Showing posts with label Australia-China relations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Australia-China relations. Show all posts

Saturday, July 18, 2015

Australia's China Dependence Compared

Australia is one of the most China dependent economies in the world. The impact of China's demand for exports has been largely positive for Australia in expanding Australia's export income, although it is important to remember that Australia's mining sector is 80 per cent foreign owned, which means that eventually most of the profits go overseas. Pity we don't have an effective tax regime to ensure that more of the gains of the resources owned collectively by Australians are returned to those same Australians.

Australia's position as the country most dependent on China for exports has been overtaken by Taiwan. 




Another way to assess China dependence is to consider exports to China as a percentage of GDP. Australia does not have a high level of exports as a percentage of GDP and therefore the impact of China on GDP is slightly less. Nevertheless, if we compare the situation in 2014 with last year, dependence has grown markedly






Australia is also an important destination for Chinese investment. 






Any slowdown or worse in China will have a direct impact on Australian exports and GDP. It will also negatively affect a lot of other countries that Australia exports to as well, particularly Japan and South Korea. 

Recently Joe Hockey said
The economy is not affected by what's happening in either Greece or China ... The Chinese stock market dropped 25 per cent in four weeks, but is now 18 per cent higher than its low point last Thursday. It is a very volatile market, [but] it's still 90 per cent higher than it was 12 months ago. ... As far I am concerned, and the Treasury is concerned, our budget forecasts for the Chinese economy remain unchanged. 
The evidence suggests, at least in the case of China, that Hockey's optimism might be misplaced.  

Friday, November 28, 2014

Australia's Growing China Dependence: Do We Need a Plan B?

Australia's increasing economic interactions with China are seen by most as unequivocally beneficial. The putative growing middle classes of China and the rest of Asia will see Australia flourish over the next decade, according to most economic policy-makers and commentators. Joe Hockey recently argued:
China's middle-class of around 150 million people is expected to reach 1 billion in just 16 years. Over 30 per cent of India's population will also lift into the middle class at around the same time! That, in particular, is an amazing transformation given that two thirds of India's population currently has no access to basic services. This rising middle class of Asia wants what comes from Australia's farms and our gas fields. They want to come here as tourists, attend our universities and they need our financial sector to manage their wealth and plan their retirement. They want our quality of life with good housing, roads and transport, clean air and excellent quality health services. Their elderly want quality aged care services and their youth want hope that they can forge an even better quality of life.
Elsewhere Hockey has argued:
The bottom line is the world’s going to want commodities because of the emerging middle class, particularly in Asia but also in Africa and various other places … I don’t think there’s any commodities (downturn) — I think that’s market trash. I think we’ve got to deal with the reality of where the world’s going to be in the next 30 years. They’re going to want commodities.
The Reserve Bank's Alexandra Heath also contends:
Yet, even if the sustainable growth trajectory for the Chinese economy gradually declines over the medium term, the economy is much larger than it was and is still growing. This implies there will continue to be a huge appetite for commodities of many kinds. Some of this demand can be satisfied by local Chinese production, but given the competitiveness of Australian production in a number of commodities, China is likely to be a large market for Australian resource exports for some time to come. 
Finally the outgoing Treasury Secretary, Martin Parkinson, contends:
In this decade – and for the first time in 300 years – we will see the number of Asian middle-class consumers equal the number in Europe and North America. This middle class – which is expected to grow from around 500 million people in 2009 to around 3.2 billion by 2030 – is likely to increase its demand for a wide range of goods and services.
They could all be right and if you judged future opportunities based on past performance you'd be reasonably confident. But what if they're wrong? Is Australia prepared if the optimistic scenario doesn't eventuate? Do we need a plan B?

Australia is now the most China dependent economy in the world. Exports to China have grown from 8.5 per cent of the total ten years ago to 32.4 per cent today.





Interestingly, India's share has fallen over the last 10 years (remember that these are shares of a growing total and exports to India have grown despite their falling share of the total). Other has declined as well meaning less export diversity. 

According to Bloomberg Australia's exports to China as a percentage of total exports is now 37.02 per cent of the total. (It's possible they mean total merchandise exports i.e. excluding services exports). 



Let's take The Treasury's figures and consider Australia's export dependence on the top three destinations in 2004 and 2014. This has grown from 33.7 per cent (Japan 15.7, US 9.5 and China 8.5) to 54.3 per cent (China 32.4, Japan 15.2 and South Korea 6.7). Top 5 has grown from 47.7 to 62.8 per cent. 



More worryingly, not only is Australia now more China dependent, but so is most of the rest of Asia. This means that Australia's exports to Japan and South Korea (our second and third largest export destinations) will also be impacted by a China slowdown or worse. 

Let us hope that the dreamers are right about China's long-term progress and that the doomsayers are wrong. But remember also that all of this export growth to China occurred without a trade agreement. It's possible that the agreement will help to diversify Australia's export mix to China - more agriculture, more services - and not just leave us more vulnerable down the track as Australia becomes even more China dependent. 

This leads us to the big question: do we need a Plan B? And what would that be? It should involve active policy efforts to diversify the economy away from a reliance on resources and selling and buying houses from each other. Policy-makers need to reconsider industry policy and think of ways to develop new industries rather than just support old ones in ad hoc ways. Encouraging the development of renewable technologies should be a no-brainer for Australia, but the Abbott government seems to have done everything possible to undermine such developments. 

Both good and bad things can come from political processes but we cannot remove politics from the equation. It is worth remembering that Australia is a wealthy and relatively equal country because of political interventions, not despite them, as many economists would have us believe. Australia needs to utilise its luck to lessen its vulnerabilities.

If we all believe that China will continue to grow rapidly over the next 20 years, then most policy-makers will believe there's no reason to change tack before its too late.




Tuesday, September 6, 2011

Dreams and Nightmares

I've recently written a very long paper on Australian-Asian relations called Dreams and Nightmares: Australia's Past, Present and Future in Asia. It was written for the Institut français des relations internationales (it's in English).


 

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

China, Mining and Manufacturing

Interesting allegations about Chinese contract stipulations about sourcing from China in a Wayne Swan interview with Fran Kelly on ABC Breakfast

KELLY: In terms of productivity, what about making the most of the manufacturing we do do? You did suggest yesterday the Government would announce more this week to follow up on union calls for a more effective local content policy. What are you talking about? Are you talking about direct incentives or tax incentives to encourage resource companies to buy Australian?
TREASURER: No, what we're talking about is that Australian firms should have the chance to pitch for business on a commercial basis. Now what I've heard from several businesses and from several sources is that some Australian businesses are not even getting the opportunity to pitch for the business on a commercial basis. I'm a bit disturbed by that so I'm going to examine those claims closely with the industry because I do think it is important that Australian business gets the opportunity to maximise the business that flows from these investments.
KELLY: Some of those claims - let me go to one of those claims because I've heard it too around places that some of the big miners signing contracts with China for instance over gas and other resources, within that contract it's mandated they buy Chinese equipment, not Australian.
TREASURER: Well, I'm a bit disturbed by that.
KELLY: Is there something you governments can do about that?
TREASURER: Well, I certainly intend to follow up that claim and ascertain whether it is true or not, and I would be very disturbed if that was the way it was going in some of the big projects. There are many people who are getting work out of these big projects. They are absolutely massive and there are lots of Australian businesses that are getting work and I'm aware of many of them. I've seen them in operation but if we are getting those sorts of practices creeping in that's not good and it's not good for the country. So I intend to look at those quite closely.
KELLY: And the report that suggests only 10 per cent of steel being used - massive amounts of steel - in projects like Gorgon and Olympic Dam, only 10 per cent of it is local. Are you critical of Australian resource companies for not buying locally made steel?
TREASURER: Well, certainly some of the steel will be imported and I don't think anyone would be surprised about that but if Australian manufacturers who are offering good product aren't getting the chance to get their head through the door then that's worth looking at very, very closely. 
While I'm against forcing companies to buy Australian., I'm also against companies being forced not to. If you're going to have a freer market-based economy, governments must be extremely vigilant against anti-competitive behaviour.




Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Australia, China and the US

For those students in 7007IBA a recent article by Paul Dibb about the Australia, China and US relationship covers some of the themes we discussed in our Seminar on Security and Defence.


Dibb's piece is called China: Not about to attack Australia
 
In it he offers a critique of White, Babbage and Sheridan's views about the strategic triangle between Australia, China and the US.
It is quite premature to advise that Australia should encourage the US to accommodate to the realities of Chinese power, as my colleague Hugh White insists. It is downright dangerous to suggest that Australia must develop the military capability to tear an arm off China, and even provoke revolt inside China, as Ross Babbage argues. It is also incorrect, as Greg Sheridan would have us believe, that historically no country has ever developed a navy the size of China’s without going to war.