Economy

- Competitiveness of Russia.
- Models of economic reforms: Latin America and East Asia.
- shares of the "new" economy.
- A review of the publications of the next issue of the British weekly "Economist".

Sergey Seninsky:

The International Institute of Management, or IMD, located in Lausanne, published the next annual rating of 47 leading countries in the level of competitiveness of national economies last week. The first three places, as last year, were taken by the United States, Singapore and Finland, the last three places, as last year, Indonesia, Venezuela and Russia.

Why are these countries - among the first or the latter? How is this rating, by the way, is one of the most famous in the international economy? To answer these questions, we used the materials of the International Institute of Management.

Firstly, the IMD rating, based on an expert analysis of almost 300 different indicators, determines, first of all, how much the social environment existing in a country helps to increase the competitiveness of companies and enterprises operating in the territory of this country. This is what is the purpose of the study.

Secondly, why, out of almost 200 countries, only 47 are included in the rating? This number includes 29 countries of the organization of economic cooperation and development, as well as the 18 largest developing economies. For example, of all the republics of the former USSR in the ranking, only Russia, of all African countries, is only South Africa, only Israel and Turkey from Western Asia countries, and only the largest countries of Latin America - Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, Chile, Colombia and Venezuela.

Thirdly, where does information and statistical data come from? Experts of the institute receive two -thirds of the necessary volume from international or national organizations. And another third - from the individual questionnaire of managers of large and medium -sized companies operating in each of the studied countries. So, to draw up a rating according to the results of 1999, more than 3 thousand 200 people were interviewed in 47 countries.

In the final recipes, how to achieve an increase or maintain competitiveness, there is no lack. But, if we talk about the results of the IMD study, then here they are formulated in the form of several points or, as they were called, "golden rules" of competitiveness. They are formulated approximately in this order:

• - stable and predictable legislation; - flexible structure of the economy; - investments in traditional and technological infrastructures; - stimulation of private savings and internal investments; - aggressive exports along with attractiveness for investors of the domestic market; - quality, flexibility and transparency of management and administration; - interdependence of wages, labor productivity and taxes; - reduction of the gap between the minimum and maximum earnings in the country and the strengthening of the middle class; - large investments in education, especially secondary, as well as continuous advanced training of workers; - Balance of the advantages of globalization of the economy and national characteristics and preferences.

It is easy to assume that it is to these provisions, in the end, that all 290 parameters can be reduced by which the level of competitiveness of the country as a whole was determined.

According to the totality of indicators, the first pair in the ranking of the International Institute of Management has not changed for five years: the United States and Singapore. The third in the 2000 ranking is Finland, which took only 15th place five years ago. Following her - the Netherlands, Switzerland and Luxembourg. All three countries in five years rose to 2-3 places.

7 In the ranking - Ireland, which has risen over the past five years from 22nd place. 8 and 9 - Germany and Sweden. In 10th place - Iceland, who was only 25 in 1996.

It is curious that the top ten did not include such countries as Japan (only 17, between Norway and Austria), Great Britain (15, following Hong Kong), Canada (11) or Italy (30, between Portugal and China).

Of the former socialist countries of Central and Eastern Europe, it is above all in the ranking of Hungary today - 27, between Chile and South Korea. Then - Slovenia: 35, between Brazil and Mexico. Czech Republic - 37, Poland - 40. The last five countries in the ranking look like this: India, Colombia, Indonesia, Venezuela and the latter, 47, Russia.

But judging not by the aggregate of parameters, but by individual indicators, the position of Russia, like all other countries, in the general rating, of course, is different. We give only a few examples.

The volume of gross domestic product of countries in 1999. Russia is almost 182 billion dollars, for 22h place, between Austria and Denmark. Russia produced 5 times less goods and services last year than China; 3 times less than Spain; 2 times less than the Netherlands or India; One and a half times less than Taiwan.

