Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Albert Keidel *
* Former senior economist in the World Bank's Beijing office, former China desk officer and acting director in the U.S.
Treasury Department's Office of East Asian Nations, and former senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace. He teaches a graduate course on China's economy in Georgetown University's Public Policy
Institute.
Versão Preliminar – Texto sujeito à revisões pelo(s) autor(es).
Copyright © 2009 - INAE - Instituto Nacional de Altos Estudos. Todos os direitos reservados. Permitida a cópia desde que citada a
fonte. All rights reserved. Copy permitted since source cited.
INAE - Instituto Nacional de Altos Estudos - Rua Sete de Setembro, 71 - 8º andar - Rio de Janeiro - 20050-005 - Tel.: (21) 2507-7212 -
Fax: (21) 2232-1667 - E-mail: forumnacional@inae.org.br - web: http://forumnacional.org.br
China in the Global Crisis: Recovery and Continued Reform?
Albert Keidel1
May 2009
XXI National Forum
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
1
Albert Keidel is a former senior economist in the World Bank's Beijing office, former China desk officer and
acting director in the U.S. Treasury Department's Office of East Asian Nations, and former senior associate at the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He teaches a graduate course on China's economy in Georgetown
University's Public Policy Institute. He is grateful to the Instituto Nacional de Altos Estudos for the opportunity to
participate in Brazil's XXI National Forum.
(Dunaway 2009, Pettis 2009, Wolf 2009). One phrase sums up the argument: "[China's] manipu-
lation is arguably the most important cause of the financial crisis. Starting around the middle of
this decade, China's cheap currency led it to run a massive trade surplus. The earnings from that
surplus poured into the United States. The result was the mortgage bubble." (Mallaby 2009)
Figure 1. Global Current Account Imbalances
Oil Exporters
% Current Account Balance as Percent of U.S. GDP
Northern
3 Europe
Non-mainland-China East Asia
1 China
0
Rest of the World
(Latin America,
-1
Southern & South Asia,
Peripheral Africa,
-2 Europe &c.)
-3 United States
China
Oil Exporters
-4 Southern & Peripheral Europe
Northern (non-oil) Europe United
Non-mainland-China East Asia States
-5 Rest of the World
-6
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
Sources: Keidel 2009, from IMF World Economic Outlook interactive data base; with author's calculations.
Note: Northern Europe: Switzerland, Sweden, Netherlands, Germany, Finland, Denmark, Belgium, Austria.
Southern & Peripheral Europe: Ukraine, UK, Turkey, Spain, Portugal, Poland, Latvia, Italy, Hungary, Greece, Georgia,
France, Estonia, Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Belarus, Armenia, Albania.
Non-mainland-China East Asia: Vietnam, Thailand, Taiwan Province, Singapore, Malaysia, Korea, Japan, Hong Kong SAR.
Oil Exporters: Venezuela, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Russia, Oman, Norway, Nigeria, Kuwait, Iran,
Canada, Azerbaijan, Angola, Algeria
This argument draws on an identity in international economics, in two versions, that says:
(1) Current Account Surplus = Foreign Savings, and
(2) Current Account Deficit = Foreign Borrowing.
These two equations say nothing about causality, but it is fashionable to assume a causal
sequence such that savings behavior drives current-account balances or that the savings and
2
spending patterns in one country cause and reinforce those in another. A popular argument then
asserts that China's high rates of national saving have been a direct cause of global imbalances
and by extension the global financial crisis that these balances induced.
In resolving such issues for the recent past, especially for the case of global savings imbalances
and their responsibility for causing the global crisis, a quick look at the world-wide pattern of
current-account balances makes it difficult to assign responsibility to China. A large U.S. current
account deficit reappeared in the 1990s, following the decline of an earlier large deficit in the
1980s associated with the U.S. savings and loan crisis. After a pause for the 2001 U.S. recession,
the U.S. current account deficit surged in 2002-06 (Figure 1).
Two different causal sequences have been posed for the U.S. deficit and subsequent world crisis.
