meant that they listen to you more?
Our graduates have always found good outlets, but perhaps now we have incorporated into the management of the BGSE a professionalisation of the management to help with that. We are now 10 years old, and at the beginning the main thing was to offer good classes. We now have that under control and we want to help our students to find good jobs. And yes, there is a lot of demand for economists at all levels. Here we provide training in economics, we are not a business school, and our graduates go to many European institutions, think tanks, research centres, etc. We have more demand and with higher quality jobs.
We often hear some business associations lamenting that universities exist with their backs to companies. In your case, with a foot in both camps, how do you see it?
I think that in this respect both sides have improved a lot. It is not that universities turn their backs on companies while the latter look to the universities. It is an attitude from both sides, which for a long time have lived separately. However, in recent years, even before the crisis, they have come together a lot. To be competitive and to survive, companies need to be much more involved in the progress of technology and knowledge. And the universities, who have seen that during a time of crisis it is not so easy for their graduates to find work, worry about these people becoming as well educated as possible. There have been reforms in education and universities now talk to companies more.
 |
| Photo: Lali Álvarez |
The paradox of the Catalan and Spanish market is that there are high school and university drop-out rates, which has led to a lack of technicians...
It is true that we have a system with two large blocs and almost nothing in between. Professional Training (FP, in Catalan) was something that almost no one wanted. That has got better and above all in Catalonia efforts have been made to strengthen this sphere. The pupils who do not do university entrance exams are left out of it a bit because standard FP was not of high quality. Moreover, drop-out rates have now fallen, albeit for a bad reason: that there are not enough jobs. It is not the reason we want for a fall in the school drop-out rate. This sector in the middle has a lot of room to improve and in the universities we have to be demanding. It is not necessary for everyone to have a university qualification if there are other useful ways of training that end in finding work. In the university we have to raise the level a little and train more qualified people.
In your research you have dealt with regional economics and solidarity between regions. Is genuine solidarity possible in which everyone will be satisfied?
The first thing we need is political agreement on how far we want this solidarity to go. A large majority of people and regions in Spain would agree that the Spanish territorial model is not well-designed. The model of solidarity is badly-designed because the richest areas do not necessarily contribute to the poorest. We know that after the funds are redistributed, the order from most to least is left distorted. Moreover, that means that the solidarity is not recognised. Once the level of solidarity required is agreed by all, there are ways of designing a funding model that is more efficient than the one we have.
What does this new design need?
For starters, transparency. The current model is unnecessarily complex and non-transparent. And then we need each of the autonomous regions to have room to manage revenue. Today there is very little margin. If as an autonomous region I make an effort to come up with a tax system that tries to collect more revenue, I am left with a very little margin and the rest goes into the large pot to be redistributed. That is bad because it creates perverse incentives in those who give and those who receive. Therefore, I would favour a model in which the autonomous communities could design their own tax system, with power over it (as happens in the United States with no problem) and to contribute to the pot was has been agreed. In this way we would have much more autonomy and responsibility. Letting each region collect its own taxes would also help to encourage responsibility and for the public to see the level of the administration that sets the tax and offers the services.
In the long run, what is the effectiveness of these transfers from richer to less well-developed areas? It is a system that is questioned in Spain, Italy and within the EU...
This is the point at which a limit and responsibility has to be set. It is good that everyone has a minimum level in basic services like education and health and, if we are wealthier, for us to contribute to the collective we belong to. Who makes up this collective is a political decision: Spain? Europe? Catalonia? The Barcelona area? That is not for me to say, but once the territorial limit is defined in which there is solidarity, it is good to guarantee services that provide opportunities to the public. What we are doing today is not efficient and, moreover, it creates disincentives. As there is no responsibility or transparency, people take what they have for granted.
 |
| Photo: Lali Álvarez |
In terms of this funding, what should we do about regional development aid?
A part of the investment in infrastructure in Spain is motivated by territorial balance and we have to be careful with this. Sometimes it leads to huge mistakes. You cannot make a major investment in infrastructure in a undeveloped area and hope it creates activity, because that is not necessarily how it works. A poorer area that is well-connected to a wealthy area can move production to the wealthy area because it is easy to come and go. It has to be very carefully evaluated. Sometimes this aid does not help the area where the money is spent, but rather helps to keep it dependent.
The wealthiest areas also call for infrastructure...
It is very important that they have what they need. In Catalonia we have examples, such as the Rodalies local rail network or the Mediterranean Corridor, which have a need for investment. At the same time we have investments in airports that do not work, without even going outside Catalonia...The public spending on infrastructure has to be rethought at all levels. It has to be well-planned, to see the cost/benefit, analysed and decided on. There is a part that is political decision, but it has to have a sound economic basis.