The volume of internal debt of the government in relation to the volume of GDP. Russia - 22, between Switzerland and the USA. In terms of investment in research work Russia - 21, between Austria and Israel.

An interesting indicator is the density of roads by one square kilometer: Russia is 31 out of 47, between New Zealand and South Africa. The United States in this rating is 25.

Finally, one of the most important performance indicators is labor productivity. It was calculated as a share of GDP for one worker. According to this indicator, a group of leaders looks like this: Luxembourg, Belgium, USA, Italy, Ireland, France, Norway, Germany. Russia here is in 42th place, between Brazil and Venezuela. Among the 47 studied countries, the level of performance is lower than in Russia, only in Venezuela, Thailand, in the Philippines, Indonesia and India.

Let me remind you that the rating of the competitiveness of economies of 47 countries of the world, with some data from which we have just introduced you, is annually compiled by the International Institute of Management located in Lausanne.

At the end of last week, the well-known Russian economist Andrei Illarionov, who was just appointed by the President of Russia, held his first press conference in a new position. He stated, in particular, that in order to achieve the maximum rate of economic growth, the volume of state expenses at the level of 17-20% of the volume of gross domestic product will be optimal. And Russia, according to Andrei Illarionov, is today a choice of three models of economic reforms: Latin American, East Asian and North African.

And we decided to create a periodic section in which only experts would talk about how, over the past 15-20 years, economic reforms were carried out in certain countries of the three these regions of the world. And the first such experience is today. The heading is opened by half-CRAG Roberts, an employee of an independent institute in California, author of the book "Capitalist Revolution in Latin America":

Paul Craig Roberts:

In Chile, from 1973 to 1978, the volume of government spending in relation to GDP was halved. This contributed to a large extent reducing the budget deficit. Say, in 1973, the budget deficit in Chili was 24% of the GDP volume, and in 1978 - only 0.8%.

But I want to emphasize that the volume of government spending itself is not the most important thing. It is much more important what these funds are spent on. For example, in Mexico, in the process of economic reforms, the volume of government spending in relation to GDP has changed little. But the fundamentally changed how these funds are spent! Before privatization, the government spent huge amounts on the support of enterprises belonging to the state. Before the reforms in Mexico, almost the entire economy was in the hands of the state. It owned banks, telephone companies, almost everyone. When all these enterprises transferred to private ownership, budget funds went to the development of the education system, the construction of roads, and the improvement of communal infrastructure.

Later, almost the entire economy of both countries turned into private ownership. Under state control, only the oil industry in Mexico and the copper industry in Chili - a kind of "sacred cows", which have not yet been touched, remain.

One of the most significant in Chile was the reform of the social and pension system. Only the most poor remained in the budget. Everyone else puts it off for their future pension - while they work - in private pension funds and just in banks. As a result, the volumes of private savings in Chile have increased sharply and make up about 26% of the country's GDP volume. This to a large extent ensured the current development of Chile and its leadership in the economic reforms of the countries of Latin America.

Sergey Seninsky:

The topic is continued by Steve Johnson, a researcher at the Heritage Foundation Institute in Washington:

Steve Johnson:

In Argentina, in the 80s, that is, during the reign of the military, government expenses amounted to 50% of GDP. Today, this share has been reduced to 12%. A similar process is in Brazil, Mexico or Uraagva, which, incidentally, throughout the 20th century was a kind of Latin American leader in attempts to create a socialist economy. And therefore, reforms are given to Uruguayans. This is a very slow process. Many Uruguayans still cherish the dream that the state will take care of them from birth to death, and believe that the government is able to get money for all this magical way.

More examples. Back in the 80s, all the banks of Colombia belonged to the state. Now the state share in this sector is about 3%. In Mexico, at the turn of the 90s, banks were nationalized. In 1994, a financial crisis erupted, to overcome which most banks were again transferred to private ownership, and tight government control was canceled with respect to the rest.

Sergey Seninsky:

Of course, this is just the beginning of a conversation about reforms in Latin America. Like reforms in the countries of East Asia, which is opened by Arthur Aleksander, the director of the Japanese economy located in Washington.

Arthur Alexander:

More relatively recently, budget expenses in South Korea or Taiwan were very significant, as the state subsidized industrial enterprises. Both South Korea and Taiwan at one time tried to go the way like Soviet, when the state actively determines the economic development of the country.

When it became clear that the unsuccessful experiment is too expensive, most industrial enterprises and banks were privatized. Although, for example, in South Korea many private banks, according to how they work, are still more reminiscent of state.

In general, in both countries the reforms were successful, they went in different ways. South Korea carefully copied the experience of Japan, sometimes bringing it to extreme. Let's say in Japan there are Keirets - huge industrial conglomerates, which in many respects slow down the country's withdrawal from the current recession. In South Korea, such conglomerates became even more powerful, but, at the same time, and even more clumsy, which clearly demonstrated the financial crisis.

On the other hand, Taiwan is a huge number of relatively small companies, which provides a very high level of competition.

Sergey Seninsky:

Continues Peter Beck, a researcher at Korea Economic Institute of America:

Peter Beck:

Economic reforms in South Korea were mainly aimed not to change the volume of budget expenditures or the share of the public sector in the volume of GDP, but to change the role of the state in the economy in general.

Over the past years, the South Korean government has gradually abandoned active interference with the economy in favor of the performance of only certain functions to regulate it, monitoring the implementation of legislation.

In South Korea, banks were privatized in the early 80s. In the 90s - industrial enterprises were intensively privatized. Now the government belongs to less than 30% of the shares in the two largest energy and steel companies, although they are all considered state. And, for example, South Korean automobile companies are all private.

The process of liberalization of the economy was difficult. So, after the economic crisis of 1998, the government again began to control two of the five largest South Korean banks, provided subsidies to some others and, to a certain extent, coordinated their activities. However, these are short -term measures, and the government now intends to completely leave the financial and banking sector.

Sergey Seninsky:

Thanks to all our interlocutors.

A review of some publications of the next issue of the British weekly "Economist", whom Dmitry Volchek will introduce you:

Dmitry Volchek:

There were so many protesters in Washington that the delegates of the next session of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank were offered not to gather at all. “The meeting was normal as usual,” said Gordon Brown, Minister of Finance of Great Britain. He could add that the result was, as usual: that is, almost minimal, writes "Economist".

They said, as before, that private investors should take on part of the expenses to overcome the consequences of financial crises, about the need to comply with international standards or more transparency of national economies. There was a conversation about writing off the hopeless debts of the poorest countries of the world, about the financing of international AIDS fighting programs. The total number of infected in the world is estimated today at 50 million people, 95% of them live in developing countries.

Of course, they spoke at sessions and international trade. In the final document, for example, it is noted that the industrialized countries of the world have already made a lot of products to their markets of less developed countries, especially agricultural products and textile industries. However, these markets open so slowly that the protest of which the delegates of the IMF session and the World Bank collided in Washington, almost deserved, concludes the "economist".

To understand what is happening today with many Internet companies, it is not necessary to monitor the American Nasdaq index, Japan is enough, the economist writes. Promotions - until recently - two leaders among Japanese Internet companies - SoftBank and Hikari Tsushin - fell in price - respectively - by 4 and 10 times. Rumors crawled about the large losses of Hikari Tsushin and that its founder may be under investigation. And the founder of SoftBank is no longer called the "Japanese answer to Bilu Gates."

However, the wave swept through many markets, from Bombay to Seoul. In Europe, shares of some Internet companies have lost two-thirds of their value in the last days.

But, ultimately, the fate of the shares of technological companies around the world now depends on further events on the Nasdaq American Exchange, concludes the "economist".

