Connect with us
//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Asean

India’s economy: growing rapidly and unequally

Author: Raghbendra Jha, ANU In 2010, India’s GDP in PPP terms was $3.92 trillion. By this reckoning, India was the fourth-largest economy in the world after the US, China and Japan . Citi Investment Research and Analysis estimates that in a decade India will be the third-largest economy. Between 2000–01 and 2007–08, India’s real GDP growth averaged 7.3 per cent per annum. Growth rates have recently been around 9 per cent and sometimes in excess of 9 per cent, except for the period since 2008–09. In that year, GDP growth fell to 6.7 per cent in the face of the global financial crisis. GDP growth rate picked up the following year to 8 per cent. In 2010–11, real GDP growth is estimated to be 8.6 per cent and in 2011–12, to return to 9 per cent. With a population growth rate of about 1.7 per cent per annum (according to the latest Census of India), real GDP growth per capita has been in excess of 7 per cent per annum for several years. At this rate, real GDP per capita will double in about 10 years. Since the 1970s, average decadal growth rates of real GPD have gone up, even as the standard deviation of year-to-year growth has gone down (Table 1). Decade Average growth rate (% per annum) YtoY SD of   growth rate 1960-61 to 1969-70 4.0 3.674007803 1970-71 to 1979-80 3.0 4.185225336 1980-81 to 1989-90 5.6 2.289323044 1990-91 to 1999-2000 5.7 1.841768474 2000-01 to 2009-10 7.3 2.08019764 Source: Computed from Reserve Bank of India: Handbook of Statistics on the Indian Economy. Structure of economic growth in India The structure of India’s GDP has undergone immense transformation in the face of such rapid economic growth and has, in turn, contributed to it. During the 1960s, agricultural value added, as a percentage of GDP, was 42.5 per cent. Corresponding magnitudes for industry, manufacturing and services were, respectively, 20.3 per cent, 14.3 per cent and 37.2 per cent. In 2008, agriculture contributed 17.6 per cent of GDP, whereas the contributions of industry, manufacturing, and services were 29 per cent, 16 per cent and 53.4 per cent, respectively. This is an indicator both of India’s potential for further economic growth as well as that of a fundamental problem facing the economy — how does one sector (agriculture), which contributes less than 18 per cent of GDP, support more than 60 per cent of India’s population? Within manufacturing, India has increasingly specialised in higher value added manufacturing. Contributors to India’s higher economic growth In a growth accounting sense, capital, labour and productivity growth have all contributed to enhanced rates of economic growth in India. Savings rates have gone up to about 34 per cent and investment to about 36 per cent, particularly since the 1990s. There is a very strong ‘demographic dividend’ as the median age of the Indian population is around 25, indicating that the country is home to more than 600 million people below the age of 25. Further, this labour force is getting better trained (literacy rates are up to 74 per cent in the 2011 census). There is evidence that Total Factor Productivity in the production of aggregate GDP and in the manufacturing and services sectors has gone up, particularly since 1994. Agricultural productivity has not grown very quickly. Openness to trade and investment went up sharply, particularly during the period 2002–07. Even after the global financial crisis, India continued its policy of trade liberalisation, with average manufacturing sector tariffs now down to 12 per cent or less. All these factors imply that economic growth rates in India will stay high and, given the increasing demographic dividend, may even accelerate. Short-term issues with economic growth Drought in 2008–09, following the sharp global rise in food prices in 2007, led to high food inflation, which has now been passed on to the general price level, particularly in light of recurrent commodity price shocks. Anti-inflation policy in the form of higher lending rates has tended to dampen investor sentiments . Economic growth and poverty alleviation in India High rates of economic growth in India imply that there has been a substantial reduction in levels of poverty. But the elasticity of poverty reduction with respect to economic growth is lower in India than in many Asian countries, essentially because of the structure of economic growth. This implies that inequality (both personal as well as spatial) has increased, particularly of incomes (as opposed to consumption where inequality is lower), but is still well below that of many emerging economies. Prospects for Australia Australia-India trade and investment relations are strong but fall well below their potential. Bi-directional trade is heavily in favour of Australia. Australian exports to India are mainly in the resource area and there are some service exports. Indian exports to Australia are largely in the areas of Information Technology, pearls and gems, some electronic equipment and some service imports. There is substantial room for expansion of both trade and investment. India is expected to invest more than US$1 trillion in infrastructure in the near future. There is substantial room for Australian investment and expertise in this area. Other areas of possible economic collaboration include food processing, educational institutions in India and the use of service sector expertise to enhance manufacturing sector growth, an area in which India has done very well. Australia could benefit from India’s expertise in this area. The Indian economy is likely to be a very strong engine for economic growth, not just in the region, but globally as well. Greater Australia-India collaboration can only enhance favourable economic outcomes for both countries. Raghbendra Jha is Professor of Economics and Executive Director of the Australia South Asia Research Centre at The Australian National University. China’s and India’s growing investment and trade with Africa China’s growing presence in India’s neighbourhood India’s 2011-12 budget fails to see the big picture

Published

on

Author: Raghbendra Jha, ANU

In 2010, India’s GDP in PPP terms was $3.92 trillion. By this reckoning, India was the fourth-largest economy in the world after the US, China and Japan.

Citi Investment Research and Analysis estimates that in a decade India will be the third-largest economy. Between 2000–01 and 2007–08, India’s real GDP growth averaged 7.3 per cent per annum. Growth rates have recently been around 9 per cent and sometimes in excess of 9 per cent, except for the period since 2008–09. In that year, GDP growth fell to 6.7 per cent in the face of the global financial crisis. GDP growth rate picked up the following year to 8 per cent.

In 2010–11, real GDP growth is estimated to be 8.6 per cent and in 2011–12, to return to 9 per cent. With a population growth rate of about 1.7 per cent per annum (according to the latest Census of India), real GDP growth per capita has been in excess of 7 per cent per annum for several years. At this rate, real GDP per capita will double in about 10 years. Since the 1970s, average decadal growth rates of real GPD have gone up, even as the standard deviation of year-to-year growth has gone down (Table 1).

DecadeAverage growth rate (% per annum) YtoY SD of   growth rate
1960-61 to 1969-704.03.674007803
1970-71 to 1979-803.04.185225336
1980-81 to 1989-905.62.289323044
1990-91 to 1999-20005.71.841768474
2000-01 to 2009-107.32.08019764

Source: Computed from Reserve Bank of India: Handbook of Statistics on the Indian Economy.

Structure of economic growth in India

The structure of India’s GDP has undergone immense transformation in the face of such rapid economic growth and has, in turn, contributed to it. During the 1960s, agricultural value added, as a percentage of GDP, was 42.5 per cent. Corresponding magnitudes for industry, manufacturing and services were, respectively, 20.3 per cent, 14.3 per cent and 37.2 per cent. In 2008, agriculture contributed 17.6 per cent of GDP, whereas the contributions of industry, manufacturing, and services were 29 per cent, 16 per cent and 53.4 per cent, respectively.

This is an indicator both of India’s potential for further economic growth as well as that of a fundamental problem facing the economy — how does one sector (agriculture), which contributes less than 18 per cent of GDP, support more than 60 per cent of India’s population? Within manufacturing, India has increasingly specialised in higher value added manufacturing.

Contributors to India’s higher economic growth

In a growth accounting sense, capital, labour and productivity growth have all contributed to enhanced rates of economic growth in India. Savings rates have gone up to about 34 per cent and investment to about 36 per cent, particularly since the 1990s. There is a very strong ‘demographic dividend’ as the median age of the Indian population is around 25, indicating that the country is home to more than 600 million people below the age of 25. Further, this labour force is getting better trained (literacy rates are up to 74 per cent in the 2011 census).

There is evidence that Total Factor Productivity in the production of aggregate GDP and in the manufacturing and services sectors has gone up, particularly since 1994. Agricultural productivity has not grown very quickly. Openness to trade and investment went up sharply, particularly during the period 2002–07. Even after the global financial crisis, India continued its policy of trade liberalisation, with average manufacturing sector tariffs now down to 12 per cent or less.

All these factors imply that economic growth rates in India will stay high and, given the increasing demographic dividend, may even accelerate.

Short-term issues with economic growth

Drought in 2008–09, following the sharp global rise in food prices in 2007, led to high food inflation, which has now been passed on to the general price level, particularly in light of recurrent commodity price shocks. Anti-inflation policy in the form of higher lending rates has tended to dampen investor sentiments.

Economic growth and poverty alleviation in India

High rates of economic growth in India imply that there has been a substantial reduction in levels of poverty. But the elasticity of poverty reduction with respect to economic growth is lower in India than in many Asian countries, essentially because of the structure of economic growth. This implies that inequality (both personal as well as spatial) has increased, particularly of incomes (as opposed to consumption where inequality is lower), but is still well below that of many emerging economies.

Prospects for Australia

Australia-India trade and investment relations are strong but fall well below their potential. Bi-directional trade is heavily in favour of Australia. Australian exports to India are mainly in the resource area and there are some service exports. Indian exports to Australia are largely in the areas of Information Technology, pearls and gems, some electronic equipment and some service imports.

There is substantial room for expansion of both trade and investment. India is expected to invest more than US$1 trillion in infrastructure in the near future. There is substantial room for Australian investment and expertise in this area. Other areas of possible economic collaboration include food processing, educational institutions in India and the use of service sector expertise to enhance manufacturing sector growth, an area in which India has done very well. Australia could benefit from India’s expertise in this area.

The Indian economy is likely to be a very strong engine for economic growth, not just in the region, but globally as well. Greater Australia-India collaboration can only enhance favourable economic outcomes for both countries.

Raghbendra Jha is Professor of Economics and Executive Director of the Australia South Asia Research Centre at The Australian National University.

  1. China’s and India’s growing investment and trade with Africa
  2. China’s growing presence in India’s neighbourhood
  3. India’s 2011-12 budget fails to see the big picture

Continue reading here:
India’s economy: growing rapidly and unequally

Asean

ASEAN weathering the COVID-19 typhoon

Published

on

Vietnam's Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc addresses a special video conference with leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), on the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), in Hanoi 14 April, 2020 (Photo:Reuters/Manan Vatsyayana).

Author: Sandra Seno-Alday, Sydney University

The roughly 20 typhoons that hit Southeast Asia each year pale in comparison to the impact on the region of COVID-19 — a storm of a very different sort striking not just Southeast Asia but the world.

 

Just how badly is the COVID-19 typhoon thrashing the region? And what might the post-crisis recovery and reconstruction look like? To answer these questions, it is necessary to investigate the strengths and vulnerabilities of Southeast Asia’s pre-COVID-19 economic infrastructure.

Understanding the structure of the region’s economic house requires going back to 1967, when Southeast Asian countries decided to pledge friendship to one another under the ASEAN framework. While other integrated regions such as NAFTA and the European Union have aggressively broken down trade barriers and significantly boosted intra-regional trade, ASEAN regional economic integration has chugged along slower.

Southeast Asian countries have not viewed trade between each other as a top priority. The trade agreements in the region have been forged around suggestions for ASEAN countries to lower tariffs on intra-regional trade to within a certain range and across limited industries. This has lowered but not eliminated barriers to intra-regional trade. Consequently, a relatively significant share of Southeast Asian trade is with countries outside the region. This active extra-regional engagement has resulted in ASEAN countries’ successful integration into global value chain networks.

A historically outward-facing region, in 2010 around 75 per cent of Southeast Asian commodity imports and exports came from countries outside of ASEAN. This share of extra-regional trade nudged closer to 80 per cent in 2018. This indicates that ASEAN’s global value chain network embeddedness has deepened over time.

Around 40 per cent of ASEAN’s extra-regional trade is with the rest of Asia. From 2010 to 2018 Southeast Asian countries forged major trade relationships with four Asian countries: China, Japan, South Korea and India. Outside Asia, the United States is the region’s major trading partner. ASEAN’s trade focus on Asia’s largest markets is not surprising. Countries tend to establish trade relationships with large, geographically close, and culturally similar markets.

Fostering deep relationships with a few large markets, however, is a double-edged sword. While it has allowed ASEAN to benefit from integration in global value chains, it has also resulted in increased vulnerability to the shocks affecting its network connections.

ASEAN’s participation in global value chains has allowed it to transition from a net regional importer in 1990 to a net regional exporter in 2018. But the region’s deep embeddedness in a small and tightly-coupled network cluster of extra-regional global value chain partners has exposed it to disruption to any and all of its external partners. By contrast, ASEAN’s intra-regional trade network structure is much more loosely-coupled: a consequence of persistent intra-regional trade barriers and thus lower intra-regional trade intensity.

In the pre-COVID-19 period, ASEAN built for itself an economic house held up by just five extra-regional markets, while doing less to expand and diversify its intra-regional trade network. The data shows that ASEAN trade became increasingly concentrated in these few external markets between 2010 and 2018.

This dependence on a handful of markets does not bode well for risk and crisis management. All of the region’s major trading partners have been significantly affected by COVID-19 and this in turn is blowing the ASEAN economic house down.

What are the ways forward? The immediate task at hand is to get a better picture of the region’s position in global value chain networks and to get on top of managing its network risk exposure. Already there are red flags around the region’s food security arising from its position in food value chains. It is critical to look for ways to introduce flexibility into existing supply chains for greater agility in responding to crises.

It is also an opportune time for ASEAN to harness the technology transfer gains of global value chain participation and invest in innovation-driven diversification of products and markets. The region’s embeddedness in global value chain networks certainly places it in a strong position to readily access large export markets not just in Asia but also Europe and the Americas.

Over the longer term, ASEAN is faced with the question of whether it should seriously look…

Source link

Continue Reading

Markets

Tiger Trade Launches SGX Trading, Meeting Demand from Asian Investors

Access to the Singapore Exchange (SGX) adds to Tiger Brokers’ current menu of stock exchanges, such as the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and the Nasdaq Stock Market (NASDAQ), the world’s two largest stock exchanges, as well as the Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKEX).

Published

on

SINGAPORE (ACN Newswire) – Tiger Trade, a one-stop mobile and online trading application by Tiger Brokers, has launched access to the Singapore Exchange (SGX).

(more…)
Continue Reading

Asean

Can Asia maintain growth with an ever ageing population ?

To boost productivity in the future, Asian governments will have to implement well-targeted structural reforms today.

Published

on

Asia has been the world champion of economic growth for decades, and this year will be no exception. According to the latest International Monetary Fund Regional Economic Outlook(REO), the Asia-Pacific region’s GDP is projected to increase by 5.5% in 2017 and 5.4% in 2018. (more…)

Continue Reading