Showing posts with label Multinationals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Multinationals. Show all posts

Monday, 27 October 2008

Are poor transport networks a brake on China's growth?

Another artice from the recent "Doing Business in China" series in the FT.

In my research where I control of transportation networks odd results are thrown up due to the geography of China and the differences in quality of network across provinces especially for rail.

Whilst certainly true that poor transport networks can act as a brake on growth, I would imagine that China is in a much better position that the perceived competition from India or more recently Vietnam where transport is certainly in a worse state than China. The investment in transport in China in recent years has been enormous and whilst a lot remains to be done China is well on the way.

It is interesting to note how the way the road network operates leads to an increase in bribes and theft. Regulations clearly make this worse than it needs to be.

Missing links [FT]

Distribution and the moving of goods remains one of the biggest headaches for almost every company looking to sell products across China.

The principal reason is the uneven development of the country’s transport sectors, with extremely high spending in some regions and sectors – above all, on the country’s expressway network – but poor overall co-ordination.

The outcome has been not just a hugely fragmented transport industry, with barely any logistics companies offering nationwide services, but also one of the world’s most expensive logistics sectors, with transport and related costs accounting for more than twice the share of gross domestic product as in the US, and about four times as much as in Europe.

On the plus side, provinces across China have spent enormously on developing an expressway network – from having less than 10,000km a decade ago, the country’s total length has grown to 78,000km, second only in total length to the US.

This roll-out is set to continue under a master plan that during the next three decades should see every city with 200,000 or more inhabitants linked into the network.

Ports have also seen heavy spending, especially around China’s main export manufacturing locations: at Shenzhen in Guangdong province, around the Lower Yangtze Delta region centred on Shanghai and at Tianjin, Qingdao and Dalian in the north and north-east.

And the country has some of the world’s biggest and most modern airports, notably at Beijing, Pudong in Shanghai and Guangzhou.

With these three elements in place, China has an excellent infrastructure for importing inputs and materials and exporting finished products – by air, if necessary, as well as by ship.

The country also has some excellent regional networks but its transport shortcomings are exposed when a company tries to move goods from one part of the country to another – links between provinces and major cities remain surprisingly poor.

The most obvious weakness is the country’s rail network, whose total length has barely grown in the past five years.

China’s transport shortcomings can be attributed to a lack of central co-ordination and the large number of competing bodies involved in overseeing the transport and logistics sectors.

Railways, aviation and road each fall under separate ministries or central government commissions: the Ministry of Commerce is responsible for licensing various logistics and other transport services; the National Development and Reform Commission, the state’s main planning body, aims at co-ordinating transport policy but has to fight turf wars with the other local and state entities; and China’s customs and State Administration for Industry and Commerce (the latter with both central and local arms) are also involved in regulating the movement of goods.

Throw in a decentralisation of administrative power that has taken place in the past two decades, and it is unsurprising that while China’s richest regions have successfully been able to fund their own infrastructure programmes, central officials have struggled to impose their will in getting different parts of the country to work together.

Making things worse are a series of additional factors that seriously hinder the movement of goods, and make the whole process a lot more expensive.

First, is that road haulage is an intrinsically more expensive and inefficient way of moving large volumes of goods long distances than railways.

Second, are road charges. China now has 70 per cent of the world’s mileage of toll roads, according to the China Supply Chain Council, which local governments have to levy in order to fund their road-building projects.

And then there is local protectionism, with provinces or cities discriminating against transport and logistics firms from other parts of the country.

The consequence of these factors are multiple changes of goods from one trucking company to another, multiple payment of fees at provincial and city borders, and lots of trucks making empty return journeys.

Such practices, of course, all encourage the demanding of bribes, create opportunities for petty theft, make the tracking of goods all but impossible and – arguably most important of all – build in long delays.

The good news is that improvements are coming. Expenditure on railways has been lifted. This summer saw the opening of a high-speed rail link between Beijing and Tianjin, and at the start of the year work began on a 1,300km high-speed route from Beijing to Shanghai, scheduled for completion in 2013.

Plans have also been announced to increase the total railway length to 120,000 km by 2015 (advanced from an original target of 2020) – a credible figure given that expenditure has been raised to more than £23bn a year, up from an average of less than £9bn a year in the first five years of this decade.

And there are also signs that the central government is looking to exercise tighter control over both planning and funding, and an opening of the logistics sector to greater foreign participation, which between them should both lower barriers between provinces, raise managerial standards and see increased investment in the soft side of the transport industry.

Nonetheless, given the time that it will take for the planned new rail lines to come into operation, a continuing shortage of experienced logistics managers, and the almost certain continued prevalence of local protectionism, distribution is going to remain one of the main obstacles to companies doing business in China – whether Chinese or foreign – for at least a decade.


.

Monday, 17 March 2008

A ravenous dragon in Africa

The increasing presence of China in Africa has been a topic of hot debate in the press, blogs and for academics.

The Economist has now entered the debate with a special issue. Better late than never.

There are a whole series of article most of which are worth a read. The quotes include the standard scare stories. There is some truth in these stories but Western companies also fear being frozen out. Is this a race to the bottom taking place? If so the West will find it very hard to compete.

This issue will become increasingly important in years to come and is something I will be working on.

A ravenous dragon [Economist]

Unwelcome advances

But China's sudden global reach is generating as much anxiety as prosperity. In 2005 America's congressmen, citing nebulous national-security concerns, scuppered the proposed takeover of Unocal, an American oil firm, by CNOOC, a state-owned Chinese one. The opposition candidate in Zambia's presidential election in 2006 made a point of attacking the growing Chinese presence in the country. Residents of Russia's far east fear that China is planning to plunder their oil and timber and perhaps even to colonise their empty spaces.

Some non-governmental organisations worry that Chinese firms will ignore basic legal, environmental and labour standards in their rush to secure resources, leaving a trail of corruption, pollution and exploitation in their wake. Western companies fret that the Chinese state-owned firms with which they suddenly find themselves competing have an agenda beyond commercial gain. The Chinese government, they say, is willing to pay over the odds for mining or drilling rights to secure access to physical resources. It also intervenes unfairly on its companies' behalf, they claim, by offering big aid packages to countries that welcome Chinese investment. All this, it is feared, will dent the profits of big oil and mining firms, stoke inflation and imperil the West's access to resources that it needs just as much as China does.

Diplomats and pundits, for their part, fear that the West is “losing” Africa and other resource-rich regions. China's sudden prominence, according to this view, will reduce the clout of America, Europe and other rich democracies in the developing world. China will befriend ostracised regimes and encourage them to defy international norms. Corruption, economic mismanagement, repression and instability will proliferate. If this baleful influence spreads too widely, say the critics, the “Washington consensus” of economic liberalism and democracy will find itself in competition with a “Beijing consensus” of state-led development and despotism.

Such fears are not entirely groundless if the recent conduct of some of Congo's neighbours is anything to go by. Angola, to the south, has been receiving so much aid and investment from China that in 2006 it decided it had no need of the International Monetary Fund's billions and all the tiresome requirements for transparency and sound economic management that come with them. Sudan, to the north, has shrugged off Western threats and sanctions over the continuing atrocities in Darfur, thanks in large part to China's readiness to invest in Sudanese oilfields and buy their output. Farther afield, China's eagerness to do business in Myanmar, and its consequent reluctance to chide the tyrannical generals that run the place, helped to prevent a forceful international response to the violent repression of peaceful demonstrations there last year.


.

Saturday, 15 March 2008

Multinationals and CSR in China

There is a considerable interest in the economics literature as well as in the popular press on the behaviour or multinationals in developing countries. I have done some recent work on China.

It is therefore interesting to see the Chinese popular press jumping on this particular bandwagon. From a political economy perspective, corporate social responsibiluty (CSR) is a good stick for China to beat foreign firms with.

The real issue is not how badly foreign firms behave but how badly relative to their plants in thier domestic market and local firms.

Consumer message to foreign firms: Behave [Shanghai Daily]

CHINESE consumers and workers want transnational companies to exercise more social responsibility following a series of scandals, a survey has revealed.

The survey, by the Guangdong Provincial Situation Study and Investigation Center, polled more than 3,000 respondents - including consumers and employees of transnational companies in Shanghai, Beijing, Guangzhou and Shenzhen - on the firms' image in the nation.

