China

Death, nationalism, China

According to the World Bank, China lifted out of extreme poverty (those living on $1.90 per day, roughly P96 per day) 800 million of its citizens from …

by · Tuesday, 15 August 2017 · China, Philippines

China’s ethnic Yi struggle against poverty

Most live in Liangshan, a mountainous district in the southwestern province of Sichuan and one of 14 areas of “concentrated poverty” identified by the …

by · Monday, 7 August 2017 · China, Turkey

Innovation helps desert tourism flourish in Inner Mongolia

BEIJING – Residents in desert areas in northern China’s Inner Mongolia autonomous region have shaken off poverty and embarked on much better-off …

by · Thursday, 3 August 2017 · China, Mongolia, Thailand

ASEAN-China forum on poverty reduction opens in Cambodia

The 11th ASEAN-China Forum on Social Development and Poverty Reduction kicked off in Siem Reap, Cambodia, on July 25. (Source: …

by · Tuesday, 25 July 2017 · Cambodia, China, Vietnam

Lowering rural poverty in Pacifica: the CEO’s challenge

Pacifica is a country bordered by Western Pacific, Celebes, and South China Seas. The country has serious poverty concerns. In rural areas, the …

by · Monday, 24 July 2017 · China, Philippines

Will Duterte continue the BSP-PDIC bias against small banks?

President Duterte’s thrusts to wipe out drugs, crime, corruption and poverty are noble goals, but it’s high time he learns the machinations of the banking …

by · Tuesday, 11 July 2017 · China, Philippines
Хятад улсын махны эрэлт Монголд ямар нөлөөтэй вэ

Хятад улсын махны эрэлт Монголд ямар нөлөөтэй вэ

Also available in English

Tsetsen-Uul soum, Zavkhan province, Mongolia. Photo: Miles McKenna/World Bank

Хүнсний аюулгүй байдлын зарчмын хувьд хүнсий сүлжээнд фермээс хоолны ширээ рүү хүрэх тухай ойлголт мах, махан бүтээгдэхүүний хувьд тийм ч амаргүй байдаг. Таны ширээн дээрх шинэ мах хажуугийн фермээс эсвэл бүр дэлхийн нөгөө өнцгөөс онгоцоор 10,000 км-ийн зайг туулан ирсэн байх боломжтой.  Хүйтэн тээвэрлэлтийн гинжин хэлхээ, логистик сайжирснаар махыг тээвэрлэхэд зарим тохиолдолд хэдэн долоо хоног шаардагддаг байсныг хэдэн цаг, эсвэл хэдхэн өдрийн дотор тээвэрлэх боломжтой болгосон. Бага болон дундаж орлоготой цөөн хэдэн орнуудын хувьд махны экспорт томоохон бизнес болоод байгаа билээ.  

Монголын бэлчээрийн мал аж ахуйн баялаг түүх, малын тоо толгойн өсөлт, мөн дэлхийн томоохон зах зээлтэй газар зүйн хувьд ойрхон зэрэг нь Монголд малын махны экспортод чиглэсэн үнэ цэнийн сүлжээг хөгжүүлэх томоохон боломж байгааг илтгэдэг.

Өнөөгийн байдлаар мал аж ахуйн салбар 150,000 орчим малчин айл өрхүүдийн амьжиргааг залгуулж байна. Эдгээр өрхийн ихэнх нь нэн ядуу бүлэгт хамаарагдах бөгөөд өрийн дарамттай, ядуурлын онц нөлөөллүүдэд эмзэг байдаг. Монгол улс малын махны дэлхийн үнэ цэнийн сүлжээнд нэгдэснээр эдийн засгаа өсгөх, ажлын байр бий болгох, ялангуяа хөдөө орон нутагт ядуурлыг бууруулах шинэ боломжуудыг нээх бололцоотой.

Хурдтай өсч буй улс орнуудад дундаж давхарга нэмэгдэн, хоол хүнсний хэрэглээний хандлагууд өөрчлөгдөж байгааг бөгөөд үүнийг дагаад дэлхий дахинд шинэ бүтээгдэхүүн, шинэ нийлүүлэгчдийг эрэлхийлж байна. Нэг талаараа зах зээл ийнхүү өргөжсөнөөр худалдааны шинэ боломжууд үүсч байгаа  ч давхар хүнсний аюулгүй байдлын шинэ эрсдэлийг бий болгон, дүрэм журмыг үр нөлөөтэй болгох, экспортлогчид өрсөлдөх чадвараа улам нэмэгдүүлэх шаардлага үүсч байна.