According to the first, enormous trade surpluses in some countries, especially China, forced their
foreign savings on the U.S., lowered interest rates and enticed consumers and government into
unwise lending habits. According to the second, rapid expansion of U.S. domestic liquidity from
a poorly regulated and over-leveraged financial sector fueled U.S. consumer spending on a scale
that forced surpluses to appear in other countries (Keidel 2009, Wolf 2009). A possible corollary
to the second explanation is that overheated consumer demand in the U.S. transmitted
inflationary pressures to exporting countries, requiring them eventually to fight inflation in ways
that weakened import demand, strengthening if not causing trade surpluses. In China's case, a
surplus emerged not because export growth accelerated in 2005 but because import growth
slowed (Keidel 2008a, 2008b, 2009). The most obvious import decline was for machinery.
A review of the evidence indicates that the second explanation is more plausible (Keidel 2009).
If nothing else, the timing gap between the U.S. deficit and China's surplus argues against China
being the driving motor of this crisis. The first appearance of a large U.S. deficit after the Asian
financial crisis was in 1998-2000. Unlike the rest of East Asia, China's current account was
nearly balanced until 2005. By 2005, U.S. subprime mortgages were already entering default,
many years after excessive borrowing had already surged in the United States (Keidel 2009).
3
2008). Other recent work reaches similar conclusions and adds that the major impact of trade on
China's growth is in productivity gains from technology imports, not export demand (He &
Zhang 2008).
With this background, a dramatic reduction in China's trade surplus during the crisis may be
better seen not as a shift in growth paradigm but rather a return to China's growth configuration
before the recent period of large international imbalances.
The second question can be summarized in terms of whether a world with appropriate current
account balances would see rich countries with surpluses or with deficits. One view is that rich
countries should run surpluses and lend funds to poorer developing countries (Bernanke 2005).
But from the developing country perspective, this would mean continuing deficits, indebtedness
and foreign asset ownership. It would mean little if any chance to accumulate the foreign
exchange reserves a developing country would need to relax regulation of its capital account.
The alternative is for rich developed countries to run modest deficits, relying on the reserve-
currency status of their growing indebtedness. This issue is controversial. One former European
Finance Minister told me that the G20 determined in 2005 that rich-country deficits were
ultimately preferable, but the G20 had to tone down the related statement that year because of
one member's objections. Its public statement, he said, only called for a reduction in global
imbalances. Developed countries like Germany and Japan appear especially reluctant to follow
this model.
For China going forward, this controversy over an appropriate pattern of global current-account
balances helps establish a strategic international financial framework. China obviously needs to
adjust its trade surplus dramatically downward, but to what point? To a sustained deficit? It will
likely be many decades before China's size and maturity will be able to support the Renminbi
(RMB) as one of the world's reserve currencies.
China Enters the Crisis -- Three Separate Trends and Initial Policy Paths
In the thirty years between 1978 and 2008, China's economy went through numerous fast and
slow economic growth cycles while overall maintaining average annual growth averaging close
to 10 percent a year. Every single up and down swing in this period was triggered by shifts in
domestic policy and in particular domestically funded investment fluctuations (Keidel 2008).
China's rural land-tenure reforms of the 1980s and its market-oriented enterprise, banking, home-
ownership and foreign trade reforms in the 1990s bequeathed to the 21st century an economy
with much higher productivity and a burgeoning global interconnectedness.
By 2008 China had already had a challenging decade. With growth finally recovering from its
late 1990s slump, China in the spring of 2003 faced the SARS pandemic, which threatened to
shut down its whole economy and which consequently triggered a sizeable government stimulus
program. Inflation in 2004-05 brought China's first wave of credit tightening, followed by
another anti-inflation effort in late 2007. With its investment rate at over 40 percent of GDP and
4
an ICOR (the rate of new capital needed per increase in GDP) more efficient than that of less
capital-intensive India, China's output increased fast and with it so did real household
consumption -- especially in rural areas.
But with the continued increases in China's trade surplus on top of already robust domestic
demand, China's economy after 2005 exhibited signs of overheating. Rising wages accompanied
government attempts to suppress inflation and manage strong demand for consumer durables on
top of a real estate boom in 2006-07. Real GDP growth in 2007 was 13 percent, as food prices
jumped 12 percent.
This was the setting for China's engagement with the global financial crisis of 2008-09.
Interestingly, worsening unemployment, slowing industrial output and weakening consumer
demand reflected three separate developments, two of which were entirely domestic. We can
appreciate the character of China's 2008-09 crisis only by following developments in all three
arenas.
The first arena was a central government program begun as early as the first half of 2007 to close
small inefficient and heavily polluting export-oriented plants in southern China. The second was
what appears to have been an overly harsh suppression of the real estate market as part of credit
tightening measures to control inflation in late 2007. The third, as demand in the United States,
Europe and Japan collapsed, was the extraordinary decline in both exports and imports starting in
the fourth quarter of 2008, a decline that curiously left China's trade surplus virtually unchanged
in early 2009. It is a decline that apparently has not yet run its full course.
10
% Year-on-Year Total CPI
8
6
4
2
0
-2
-4 2007 2008 2009
May
May
Jul
Jul
Jan
Sep
Jan
Sep
Jan
Mar
Nov
Mar
Nov
Mar
Sources: China National Bureau of Statistics, Monthly Statistical Bulletin, 2006-2009, various issues, and author's
calculations.
The timing of the slump in China's domestic real estate funding can be seen in Figure 3. The best
measure of this dramatic downturn would be month-on-month measures adjusted for regular
seasonal effects, but these data they are too unstable and of too short duration as a data series to
be useful. Instead, the growth rates are calculated year-over-year, which obscures exactly when
the slowdown began, making it look later than it was. But even in these data it is clear that the
sharp decline in funding pre-dated the financial crisis' eruption in September 2008. What seems
important to note is that even these year-on-year data are better than officially published statistics,
which only show year-on-year change for year-to-date funding levels, statistics that change more
and more slowly as the year proceeds and heavily obscure new trends.
7
Figure 3. China Real Estate funding Slump, 2007-2009
% increase (y-o-y)
China Real Estate Funding
75
25
-50
2008 1-2
2009 1-2
10
12
10
12
2007 1-2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
11
Total Funding Bank Loans & FDI Other, including mortgages
Sources: China National Bureau of Statistics, Monthly Statistical Bulletin, 2006-2009, various issues, and author's
calculations.
The slump in real estate spending and hence in real estate construction and sales had a profound
effect on China's domestic economy beginning in early 2008. Most importantly, a real estate
pricing bubble had formed by late 2007, fueled by the excessive funding in the third-quarter of
2007 (Figure 3). The credit tightening burst this bubble, and real estate and consumer durable
prices began to fall and continued to fall. With prices falling, buyers increasingly stayed on the
sidelines, waiting for a better price. Inventories of construction materials and steel, as well as
finished goods, began to accumulate. In April 2009, a senior researcher in a Beijing government
think tank told the author that many government analysts now think this domestic slump is the
cause of China's greatest economic difficulties today.
This slump in domestic demand follows a thirty-year pattern of major economic fluctuations in
China triggered by domestic investment policy shifts, not foreign trade (Keidel 2008). In the past,
it has taken Chinese leaders a period of time to be satisfied that their inflation-fighting measures
had worked. But the third component in China's current crisis condition, the collapse in global
trade, has completely overridden any lingering concerns.
8
difficulties acquiring trade credits as global finance froze up in the fourth quarter of 2008. Until
that time, China's export growth had been gradually decelerating from its growth surge earlier in
the decade, following its 2001 accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO). Trends in
Figure 4 confirm that China's surplus only began to appear at the end of 2004, just when Chinese
customs statistics (NBS 2006) show weakened import demand for machinery and transportation
equipment corresponding to China's first domestic anti-inflation credit tightening and investment
slowdown of the decade.