About 70 companies were involved, including drinks giant Coca-Cola and telecommunications major Nokia, both of whom have a high-profile presence in China.

Close to 90 percent of those polled agreed that the companies had made significant contributions to the country's economic development.

However, only about 22 percent of those polled said that the companies had fulfilled their social responsibilities in accordance with profits they had made in China.

Almost 80 percent of the respondents also said there was discrimination against Chinese employees within multinational companies.

Feng Shengping, a researcher with the study and investigation center who led the study, said multinational companies should attach more importance to improving their corporate image among consumers, so they can better integrate into the economy and society.

"The public is paying more attention to whether multinationals are performing in accordance with the law, and whether they realize due social responsibility," Feng said.

"Transnational companies, which were once regarded as exemplary businesses for the Chinese economy, have, to some degree, lost their image among consumers, following a series of business scandals in recent years."

More than 570,000 foreign-invested companies have registered in China since 1982, bringing investment of US$665 billion, the researcher said.

Monday, 10 March 2008

Aid from China and Human rights abuses

Excellent article reflecting on a recent academic paper on Chinese aid and human rights abuses.

Instead of going through the arguments again I point you to Chris Blattman's Blog that has the appropriate links. I believe the economists have got it about right here - it is crucial to identify the order of causation.

I believe that this will become an increasingly important topic for empirical researchers and something I will be looking at in the near future data permitting.

Do trade and aid from China increase human rights abuses?

Yesterday, the New York Times lamented the worsening war in Sri Lanka, the rise in human rights abuses, and the emasculation of rights observers. "Gone are the Nordic monitors," it writes, "independent journalists are not allowed anywhere near the front lines."

Today, the blame is apportioned. "Take Aid From China and Take a Pass on Human Rights" proclaims the newspaper. The argument: unconditional aid and trade from China insulates regimes from Western mores and threats of sanctions in a dirty war.

China fear-mongering? Taking the story beyond the evidence? Maybe not.

The Times misses a paper posted last week by economists Erik Meyersson, Nancy Qian, and Gerard PadrĂ³-i-Miquel, but it gets the story right. Here newspaper anecdotes get support from some powerful statistics: trade with China predicts human rights abuses. At least in Africa.


.

Monday, 14 January 2008

Can Chinese banks compete after accession to WTO?

I am sorting through some old papers at the moment and keep coming across research that may be of interest.

These are academic papers that may require access to download the full paper. The papers may also be rather technical for non-economists. If you need a copy please email and a friendly academic may be able to find a PDF version of any paper featured on this blog.

The short answer according to this paper is NO. I suspect with continued foreign joint ventures and investment in the share capital of these banks that they will learn very quickly. Howeve, teh bad load provision will remain a serious problem and may get considerably worse if there is a down turn of any magnitude.

Can Chinese banks compete after accession to WTO?

Lei Xua and Chien-Ting Linb,

International Graduate School of Business, University of South Australia and
School of Commerce, University of Adelaide.

Abstract

Our answer is no, not at least without fundamental changes on the roles of Chinese banks and on the current unfavourable bank regulations towards domestic banks. As a result of China's accession to World Trade Organization (WTO), foreign banks could compete directly with Chinese banks with little barriers from December 2006. We argue that foreign banks’ expertise and experience in modern banking activities coupled with their interests and regulatory advantages in the traditional Renminbi (RMB) business will lead to a loss of RMB deposits and loans from local banks. Given that Chinese banks are currently ridden with large non-performing loans and low capital adequacy, the foreign bank entry will exert further pressure on the banks’ profitability and solvency. It is likely that the health of Chinese banks will deteriorate further in the post-WTO era.

.

Wednesday, 12 December 2007

What Drives China's Growing Role in Africa?

China's role in Africa has important economic and political implications. In one sense, China is filling a gap left by the West who tend to tie aid and FDI to good governance. Therefore China could be criticised for helping to support corrupt and inefficient regimes. Finally, Chinese involvement is part of a wider "land grab" for resources. China knows that to support its current rapid rate of growth it will require huge quantities of natural resources. Africa at the moment provides easy pickings. The reaction of Western multinationals will be interesting to watch as they try to free themselves from the constraints Western governments to ensure they continue to win contracts against the Chinese. Not easy.

-------------------------

"What Drives China's Growing Role in Africa?"
IMF Working Paper No. 07/211


Contact: JIAN-YE WANG
International Monetary Fund (IMF) - European
Department
Email: jwang1@imf.org
Auth-Page: http://ssrn.com/author=348512

Full Text: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1012994

ABSTRACT: What role does China play in Africa's development? What drives China's increasing economic involvement in the continent? This paper attempts to provide a quantified assessment of China's multifaceted influence as market, donor, financer and investor, and contractor and builder. Though in the past official development aid predominated, the paper argues that government policies, markets for each other's exports, Africa's demand for infrastructure, and differences in China's approach to financing have together moved commercial activities - trade and investment - to the center of China-Africa economic relations. While China's public sector, state financial institutions in particular, has been instrumental in the process, the influence of its private sector is increasing. Implications for the future of China-Africa economic relations are briefly noted.
______________________________

Monday, 15 October 2007

Economics in China: a story about "Beer"



Here at chinaconomicsblog "beer" is never too far away from our minds. So imagine our delight in finding a "economics and beer" post on a law blog (Chinalawyerblog).

On a serious note, this small anecdote tells us a considerable amount about doing business in China and more specifically how tight the margins are in what amounts to probably the most capitalistic market in the world and fits the economists standard assumption of "perfect competition" the most economics models are based on.

Such thin margins are also a deterrent to multinationals wanting to supply the home market. As an export platform China remains a good place to do business. When one thinks of some of the problems with "quality" it is clear to see that this overriding pressure on margins forces some companies to cut corners.

Tight Profits, How Can A Foreign Company Survive?

I went biking into the hills nearby Beijing last weekend, and returned with a story about beer and profit margins, and learned more about why it is so difficult for some foreign companies to compete here. Somewhere in the hills a few kilomters off the main road, I ran out of water and found a small, very simple store that sold water, soap, snacks and beer. Here is a photo of the beer stacked outside the store.

The bottle of water cost 1.2 Chinese yuan (RMB), about US$0.17, and to my surprise the shopowner told me the 500ml bottle of beer was the same price. I was startled, since beer in Beijing costs a minimum US$0.26, twice that price, and I couldn’t see how anybody could profit on such cheap beer, especially since it needs to be transported so far to this store.

The shopowner told me that his cost for a bottle of beer is 1 Chinese yuan, about US$0.13, and therefore his profit on the sale of an entire crate of 24 bottles is about 24 x US$0.04 per bottle, or about US$1.

So, what I am wondering here is how do foreign brands compete? I think they answer is that at least in the beer industry they really can’t. There’s no way Chinese consumers are going to pay four times more for a bottle of Budweiser than the local beer.


Incidentally, if you have not read Chinalawyerblog before I can wholeheartedly recommend it. Although there is an element of car crash blogging jjb gives insights into life living and working in China not found elsewhere. It is a soap opera in blog form. Will he ever get his money? Will he be bumped off before he gets paid? Tune in to find out.

Wednesday, 10 October 2007

Multinationals and the Creation of Chinese Trade Linkages

A new NBER research paper hits the streets by Deborah Swenson of UCD.


--------------------------

"Multinationals and the Creation of Chinese Trade Linkages"
NBER Working Paper No. W13271


Contact: DEBORAH L. SWENSON
University of California, Davis - Department of
Economics, National Bureau of Economic Research
(NBER)
Email: dswenson@ucdavis.edu
Auth-Page: http://ssrn.com/author=98388

Full Text: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1002050

ABSTRACT: This paper studies the relationship between multinational firm proximity and the formation of new export connections by private Chinese exporters between 1997 and 2003.
The results indicate that growth in the presence of multinational firms is positively associated with the formation of new trade by local Chinese firms. Further exploration suggests that information spillovers may drive this result, as the positive association due to own-industry multinational presence is particularly strong in contexts where information improvements may be the most helpful. Thus, it appears that a growing presence of multinational firms may enhance the export capabilities of local domestic firms.

.