Хятадын зах зээл дэх малын махны хэрэглээний өсөлт нь дэлхийн улс орнуудын махны зах зээлийн өсөлтийн гол хөдөлгөгч хүч ­­­­­­­­­­бол болж байна. Сүүлийн 30 жилд Хятадын нийт махны хэрэглээ дөрөв дахин өссөн. Хэдийгээр хэрэглэгчдийн ихэнх нь гахайн махыг сонгодог ч одоогийн байдлаар Хятад улс жил бүр 3 тэрбум ам.долларын өртөг бүхий үхэр, хонины махыг импортолдог (Зураг).

Хятадын махны эрэлтийг хангах энэ боломж нь тус зах зээл дээр өөрийн байр суурийг олж авах хүсэлтэй олон оронд төр болон хувийн хэвшлийн аж ахуйн нэгжүүд үйлдвэрлэлийн хүчин чадлаа нэмэгдүүлэх, дэд бүтэц, дүрэм журмаа шинэчлэх, худалдааг хөнгөвчлөх зэргээр хамтран ажиллах хөшүүргийг бий болгож байна.

Монгол улсад Хятадын зах зээлд мах нийлүүлэх хүсэл эртнээс байсан боловч өдийг хүртэл маш бага хэмжээг экспортлоод байна. Гэсэн хэдий ч Монголын үйлдвэрлэгчид  Хятадын махны эрэлтийг хангах зорилгоор экспортын хэмжээгээ нэмэгдүүлж чадна гэсэн нийтлэг ойлголт байсаар байна. Монгол, Хятадын хооронд энэ чиглэлээр байгуулсан гэрээний дагуу 2016 оны 8 дугаар сараас эхлэн Монголын мах Хятадын зах зээлд гарах боломж нээгдэх хүлээлт өндөр байв.

Гэвч Монгол улсын баруун бүст халдварт өвчин гарснаар Хятад улс хойд хөршөөсөө түүхий мах импортлохыг дахин хориглосон.

Монгол улс өөрийнхөө бүтээгдэхүүнийг аюулгүй гэдгийг худалдааны түншүүддээ батлан харуулж чадахгүй байгаа нь сүүлийн арваад жил Монгол улстай алдаг оног, зайгаа барьсан худалдаа хийхэд хүргэсэн. Худалдан авагч, нийлүүлэгчийн хооронд урт хугацааны харилцаа төдийлөн хөгжөөгүй байгаагаас тэдгээрийн мэдлэг, ур чадвар, технологийн үр ашиг нь нэгдсэн үнэ цэнийн сүлжээнд ашиглагддаг шиг өндөр хэмжээнд биш байгаа юм.

Дэлхийн Банк Группээс саяхан хийсэн үнэ цэнийн сүлжээний дүн шинжилгээгээр Монголын үйлдвэрлэгчид малын эрүүл мэндийг сайжруулах болон бусад сорилтуудыг хэрхэн давж өндөр өрсөлдөөнт дэлхийн үнэ цэнийн сүлжээнд орж болох талаар судалгаа хийсэн. Уг судалгаагаар Ойрхи дорнод, Зүүн өмнөд Ази зэрэг Монголын үйлдвэрлэгчид экспортоо нэмэгдүүлж болох дэлхийн үнэ цэнийн сүлжээний өөр бусад зах зээлүүдийг мөн тодорхойлжээ.  

“Гадаадын шууд хөрөнгө оруулалтыг татах чиглэлээр хөдөө аж ахуйн бизнесийн салбарын өрсөлдөх чадвар” сэдэвт судалгааны тайланд Монголын малын махны нөөц бололцоог ашиглахын тулд ойрын 18 сарын хугацаанд нэн тэргүүнд хэрэгжүүлэх шаардлагатай үйл ажиллагааны жагсаалтыг гаргав. Үүнд УИХ-аас  шинэ хуулиудыг батлах, хөшүүргийн бүтцийг шинэчлэх, олон улсын зах зээлд өрсөлдөх чадвар бүхий хамгийн өндөр үйлдвэрлэлийн сүлжээг дэмжих байдлаар хөтөлбөрийн хэрэгжилтийг эрэмбэлэх зэрэг арга хэмжээ багтаж буй юм.