Figure 4. China Trade Growth and Balances, 2002-2009 (3-month moving averages)
% increase (y‐o‐y) 3‐month average Billion US$
60 120
50 100
40 80
30 60
20 40
10 20
0 0
-10 -20
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
-20 -40
-30 -60
-40 -80
Export growth (Left scale) Import growth (Left scale) Trade Balance (Right Scale)
Sources: China National Bureau of Statistics, Monthly Statistical Bulletin, 2000-2009, various issues, and author's
calculations.
The clearest point from Figure 4's longer-term 3-month rolling average perspective, however, is
that China's exports and imports both grew extremely rapidly for most of this decade, only
gradually decelerating from 35 percent growth in 2003-04 to under 25 percent in the first half of
2008. The most important explanation for this rapid growth is the re-routing of exports from
other Asian economies through China -- exports that had initially been shipped directly to the
United States and Europe. For example, total exports from East Asia to the United States barely
changed at all through much of the 2000s; exports to the United States actually declined from a
number of East Asian economies as they sent their semi-finished products and key components
to China for inexpensive assembly, packaging and shipment to North America. The buildup of
this kind of trade pattern also helps explain the pattern of export and import deterioration once
the global crisis hit China in full force.
9
Individual monthly data for more recent years (Figure 5) show that export growth first dropped
sharply in November 2008, well after the initial impacts of the southern coast restructuring began
and also clearly after China's real estate slump became serious.
2008
2009
-10 -20
-20 -40
-30 -60
-40 -80
Export growth (Left scale) Import growth (Left scale) Trade Balance (Right Scale)
* Note: Because Chinese New Year shifts regularly between January and February, year-on-year growth calculations for these two
months are unusable; here, each January and February statistic is the average of both months' levels.
Sources: China National Bureau of Statistics, Monthly Statistical Bulletin, 2006-2009, various issues, and author's calculations.
The curious aspect of China's export growth collapse is that through the first quarter of 2009
import growth rates fell even faster than export growth, so that China maintained a trade surplus
-- indeed, it maintained positive growth in its trade surplus through February. As we will see
later in the paper, this trade surplus in the first quarter barely declined at all. The major
explanation for this most likely is that the decline in U.S. and European import demand has been
more difficult for those other East Asian economies who have assembly operations in China than
it has been for China's value-added contributions and its solely domestically sourced exports.
This point is made most clearly in Figure 5's data for November and December 2008. It appears
likely that while China was finishing and shipping exports to fill pre-crisis orders, new orders for
post-crisis processing and assembly had weakened dramatically, immediately reducing demand
for imported parts and materials. As a result, China's trade surplus in November and December
increased rapidly. A clearer understanding of this relationship awaits more detailed analysis of
trends in customs statistics. How this relationship will play out in the longer term is not at all
clear.
The just-released trade data for April 2009 show a likely pattern -- export growth has weakened
further while the import decline has abated. The result is a roughly 20-percent drop in China's
10
trade surplus--a potentially important component in GDP growth for the second quarter and the
rest of 2009-10.
The critical conclusion to draw from China's trade patterns in the global crisis to-date is that it is
too early to know what the ultimate impact of world-wide trade contraction will be on China. So
far, of the three major Chinese crisis components, the trade dimension appears to have been the
most benign. The April decline in China's trade surplus indicate this state may not last much
longer.
Once the global crisis situation became clear, however, China in November responded swiftly
with the largest (as a share of GDP) officially announced fiscal stimulus package in the world. It
followed up with extensions and adjustments to the stimulus and in December launched a
powerful monetary expansion. By the end of the first quarter 2009, the impact of this stimulus
11
was still unclear, but GDP growth was still positive using year-on-year calculations and by some
quarter-to-quarter growth estimates. But to maintain even these lower first-quarter growth rates,
China's domestic demand growth would have to accelerate significantly if its trade surplus is
going to decline as much as seems likely.
