《高盛高华全球经济周评1115.ppt》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《高盛高华全球经济周评1115.ppt（12页珍藏版）》请在三一办公上搜索。
1、,高盛国际,高盛国际,高盛集团,IND,BRA,IND,BRA,BRA,2012 年 11 月 15 日Issue No:12/38全球经济周评研究报告全球制造业格局改变,全球制造业活动的改变导致全球制造业活动在过去几年里出现了明显改变。相对来说，在这些变化中有的已广为人知，比如制造业在 GDP 中的占比下滑，以及全球制造业活动朝向新兴经济体转移等。但是，随着发达经济体迎接经济增长停滞和高失业率的挑战，以及新兴经济体寻求更平衡且具可持续性的发展道路，重新思考发展策略的趋势越发明显。,Kamakshya Trivedi+44(20)7051-4005 Jose Ursua(212)357-223
2、4,高盛集团针对发展策略的再评估,我们试图阐明与这一再评估过程有关的问题。具体而言，我们研究了制造业附加值的再平衡、探讨了危机以来制造业竞争力层面（包括劳动力成本、生产率以及,George Cole+44(20)7552-3779,发展支持程度）的改变，并研究了一些分析制造业在长期发展及趋同过程中所扮演角色的最新学术报告。Julian Richers,制造业再平衡势头的巨大潜力我们在此阐述的制造业转变可能会在相对较长的时间里推进，因此对投资的影响可能更为间接且更具中期属性。除了制造业或外商直接投资相关资金流对个股投资造成的影响之外，在这一领域再平衡势头所蕴含的潜力将对整体发展道路、以及对汇市和
3、债市等其他资产市场带来显著影响。在过去十年中，新兴经济体在全球制造业中的占比飙升制造业附加值（按 2000 年可比美元汇率计算；全球占比）,(212)855-0684 多米尼克威尔逊(212)902-5924 高盛集团,50,%of world,40,JAP,JAP,JAP,30,GER,GER,GER,20,100,USA2000,USA2005,USA2010,CHNRUS2000,CHNRUS2005,CHNINDRUS2010,N112000,N112005,N112010,G3BRICs N11资料来源：联合国工业发展组织、高盛全球经济、商品和策略研究投资者不应视本报告为作出投资决策
4、的唯一因素。有关分析师的申明和其他重要信息，见信息披露附录，或参阅,2,2012 年 11 月 15 日,Global Economics Weekly,The changing shape of global manufacturingThe past few years have seen remarkable changes in global manufacturing activity.Some ofthose changes are relatively well known,such as the declining share of manufacturing incountr
5、ies GDP and the shift in global manufacturing activity towards EMs.But with DMscontending with the challenges of stagnation and high unemployment,and EMs attempting amore balanced and sustainable growth path,there is an increasing tendency to rethink growthstrategies.Related to this reappraisal,a ne
6、w set of questions has moved to the forefront ofinvestors minds:how far has the migration of manufacturing from DMs to EMs extended?Arethere any signs that the declines in manufacturing in DMs are stabilising?How have the forcesthat determine the manufacturing competitiveness of location evolved and
7、,in particular,how havethey changed since the global financial crisis?These questions are difficult to answer definitively,not least because it is hard to find extensiveand consistent data on many of the dimensions of interest.Still,in this Weekly,we attempt toshed light on some of these issues.In p
8、articular,we explore the rebalancing in manufacturingvalue added in detail,highlighting what has changed,discuss the shifts in aspects ofmanufacturing competitiveness since the crisis,and also review new academic work thatunderlines the role of manufacturing activity in long-run growth processes.Our
9、 main findings are as follows:Manufacturing has rebalanced across DMs and EMs over the past decade or so,withthe former losing weight in global value added and exports in favour of the latter(especially China).EMs have gained market share in various branches of industry,especially but not exclusivel
10、y those associated with low-cost products.The race for manufacturing competitiveness has involved various combinations of lowerlabour costs,higher productivity and the creation of better growth environments acrosscountries.In some EMs,manufacturing wages have begun to increase,although theyare still
11、 at relatively low levels.But sustaining competition will require increasedinvestment in human capital.Looking ahead,convergence dynamics will likely support manufacturing growth in EMs,while expenditure on research and development(R&D)is likely to continue to boostinnovation and productivity in DMs
12、.These two forces partly offset each other,but notentirely.The asset pricing implications of the manufacturing rebalancing story are more subtlethan those from short-run cyclical fluctuations.But markets may reward the continuationof some medium-run processes that benefit structural winners,at the c
13、ountry level,insingle-stock space or in FX,for example.Manufacturing has rebalanced across DMs and EMsSince the early 1980s,manufacturing has declined as a share of global output from almost 25%to close to 16%(while the share of services has risen from 57%of GDP to 70%).In the US,forexample,it has f
14、allen from 22%of GDP to about 13%,and similar declines have occurred in otherDMs.Manufacturing activity in EMs is still thriving,although it also has fallen as a share ofGDPin China,for example,it has fallen from 40%to 30%.The fact that manufacturings sharehas also declined in EMsalthough at a slowe
15、r ratereveals that non-manufacturing sectors inthese countries have also grown rapidly in recent decades.Manufacturing also continues toemploy a large number of people.Its share of total employment has halved in the US but itremains high in other DMs.In EMs,the declines have been smaller and manufac
16、turingemployment has grown strongly in China,where workers have been transferred from low-value高盛全球经济、商品和策略研究,Apparel,Basicmetals,Leather/footwear,Electricalmach.,Textiles,Non-metalmineral,Othertransport.,Tobacco,Rubber/plastics,Furniture,Chemicals,Paper,Motorvechicles,Mach.&equip.,Food/beverages,Wo
17、od(ex.Furnit.),Refinedoilprdcts.,Fabricatedmetals,Office/Computers,Medicalinstr.,Printing/publishing,TV/Comm.equip.,JAP,IND,RUS,IND,RUS,RUS,3,2012 年 11 月 15 日,Global Economics Weeklyactivities in the primary sector to factories in urban centres(see Asia Economics Analyst 12/16,China:Shifting to a lo
18、wer gear).But beyond those trends within countries,which are relatively well known,manufacturing haschanged across countries in important ways.For example,China and other EMs increased theirshare in manufacturing global value added by a large fraction during the last decade(Exhibit 1).The BRICs(main
19、ly China)have gained almost 10ppt compared with a loss of about 8ppt in theG3(half of it in Japan).India has doubled its share,albeit from very low levels,while the N-11group has expanded it by 1.5ppt.In terms of manufacturing exports,of the DMs only Germanysshare has gained a touch,but Japans share
20、 fell 3ppt and the US lost almost 5ppt.On the back ofthese losses,Chinas share has almost tripled,Indias has more than doubled and the N-11s hasrisen about 1ppt.The magnitude of Chinas expansion to cover 13%of global manufacturedexports is impressive(it started the decade with a share of 4.5%and end
21、ed it with 4.5ppt morethan the US).EMs have made gains over DMs in virtually all sub-sectors of industry,and not necessarily inareas that represent the largest shares of their own composition of manufactured goods.Exhibit 2shows a breakdown of the top 22 branches of industry and EMs gains in the glo
22、bal market sharefrom 2000 to 2010.The highest gains have occurred in apparel,basic metals andleather/footwear,which saw advances of more than 30ppt.Electrical machinery,tobacco,furniture,chemicals,motor vehicles and food/beverages,saw gains higher than 15ppt,and evenin more high-end branchessuch as
23、medical instruments and computersgains are close to10ppt.The structure of the value added by sub-sector shows that gains in global share have not alwayscoincided with the highest shares within the aggregate of EMs.For example,although the sharegains in apparel are close to 35ppt,this sector represen
24、ts only about 3%of value added in thegroup.On the other hand,gains in TVs and communication equipment have been more modest,at close to 5ppt,while their share in the groups value added is close to 10%.This inverserelationship does not hold in every sector,but it reflects that some of the largest sha
25、re gains ofEMs correspond to relatively cheaper goods,while making inroads in higher-end products hasbeen more challengingalthough it has certainly occurred too.,Exhibit 1:EMs share in global manufacturing spikedduring the last decadeValue added in manuf.(in constant 2000 US$;%of world),Exhibit 2:As
26、 they overtook DMs in various sub-sectorsManuf.value added(Diff.in EMs%of worlds total 2010 vs.2000,and intra-EM shares in 2010),504030,%of worldJAPGERGER,JAPGER,403530252015,ppt,World share gained by EMs 2000-2010Share of branch within EMs in 2010(RHS),%,14121086,20,10,4,100,USA,USA,USA,CHNBRA,CHNB
27、RA,CHNINDBRA,N11,N11,N11,50,20,2000,2005,2010,2000,2005,2010,2000,2005,2010,G3BRICsN11,Source:UNIDO;GS Global ECS Research.高盛全球经济、商品和策略研究,Source:UNIDO;GS Global ECS Research.,NOR,SWZ,BEL,DEN,SWE,GER,FIN,AUT,NED,AUS,FRA,IRE,CAN,USA,ITA,JAP,UKG,SPA,GRE,NZL,ISR,SGP,KOR,ARG,POR,CZR,SVK,BRA,HUN,TWN,POL,M
28、EX,PHL,4,2012 年 11 月 15 日,Global Economics WeeklyThe race for manufacturing competitiveness:Lower costs,higherproductivity and growth-friendlinessMarket forces related to international competition and the search for higher profit margins havedriven these manufacturing rebalancing patterns.Three key
29、components of these dynamics are(i)labour costs,(ii)labour productivity and(iii)an environment conducive to growth.The financial crisis and its aftermath witnessed noticeable movements in unit labour costs.Butlonger-run trends over the past decade reflect deeper forces stemming from labour-marketcom
30、petitiveness.The abundance of labour has given EMs an important edge over DMs.Exhibit 3compares hourly compensation costs in manufacturing in 1997 vs.2010 in Dollar terms for alarge set of countries.EMs have the lowest labour costs,but not necessarily the lowest increasesin proportion of starting va
31、lues.Given that labour costs in the US rose by close to 50%,largeincreases in EMs reflectin addition to FX appreciationa relative catching up of manufacturingwages over time.Even China and India have seen important increases in hourly earnings,buttheir levels are still only a fraction of hourly earn
32、ings in the USabout 10%in China and 5%inIndiaalthough trends clearly point upwards(Exhibit 4).Increases are likely to persist,as therelative abundance of lower-cost labour from the first cohorts of manufacturing workers isgradually depleted in those countries.As adjustments in labour costs take plac
33、e,the other two factors that define countriescompetitiveness will continue to evolve.On the one hand,labour productivity has increasedmarkedly in places such as the US(at a yearly rate of almost 5.4%since the early 2000s).This islower than the rates seen in places such as Korea,the Czech Republic an
34、d Taiwan(at 6%ormore),but higher than in many other DMs.It is reasonable to expect competitiveness in terms of countries growth environments to progresstoo.We matched labour productivity growth in OECD countries for which data are available withthe corresponding yearly changes in their Growth Enviro
35、nment Scores from 1998 onwards(seeGlobal Economics Paper 211,Our 2011 GES:A Sharper Signal for Growth).The simplecorrelation pictured by a scatter plot reveals the positive association between the two(Exhibit 5).As we have stressed in our GES research,the scores pick up microeconomic andmacroeconomi
36、c factors that improve(or impede)countries ability to,Exhibit 3:EMs compete through lower labour costsHourly compensation costs in manufacturing(US$),Exhibit 4:China and India are special cases of low butrising costsHourly earnings of manuf.workers(varying defs.;%of US),70605040,US$,US20101997,10987
37、6,%US,China(urban units)China(towns and villages)India(all employees)India(prod.workers),3020100,543210,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2010e,Source:BLS;GS Global ECS Research.高盛全球经济、商品和策略研究,Source:BLS;GS Global ECS Research.,ChangeinGES(idx.pts.),crisis,5,2012 年 11 月 15 日Exhibit 5:GES are relate
38、d to labour productivity growth,Global Economics WeeklyExhibit 6:Disparities in competitiveness around the,Labour productivity gwth.OECD)Average yearly changes(2001-06 vs.2007-10),0.6,Labor costs(%),Productivity(%),GES(Idx.points),Export value(%),0.4,AUS,Bef.14.6,Aft.4.7,Bef.1.8,Aft.1.7,Bef.0.14,Aft
39、.-0.10,Bef.0.0,Aft.-0.2,0.2,Non-Euro,CAN 10.6JAP-3.7,0.59.1,1.56.0,0.51.2,-0.020.34,-0.55-0.38,-0.3-0.4,-0.9-0.2,0-0.2-0.4-0.6,All economyManufacturing,DMsEuroDMs,USAUKGFINGERFRASPAITA,-2.76.83.35.48.011.612.2,0.2-5.52.93.60.70.53.1,8.55.18.24.43.70.5-0.2,3.50.4-2.5-3.20.02.1-2.7,-0.050.26-0.320.250
40、.200.58-0.03,-0.46-0.41-0.36-0.13-0.15-0.48-0.16,-0.5-0.4-2.1-0.3-0.3-0.70.4,-1.30.1-0.5-0.10.1-0.4-1.2,-0.8,-10,-5 0 5Labor productivity growth(%),10,15,EMs,CZRKORMEX,10.28.8na,0.0-5.6-1.4,10.29.4na,4.54.3-0.6,0.440.110.53,-0.080.60-0.04,na0.3-0.4,na-0.10.5,TWN,-3.2,-4.4,9.9,7.9,0.50,-0.29,na,na,So
41、urce:OECD;GS Global ECS Research.,Source:BLS;INEGI;UN;WDI;GS Global ECS Research.,achieve their growth potential.It is intuitive that superior growth environmentscharacterised bystronger macro fundamentals,higher human capital and enhanced easiness of doing business,among other factorsare those wher
42、e labour productivity gains have been higher.Exhibit 6 shows the average changes in the three competitiveness variablesunit labour costs,output per worker and GESfor three sets of countries:non-Euro area DMs,Euro area DMs andEMs.The crisis brought widespread reductions in labour costs,but they were
43、more pronounced inEMs than in most of the DMs.The European periphery shows very large increases in costs in therun-up to the crisis,which were not matched by high productivity gains(at least not like in the USor the European core).EMs did much better on this dimension,and also in terms of GES change
44、s,before and during the crisis.The last two columns in Exhibit 6 show changes in the value of each countrys exports.Thismetric captures the quality of export baskets from low-to high-value-added items withinmanufacturing goods,and it reflects an economys position in the export value chain(see Global
45、Economics Weekly 12/21,Quantifying the Value Chain in Global Exports).Changes in unitlabour costs sometimes reflect movements up and down this value chain,but not always.Indeed,the large increases in labour costs observed for the set of Euro area countries in our samplecoincided with important losse
46、s in the value of their export basketand this development is a keyexplanation for the unsustainable external positions in some of the periphery countries.Incontrast,countries such as Korea saw increases in labour costs that were more than offset byproductivity gains and,in addition,coincided with a
47、movement up the export value chain.Into the future:Convergence behind EMs and R&D behind DMsThe global trends we described above were affected by the financial crisis and its aftermath,butnot substantially(see,for example,US Economic Analyst 12/27,Another Sluggish Summer).Although manufacturing rega
48、ined space from services,unit labour costs declined and productivityslumped temporarily around 2009,the broader patterns obey fundamental forces more thancyclical headwinds,as the previous exhibits show.In particular,two of those forces are likely toshape the future of manufacturing.First,we expect
49、convergence dynamics to continue to support higher rates ofmanufacturing growth in EMs.The latest five-year periods since 1995 show that the高盛全球经济、商品和策略研究,6,2012 年 11 月 15 日,Global Economics Weeklydynamism of this sector has come to rest mostly in that groupwith recent growth ratesof around 7%vs.the
50、 2%observed for DMs(Exhibit 7).As the Box describes,unlikeother areas of the economy,manufacturing exhibits absolute convergence in the sensethat,even without adjusting for country characteristics,those that are farther back intheir development processes(the majority of EMs)actually tend to grow fas