Хятадын компаниуд Монголын мал аж ахуйн салбарыг өөрсдийн нийлүүлэлтийн сүлжээнд голлох нийлүүлэгч болгон хөгжүүлэх сонирхолтой байгаа нь олзуурхууштай. Зарим тохиолдолд Хятадын компаниуд Хятадад хориг тавьснаас үл хамааран Монголын үйлдвэрлэгч нартай холбогдож, Хятад руу мах экспортлох зөвшөөрөл авахад шаардлагатай стандартыг хангах, хүчин чадлыг нэмэгдүүлэх чиглэлээр аль хэдийн хамтран ажиллаж эхэлсэн. Дэлхийн үнэ цэнийн сүлжээн дэх энэ төрлийн мэдлэг, ур чадвар, хөрөнгө оруулалтын урсгал нь Монголын малын махны салбарын өрсөлдөх чадварыг сайжруулахын тулд дэлхийн үнэ цэнийн сүлжээнд зайлшгүй нэгдэх ёстойг илтгэж байгаа юм.

by · Wednesday, 5 July 2017 · China, Mongolia
The Philippines: Resurrecting Manufacturing in a Services Economy

The Philippines: Resurrecting Manufacturing in a Services Economy

In recent years, the Philippines has ranked among the world’s fastest-growing economies but needs to adjust to the demands of a dynamic global economy.

The Philippines is at a fork in the road. Despite good results on the growth front, trends observed in trade competitiveness, Global Value Chain (GVC) integration and product space evolution, send worrisome signals. The country has solid fundamentals and remarkable human assets to leapfrog into the 4th Industrial Revolution – where the distinction between goods and services have become obsolete. Yet it does not get the most out of this growth, especially with regards to long-term development prospects. In order to do so, the government will have to make the right policy choices.


The Philippines seemingly performs well. From 2011 to 2015, the Philippines grew on average at 5.9% a year and in 2016 growth reached nearly 7%. At the same time, the manufacturing sector resurged with an average 6.9% growth from 2013 to 2015—surpassing services that posted an average 6.4% growth. However, the recent World Bank Philippines Economic Update illustrated trends in recent export performance and GVC integration which could be read as early warning signs:

  • Increasingly remote in GVCs, the Philippines has become a supplier of intermediate goods to China, exposed to demand fluctuations, and has not penetrated new markets; 
  • The Philippines has not diversified its exports basket, if only to move away from sophisticated products, with little domestic transformation;  
  • This move will make future upgrading and innovation more difficult, as illustrated by the low export survival rates (Figure), including for sophisticated products.

 
At the doorstep of the 4th Industrial revolution, because the poles of growth have moved, the country has not kept its sophistication edge. Today, it is not enough to create just more jobs, but to create better jobs. Participation in GVCs should be a path to socio-economic upgrading and facilitate transfers of technology, sustainable practices or skills. Little transformation actually takes place in the Philippines with value added captured in other countries along the value chains.

To avoid short-term growth that translates into long-term downgrading prospects, quick action would be required. The government has already initiated a number of programs (e.g., for the resurgence of industry or the support of small and medium enterprises) as part of the Presidential Socioeconomic Agenda, and launched vast consultations to design trade roadmaps in 40 different sectors. These are excellent first steps, but additional efforts will be needed, and the experience of other countries that have found themselves in the same corner could help in identifying the right solutions.

But there are preconceived ideas about trade and GVC integration that could lead to strategic mistakes. For example, governments often focus on increasing domestic value added—which is a good and legitimate objective—but attempt to do so by using inappropriate methods, e.g., by introducing import substitution or imposing more- restrictive-than-necessary rules on trade on local content. The impact could be harmful to investment attractiveness and industry competitiveness. It is about positioning the domestic industry or services providers in the right segments of the value chain: Vietnam, for instance, reduced the share of domestic value-added in its exports from 45 to 30% between 1995 and 2011, but increased the volume of its exports from $0.2 to $3.8 billion (World Bank, 2016). Other ideas include the necessity to add more incentives, when their effect is not obvious and economic development policies are more productive when focused on improving the country’s fundamentals.

A number of good solutions have been tested elsewhere that could help the Philippines move back to a more sustainable and inclusive growth path. For example, “servicification”, with the development of higher services content in goods, has become a major path to competitiveness and diversification in the 4th Industrial Revolution.

The Philippines is a services economy and a lead exporter of services; paradoxically, however, efficient linkages between services and other sectors of the industry (manufacturing and agriculture) are lacking. Clearly, the Philippines cannot compete on prices only to attract foreign investment—ending the “race to the bottom” to attract lead firms would require, for example, putting in place an environment able to reduce sustainability risks along GVCs, following the examples of countries like Vietnam or Colombia.

