Showing posts with label middle income trap. Show all posts
Showing posts with label middle income trap. Show all posts

Thursday, January 02, 2014

Business 360 14: Middle Income Trap and Economic Freedom

* This is my article for the December issue of this magazine, published in Kathmandu, Nepal.
---------

Economic freedom is a major factor for an economy and its people to move from a low income country (LIC) to middle income country (MIC), and ultimately to a high income country (HIC).

People need to be given enough leeway to be creative and innovative in introducing new products and services to their consumers, resulting in continuous and endless process of innovation and healthy competition among the various players in the economy.

This fact is among the lessons drawn from the two-days Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia  conference in Bangkok, Thailand in October.

Among the prominent speakers of the conference was Dr. Razeen Sally of the European Center for International Political Economy, also a vising faculty at the National University of Singapore (NUS). He said that  a poor country or LIC must “get the basics rights” to catch up with growth. Among such “basics” are 1st generation reforms, “product market liberalization.” This includes the following:  macroeconomic stability in fiscal and monetary policy, rule of law and property rights, free international trade, and good skills and education of the people.

The next generation reforms are more structural and more complicated.  They are the “factor market liberalization” reforms.  Increasing globalization and free market does increase income inequality among the people. While this is a natural economic result, this is also a political challenge how to face this reality and find ways to address it.

Penalizing more efficient, hard working people via higher taxation, more business regulations and restrictions is not the way to do it. Rather, it is encouraging those in the lower end of society to keep working. They may feel “poor” when in fact, their economic status is already comparable to the upper middle class of a LIC or even a MIC.

In the last session, I was one of four rapporteurs for the four discussion groups on other issues raised during the conference. Among the issues raised in our group was shared by Dr. Chung-ho Kim of Freedom Factory Ltd. in Seoul, that many  people in HICs like S. Korea  feel and complain that they are poor, despite the high standard of living they enjoy compared to what the poor in low income and middle income countries experience.

I made this chart in my report on stage that day.


Middle income is broadly defined as having a per capita GDP income at purchasing power parity (PPP) valuation of between $3,000 to $16,000  per year. Thus, an economy with per capita GDP of only $3,000 or less for many years is said to be caught in a low income trap shown by growth path AB. Economies which have been stuck at $16,000 or less per capita GDP for several years is said to be caught in a middle income trap, shown by growth path AC.

There are several factors why an economy can be stuck at AB or AC path. Foremost of which are: lack of economic freedom of the people -- where a big portion of the economy is held by a few oligarchs or business cronies of high political leaders or monarchy. Another reason is the lack of the rule of law, where rules are applied differently to different people due to arbitrary powers of lawmakers.

These two factor can also contribute to a retrogression of an economy from a lower  middle income to an LIC and go back to low income country. Or for an HIC to become an MIC.

The way some member- economies of the European Union are being managed, it is possible that they might plunge into growth path A’E someday, meaning may fall back to MIC status. When entrepreneurs are shacked by too many taxes and regulations, either they will experience production shrinkage or quit altogether, migrating to another country where their economic freedom is more respected. Heavily regulated country will experience more debt and fiscal constraints as the number of net tax payers will flatline if not decline.

Whether aspiring to move a status, ensuring the economic freedom of the citizens and limiting the role of government to enforcing the rule of law and protecting property rights, are the basic ingredients of success.
--------------

See also:
Business 360 10: Foreign Aid as Band Aid Solution, August 11, 2013 
Business 360 11: Avoiding Middle Income Trap, September 19, 2013 

Business 360 12: Optimum Size of Government, October 13, 2013 

Business 360 13: US Government Shutdown and Lessons for Asia, November 28, 2013

Saturday, November 09, 2013

EFN Asia 32: Day 2 of Conference 2013 in Bangkok

* This is my article yesterday at the EFN website. Karthik Chandra of the Foundation for Democratic Reforms and Lok Satta (People Power), India, helped in filling up some gaps in my original article. Thanks Karthik.
--------------

Day 2 of the Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia 2013 Conference started with a presentation by Fred McMahon of Fraser Institute in Canada, of the results of the Economic Freedom of the World (EFW) 2013 Report. Before presenting the numbers, he reiterated the definition of “economic freedom” as fundamental rights. Without these basic rights, no political or civil freedom can prosper.


The results of the latest EFW report showed once again, that more freedom means, more growth, less poverty. It also means less corruption, higher life satisfaction, life expectancy, more prosperity. For Asia, Economic freedom has been following global average or trend. The full EFW Report can be accessed at  http://www.freetheworld.com , http://fraserinstitute.org .

