Apart from providing statistical data, the index also features data from the Executive Opinion Surveycarried out by the World Economic Forum. The 2011 Survey captures the perceptions of over 13,000 business leaders from the featured 142 economies.
The full version of the Report can be read online at THIS LINK.
This year, Switzerland tops the overall rankings in The Global Competitiveness Report 2011-2012.Singapore overtakes Sweden for second position. Northern and Western European countries dominate the top 10 with Sweden (3rd), Finland (4th), Germany (6th), the Netherlands (7th), Denmark (8th) and the United Kingdom (10th). Japan remains the second-ranked Asian economy at 9th place, despite falling three places since last year.
The statistics show that even though advanced economies have stagnated in competitiveness over the past seven years, the performance of many emerging markets has improved leading to more stable growth and in tandem with the shift in economic activity from advanced to emerging economies. Key findings from the report can be viewed HERE.
The latest Global Competitiveness Report this year shows that Malaysia has improved by five places among 183 countries.
Last year, Malaysia was in the 26th spot but now, it is in the 21st spot having scored an overall 5.08 out of the maximum seven points for “improvements across the board”. Its previous score was 4.88.
In the area of financial market development, Malaysia is also ranked third among the world's economies - trailing behind Singapore and Hong Kong. In the highly efficient goods market, Malaysia is in 15th place.
In the Asean region, Malaysia has been gauged as the second most competitive economy and sixth among Asia-Pacific economies.
The report also stated that Malaysia's progress had been particularly noteworthy under the forum's pillars on institutions and macroeconomics as well as in several measures of market efficiency.
If you scrutinize the report for the section on Malaysia (Section 2.1, page 248), the population of Malaysia is listed as 27.9 million with a GDP of USD238 billion and a per capita GDP of USD 8423.
According to the report, the most problematic factors for doing business include:
- Inefficient government bureaucracy
- Access to financing
- Restrictive labor regulations
- Corruption
- Inadequately educated workforce
- Policy instability
- Poor work ethic in national labor force
- Inadequate supply of infrastructure
- Inflation
- Foreign currency regulations
- Crime and theft
- Tax rates
- Government instability/coups
- Tax regulations
- Poor public health
The above results were from a survey whereby from a list of 15 factors, respondents were asked to select the five most problematic for doing business in their country and to rank them between 1 (most problematic) and 5. The bars in the figure show the responses weighted according to their rankings.
For Malaysia, significant findings I selected are as follows:
- public trust of politicians Position # 25/142
- Irregular payments and bribes Position # 43/142
- Judicial independence Position # 43/142
- Wastefulness of government spending Position 54/142
Malaysia's rankings in this report show that our government must improve its structures and practices as soon as possible to see how new networks and technologies can be leveraged to improve our performance and capacity to be more competitive.
Despite running a budget deficit of about five per cent of gross domestic product.Malaysia's macroeconomic situation has improved markedly over the past year to reach 29th place.
Whilst it may dream of becoming an innovation-driven country, Malaysia will need to improve its performance in education and technological adoption by both businesses and the population at large. Areas of need that can be see in the report would be in higher education and training (38th). Our country must improve access to education as the report showed low enrolment rates of 69 per cent (101st) and 36 per cent (66th) for secondary and tertiary education respectively.
It would be seriously myopic to just centre on the improved overall position to # 12. Despite whatever challenges, it is clear that the government must adapt to the many changing environments and evolve to be better than its neighbours.
Expectations are high but so far, even if there is KPI, performance is still below expectations. Greater value and output is needed in both the private and public sectors for maximum value and output.
For sure, there is a lot that needs to be done, especially in the fourth (Health and Primary education) and fifth pillar where there is plenty of room for improvement.
And who will take responsibility in making sure that our rankings for next year will be even better (without unnecessary expenditure on new organizations/bodies)? - masterwordsmith
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.