14 13.8%
GDP Growth, Percent y-o-y 13%
12
10
9%
8
7.0%
6 6.1%
0
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
Annual Quarterly (y‐o‐y)
Sources: China National Bureau of Statistics Monthly Bulletins, various issues and NBS 2009b, with author calculations.
The total figure is somewhat misleading for several reasons. First, a portion of the spending is for
projects already in the five-year plan; the stimulus program merely advances the dates of their
implementation. Second, Beijing announced that only one-third of the total amount would be
fiscal spending -- that is, coming from government budgets. The rest would rely heavily on
domestic bank lending. Virtually all of China's major banks are state-owned or state-controlled.
Hence, the tenth item in Table 1, labeled "Finance," is really a financing methodology point
rather than an expenditure category; it reportedly accounts for two-thirds of all expected stimulus
12
financing. Third, not all of the 10 points have monetary figures formally associated with them.
For example, it is not clear what the spending scale will be for increasing household incomes.
In addition to this initial stimulus announcement, government has on several occasions
announced supplemental stimulus programs and adjustments to the original program. The actual
plan for China's stimulus program therefore seems to be flexible and responsive to changing
conditions. Chinese officials have repeatedly emphasized that they are ready to do more if it
becomes necessary.
13
its export decline because imports fell so much faster, yet its domestic demand still weakened
significantly.
One version of China's first-quarter growth appears in Table 2, based on data from the first-
quarter's data-release press conference. Change in China's trade surplus only contributed a
negative 0.2 percentage points of growth to China's GDP output difficulties. If China had been
seriously affected by the global trade contraction, net trade's negative impact would have been
much stronger, and its GDP growth would have been much lower.
The lack of any significant negative
trade impact raises the question of why Table 3. Quarterly GDP by Sector (% y-o-y)
China's manufacturing output growth, GDP Primary Secondary Tertiary
at only 5.3 percent, was so weak in the 2008 Qtr-1 10.6 2.8 11.5 10.9
first quarter (Table 3). For the time Qtr-2 10.2 4.0 11.1 10.5
being, the burden of sustaining China's Qtr-3 9.0 5.7 9.2 10.1
growth seems to be borne by the Qtr-4 7.0 7.4 6.2 7.4
services (tertiary) sector. Just such a 2009 Qtr-1 6.1 3.5 5.3 7.4
Source: NBS 2009b, and National Bureau of Statistics monthly bulletins,
shift is however one of China's various issues, with author calculations.
medium-term restructuring goals, so
China's initial response to the crisis is not completely out of sync with longer-term desirable
development directions.
The overall picture for China in 2009, then is one of greater vulnerability to the likely path of
global recession than its headline growth statistics would indicate.
China doesn't publish full-blown expenditure GDP data on a quarterly basis, but very rough
estimates indicate that if China's trade surplus (its net exports) of goods and services declined by
only a third in 2009, domestic demand would have to grow at 11 percent for the whole year in
order for annual GDP to come close to the government's target of 8 percent. With the slow start
early in the year for such an ambitious possibility, the stimulus burden is to generate mid-teens
double digit domestic demand growth in the second half of 2009. Such a result would imply a
dramatic growth acceleration.
Just-released April 2009 manufacturing output growth rates underscore the uncertainty of
China's recovery this year -- as well as the fickleness of such short-term indicators. Figure 7
presents both year-on-year (y-o-y) and seasonally adjusted month-on-month (m-o-m SA) data on
Chinese manufacturing growth through April. By both indicators, growth deteriorated rather than
accelerating, as one might expect in a strong recovery.
In yet another dimension, one indicator of a successful domestic demand turnaround would be a
clear end to what has looked like price deflation in recent months and possibly some mild
increases in prices across the board. The most recent data on consumer price inflation, for April,
give positive indications -- but only after correcting for the weaknesses of year-on-year (y-o-y)
measures. We can see in Figure 2 that April 2009 y-o-y CPI price data are different from month-
14
on-month seasonally adjusted (m-o-m SA) CPI indicators. The "headline" y-o-y figure reads as a
price drop of 1.5 percent and looks like a deterioration from March's CPI y-o-y decline of
1.2 percent. This negative 1.5 percent statistic might lead policy makers to think that more
stimulus is needed to fight deflation.
