Is global competitive index a good standard to measure economic growth? A suggestion for improvement

Xia, Ruixia; Tao, Liang; Zhang, Yali; Wu, Sibin

doi:10.1504/ijss.2012.048438

Cited by 23 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Cazacu (2015) examined the linkage between economic growth and competitiveness index on a panel of 28 European countries, during 2006-2013 and found that a shock in the competitiveness index had a positive impact on GDP developments. Other researchers claim the lack of a good theoretical basis for the selection of its variables (Berger & Bristow, 2009) and methodological errors which may determine wrong results (Freudenberg, 2003) or that it is not an adequate index for predicting economic growth because it covers so many variables (Xia, Liang, Zhang, & Wu, 2012). Petryl_ e (2017) finds no correlation between GCI and GDP growth in EU-27 countries plus Norway, Switzerland, Iceland, the United States and the Russian Federation, but shows that high GCI values avoid sharp GDP fluctuations.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consumption vs. Investments for stimulating economic growth and employment in the CEE Countries – a panel analysis

Rădulescu

Şerbănescu

Sinisi

2019

Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to find out if the high economic growth rates achieved by the CEE countries are based either on consumption or on investments, considering many exogenous factors that impact on the economic growth and how these factors can contribute to the employment process in the CEE economies to stress if these trends of economic growth and employment are sustainable in the long run. We performed two Panel Least Squares and Pool Least Squares estimations to determine the impact of the exogenous variables on the economic growth (as GDP per capita growth) and on the unemployment rate in the short and long run, depending on the lags of the exogenous variables used in the analysis. We used yearly data series during 2004-2017 for eight selected CEE countries. Our results show that private consumption is positively related with economic growth in the short run, but it doesn't support the job creation process, in the same way as the savings rate can't determine positive effects on the employment. Public spending is strongly and negatively correlated with economic growth and positively correlated with the unemployment rate in the CEE region, while the net export is weakly impacting on the economic growth in the CEE region and doesn't support the employment process in this area. The impact of the domestic investments on the economic growth is weaker in the CEE area than the impact of both private and public spending, but they are positively correlated with the economic growth and negatively correlated with the unemployment rate, while the correlation of the foreign direct investments (FDIs) with both economic growth and unemployment is very weak, as it is the case of net exports. We conclude that the economic growth in the CEE area is mainly based on the private consumption in the short run but the private consumption doesn't support the job creation process either in the long run or in the short run. The qualitative factors included in the analysis by using global competitiveness index (corruption control, bureaucracy, infrastructure quality, governance effectiveness, political stability, ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consumption vs. Investments for stimulating economic growth and employment in the CEE Countries – a panel analysis

Rădulescu

Şerbănescu

Sinisi

2019

Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In recent years, the studies and researches devoted to the critical analysis of GCI, including optional improvements (as Xia, Liang, Zhang, & Wu (2012)), upgraded methodologies and replacement indicators (as Podobnik, Horvatic, Kenett, & Stanley (2012)) are more numerous than those studies that recognize GCI as a general indicator to estimate and compare nations regarding the global competitiveness. Xia et al (2012) argue that WEF should refine GCI methodology including national culture as an additional factor so that GCI can become a much better predictor of economic growth, the authors admit that GCI can only be meaningful when it is better at predicting economic growth than other variables, otherwise other well established indices should be used to make predictions about national economies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Xia et al (2012) argue that WEF should refine GCI methodology including national culture as an additional factor so that GCI can become a much better predictor of economic growth, the authors admit that GCI can only be meaningful when it is better at predicting economic growth than other variables, otherwise other well established indices should be used to make predictions about national economies. Podobnik et al (2012) examined how the level of competitiveness affects the dynamics of a country's wealth during a recession and the authors developed a new measure, which is called a relative competitiveness, to evaluate an economy's competitiveness relative to its GDP.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Labour Productivity, Economic Growth and Global Competitiveness in Post-crisis Period

Auziņa-Emsiņa

2014

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Labour productivity and economic growth are key factors to maintain and improve the competiveness of nations in the global market. The paper is devoted to the analysis of recent trends of labour productivity and economic growth in post-crisis period in comparison with the trends in pre-crisis and crisis periods. The paper analyzes the impact of changes in labour productivity and its effect on the nation's global competitiveness. The research focuses on the European Union countries that experienced the most severe crisis and afterwards the most rapid recovery in post-crisis period (as Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia). The research findings argue that there are weak or no relations between productivity increase and economic growth in pre-crisis period and the first phase of post-crisis period; however, the increase of productivity during the crisis is a significant driver of the economy after a period of time.

show abstract

“…Entre los gobiernos y los líderes industriales existe un interés por encontrar las razones por las que las naciones u organizaciones fracasan (Xia, Liang, Zhang, & Wu, 2012), por esto, la competitividad se convierte en tema de debate político-económico en busca de la prosperidad de las naciones. (Delgado, Ketels, Porter, & Stern, 2012 (Archibugi & Coco, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Índice para la medición de la competitividad en Colombia

Acevedo-Prins

Jiménez-Gómez

2015

Rev. CEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cómo citar/ How to cite Acevedo, N. y Jiménez, L. (2015). Índice para la medición de la competitividad en Colombia. Revista CEA, 1(2), 109-121.Recibido: 12 de mayo de 2015 Aceptado: 25 de junio de 2015Resumen Esta investigación presenta una metodología para la construcción de un índice compuesto para medir la competitividad como factor de crecimiento económico para Colombia, a partir de los modelos de competitividad de Michel Porter y el trabajo de Cho y Moon. Los índices actuales presentan falencias en la construcción, desde la parte teórica o desde el manejo estadístico. Es por esto que se implementó el análisis factorial, herramienta estadística que permite una construcción objetiva evitando la inserción de subjetividades en la ponderación y agregación de variables. También, la utilización de datos duros provee a la investigación de mayor confiabilidad. Por medio de esta construcción se evidenciaron los esfuerzos que realiza el país para mejorar la competitividad apoyada por la estabilidad macroeconómica, sin embargo rezagada por la seguridad y salud pertenecientes a la institucionalidad. Los resultados concuerdan con las recomendaciones de los estudios económicos que hace la Organización para la Cooperación y Desarrollo Económico para Colombia.Palabras clave: Índice compuesto, competitividad, análisis factorial, diamante de la competitividad. AbstractThis research presents a methodology for the construction of a composite index to measure competitiveness as a factor for economic growth in Colombia, from competitiveness models by Michel Porter and the work of Cho and Moon. Current rates have shortcomings in construction, from the theory or the statistical management. That is why a factor analysis was developed, a statistical tool that allows an objective construction, avoiding mistakes from including subjectivity in the weighting and aggregation of variables. Also, the use of hard data provides greater reliability to the research. Thanks to this construction the efforts of the country to improve competitiveness supported by macroeconomic stability were evident, nevertheless; lagging behind due to the safety and health belonging to the institutions. The results are consistent with the recommendations of the economic studies presented by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentColombia.

show abstract

Is global competitive index a good standard to measure economic growth? A suggestion for improvement

Cited by 23 publications

References 27 publications

Consumption vs. Investments for stimulating economic growth and employment in the CEE Countries – a panel analysis

Consumption vs. Investments for stimulating economic growth and employment in the CEE Countries – a panel analysis

Labour Productivity, Economic Growth and Global Competitiveness in Post-crisis Period

Índice para la medición de la competitividad en Colombia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About