Source : FinfactsDirector of the World Competitiveness Project and Professor at IMD Business School and University of Lausanne, says that in 2006, competitiveness is a more compact race than ever before. Although the US is still No. 1 in IMD’s World Competitiveness Yearbook, other economies, especially Hong Kong and Singapore are closing the gap. Why?
Garelli says that there is a striking difference between the achievements of the US economy in 2005 (3.5% growth) and the US$318bn budget deficit accumulated by the federal government and the US$8,000bn debt. Are some governments becoming a burden for competitiveness? Italy, France and some Latin American countries seem to be confronted with the same situation. Some governments fail to contribute to the overall competitiveness of their country.
Ireland gets an 11th ranking and the UK at 21st place, is the top-ranked large economy in Europe.
IN THE LIMELIGHT IN 2006: ARE SOME GOVERNMENTS DRAGGING THEIR FEET?
This year, IMD have also calculated the biggest negative differences between the contribution of the government and the contribution of the economy to the overall competitiveness of a country. In these calculations, the governments of Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and Italy show the weakest performance; they significantly lag behind their economic performance. They fail to perform on several fronts: budget deficits, debt, taxes, bureaucracy, etc. In some cases, like Venezuela and Argentina, the economy still performs well for external reasons, such as oil prices or exports. On the other hand, Brazil and Mexico remain weak for growth. Italy is the only country in the ranking with no economic growth in 2005!
USA and France are the two industrial nations that show the biggest difference between the performance of their governments and the performance of their economies. Budget deficits and debt are running higher in both countries, calling into question the efficiency of the State. Meanwhile, the US and France are still the 2nd and 5th largest exporters in the world thanks to very dynamic enterprises. In these two countries, business outperforms government.
India and China face similar gaps between government and economic performance, but for different reasons. With growth rates of 8.1% and 9.9% respectively, both governments face the challenge of keeping pace with rapid economic expansion. Their task now is to meet the standards and expectations of a buoyant economy. Failure to do so may create economic and social imbalances that could jeopardize what has been achieved so far. The lesson here: success has a price.
ARE GOVERNMENTS DRAGGING THEIR FEET?
(Biggest negative difference between the government’s and the economy’s contribution to competitiveness)
IMD’s World Competitiveness Yearbook defines a nation’s environment by the contribution of four Factors of Competitiveness: Economic Performance, Government Efficiency, Business Efficiency and Infrastructure. Here it shows a comparison between the contributions of Economic Performance and Government Efficiency, calculating the biggest negative differences between the government’s and the economy’s contribution to the overall competitiveness of each country.
To support and stimulate the competitiveness of their country, governments need to remain on top of economic imperatives. Hong Kong and Singapore are catching up with the US because their governments are more in synchronisation with economic performance. Finland and Denmark also fare well; others less. A growing gap between governments and economic performance is always a bad omen for the future, Professor Garelli says.
What is the WCY?
· Competitiveness of 61 national & regional economies, based on 312 criteria
· Focuses primarily on Hard data (2/3 from international, regional and national sources)
· Survey data (1/3) – from our annual WCY Executive Opinion Survey 2006
· Published annually since 1989 and updated twice a year on-line
· Worldwide reference point with objective benchmarking
· Reliable and up-to-date data with unique network of 58 Partner Institutes worldwide
THE WORLD COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE IN 2006 By Professor Stéphane Garelli