But the m-o-m SA result for April CPI inflations is not negative; it is a positive 0.1 percent
change from March price levels, which when compounded for a whole year would yield a
+1.1 percent CPI increase. The difference with the m-o-m price decline result is due to price
changes a year earlier, when the m-o-m SA series shows there was a brief surge in CPI prices.
Compared to this surge a year earlier, April 2009 is lower, but not compared to March 2009.
Figure 7. China Monthly Manufacturing Growth, 2007-09
% increase in industrial value added (y-o-y, m-o-m SA)
20
y-o-y
15
10
0
2007 2008 2009
-5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4
One month's positive inflation results are not enough to guarantee that China's domestic stimulus
is working. The important lesson is to be careful about relying too heavily on y-o-y rates of
change.
Furthermore, if inflation does reappear quickly because of China's strong stimulus, what should
be the government's response? During a global recession, when China has a large trade surplus, a
little inflation could be a good thing. General inflation would induce an effective real revaluation
of China's currency on top of what might be recovered domestic demand for imports.
15
Consequently, China's trade surplus could shrink faster in 2010 than would otherwise be the case,
not because of export weakness but because of import strength.
In a recession-ridden world prone to trade protectionism if unemployment worsens significantly,
a continued sharp reduction in China's trade surplus might help weaken arguments of
protectionism advocates worldwide. Avoiding full-blown global protectionism is one of the
world community's major objectives, as emphasized by both G20 meetings. China's swift
recovery if coupled with inflationary tendencies could have unintended extra beneficial
consequences.
Looking beyond current crisis circumstances and prospects for medium-term recovery, the most
interesting question of all is whether the crisis can steer China's economic policy institutions,
with their systemic leadership capabilities, in even more useful directions as China continues to
shake off poverty and modernize.
Both the global financial crisis and the health of China's whole financial system invite an
investigation into ways China's experience can inform necessary adjustments in thinking about
optimal paths for financial sector development in poor and middle-income economies. How
might capital-account controls be more directly managed as a logical extension of domestic
financial regulatory systems? When is a current account imbalance the sign of a misaligned
currency rather than unbalanced forces of global demand? What is a suitable level of reserves for
a developing country; might it not be better measured as a share of domestic money supply and
potential capital flows rather than merely a facilitator of foreign trade? What should the new
standards be? Both the global crisis and China's experience invite reflection on these questions.
China has enjoyed a investment rate (or savings rate, if you will) in GDP of over 40 percent, and
the concern is that by pushing fixed asset investment so much, this development strategy has
handicapped the growth of household consumption and ultimately of the basic source of national
demand needed to support sustained growth.
What is usually missing from the discussion is analysis of whether this investment is used
productively or not and what China's very low levels of per-capita consumption in virtually all
categories says about the risk of overcapacity emerging anytime soon. A review of investment
efficiency is best summarized in the additional investment it takes to get additional GDP output
(the ICOR, or incremental capital-output ratio). Comparisons with India, a much less
industrialized and much less capital-intensive economy, shows that China's ICOR is as good as
India's, and for some periods better, despite its much higher rate of investment in GDP and its
more capital intensive economy (Keidel 2009b).
18
The combination of China's low ICOR and high investment rate has resulted in decades of rapid
growth. The key point is that to the degree that the investment and consumption rates in GDP
have stabilized, as they have in China, both investment and consumption grow rapidly together.
Real household consumption in China has grown at sustained rapid rates from the 1980s through
the most recent years for available data, averaging between 6 and 8 percent every year from 1985
to 2005, in all regions of China, according to one study (Keidel 2009c). The growth of
consumption has even accelerated in the years of high investment-savings rates since 2005.
Generating a high savings rate and using it efficiently for sustained growth is clearly one of the
major leadership requirements in a developing country. China provides an example of how this
has been done successfully so far, especially with its emphasis on an especially difficult
dimension, public infrastructure. China during the crisis, in the design of its stimulus program, is
clearly continuing this tradition. A big question is whether it can relax its grip on the structure of
national investment to allow much broader private participation in its services sector, arguably
the most important dimension for its future expansion.
One of the best examples of an interest group China's leaders had to manage creatively but
sternly was its urban-registered labor force in the 1980s and 1990s. This labor force, more than
20 percent of the total, had been heavily subsidized since the Maoist period, despite its low
productivity in over-staffed collectives and state-owned enterprises.
By using pro-rural administrative price reforms in the 1980s and a violence-plagued urban layoff
program in the 1990s, China pushed through a series of painful adjustments made politically
feasible because of an obvious major macroeconomic downturn beginning in 2007 and because
China's other pro-development institutions could also fund new urban job investments, could
administratively manage the pace of relative price changes, and could deploy a whole array of
social safety net subsidies and other compensations.
The basic task was to realign the productivity of a whole privileged class of citizens with its
living standard expectations -- including some downward adjustment in those expectations for
significant subgroups of the class. Productivity rose through layoffs (50 million workers left
state-owned enterprise employment between 1996 an 2005) and liberalized regulations
encouraging small-scale enterprises and sole proprietorships.
In other words, China's economic leadership system did not allow the privileges of a subsidized
urban elite to block the major price, wage and employment reforms it saw as essential for
medium- and long-term national economic success. The guiding principle seems to have been to
create individual personal incentives encouraging productivity gains--like making education
19
remunerative and encouraging small-scale entrepreneurial risk-taking. In this way, self-
motivated individual behavior promoted more rapid national growth.
These reforms are not finished. China still has legal distinctions nationwide between "urban"
citizens and "rural" citizens". Pilot programs in major cities to eliminate these distinctions have
gone quite far but also run into serious challenges. The crisis, with strong reverse migration from
urban to rural areas for the time being, is a chance for China to continue these reforms. This on-
going process is important both for China after the crisis and for those wanting to learn from
China's experience.
Productivity-enhancing inequality
A widely mentioned aspect of China's modernization to-date is the increase in inequality it has
generated, both between regions and between and within urban and rural areas. As measured by
summary statistics like the Gini coefficient, increases in inequality have been substantial. But
summary statistics say nothing about the shape of different distributions and the contribution the
shape makes to creation of individual incentives for personal productivity and income gains.
China's growing inequality, especially between urban and rural areas, has to be considered in
conjunction with the investments China has generated in urban jobs, urban rural transport and
communication, basic education in rural areas, and increased flexibility in residency restrictions.
Together, they have made inequality an engine of personally motivated migration and job change
raising individual productivity and income.
As China responds to the global crisis, and as the Chinese stimulus program seeks to expand
more sophisticated and technically demanding employment opportunities, one of its many
challenges will be to make sure that inequality continues to develop in productivity-enhancing
ways. The stimulus program emphasis on affordable housing, middle-school education,
healthcare, and transport and communication all promise to work in that direction. The risk is
that a deep slump in output and employment growth from the collapse of world trade later this
year will create a large more permanently disenfranchised minority.