The rate of economic growth in China, despite the constant decline in recent years, continues to remain at the level of 7-8% per year, writes Economist. However, this is partly explained by the ongoing release of goods that are not in demand. Studies show that in those sectors of the economy where the competition is most strong, for example, in the production of consumer goods, overproduction is minimal. And in the steel industry or the production of cement - vice versa. But it is in such industries where large state -owned enterprises dominate that the lion's share of state subsidies falls. It would be better to transfer this money to customers, so that they, and not the authorities, determine which enterprises of these funds really deserve, concludes the "economist".

Sergey Seninsky:

Dmitry Volchek introduced you to the review of some publications of the next issue of the British weekly "Economist".

The events of the last weeks in the American stock market. As an afterword to them, we offer you the opinions of commentators of several international economic publications:

Elena Kolomiychenko:

This is a convergence that will only benefit the market, writes the American weekly Businessweek.

Over the past year and a half, the stock market has become the extremes market: on the one hand, incredibly high quotes of shares of the New Economy companies, and on the other, are overly lowered shares of "traditional" companies. What has happened on the market in recent weeks can be defined as adjustment of both extremes. Behind these external manifestations are a significant shift in the psychology of investors and a reassessment of the value of those companies that so far, in addition to grandiose ideas and significant potential, in fact, have nothing more. Conversely, investors again turned to the largest companies in the "traditional" economy.

But the most important factor in favor of the fact of market correction is data on the real profit of leading American corporations. Over the first three months of this year, it increased by almost a third - compared to the volume of the first quarter of last year. In general, the growth of profit by the end of the year 500 leading US corporations included in the Standard & Poor's - 500 exchange index is predicted at almost 18%.

So far there are no guarantees that the market correction will lead in the near future to a new take -off on it. But at least, any new increase in the cost of shares will be much more justified than before, writes the American Businessweek weekly.

Tengiz Gudava:

The shares of many Internet companies fell by 70-80% of their maximum quotes and may become more cheaper, the American weekly Newsweek writes. The collapse did not bypass even the "whales" of the high -technology industry. Акции компании Cisco Systems, которая совсем недавно стала самой дорогостоящей компанией в мире, обойдя лидера последних лет - Microsoft, даже они потеряли за неделю почти четверть своей стоимости. Но, по сути, это - та же солидная компания, которая просто стала дешевле. Более того, на фоне крутого падения акций новых Интернет-компаний, которые, по сути, еще не вышли из зоны интересов лишь венчурного капитала, акции Cisco Systems представляются многим инвесторам почти столь же надежными, сколь и облигации казначейства США.

Сегодня еще слишком рано говорить о том, что постоянно растущий рынок акций утратил свое былое магическое влияние на инвесторов. Однако то, что происходило в последние дни, более чем наглядно демонстрирует, насколько хрупким этот рынок может оказаться. И сколь недальновидно полагать, что он может расти бесконечно, пишет американский еженедельник Newsweek.

Игорь Таборский:

Последние события на фондовых рынках стали хорошей новостью. Рынок отнюдь не рухнул, но все происшедшее на нем, это то, что необходимо и американской, и мировой экономике, пишет британская газета Financial Times.

Во-первых, события напомнили всем, что вложения в акции всегда являются рискованным делом. Во-вторых, они продемонстрировали, что даже "новейшая" экономика может оказаться "перегретой". В-третьих, коррекция на фондовом рынке будет способствовать замедлению темпов роста внутреннего спроса в США, которое назрело, и это очевидно.

То, что уже произошло на фондовом рынке в последние недели, - лишь начало. Пока падение котировок акций всего лишь отчасти компенсировало их рост только с начала нынешнего года. Еще более очевидное теперь ужесточение денежной политики в США отразится и на фондовом рынке.

Сейчас - идеальное время для такой коррекции, так как мировая экономика все более наглядно демонстрирует ускорение темпов роста. Поэтому можно лишь приветствовать последние события на фондовых рынках и надеяться, что его коррекция продолжится, пишет британская газета Financial Times.