Flexibility, quality of labor, and innovation are key to the Philippines’ future success. While the Philippines innovates a lot, it does so in areas where there’s little impact on trade performance. In areas where chances of being competitive and surviving are lower for innovation strategies, a look at successful Philippine companies would show that they have identified the right niches (technology or skill-based) and could go around the competition of low-cost emerging countries. Support for SMEs will also be a determinant in the success of this innovation strategy. The GVC and economic complexity analyses provide some guidance on the way to go. Beyond seeing its evolution in the service and product space as a linear process, considering a third dimension—increased innovation and services content—will allow the Philippines to make a double leap in value added and technology.
 
 

by · Friday, 23 June 2017 · China, Philippines, Vietnam
The Philippines: Resurrecting Manufacturing in a Services Economy

The Philippines: Resurrecting Manufacturing in a Services Economy

In recent years, the Philippines has ranked among the world’s fastest-growing economies but needs to adjust to the demands of a dynamic global economy.

The Philippines is at a fork in the road. Despite good results on the growth front, trends observed in trade competitiveness, Global Value Chain (GVC) integration and product space evolution, send worrisome signals. The country has solid fundamentals and remarkable human assets to leapfrog into the 4th Industrial Revolution – where the distinction between goods and services have become obsolete. Yet it does not get the most out of this growth, especially with regards to long-term development prospects. In order to do so, the government will have to make the right policy choices.


The Philippines seemingly performs well. From 2011 to 2015, the Philippines grew on average at 5.9% a year and in 2016 growth reached nearly 7%. At the same time, the manufacturing sector resurged with an average 6.9% growth from 2013 to 2015—surpassing services that posted an average 6.4% growth. However, the recent World Bank Philippines Economic Update illustrated trends in recent export performance and GVC integration which could be read as early warning signs:

  • Increasingly remote in GVCs, the Philippines has become a supplier of intermediate goods to China, exposed to demand fluctuations, and has not penetrated new markets; 
  • The Philippines has not diversified its exports basket, if only to move away from sophisticated products, with little domestic transformation;  
  • This move will make future upgrading and innovation more difficult, as illustrated by the low export survival rates (Figure), including for sophisticated products.

 
At the doorstep of the 4th Industrial revolution, because the poles of growth have moved, the country has not kept its sophistication edge. Today, it is not enough to create just more jobs, but to create better jobs. Participation in GVCs should be a path to socio-economic upgrading and facilitate transfers of technology, sustainable practices or skills. Little transformation actually takes place in the Philippines with value added captured in other countries along the value chains.

To avoid short-term growth that translates into long-term downgrading prospects, quick action would be required. The government has already initiated a number of programs (e.g., for the resurgence of industry or the support of small and medium enterprises) as part of the Presidential Socioeconomic Agenda, and launched vast consultations to design trade roadmaps in 40 different sectors. These are excellent first steps, but additional efforts will be needed, and the experience of other countries that have found themselves in the same corner could help in identifying the right solutions.

But there are preconceived ideas about trade and GVC integration that could lead to strategic mistakes. For example, governments often focus on increasing domestic value added—which is a good and legitimate objective—but attempt to do so by using inappropriate methods, e.g., by introducing import substitution or imposing more- restrictive-than-necessary rules on trade on local content. The impact could be harmful to investment attractiveness and industry competitiveness. It is about positioning the domestic industry or services providers in the right segments of the value chain: Vietnam, for instance, reduced the share of domestic value-added in its exports from 45 to 30% between 1995 and 2011, but increased the volume of its exports from $0.2 to $3.8 billion (World Bank, 2016). Other ideas include the necessity to add more incentives, when their effect is not obvious and economic development policies are more productive when focused on improving the country’s fundamentals.

A number of good solutions have been tested elsewhere that could help the Philippines move back to a more sustainable and inclusive growth path. For example, “servicification”, with the development of higher services content in goods, has become a major path to competitiveness and diversification in the 4th Industrial Revolution.

The Philippines is a services economy and a lead exporter of services; paradoxically, however, efficient linkages between services and other sectors of the industry (manufacturing and agriculture) are lacking. Clearly, the Philippines cannot compete on prices only to attract foreign investment—ending the “race to the bottom” to attract lead firms would require, for example, putting in place an environment able to reduce sustainability risks along GVCs, following the examples of countries like Vietnam or Colombia.

Flexibility, quality of labor, and innovation are key to the Philippines’ future success. While the Philippines innovates a lot, it does so in areas where there’s little impact on trade performance. In areas where chances of being competitive and surviving are lower for innovation strategies, a look at successful Philippine companies would show that they have identified the right niches (technology or skill-based) and could go around the competition of low-cost emerging countries. Support for SMEs will also be a determinant in the success of this innovation strategy. The GVC and economic complexity analyses provide some guidance on the way to go. Beyond seeing its evolution in the service and product space as a linear process, considering a third dimension—increased innovation and services content—will allow the Philippines to make a double leap in value added and technology.
 
 

by · Friday, 23 June 2017 · China, Philippines, Vietnam
The Philippines: Resurrecting Manufacturing in a Services Economy

The Philippines: Resurrecting Manufacturing in a Services Economy

In recent years, the Philippines has ranked among the world’s fastest-growing economies but needs to adjust to the demands of a dynamic global economy.

The Philippines is at a fork in the road. Despite good results on the growth front, trends observed in trade competitiveness, Global Value Chain (GVC) integration and product space evolution, send worrisome signals. The country has solid fundamentals and remarkable human assets to leapfrog into the 4th Industrial Revolution – where the distinction between goods and services have become obsolete. Yet it does not get the most out of this growth, especially with regards to long-term development prospects. In order to do so, the government will have to make the right policy choices.


The Philippines seemingly performs well. From 2011 to 2015, the Philippines grew on average at 5.9% a year and in 2016 growth reached nearly 7%. At the same time, the manufacturing sector resurged with an average 6.9% growth from 2013 to 2015—surpassing services that posted an average 6.4% growth. However, the recent World Bank Philippines Economic Update illustrated trends in recent export performance and GVC integration which could be read as early warning signs:

  • Increasingly remote in GVCs, the Philippines has become a supplier of intermediate goods to China, exposed to demand fluctuations, and has not penetrated new markets; 
  • The Philippines has not diversified its exports basket, if only to move away from sophisticated products, with little domestic transformation;  
  • This move will make future upgrading and innovation more difficult, as illustrated by the low export survival rates (Figure), including for sophisticated products.

 
At the doorstep of the 4th Industrial revolution, because the poles of growth have moved, the country has not kept its sophistication edge. Today, it is not enough to create just more jobs, but to create better jobs. Participation in GVCs should be a path to socio-economic upgrading and facilitate transfers of technology, sustainable practices or skills. Little transformation actually takes place in the Philippines with value added captured in other countries along the value chains.

To avoid short-term growth that translates into long-term downgrading prospects, quick action would be required. The government has already initiated a number of programs (e.g., for the resurgence of industry or the support of small and medium enterprises) as part of the Presidential Socioeconomic Agenda, and launched vast consultations to design trade roadmaps in 40 different sectors. These are excellent first steps, but additional efforts will be needed, and the experience of other countries that have found themselves in the same corner could help in identifying the right solutions.

But there are preconceived ideas about trade and GVC integration that could lead to strategic mistakes. For example, governments often focus on increasing domestic value added—which is a good and legitimate objective—but attempt to do so by using inappropriate methods, e.g., by introducing import substitution or imposing more- restrictive-than-necessary rules on trade on local content. The impact could be harmful to investment attractiveness and industry competitiveness. It is about positioning the domestic industry or services providers in the right segments of the value chain: Vietnam, for instance, reduced the share of domestic value-added in its exports from 45 to 30% between 1995 and 2011, but increased the volume of its exports from $0.2 to $3.8 billion (World Bank, 2016). Other ideas include the necessity to add more incentives, when their effect is not obvious and economic development policies are more productive when focused on improving the country’s fundamentals.

A number of good solutions have been tested elsewhere that could help the Philippines move back to a more sustainable and inclusive growth path. For example, “servicification”, with the development of higher services content in goods, has become a major path to competitiveness and diversification in the 4th Industrial Revolution.

The Philippines is a services economy and a lead exporter of services; paradoxically, however, efficient linkages between services and other sectors of the industry (manufacturing and agriculture) are lacking. Clearly, the Philippines cannot compete on prices only to attract foreign investment—ending the “race to the bottom” to attract lead firms would require, for example, putting in place an environment able to reduce sustainability risks along GVCs, following the examples of countries like Vietnam or Colombia.

Flexibility, quality of labor, and innovation are key to the Philippines’ future success. While the Philippines innovates a lot, it does so in areas where there’s little impact on trade performance. In areas where chances of being competitive and surviving are lower for innovation strategies, a look at successful Philippine companies would show that they have identified the right niches (technology or skill-based) and could go around the competition of low-cost emerging countries. Support for SMEs will also be a determinant in the success of this innovation strategy. The GVC and economic complexity analyses provide some guidance on the way to go. Beyond seeing its evolution in the service and product space as a linear process, considering a third dimension—increased innovation and services content—will allow the Philippines to make a double leap in value added and technology.
 
 

by · Friday, 23 June 2017 · China, Philippines, Vietnam