FNF Regional Director for SouthEast and East Asia, Rainer Adam discussed the work of FNF in Asia, then explained that they invited some Thai incumbent government officials, they all declined, so they invited the opposition, former Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejajiva. (Photo from left: Rainer, Abhisit, Fred.) 


Hon. Vejajiva said that Thailand’s high growth in past decades was due to dynamic private sector subject to competition. Government’s monetary policy helped without compromising inflationary pressure. The administration is buying Thai farmers’ rice at 50 percent higher than market rice. The farmers are richer but public finance suffered, also global rice prices rose.

He added that low wages, natural resources extraction can not sustain growth. Needed are more innovations to escape middle income trap. It is not how small or how big the government is, but to properly identify the sectors that government should come and support, and which sectors the government should get out. When markets are distorted, corruption goes up.

Economic freedom can be improved, Abhisit added, by identifying sectors where government can engage and solve inequality. Populist policies and authoritarian government feed each other, but .they can be tackled with democratic and good Governance. Thailand is successful In attracting various car producers and has no national car. An economy improves its competitiveness by gradual opening up.

Discussions in Panel 4 followed with 6 speakers from 6 countries, to talk about different experiences in dealing with middle income trap. Adinda Muchtar from the Indonesian Institute moderated the panel. Photo below, from left: Adinda (Indonesia), Wan saiful (Malaysia), Xingyuan (China), Set (Myanmar), Nguyen (Vietnam), Barun (India), and Hiroshi (Japan).


Monday, October 21, 2013

EFN Asia 29: Speakers in Day 1, Conference 2013 in Bangkok

The two-days Economic Freedom Nework (EFN) Asia conference 2013 will start today here at Plaza Athenee hotel, Bangkok, Thailand. More than 130 international and local participants have registered, a good number. Here are the speakers today, in order of their appearance on stage from morning to afternoon.  See the two-days program here (this blog) or here. (EFN website)

The first four speakers will come from Thailand, Germany, Philippines and India. The keynote speaker will be the Philippines' Department of Justice (DOJ) Assistant Secretary, Geronimo Sy, who is a friend in Manila.


The next four speakers are from Canada, Thailand, India and Thailand, respectively. Fred, me and other speakers in this conference came from Hong Kong yesterday, we attended the Lion Rock Institute's Reading Club Salon 2013 last Saturday.


The batch of speakers are from S. Korea, Thailand, Sri Lanka and Hawaii, USA. Ken Schooland will speak during the farewell dinner tonight.


So there. I will try to blog during the conference today. If not, I will just tweet, so stay tuned.
-----------

See also:

Thursday, October 17, 2013

EFN Asia 28: Program of the 2013 Conference in Bangkok

The EFN Asia 2013 Conference is all set next week, Monday and Tuesday, in Bangkok. The EFN and Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom (FNF) have partnered with two think tanks in Bangkok as their co-sponsors.


Here is the program. Department of Justice (DOJ) Assistant Secretary Geronimo "Indian" Sy will be the keynote speaker. ASec "Indian" is a friend since about 2001 when he was among the key debaters of the pilipinasforum@yahoogroups that I co-moderated, with lots of discussions and debates daily, from 2001 to around 2004. There was no facebook or friendster or twitter then.


The panel discussions 2 and 3 will feature speakers from several Asian countries like India, Thailand, Philippines, S. Korea and Sri Lanka. The welcome dinner program looks interesting too, a philosophical dialogue between Lao Tzu and Confucius, wow! It may be like the Socratic dialogue in Plato's "The Republic". I will also join the short talk by EFN member think tanks and individual scholars as Minimal Government Thinkers is among the active members of EFN Asia.

Day 2, Tuesday, will be the presentation of the result of the EFW 2014 Report by the Fraser Institute.


Panel discussions 4 and 5 will feature another batch of speakers from other Asian economies: Malaysia, China, India, Vietnam, Japan, Thailand, plus the US.


What's my role in this conference aside from the short discussion about MG Thinkers during the welcome dinner on Monday? Secret for now, but it's related with a post-conference project.

Stay tuned, I will try to blog and tweet as many panel discussions as possible this coming Monday and Tuesday.
--------------

See also:

Tuesday, October 08, 2013

EFN Asia 27: Escaping Middle Income Trap via Economic Freedom

Hong Kong, S. Korea, Taiwan and Singapore were able to escape a possible middle income trap (MIT) by growing fast. Malaysia, China, Thailand, other developing Asia seem to be trapped already. How to escape this trap?

The Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia conference on Asia, Middle Income Trap and Economic Freedom will be held in two weeks, October 21-22, 2013, in Bangkok, Thailand and I will be there. Today, I read three papers about the subject.



The first paper is from the East Asia Forum, Developing Asia and the middle-income trap dated August 5th, 2013 and written by Homi Kharas. It says,

Developing Asia’s share of global GDP has risen inexorably over the last 30 years: 7.5 per cent in 1980, 10.5 per cent in 1990, 14.5 per cent in 2000 and 26 per cent projected for this year....
At its heart, the middle-income trap is a governance failure: an inability to take a long-term view of the best way forward for society as a whole. Avoiding the trap can take careful preparation and implementation over a decade or more. Building top-tier universities, forming fair, transparent and accountable public institutions.... Politically, the shift from the ‘rule of man’, where an enlightened leader can be relied upon to make the right choices, to a ‘rule of law’, with institutional structures that produce predictable and sound decisions, is hard to accomplish. But unless middle-income Asian countries take the long view and change course they could fall, like many Latin American countries, into middle-income traps of their own making.

I like that. The author has hammered the importance of having accountable public institutions and having a rule of law, not rule of men, to enable economies to escape the MIT.

The second paper I checked is from the ADB Institute, The Middle-Income Trap: Issues for Members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations published in May 2013 and authored by Tran Van Tho. The paper (31 pages) has some good conceptual framework, lik this one. A country or an economy must aspire to attain the C-D growth path.

Also good data on per capita gross national income (GNI), comparative R&D spending, patents granted, tertiary graduates in engineering, and labor productivity, for the ASEAN 5 (Indonesia, Malaysia, PH, Thailand, Vietnam), China and India. But weak analysis on institutional factors like promoting the rule of law and economic freedom.

Another good framework from that ADBI paper, using the evolution of new, higher skilled industries, as benchmark for an economy's transition to higher income and hence, escape MIT.

But its definition of International Competitiveness Index,
ICI = (X-M) / (X+M), looks problematic. The denominator can become so big as it is total trade, sum of all exports of goods and services less imports (X+M) while the numerator can approach zero for those with balance trade (X = M).

And third paper, article from WSJ blog, Four Ways Asia Can Avoid the ‘Middle-Income Trap’ dated April 30, 2013, the IMF suggested these four ways to "escape" MIT:

1. Invest in infrastructure.
2. Guard against excessive capital inflows.
3. Boost spending on research and development and post-secondary education.
4. Get more women into the workforce and raise the retirement age.

It is typical for the IMF, along with the UN, WB, ADB, etc. to have central planning thinking. While the above measures are important, there are more important Entrepreneurship by nature is largely dynamic, spontaneous and subversive to existing businesses. Just (a) protect investors' (big and small) private property and investments, enforce contracts without favor, (b) do not over-bureaucratize and over-tax them and allow economic freedom. And growth should be everywhere, from infrastructure to telecomms, energy, shipping, airlines, land transportation, water, real estate, etc. And countries can grow faster and escape MIT.

I am excited to hear the various presentations on this subject during the EFN conference just two weeks from now.
-------------

See also:

Thursday, September 19, 2013

Business 360 11: Avoiding Middle Income Trap

* This article was published twice. First in Business 360 magazine in Kathmandu, Nepal, September 2013 issue; then in the Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia website today.
-------------

Many Asian economies are now among the “engine of growth” for some countries within and outside the continent due to their huge contribution to international trade as big exporters/producers  and big importers/consumers, as well as big recipients of foreign remittances.

Such opportunity has allowed many Asian economies to move from low income to middle-income levels, and for the lucky and more technologically advance ones like the four “tiger economies” of Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan and S. Korea, to move from middle- to high-income countries.


“Middle income” is defined as having a per capita GDP income based on purchasing power parity (PPP) of $3,000 to $20,000, or $16,000 for other definitions.

“Middle-income trap” (MIT) is the phenomenon of some rapidly growing economies stagnating at middle-income levels and failing to graduate into high-income countries. This is brought about by growth slowdown after sometime.

Avoiding the MIT is an important topic for many Asian emerging economies. This subject will be tackled during the annual Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia conference to be held in Bangkok this coming October 21-22, 2013. This writer will be among the participants of that big and important annual international conference.

Here is a chart showing countries in the MIT and those that were able to escape it.


Source: Aiyar, Duval, Puy, Wu and Zhang, Growth Slowdowns and the Middle Income Trap, IMF Working Paper WP/13/71, March 2013.

