Monday, March 13, 2006

PricewaterhouseCoopers on Potentials of the E7

``The entrepreneur always searches for change, responds to it, and exploits it as an opportunity."- Peter F. Drucker

Unless the country tacks into the fold of a Cuba or North Korea, as suggested by some xenophobic but influential segments of the society, (aside from the politically fixated minds), the seismic changes unfolding amidst the macroeconomic and geopolitical front is truly a wonder to behold if the trend should persists. Aside from Goldman Sachs, an investment firm that predicted the rise of economic powers of the ``BRIC: Brazil Russia India and China” to supplant the major western powers, now we have PricewaterhouseCoopers predicting on the same plane that (emphasize mine) ``By the year 2050, what the report calls the ‘E7’ economies (China, India, Brazil, Russia, Indonesia, Mexico and Turkey) will have outstripped the current G7 (United States, Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy and Canada) by between 25%, when comparing Gross Domestic Product (GDP) using market exchange rates, and 75%, when using purchasing power parity (PPP) exchange rates.”

The two tables from PricewaterhouseCoopers (United Kingdom) shows of the following: Table 1 (projected growth rates from year 2005) and Table 2 (projected size of economies relative to the United States).

Table 1: Projected real growth in GDP, income per capita and working age population: 2005-50 (%pa)

Country

GDP in

US $ terms

GDP in domestic currency or at PPPs

GDP per capita at PPPs

Working age population

India

7.6

5.2

4.3

0.9

Indonesia

7.3

4.8

4.2

0.4

China

6.3

3.9

3.8

-0.4

Turkey

5.6

4.2

3.4

0.6

Brazil

5.4

3.9

3.2

0.5

Mexico

4.8

3.9

3.3

0.4

Russia

4.6

2.7

3.3

-1.1

S. Korea

3.3

2.4

2.6

-0.9

Canada

2.6

2.6

1.9

0.2

Australia

2.6

2.7

2.0

0.4

US

2.4

2.4

1.8

0.4

Spain

2.3

2.2

2.2

-0.7

UK

1.9

2.2

2.0

0.0

France

1.9

2.2

2.1

-0.3

Italy

1.5

1.6

1.9

-0.9

Germany

1.5

1.8

1.9

-0.5

Japan

1.2

1.6

1.9

-0.9

Source: PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP GDP growth estimates. Working age population growth from the UN.

Table B: Projected relative size of economies in 2005 and 2050 (US = 100)

Country

(indices with US = 100)

GDP at market exchange rates in US $ terms

GDP in PPP terms

2005

2050

2005

2050

US

100

100

100

100

Japan

39

23

32

23

Germany

23

15

20

15

China

18

94

76

143

UK

18

15

16

15

France

17

13

15

13

Italy

14

10

14

10

Spain

9

8

9

8

Canada

8

9

9

9

India

6

58

30

100

Korea

6

8

9

8

Mexico

6

17

9

17

Australia

5

6

5

6

Brazil

5

20

13

25

Russia

5

13

12

14

Turkey

3

10

5

10

Indonesia

2

19

7

19

Source: PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP estimates (rounded to nearest percentage point)

Of course these are nothing more than assumptions with immense probabilities of deviations from the embedded very long-term forecasts, akin to those institutions or buyers of sovereign 50-year bonds (whom are projecting more of the past and present to the future).

However, the essential point driven by PricewaterhouseCoopers is that the critical sources of the largest growth potentials come from Emerging markets rather developed ones, characterized by the confluence of a large dynamic growing populations, are resource rich and have been capitalizing from the ongoing wealth and technology transfer as the global division of labor gets to be highlighted, on the backdrop of increasing trends of globalization, or economic growth on more trade and financial integration (unless subverted by protectionist policies).

Investors looking for YIELD outperformance should therefore seriously look at or consider the prospects of investing in emerging markets as ours. It is probably one reason why foreign investments constitute a majority of the activities in the Phisix despite the mephitic political atmosphere. If the Indonesia can get noticed, why shouldn’t we? Or simply, how can the Philippines be NOT a part of the growth dynamics of its sizzling hot neighbors unless it adopts “curtain wall” policies?

No comments: