发信人: tao_wong(up2u)
整理人: jasminwen(2003-06-12 15:02:10), 站内信件
|
The following article is collected and regulated by Tao
please visit "http://cnn.countrywatch.com/cnn_globrank.asp?TP=NUMERIC&TBL=GDPOVER" for more details:)
GDP Rankings
GDP Rankings presents data on the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on 191 countries of the world, along with the population of each country and the GDP per capita for each.
The GDP Rankings tables allow you to rank countries in two ways: 1) by size of GDP, population and GDP/capita ("Numeric Rank") or 2) alphabetically by country name. However, CountryWatch also provides two alternative Global Rankings tables梠ne based upon GDP computed in "US dollars at Current Exchange Rates" and one computed in "US dollars based upon Purchasing Power Parity."
To use the GDP Rankings tables, select either:
GDP in US$ (Current Exchange Rate Method)
GDP in US$ (Purchasing Power Parity Method)
To learn more about the difference between these alternative ranking methods, read the discussion below:
Measuring Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
GDP measures the value of production of final goods and services within the geographic boundaries of a country during a year's period; it is also a widely used measure of the income earned by workers and owners of the factors of production located within a country in a specified year. GDP per capita is the most commonly used indicator of the living standard within a country, although it is, of course, a measure of the average income of a country. In many countries, there are wide disparities in income around the average represented by GDP per capita.
GDP comparisons across countries are only meaningful if the GDP for each country is expressed in a common standard of monetary measure; most commonly, the US dollar is used. The most straightforward way to compute a country's GDP in the common US $ currency measure is to divide the country's GDP in local currency by the exchange rate (expressed in local currency units/US$). For example, consider the GDP and exchange rate (based on data from the IMF International Financial Statistics) for Myanmar:
Year 2000 GDP for Myanmar = Kyats 2,547,774 million
Year 2000 Period Average Exchange Rate = Kyats 6.51672/US$
The current exchange rate method for computing Myanmar's year 2000 GDP in US$ gives the following result:
US$390.96 billion
In the Global Rankings Table A1 (Current Exchange Rate Method), Myanmar ranks 15th among the world's nations, suggesting Myanmar's 2000 GDP, the value of final goods and services produced in Myanmar during 2000, is larger than the GDP of a number of countries we usually think of as having large economies (e.g. Australia, the Netherlands, Argentina, Russia and Switzerland).
Myanmar's year 2000 population was 41.735 million (27th among world nations) so Myanmar's year 2000 Per Capital GDP was US$9,368, suggesting a global ranking on GDP per capita of 41st.
While GDP and GDP per capita statistics are frequently presented in US dollars at current exchange rates to make them comparable internationally, there are obvious problems with this method. Few people would accept that the Myanmar ranks 15th in the world in the value of final goods and services produced, yet that is what the method tells us.
The problem lies in the official?Kyats/US$ exchange rate as it relates to the price level in Myanmar. The official exchange rate does not reflect the value of the Kyat against the US dollar in a market transaction. Consider the underlying data on Myanmar's GDP, price level and exchange rate over the period 1995-2000:
GDP (Kyats, billions)
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
604.7 792.0 1,119.5 1,609.8 2,190.3 2,547.8
Price Level (1995 = 100)
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
100.0 123.1 164.4 223.5 274.1 300.3
Official Exchange Rate (Kyats/US$)
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
5.67 5.92 6.24 6.34 6.29 6.52
These data show that GDP in kyats, Myanmar's local currency, has risen by 325% over the period, but the level of prices has also risen, by 200%. Meanwhile, the kyat has depreciated against the US dollar by less than 13% over the 5-year period. So, while Myanmar's Real GDP (i.e. corrected for inflation) has risen by about 40% (7% per year on average) over the period, the economy is not as large as the conversion of its kyat GDP into US dollars at the official exchange rate makes it appear. In US dollars, Myanmar GDP increased from US$106.6 billion in 1995 to US$390.9 billion in 2000梑ut that does not give an accurate reflection of the increase in the value of goods and services produced in Myanmar over this period.
The same problem arises with developed nations even when market, rather than officially-controlled exchange rates are used. Consider the measurement of Japan's GDP in US dollars over the past five years. In yen, Japanese GDP increased about 2.7% and the price level in Japan declined by about 3.5% over the period, so that Japan's Real GDP increased by about 6.25%. However, over these five years, the period average exchange rate has varied from Y94/US$ to Y131/US$. Converting Japan's GDP to US dollars would give the impression that Japan's output of goods and services fluctuated by more than 30%! Clearly, that does not reflect reality.
Purchasing Power Parity ("PPP") Method
To provide more reasonable international GDP comparisons among nations, the Purchasing Power Parity ("PPP") Method has been developed. The PPP method employs standardized US dollar price weights that are applied to the quantities of final goods and services produced in each country so that, for example, haircuts have the same price in US dollars in each country. PPP GDP estimates give a better yardstick for the comparison of economic performance and well-being because the very significant distortions like those illustrated above are eliminated桿S$1,000 will purchase the same market basket of goods in each country. Researchers have found that PPP comparisons among developed nations are quite reliable because they can be based upon better price information for comparable goods. Similar PPP estimates for developing countries are often much rougher estimates, but should still avoid the major problems encountered when making comparisons with current exchange rates.
CountryWatch has made its PPP GDP estimates by extrapolating Real GDP growth rates from the IFS from PPP estimates provided by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The CIA bases its PPP estimates on data from the UN International Comparison Program (UNICP) and Professors Robert Summers and Alan Heston of the University of Pennsylvania. For further information on PPP estimates of GDP, see the CIA's Handbook of International Economic Statistics.
Comparing the Global Rankings in Tables A1 (Current Exchange Rate Method) and Table A2 (PPP Method), it is apparent that developing countries with weaker currencies show a substantial increase in PPP estimated-GDP as compared to current exchange rate GDP. Significant effects on the global rankings are also apparent in the top ten countries. Conventional measurement in US dollars at current exchange rates gives the following ranking on year 2000 GDP:
Rank Country
1 USA
2 Japan
3 Germany
4 United Kingdom
5 France
6 China
7 Italy
8 Egypt
9 Canada
10 Brazil
By contrast, the year 2000 Global Rankings based on PPP show the following:
Rank Country
1 USA
2 China
3 Japan
4 India
5 Germany
6 France
7 United Kingdom
8 Italy
9 Brazil
10 Mexico
The GDP rankings of China and India make high profile moves up in the Global Rankings when the PPP method is used. In fact, China's economy is measured as larger than Japan's when the output of goods and services produced in the two countries are priced at the US dollar reference market basket prices. China moves up because it produces a large volume of goods and services at relatively low prices relative to their prices in the US dollar reference market basket while the reverse is true for Japan whose goods and services tend to be high priced relative to the reference market basket prices. Thus, on a purchasing power parity?basis, China's economy is bigger than Japan!
Close inspection of the tables shows many changes in rankings of the countries when the PPP methodology is used, but for purposes of making meaningful comparisons of the size of the economies of the world, the PPP method has the advantage of making the price yardstick?much more comparable across countries, and therefore often giving a better picture of the relative sizes of the economies.
|
|