Bibliography
Bernanke 2005, Ben S. Bernanke, "The Global Saving Glut and the U.S. Current Account Deficit,"
speech given on March 10, 2005, at the Sandridge Lecture, Virginia Association of Economists,
Richmond, Virginia: http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2005/20050414/default.htm
Dunaway 2009, Steven Dunaway, "Global Imbalances and the Financial Crisis," Council on Foreign
Relations, Council Special Report No. 44, March 2009:
http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/Global_Imbalances_CSR44.pdf
He & Zhang 2008, Dong He and Wenlang Zhang , "How Dependent is the Chinese Economy on Exports
and in What Sense has its Growth been Export-led?" Hong Kong Monetary Authority Working paper
20
14/2008, 14 October 2008,
http://www.info.gov.hk/hkma/eng/research/working/pdf/HKMAWP08_14_full.pdf
Keidel 2008a, Albert Keidel, China's Economic Fluctuations: Implications for its Rural Economy,
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington DC:
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/keidel_china_fluctuations_final.pdf
Keidel 2008b, Albert Keidel, "China's Economic Rise -- Fact and Fiction," Policy Brief 61, Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace, July 2009:
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/pb61_keidel_final.pdf
Keidel 2008c, Albert Keidel, "China's Economic Rise -- A Technical Note," Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace: http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/Technical_Note.pdf
Keidel 2009, Albert Keidel, "Global Imbalances and China," paper presented at the international
conference "Towards a New Economic Multilateralism," April 20-21, 2009, Shanghai, China,
sponsored by the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung of Berlin and the Shanghai Institutes for International
Studies. Copy for comment available upon request from AKeidel@Keidel.us.
Keidel 2009b, Albert Keidel, "China's Financial Sector: Contributions to Growth and Downside Risks,"
in James R. Barth, John A. Tatom, and Glenn Yago (eds.), China’s Emerging Financial
Markets: Challenges and Opportunities (Santa Monica, CA: Milken Institute, 2009)
Keidel 2009c, Albert Keidel, " China Regional Disparities - The Causes and Impact of Regional
Inequalities in Income and Well-Being," Review of Income and Wealth, 2009 (forthcoming).
Mallaby 2009, Sebastian Mallaby, "What OPEC Teaches China," Washington Post, January 29, 2009:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/23/AR2009012303291.html
NBS 2006, China National Bureau of Statistics, China Statistical Yearbook 2006, Beijing: China
Statistical Press
NBS 2009a, China National Bureau of Statistics, Comprehensive Department, "The 2008 economy
overall sustained rapid stable development," (2008 年国民经济总体保持平稳较快发展):
http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjfx/jdfx/t20090122_402534140.htm, in Mandarin Chinese.
NBS 2009b, China national Bureau of Statistics, Comprehensive Department, "First-quarter National
Economy Shows Active Change" (一季度国民经济运行出现积极变化):
http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjfx/jdfx/t20090416_402552267.htm, in Mandarin Chinese.
Pettis 2009, Michael Pettis, "The G20 Meetings: No Common Framework, No Consensus," Policy Brief
79, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, May 2009:
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/g20_consensus.pdf
Wolf 2009, Martin Wolf, "Why G20 leaders will fail to deal with the big challenge," Financial Times,
March 31, 2009: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/22e0122a-1e1d-11de-830b-00144feabdc0.html
World Bank 2009, The World Bank, "China Quarterly Update --March 2009,"
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTCHINA/Resources/318862-
1237238982080/CQU_March2009_fullreport.pdf
Xinhua 2008a, New China News Agency (Xinhua), "China plans 10 major steps to spark growth as fiscal,
monetary policies ease," English web service China View, Special Report, November 9, 2008:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-11/09/content_10332422.htm
21
Xinhua 2008b, New China News Agency (Xinhua), reprinted from the Yangcheng Evening News (羊城
晚报), "State Council for the first time clarifies the 5 major orientations of the 'Scientific Development
Pilot Reform Area'" (科学发展试验区" 国家首次明确珠三角五大定位), New China News
Agency Web (新华网),December 19, 2008: http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2008-
12/19/content_10528040.htm, in Mandarin Chinese.
Xinhua 2009, New China News Agency (Xinhua), "NBS Chief Li Xiaochao: Consumption demand
pulled first-quarter GDP 4.3 percentage points," (李晓超:一季度消费拉动中国经济增长 4.3 个百
分点), Press Conference report, Xinhuanet April 16, 2009:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2009-04/16/content_11194267.htm, in Mandarin Chinese.
Zhai 2009. Ivan Zhai, "Guangdong hit by Beijing's Policies, says governor," South China Morning Post,
Hong Kong, January 1, 2009.
22