The Asian tiger economiesHong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan and S. Korea, plus oil-rich country Brunei, are able to escape the MIT by growing very fast for two to four decades, before they experienced growth slowdown. By that time, they have already attained the high income country (HIC) status. Below is a list of the major HICs.

Table 1. High Income Countries, GDP based on PPP per capita income, in current international dollar

Rank 
Country
2000
2012
2013
1
Qatar
54,473
102,211
105,091
2
Luxembourg
55,413
79,785
79,594
3
Singapore
32,262
60,410
61,567
4
Norway
39,092
55,009
56,663
5
Brunei Darussalam
43,320
54,389
55,111
6
Hong Kong
26,737
51,494
53,432
7
United States
35,252
49,922
51,248
8
United Arab Emirates
39,315
49,012
49,884
9
Switzerland
32,096
45,418
46,475
10
Canada
29,735
42,734
43,594
11
Australia
27,263
42,640
44,074
18
Germany
26,090
39,028
39,993
19
Taiwan
20,290
38,749
40,393
22
United Kingdom
25,241
36,941
37,502
24
Japan
25,669
36,266
37,525
25
France
26,036
35,548
35,942
27
Korea
16,503
32,272
33,580


Source: IMF, World Economic Outlook, April 2013 Database.

And here are the Asian middle-income countries (MICs) which might be pulled in the trap. In the lower batch are some low-income Asian countries aspiring to reach middle income level.

Table 2. Asian Middle and Low Income Countries, GDP based on PPP per capita income, in current international dollar

 Rank
Country
2000
2012
2013
56
Malaysia
9,088
16,922
17,776
87
Thailand
5,007
10,126
10,849
89
Timor-Leste
2,714
9,873
10,784
93
China
2,379
9,162
10,011
113
Sri Lanka
2,771
6,107
6,550
119
Mongolia
2,039
5,372
6,134
123
Indonesia
2,429
4,977
5,302
129
Philippines
2,442
4,430
4,691
131
India
1,534
3,830
4,060
133
Vietnam
1,424
3,548
3,750
138
Lao P.D.R.
1,199
3,011
3,261





139
Pakistan
1,780
2,881
2,970
144
Cambodia
908
2,402
2,579
152
Bangladesh
918
2,039
2,174
163
Myanmar
459
1,405
1,491
166
Nepal
791
1,308
1,348







Source: IMF, World Economic Outlook, April 2013 Database.

In a paper by Aiyar, Duval, et al mentioned above, they identified what are the factors that can limit or counter growth slowdown. Among the factors they tested are observance of rule of law and limited government. The study showed that

The level of Rule of Law is significant at the 1 percent level: good legal systems, contract enforcement and property rights are strongly associated with a reduced probability of a growth slowdown episode. The Size of Government and Regulation indices are also highly significant but in differences: a country that reduces government involvement in the economy and deregulates its labor, product and credit markets is less likely to slow down in the subsequent period….  
Government Size replaces the Rule of Law as the most significant institution variable in levels. It may be that at very low levels of income, the development of a basic framework of property rights and contract enforcement has a large impact in staving off slowdowns, but once this condition is more or less satisfied the capacity of the private sector to grow and innovate becomes relatively more important. The capacity of the private sector to expand may be hampered by the extent of government involvement in the economy, which therefore shows up as significant for MICs (middle income countries). Related to this, the coefficient on Regulation in differences is twice as large for MICs than for the full sample of countries, suggesting again that deregulation is a particularly important channel for guarding against slowdowns in MICs.

The paper also discussed other factors like demography, infrastructure, trade, and macroeconomic environment, as possible explanations to limit growth slowdown.

It is important therefore, for the Asian MICs, those in the upper range already like Malaysia and Thailand, to sustain growth, by limiting their government role and function to promulgating the rule of law, to protect private property rights, and stay away from heavy economic intervention and populism that can restrict business dynamism.

The same lesson can be applied by the low-income countries in Asia to allow them to move to MIC status soon. Attaining an MIC, and later a HIC status, is the single most important achievement that Asian economies must strive, and save their people from poverty and misery.
-------------

See also:
Business 360 8: TPP, RCEP, SAARC and Free Trade, June 17, 2013 

Business 360 9: Free Trade and Economic Prosperity, July 03, 2013 

Business 360 10: Foreign Aid as Band Aid Solution, August 11, 2013

EFN Asia 25: The ASEAN Economic Community in 2015, July 23, 2013 
EFN Asia 26: Past Conferences and Avoiding the Middle Income Trap, August 03, 2013