Trade performance in the aftermath of the crisis
Exports from all major East Asian economies have declined shapely from the fourth
quarter of 2008 (Table 7 [ PDF 15.6KB | 2 pages ], Figure 3 [ PDF 13.3KB | 1 page ] and Figure 4 [ PDF 26.3KB | 1 page ]). The absolute degree of export contraction
experienced by all countries in the region in the region in the last quarter of 2008 and
the first three (or four) months of 2009 was far greater than the contraction in world
income during this period. The degree of export contraction (on average about 20%)
is remarkably synchronous among the countries regardless of the well-documented
differences among these countries in the degree of export orientation, or the degree
of dependence on the US, and other developed country, market. These patterns
suggest that the drying up of trade credit and traders' overreaction to a possible collapse in demand would have played a role in the total decline in trade. It is,
therefore, too early to make any definitive analysis of the importance of the
dependence on network trade and other related structural features of trade patterns
evolved during the precrisis era for export performance following the on-set of the
crisis. However a close look at data for individual countries does reveal some
interesting patterns.
Among the East Asian countries Japan is by far the worst hit. Japan's exports consist
of two broader product categories: capital goods and high-end durable consumer
goods (mostly motor vehicles) directly exported predominantly to the US and other
developed countries, and components of electronics and electrical goods exported to
the PRC and other East Asian countries to be used in final assembly. Exports to the
developed countries are directly exposed to the global economic decline. On the
other hand, contrary to the predictions of the decoupling enthusiasts, Japan's
growing exports in the latter category have been indirectly affected by a decline in
final (assembled) exports from the PRC (Fukao and Yuan 2009). The degree of
export contraction suffered by Taipei,China and Korea has been much smaller
compared with Japan, but, on average, notable higher compared with the other East
Asian countries. As in the case of Japan, growing exports to the PRC does not seem
to have provided a cushion against collapse in world demand for these two countries.
The relatively lower degree of export contraction experienced by Korea, Taipei,China
and the second-tier exporting countries in the region compared with Japan could
possibly reflect consumer preference for price-competitive low-end products during
this crisis.
Table 8 [ PDF 29.9KB | 5 pages ] compares growth rates of intra-regional exports of East Asian countries with
that of these countries exports to the US and EU. There is no evidence here to
suggest that the regional dynamic growth of East Asia has made its economies less
susceptible to the world-wide trade contraction Naturally, for East Asia and also for
all individual countries, the rate of contraction in exports to the US has been much
sharper compared with exports to all other destinations. Exports to the PRC too,
however, have recorded a significant contraction, more than 10% in most cases. The
PRC's imports from Japan, Korea, and Taipei,China have shrunk more rapidly than
imports from other countries. This is not surprising, given the dominant role played by
the former countries in the supply of parts and components to ICT assembly activities
in the PRC, which are heavily exposed to contraction in import demand in the US and
other developed countries.
The data on export and import growth of the PRC (Table 9 [ PDF 11.5KB | 2 pages ] and Figure 5 [ PDF 24.6KB | 1 page ]), provide
further evidence of the synchronous nature of the trade shock of the global economic
crisis. In the first quarter of 2009 the PRC's exports to the US contracted by 15.4%
accompanied by a contraction in exports to East Asia and the three sub-regions even
at slightly higher rates (over 20%). PRC imports from most countries in the region
have generally contracted at a much faster rate compared with exports, perhaps an
indication of liquidation of imported parts and components by PRC firms given the
gloomy market outlook for exports. Overall the PRC's intra-regional imports have
contracted at a much faster rate compared to her imports from the US and EU.
Data on export growth by major commodity category for import and export trade of
China, and export trade of Malaysia and Thailand are summarized in Table 10 [ PDF 12.1KB | 2 pages ] and
Table 11 [ PDF 15.3KB | 1 page ] respectively. A notable patterns observable for manufacturing exports across all
three countries is the relatively sharper contraction in the category of machinery
exports (in which network trade is heavily concentrated) compared with other product
categories, in particular traditional labor-intensive products (textiles and garments,
footwear and other miscellaneous manufactures). Products belonging to the
category of machinery and transport equipment, in particular ICT products and electronics, are predominantly consumer durables. Demand for these products is
generally more susceptible than other categories to income contraction. For
traditional labor intensive products, developing country producers have the ability to
compete on cost and so perform better than developed-country counterparts even in
a context of depressed demand.
Download this Paper [ PDF 222KB| 48 pages ].
Post a Comment | We welcome your feedback on this publication. Post a comment. ADBI is not obliged to acknowledge or publish comments and may abridge or edit them before web posting. |
Comment(s)
There are [0] comment(s) for this entry. Post a comment.
|
The views expressed in this paper are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Asian Development Bank Institute (ADBI), the Asian Development Bank (ADB), its Board of Directors, or the governments they represent. ADBI does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this paper and accepts no responsibility for any consequences of their use. Terminology used may not necessarily be consistent with ADB official terms.
|
|