Saturday, 3 March 2012

No barriers



This op-ed was the lead in the South China Morning Post's Insight section on February 18, 2012:

Ken Davies says Chinese investment needs to be welcomed,
not feared, by the US and other sputtering economies. 
For their part, Chinese companies must operate more transparently to gain international trust


I squirmed as I listened to US President Barack Obama’s recent state-of-the union address. China got pride of place as a cause of America’s economic woes. He mentioned it four times.

I should have expected that. It’s a presidential election year. Bashing China is now as popular as bashing Japan in days gone by.

Here in New York, people complain about “all the jobs going to China” and Chinese products being rubbish. So blaming China just might help Obama stay in the White House. But does it make economic sense? Not at all. I’ve got news for America and the other countries that see China only as a dangerous competitor, sucking out jobs from their economies and flooding their markets with cheap rubbish.

China is now one of the biggest investors in the world. Its companies are opening factories and buying oil wells. And it’s not all in Africa. More and more is in America. In companies that invent things and create jobs.

Chinese multinationals have the cash stashed. Ten years ago, many were up to their
ears in debt. They have since turned profitable, and they are making money overseas. A third of
their overseas investment is paid for by “reinvested earnings”, profits made abroad. They
have the government yelling at them to “go out”. It’s in the latest five-year plan. They want
as much investment money going out as coming in. And with 8.3 per cent unemployment in
the US, America could do with that cash.

The trouble is that lots of people around the world don’t trust Chinese companies. From the
Chinese viewpoint, this looks like everyone is against them. This isn’t entirely paranoia. There
have been cases where a government has said “yes, it’s OK” to a plan, and the public and
legislature have said “no”.

There are reasons for this distrust. Factories have closed in America and opened in China,
leaving thousands of US workers without jobs.There are the poisoned products. There are the
images of Beijing shrouded in smog. There are the stories about how bad it is to work in some
Chinese factories.

So, if Chinese multinationals are to help other nations’ economies back on their feet,
two things need to happen.

First, countries that can benefit from Chinese investment need to stay open for
business. Putting up fences to stop foreign investment hurts the economy. As Hong Kong
has shown, letting capital flow freely keeps the  economy growing. There is no need to treat foreign investment any differently from domestic investment. If the business environment is predictable and market prospects are good, investors will open factories and buy ailing companies. It doesn’t matter if they are locals or foreigners. So, please, everyone, keep your markets open to foreign investment, including from China.

Secondly, Chinese companies need to clean up their act. They need to learn how to operate
transparently. If they have nothing to hide, why hide it? Let everyone know what a good job you
are doing. If you are doing good things, you want people to know about it. But, please, no
greenwash. You will be found out.

Chinese companies need to make good products. Safe products and quality control will bring customers. If Chinese enterprises can do this for international brands – and the proof of that is in shops around the world – they can do it  when making their own designs.

Chinese companies can do clean production. I’ve seen a power plant in a Guangdong
factory using the latest fluidised-bed coal combustion and chimney scrubbers to remove
pollutants, with the waste heat and steam used for production. The same clothing plant cleans
its waste water from black to clear before putting it back in the Pearl River.

People outside China know about suicides among factory workers. But there are factories
in China where the workers are empowered to look after concerns like health and safety. Chinese companies can benefit from treating their workers fairly.

What does this add up to? Simply that if Chinese companies address legitimate concerns of people in other countries (and at home), they can change perceptions. They need to do this if they want a good reputation.

Chinese investments are no longer small and short term. They are often huge and, almost always, the companies are in it for the long term, not just to turn a quick profit and head for the exit. This means they are vulnerable to scandals. It only takes one or two of these to torpedo a reputation that a company has spent billions building up. Look at BP.

So Chinese companies need to make big changes. They can’t just hire a public relations firm to write a glossy “annual corporate social responsibility report”. They need to change their behaviour. And, for that, they need to readjust their management structure.

Fortunately, there are lots of guidelines out there that they can use. Chinese multinationals should already know about these because China is committed to many of them, as are the countries where they want to operate. But they take time and effort to learn and use.



Monday, 23 January 2012


              Wishing you all a very Happy New Year of the Dragon!               






 新年快樂!    恭喜發財!

Monday, 12 December 2011

Production input inflation moderates slightly


As China prepares to withstand the shock of a deteriorating situation in Europe, it is clear that there is not much room for manoeuvre. A repeat of the CNY 4 trillion stimulus package is not possible, since this would damage both government finances and the banks' non-performing loan ratios. The recent slight downward move in interest rates can not be taken much further because the threat of inflation persists. Food price inflation, which, along with fuel price inflation, is the main factor behind this year's rise in consumer price inflation, has hit the headlines, but also important are the rises in prices paid by producers, which have been at unsustainable rates for much of this year. The overall coporate goods price index fell sharply from 8.4% year-on-year in September to 5.9% in October, though major component indices show continuing double-digit year-on-year increase rates.

Corporate Goods Price Indices
2011
Overall
Agricultural products
Mining products
Coal, oil & electricity
Jan
8.0
18.2
12.7
6.2
Feb
8.7
19.5
15.0
6.5
Mar
9.3
20.2
14.5
8.3
Apr
8.5
16.8
12.3
9.1
May
8.8
15.2
10.8
9.6
Jun
9.5
17.8
12.6
10.9
Jul
9.7
16.8
13.4
11.8
Aug
8.9
13.5
14.8
11.9
Sep
8.4
14.5
14.6
11.7
Oct
5.9
11.0
10.2
10.3
Source: People's Bank of China.
  

Monday, 5 December 2011

Hu's answer to Europe


Cartoon by Christian Adams in The Telegraph.

Saturday, 3 December 2011

Hong Kong still thriving 10 years after I left...


I left Hong Kong ten years ago. It was a great place to live and work (I was then Chief Economist for Asia and Bureau Chief at the Economist Intelligence Unit, EIU), but my lungs couldn't stand the air pollution, which has since got worse. After spending a fortune on medication and short breaks in cleaner climates, I moved back to the UK briefly before being enticed to Paris, where I ended up as Head of Global Relations in the Investment Division of the OECD, working mainly with China on the country's investment policies.

Yesterday I attended a seminar in New York organised by the Hong Kong Trade Development Council (HKTDC) to present Hong Kong as "America's Bridge to Asian Growth". As always with HKTDC events, the presentations were authoritative, informative and wholly persuasive. 

Hong Kong has, as the EIU predicted many years ago, prospered from closer integration with the Chinese mainland following the 1997 handover, despite a bad start caused by the Asian economic crisis of 1997-1998.

The presentations focused on Hong Kong's development as an Asian financial centre, emphasising the opportunities for US business in China arising from the continuing internationalisation of the renminbi/Chinese yuan. 

Hong Kong has for many decades successfully promoted itself as the gateway to China, but in the past decade it has also been marketing itself as a world city and a bridge between the whole of East Asia and the rest of the world. This was a major theme of the seminar. 

At the same time, opportunities for US companies to sell to Hong Kong itself were highlighted, for example in a presentation by Raytheon on its successful bid to supply air traffic control equipment to the "new" airport at Chek Lap Kok, which was opened in 1998 but is already starting to upgrade its infrastructure in line with traffic expansion. Unlike many other major players in the world economy, Hong Kong has sound finances and therefore real money to spend.

As ever, no opportunity was lost to describe Hong Kong's advantages, including rule of law, clean government, free movement of capital, free trade, ultra-low taxes and so on, which contrast so strongly with the situation in mainland China. The claim that Hong Kong has excellent corporate governance went unchallenged, which it might not have done if the seminar had been held in Hong Kong, but then complaints of minority shareholders are not exactly unique to Hong Kong.

Hong Kong has lost none of its strong advantages as a business centre for China and East Asia, despite the rise of Shanghai and other cities up the Chinese coast. But it needs to keep improving to maintain that advantage. As informal conversations during lunch demonstrated, people in Hong Kong remain proud of the SAR's tremendous economic success, but would like to do more to render their home more attuned to global culture and make the air safe to breathe.

You can read more about Hong Kong's advantages as a business centre in an HKTDC booklet at: http://portaluat.tdctrade.com/bread/US_SuccessStories/index.html

Monday, 14 November 2011

Consumer Prices for October 2011


National Bureau of Statistics of China 9 November 2011
In October, the consumer price index went up by 5.5 percent year-on-year. 
The prices grew by 5.4 percent in cities and 5.9 percent in rural areas. 
The food prices went up by 11.9 percent while the non-food prices increased by 2.7 percent. 
The prices of consumer goods went up by 6.6 percent and the prices of services grew 
by 2.8 percent. In October, the month-on-month change of consumer prices was up 
by 0.1 percent. Of which, prices in cities went up by 0.1 percent, and rural remained 
the general level. The food prices down by 0.2 percent while the non-food prices 
increased by 0.2 percent. The prices of consumer goods rose by 0.1 percent, 
and the prices of services went up by 0.2 percent.

I. Year-on-Year Changes of Prices of Different Categories
Food Prices went up by 11.9 percent year-on-year, contributing nearly 
3.62 percentage points to the overall growth. Of which, the prices of grain 
rose by 11.6 percent, meaning 0.32 percentage point growth in the overall price level; 
meat, poultry and related products, surged 26.1 percent, contributing 1.72 
percentage points (price of pork was up by 38.9 percent, contributing 
1.12 percentage points); fresh eggs, up 12.6 percent, contributing 
0.11 percentage point; aquatic products, up 12.4 percent, contributing 
0.28 percentage point; fresh vegetables, dropped 6.8 percent, fresh fruits, up 
11.1 percent, contributing 0.19 percentage point, grease, increased 15.8 percent, 
contributing 0.18 percentage point.
Prices for tobacco and liquor went up by 3.7 percent year-on-year, of which, 
that for tobacco was up by 0.4 percent and liquor 8.7 percent.
Prices for clothing rose by 3.7 percent year-on-year. The clothes prices went up 
by 4.0 percent while the shoes prices increased by 2.5 percent.
Prices for household facilities, articles and maintenance services went up by 
3.1 percent year-on-year, of which, prices for durable consumer goods was up by 
1.0 percent, and household services and processing, maintenance services, up 
by 11.9 percent.
Prices for health care and personal articles grew by 3.5 percent year-on-year. 
Of which, prices for western medicine went down by 0.6 percent; Chinese medicinal 
materials and patent medicine, up 13.0 percent; and health care services, up 0.5 percent.
Prices for transportation and communication rose by 0.8 percent year-on-year. 
Of which, prices for vehicles dropped by 0.3 percent; fuels and parts for vehicles, 
up 12.2 percent; vehicles use and maintenance, up 4.6 percent; transportation fares 
between cities, up 2.9 percent; public transport fares in cities, up 1.9 percent; and 
communication, down by 13.7 percent.
Prices for recreation, education, culture articles and services remained the general level 
year-on-year. Of which, education went up by 0.9 percent; recreation and culture, 
up 1.5 percent; traveling, up 2.3 percent; and durable goods and services for recreation 
and culture, down by 6.6 percent.
Prices for housing went up by 4.4 percent year-on-year. Of which, prices for water, 
electricity and fuel rose by 3.5 percent; houses building and decorating materials, up 
4.5 percent; and housing rental prices, up 3.6 percent.
According to estimation, in the 5.5 percent growth in October, the carryover effect of 
last year’s prices rising accounted for 1.5 percentage points, while new prices rising 
factors in this year accounted for 4.04 percentage points.

