Connect with us

Economy

China's imports, exports surge as global economy reopens – The Guardian

Published

 on


By Gabriel Crossley and Stella Qiu

BEIJING (Reuters) – China’s imports grew at their fastest pace this year in September, while exports extended strong gains as more trading partners lifted coronavirus restrictions in a further boost to the world’s second-biggest economy.

Exports in September rose 9.9% from a year earlier, customs data showed on Tuesday, broadly in line with analysts’ expectations and up from a solid 9.5% increase in August.

The strong trade performance suggests Chinese exporters are making a brisk recovery from the pandemic’s hit to overseas orders. As the global economy restarts, Chinese firms are rushing to grab market share as their rivals grapple with reduced manufacturing capacity.

“The big picture is that outbound shipments remain strong, with easing demand for COVID-19 related goods such as face masks being mostly offset by a recovery in broader demand for Chinese-made consumer goods,” Capital Economics Senior China Economist Julian Evans-Pritchard said.

“A jump in imports suggests that domestic investment spending remains strong.”

China’s factory activity has also picked up as international trading gradually resumes.

But some analysts warn exports could peak soon as the demand for Chinese-made protective gear recedes and the base effect of this year’s massive declines wears off.

Imports surged 13.2% in September, returning to growth from a fall of 2.1% in August and much stronger than expectations for a 0.3% increase.

Graphic – China’s trade recovery: https://graphics.reuters.com/CHINA-ECONOMY/TRADE/yxmvjjgjnvr/chart.png

RECOVERY AT HOME

Wang Jun, chief economist at Zhongyuan Bank, said the data showed government support for the economy has kicked in as the epidemic comes under control.

“This has boosted domestic demand, especially investment-led demand, which buoyed imports,” Wang said, adding that the yuan’s recent appreciation was positive for imports and people’s spending power.

The Chinese yuan rose to a 17-month high against the dollar on Friday.

The rise in imports pushed the trade surplus for September down to $37 billion, compared with $58.93 billion in August and lower than an expected $58.00 billion.

Across products, China bought more soybeans, grains, semiconductors, copper and steel products in September, customs data showed. Analysts expect imports to stay on an improving trend, underpinned by strengthening domestic demand.

Zhang Jun, chief economist at Morgan Stanley Huaxin Securities, said higher purchases of U.S. agricultural and energy products as China implemented the Phase 1 U.S.-China trade deal, and the resumption of logistics services in the United States and Europe contributed to China’s import strength.

Top U.S. and Chinese trade officials reaffirmed their commitment to a Phase 1 trade deal in a phone call in August.

China’s trade surplus with the United States narrowed to $30.75 billion in September from $34.24 billion in August.

(Additional reporting by Colin Qian; Editing by Sam Holmes and Richard Pullin)

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Skills for the new economy – The Globe and Mail

Published

 on


Event summary produced by The Globe and Mail Events team. The Globe’s editorial department was not involved.

As the digital transformation gains velocity though the pandemic, business leaders are assessing the skills most essential for future-ready workforces. The Globe and Mail hosted a webcast on October 13 to bring business and academic leaders together to discuss the knowledge employees will need to succeed in the shifting economy. The webcast was presented with support from Athabasca University. Sean Stanleigh, head of The Content Studio at The Globe and Mail, moderated the panel discussion.

Highlights from the discussion appear below the webcast recording.

Story continues below advertisement

[embedded content]

Highlights from the discussion:

1). The nature of work is changing

Much of the work we currently do is process or task focused but that will change with the development of technologies such as artificial intelligence (A.I.), said Joe Cox, Canada research chair in digital disruption and organizational transformation with Athabasca University. With A.I. in the picture, they will shift their focus to figuring out the business problems that need solving and how best to pose these problems to the technology systems. The role of managers will also change, he added, skewing away from their current priority of predicting what will happen in the future, to making good judgements.

2). Training is vital for success

The digital economy requires individuals who have specific technology skills, especially in the area of cybersecurity, said Claudette McGowan, global executive officer for cybersecurity with TD Bank. She pointed out the skills shortfall in cybersecurity and noted it could be a good opportunity for mid-career individuals to pivot into a growing field by taking training at an academic institution or privately. She said reverse mentorships are also valuable, providing an opportunity for more senior staff to shore up their skills in emerging technologies, social media and data analytics.

3). Soft skills and micro-skills will dominate

Nicole Verkindt is a tech entrepreneur and founder of OMX, a procurement technology company. She said new hires at OMX fall into two camps. The first relates to soft skills, including judgement ability, in order to interpret data from technology programs. Diversity of backgrounds and experiences is also important. The second area relates to specific skills. In the past, an undergrad degree in business might be sufficient to achieve a job in marketing, for example. Increasingly, however, she is looking for candidates with niche skills, such as experience with HubSpot or data analytics tools. An entrepreneurial mindset is also highly valued, she added.

Story continues below advertisement

Watch the full webcast above for specific examples of the knowledge, experience and skills of most importance for success in the digital economy.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Are more steps needed to help the economy recover? – CityNews Toronto

Published

 on


* profilePhotoCustom *

* public_profileBlurb *

* public_displayName *

* public_name *
* public_gender *
* public_birthdate *
* public_emailAddress *
* public_address *
* public_phoneNumber *

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

We saved our economy in Sweden. But too many people died. – The Washington Post

Published

 on


When the coronavirus pandemic gained momentum in the spring, Sweden chose a less restrictive containment strategy than most other countries did, including its Nordic neighbors. Some medical experts and economists, in and out of Sweden, have criticized its policy for being too lenient. Others, from Elon Musk to National Review columnists, have hailed it as a role model for allegedly keeping the economy open, staving off the consequences of a harsher lockdown. President Trump’s medical adviser Scott Atlas has advocated that the United States adopt the Swedish approach to the pandemic.

