Principle
Since the early and mid 19th century economic recessions, few countries have been able to enjoy fully the proceeds of economic well being. Those that have achieved industrialization are a home for less than a fifth of the global population. China and India as against the United States over the past quarter of a Century have experienced tremendous and significant economic developments in their economies to become major forces in the global economy. This trend is likely to continue into the next several decades (Bosworth, Susan and Arvind 2007, p.23).
Practice
The simplicity or otherwise of economic growth and prosperity as a social political phenomenon departs from the traditional cause and effect model and way of thinking. The fact that there exists more than one factor behind the growth and continued development of emerging economies such as India and China disqualifies a two tail school of thought. It is not therefore possible to fully attribute the growth of an economy to specific individual factors. This however does only to increase the scope of the discussion and argument and delimit its value in totality. The topic therefore falls under generally accepted body of knowledge that deals with basic facts and fundamental principles (Holtz 2006, p. 89).
Particulars
A simplistic evaluation and quantification of India, China and the United States based on the four main parameters of economic, social, political and cultural elements allows for a clear definition and explanation of the reasons behind the motivated and aggressive growth of these economies amidst the ever increasing economic barriers in the global arena. China and India benefit from various structural and situational advantages that stem from their size and capacity. The United States on the other hand has maintained an upper hand in economic growth due to its massive economic resources alongside a stable and consistent economic environment. This has allowed it to maintain a leadership in the global market and economy (Chow 1993, p. 850). This paper interrogates the past present and future status of Indian and Chinese economies in contrast to the United States over the past 25 years. It will investigate the factor that stimulate and sustain the Indian and Chinese economic infrastructure as well as the reasons and mechanisms behind their continued growth.
Persons
Drivers of economic growth and prosperity differ in various economies. The greatest of roles is played by investors who are responsible for sustained and continued trade and development activities. In fast growing economies investors are considered to be the most valuable players besides the state and government. The success or otherwise of India China and the United States has been pegged heavily on the goodwill of these players and their continued cooperation.
Period
Since the end of the war, and the consequent economic crises, world economies have grown at different rates over the years. The past 25 years have however proven to be the most progressive for these three tiger economies. An interrogation of the economies individually shows that the major milestones have been made during the past 25 years.
Places
India and China have the privilege of being among the earliest centers of civilization and therefore have a long history of that goes down to specific towns and villages. This accompanied by the heritage and diversity of the geography of the region have played a fundamental role in stimulating economic growth. The United States on the other hand has a highly decentralized system of organization that has allowed it to diversify its risks and increase its sources of economic growth (Holtz 2006, p. 89).
Pictures
Prospects
India and China have a combined population of more than a third of the world’s population and have continuously cultivated and maintained a progressive economic growth rate and hedging against poverty (Bosworth and Susan 2003, p.150). This therefore presents a strategic advantage for the present and future economic growth prospects.
Problems
The two economies have had their share of misfortunes and economic barriers. China for instance has suffered long periods of political instability that have created a rather hostile and unfriendly economic environment (Hsueh and Q. 1999 p.56). It has also led to a lack of fit between the economic environment and the policy and legal structure governing the economic activities. India on the other hand despite being among the most successful democracies has struggled with high poverty rates that have reduced the quality of life and per capital incomes (Knight and Li 1996, p. 107). This has increased the number of civil unrests that have led to a slow down of the industrial and service sectors. This has not however deterred these countries from economic growth with each maintaining a higher rate than the United States and other top economies. This has enabled them to claim a position in the world economy (Kuijs and Tao 2005, p 79).
Performance
Both China and India have similar economic characteristics in as far as per-capita incomes, population and geographical elements. They both operate under extremely low per-capita incomes and a large population. They however present different economic growth rates. China on its part has over the past 25 years reduced the hindrances to trade and trade barriers that have caused a great increase in foreign direct investment inflows. It has also increased the investor confidence in its industrial sector by investing in innovation and technological advancement (Chow and Li 2002, p. 247). This has boosted the economic growth rates through export of raw materials and finished products alike.
India has however taken keen interest in the provision of services and the service industry. It has expanded its service producing industry to offer world class service in economic social and technological realms. These sharply compare to the American economy that is fueled by both industrial and service based industries. It imports raw materials from other countries and economies and produces large scale services and products (Dekle and Guillaume 2006, p 57)..
Maddison (1998) suggests that three major parameters of economic growth and development in any economy form the basis of the evaluation of the performance of the three economies as against the global market. The primary economic sectors that include subsectors such as agriculture, forestry and fisheries are a strong indicator of economic growth since they sustain and provide for all other economic sectors by generating raw materials as well as other factors of production. China and India rank differently in this aspect as compared to the United States (Fan and Xiaobo 2002, p. 825). The industrial sector on the other hand offers the greater portion of economic activity. It covers sub-sectors such as manufacturing mining construction as well as other related utilities.
These sectors therefore indicate an economy’s ability to grow and limit the capacity and rate of such growth (Heytens and Harm 2003, p 56). The service sector on the other hand offers an important implement of economic growth. It is both a tool and an item for trade that determines the capacity and rate at which a country experiences economic growth (Holtz 2006, p. 89). The past 25 years have seen China, India and the United States restructure these three major sectors to reflect and stimulate economic growth and development. India and China have a great capacity and potential for growth due to their massive resource base that if properly utilized could see them rise to the top of economic supremacy. Chinas’ population for instance is at least four times the American population. This offers a large and sufficient labor resource that is reliable competitive and efficient. It offers a wide and diverse market that is ready and willing to purchase the goods and services.
India’s population is equally large with a high level of specialization of labor. This therefore ensures that the country maintains a stable and reliable service base that can be exported even to larger economies such as the United States (Kwan 2006, p. 97).
Conclusion
India and China relate in various aspects such as energy, security, borders and trade (IMF 2006, p.30). This has motivated a competitive spirit for economic supremacy that caused them to establish further strategic ties and treaties with better performing economies such as the United Kingdom and the United States. They both have an impressive past a growing present and a promising future.
Publications
Bosworth, B. Susan M., and Arvind V. (2007). Sources of Growth in the Indian Economy. India Policy Forum 3, forthcoming.p 7-23.
Bosworth, B., and Susan, M. (2003). “The Empirics of Growth: An Update.” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 2003, no. 2: 113-206.
Chow, C. (1993). Capital Formation and Economic Growth in China. Quarterly Journal of Economics 108, no. 3: 809-842.
Chow, G. and Li, K. (2002). China’s Economic Growth: 1952-2010.Economic Development and Cultural Change, v. 51, no. 1: 247-56.
Dekle, R. and Guillaume, V. (2006). A Quantitative Analysis of China’s Structural Transformation. Mimeo. University of Southern California.
Fan, S. and Xiaobo, Z. (2002). “Production and Productivity Growth in Chinese Agriculture: New National and Regional Measures,” Economic Development and Cultural Change, 50:819- 838.
Heytens, P. and Harm, Z. (2003). “How Fast Can China Grow?” in Wanda Tseng and Marjus Rodale (editors), China Competing in the Global Economy. International Monetary Fund, Washington, 2003.
Holtz, A. (2006). China’s Reform Period Economic Growth: How Reliable Are Angus Maddison’s Estimates? Review of Income and Wealth 52, no. 1, (March): 85-119.
Hsueh, T. and Q. Li (Eds.). (1999). China’s National Income, 1952-1995. Boulder, CO: Westview.
IMF. (2006). “Asia rising: Patterns of Economic Development and Growth,” Chapter 3 of World Economic Outlook: 1-30.
Knight, J., and Li Shi. (1996). Educational Attainment and the Rural-Urban Divide in China.Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 58, no. 1: 83-117.
Kuijs, L. and Tao, W. (2005). China’s Pattern of Growth: Moving to Sustainability and Reducing Inequality, China and the World Economy, Volume 14, Issue 1, 2006.
Kwan, C.H. (2006). Improving Investment Efficiency in China through Privatization and Financial Reform. Nomura Capital Market Review, Vol. 9, no. 2: 33-43.
Maddison, A. (1998). Chinese Economic Performance in the Long Run. Paris: Development Centre of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.