II. Month-on-Month Changes of Prices of Different Categories
In October, food prices down by 0.2 percent month-on-month, contributing 
0.06 percentage point to the month-on-month growth of consumer prices. In October, 
price for fresh vegetables continued to decline 3.4 percent month-on-month, affecting 
0.09 percentage points decrease in the overall price level, price for meat, poultry 
and related products decreased 0.6 percent (that for pork declined 1.8 percent, 
while resulted in 1.2 percentage point up month-on-month.), price for fresh eggs 
dropped 3.8 percent (caused 2.4 percentage points increase month-on-month), 
price for aquatic products continued to decline 1.5 percent month-on-month, Prices 
growth of the above mentioned three items triggered 0.13 percentage points decrease 
of the overall prices. Price for grease climbed 0.5 percent, narrowed 1.0 percentage 
points month-on-month, price for fresh fruits increased 5.7 percent month-on-month, 
expanded 2.6 percentage points over September, price for grease and fresh fruits 
affecting 0.11 percentage points increased in the overall price level.
Non-food prices climbed 0.2 percent in October, affecting 0.15 percentage points 
increased in the overall price level. Of this total, prices for tobacco and liquor, clothing, 
household facilities, articles and maintenance services, recreation, education, culture 
articles and services, and housing rose by 0.5, 1.6, 0.1, 0.2 and 0.1 percent respectively, 
while that of prices for health care and personal articles, and transportation and 
communication dropped 0.1 and 0.3 percent, respectively.

Consumer Prices in October
Item
October
Jan-Oct
M/M (%)
Y/Y (%)
Y/Y (%)




Consumer Prices
0.1
5.5
5.6
Of which: Urban
0.1
5.4
5.5
Rural
0.0
5.9
6.2
Of which: Food
-0.2
11.9
12.4
Non food
0.2
2.7
2.8
Of which: Consumer Goods
0.1
6.6
6.5
Services
0.2
2.8
3.7
Commodity Categories
 
 
 
    Food
-0.2
11.9
12.4
    Tobacco, Liquor and Articles
0.5
3.7
2.6
    Clothing
1.6
3.7
1.8
    Household Facilities, Articles and Maintenance Services
0.1
3.1
2.3
    Health Care and Personal Articles
-0.1
3.5
3.4
Transportation and Communication
-0.3
0.8
0.5
    Recreation, Education, Culture Articles and Services
0.2
0.0
0.4
    Housing
0.1
4.4
5.9









Notes:

1. Explanation of Indicator. Consumer Price Index (CPI) is an index measuring changes 
over time in the price level of consumer goods and services purchased by residents, 
which reflects comprehensively changes of price level.

2. Statistical Coverage. Consumer Price Index (CPI) covers the prices of goods and 
services of eight categories and 262 basic divisions which cover the living consumption 
of urban and rural residents, including food; tobacco, liquor and articles; clothing; household 
facilities, articles and maintenance services; health care and personal articles; 
transportation and communication; recreation, education, culture articles and 
services and housing. Data are collected from 63,000 prices collection units in 
500 cities and counties of the 31 provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities), 
which cover grocery stores, department stores, supermarkets, convenience stores, 
professional markets, franchise houses, shopping centers, open fairs and service 
consumption units etc.

3. Data Collection. Original data of consumer prices are collected by specific person in 
fixed place at fixed time.

4. From January 2011, the CPI calculation in China began to take 2010 as the base year. 
It was the second routine adjustment since the adoption of fixed-base price index in 2001. 
The first round base year was 2000, as changing every five years, the second round 
base year was 2005.

5. In accordance with the data of national survey of urban and rural household 
consumption expenditure in 2010 and data of other surveys conducted by relevant 
departments, the National Bureau of Statistics made a routine adjustment of the weights 
of CPI from January 2011. By using the new weights, the consumer price index in October 
went up by 5.495 percent year-on-year, or 0.093 percent month-on-month, while it was 
up 5.606 percent year-on-year, or 0.106 percent month-on-month if the former weights 
were used.