Sweden’s strategy indeed likely helped the economy — but this came at too high a cost, in terms of lives lost. Taking a similar approach in the United States would, in all probability, be even more costly, because unlike Sweden and other European countries, the United States does not have a centralized, publicly funded health-care system with universal coverage.

Observers outside of Sweden have often misunderstood its handling of the pandemic. It is true that the government never imposed a formal lockdown and that day-care centers and elementary schools remained open. But the Public Health Agency has strongly recommended social distancing, working from home and avoiding unnecessary travel, among other precautions; compliance was high. The agency instructed people above 70 years of age to avoid socializing with others, and visits to old-age homes were banned. The government prohibited public gatherings of more than 50 people. The Swedish summer holidays, when many people leave the cities and towns for their summer houses in the countryside, may have worked as an informal lockdown, slowing the spread of the virus.

Even for observers within Sweden, it has been difficult to ascertain the rationale behind its pandemic strategy. Throughout, the Swedish Public Health Agency remained reticent about the motives behind its policy approach. Officials did not explain how they weighed economic considerations and wider public health concerns, and whether they drew up policies with an objective of achieving herd immunity or based on a worry that rigorous restrictions would be unsustainable.

It might be most accurate to characterize the Swedish “strategy” as one that began with misjudgments of the risk of large-scale spread and the extent of asymptomatic contagion. The health agency did not try to dissuade families from going skiing in the Alps during the winter holidays in late February, though reports regarding an outbreak in northern Italy soon surfaced. A recommendation to avoid unnecessary travel to that region did not come until March 6. When travelers from the skiing resorts returned, they were not quarantined. In media interviews, representatives of the health agency even criticized employers who, on their own initiative, quarantined personnel returning from hot spots. The other Nordic countries imposed limits on public gatherings of five to 10 people in mid-March, but Sweden did not introduce its much higher limit until the end of the month. Even as infections surged in April and May, test-and-trace-programs were not boosted, on the grounds that they would not be effective in a situation with large virus spread. These programs began to be substantially expanded only in the late spring. Very recently, in mid-September, the Public Health Agency recommended, for the first time, that people should quarantine themselves if someone in their household is infected.

What has been the economic effect? Like other countries, Sweden has been hit hard economically. During the first six months of 2020, the gross domestic product fell by 8.5 percent. Unemployment is projected to rise to almost 10 percent in the beginning of next year.

The drop in GDP is considerably smaller than in southern European countries and the United Kingdom, and one to three percentage points smaller than in Denmark, Germany and the United States. The GDP fall, however, is larger than in Finland and Norway. It’s difficult to meaningfully evaluate the impact of different coronavirus strategies using this metric, because of the differences between the countries’ economic structures. For example, Sweden depends less on tourism, an industry hit particularly hard by the pandemic, than do Italy and Spain. Still, the lenient Swedish approach to the pandemic, involving fewer formal restrictions, likely did dampen the economic impact of the pandemic.

But the death toll here has been much higher than in our Nordic neighbors. As of Tuesday, the cumulative number of deaths from coronavirus infections per million people was 52 in Norway, 64 in Finland, and 118 in Denmark, according to Johns Hopkins University. In Sweden it was 581 — not that far below the United States with 673. Comparisons of infection rates are less reliable because of differences in the testing volume, but here, too, Sweden stands out, relative to its neighbors. Registered cases in Sweden are slightly above 106,300, compared with around 13,800 in Finland and 16,600 in Norway — each with about half the population of Sweden.

Have the economic gains from the Swedish strategy been worth the cost? The following are crude back-of-the-envelope calculations.

Assume that the differential Swedish approach dampens the GDP fall this year by 1 percentage point. This represents a gain of approximately $5.6 billion. Also suppose that the approach has caused 5,000 extra deaths — a reasonable guess from comparisons with other Nordic countries. How could one estimate that loss of life in economic terms? The value of a statistical life, used by the Swedish Transport Administration in its cost-benefit analyses of investment in traffic security, is approximately $4.6 million. Using this number, the economic cost of lost lives would be as high as $22.9 billion — clearly outweighing the benefits from the smaller GDP fall. One might argue that the value of lost lives should be set much lower, as the vast majority of deaths have been among elderly people, with fewer years left to enjoy life: 89 percent of the dead in Sweden have been above 70 years of age, and 67 percent above 80. One reaches the break-even point in my calculation if one lowers the value of an average life lost to $1.14 million. For the Swedish approach to be “profitable,” the average life lost must be valued lower than that.

A more complete analysis should consider other factors as well: future health consequences for covid-19 patients, the crowding out of other medical treatments during the pandemic, and the benefits of maintaining a more normal life and keeping more people attached to the labor market. But even a simple calculation, looking only at lives lost, suggests that the costs of the so-called Swedish “strategy” were too high. One thing Sweden may perhaps have done right was to keep day-care centers and elementary schools open. Closing them would have prevented many parents from working, at great cost to their economic output and their livelihoods, and to pupils’ opportunities to learn. There appears to be no evidence that these institutions played an important role in spreading the virus in Sweden: An early study found that day-care personnel and teachers were not at higher risk of infection compared with the labor force in general. There is clearly a need, however, for more research into the potential role of schools in viral spread, in Sweden and elsewhere.

The jury is still out on how well Sweden copes with the pandemic in the longer run: Case numbers, hospitalizations and deaths fell to low levels in August and early September but are now rising again. Based on the numbers so far, however, it appears that Sweden’s failure to adopt a more cautious approach in the early phase of the pandemic caused an unnecessarily large number of deaths, most of them among the elderly. In my view, one would have to attach an unreasonably low value to their lives to conclude that the economic gains outweighed the human losses.

Read more:

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending