“This point suggests a broader perspective on the economic crisis in the Eurozone. Most current discussions of the crisis focus on debts, failing banks, capital-flight deflationary pressures, self-defeating austerity, and so on. That’s all relevant, but there is a deeper backdrop to these problems. Europe really is integrating economically, however imperfectly, and we are learning that there are big winners and big losers to this process. The debt problems and the high bond yields and the other signs of crisis can be read—in this account—as our financial markets heralding the future arrival of major changes in economic geography.
A lot more of Mediterranean Europe is going to look like southern Italy and Sicily: somewhat empty in terms of economically successful enterprises on a large scale. It will rely more on tourism and more on retirees and government transfers, but overall the fiscal problems of these regions will worsen and they may lose some political autonomy. In any case, their current and forthcoming revenue problems will show up in forward-looking market prices, in capital markets most of all, and that means crises in the bond markets as indeed we have been seeing.
It is striking how frequently the phrase “the periphery” is used in discussions of the Eurozone. It is exactly appropriate, and few people hesitate to use it to describe large parts of a region devoted to the ideal of economic integration. It’s time we started thinking through the other implications of that reality, namely that the geographic and institutional clustering of commercial talent is on the rise.”