Gross domestic product (GDP), as an indicator that gauges
economic growth, has become the most important focus of concern for
the country's economists and government departments.
It is safe to say that currently GDP growth is the exclusive
consideration of many local governments. This finds expression in
the fact that the difference between the national GDP and the sum
of local GDP figures is becoming all the larger.
Technical and institutional factors are behind the widening
gap.
Technically, it is quite normal for discrepancies to occur in
statistics. Even in developed countries, statistical figures
undergo repeated revisions. So, the Chinese statistical
institutions and undertakings need some time to adapt to
established international practices and norms in this regard,
taking into account that we have just begun to bring our
statistical work more in line with international practice.
The Chinese statistical system did not start to integrate with
the internationally adopted economic calculating system until the
1990s. Groundwork in this respect largely still needs to be
promoted.
More importantly, the Chinese economy is undergoing rapid and
dramatic changes in terms of total volume and economic sectors. The
sharp swing from planned economy to market economy poses a serious
challenge even to mature statistical systems, let alone the
defective Chinese statistical institutions. Despite all this, the
country's statistical system and methods are being improved
steadily, which wins appreciation and recognition from the
international statistical establishment.
But the gaping difference between the national GDP and the sum
of local GDP figures defies technical factors, particularly after
taking into account that the central and local statistical
authorities adopt much the same calculating approaches.
As a matter of fact, it is the "GDP-above-everything-else"
system of calculation that has caused the distortion of GDP
figures.
GDP is a vitally important economic indicator, but it is by no
means omnipotent. Because GDP ignores many factors relevant to the
well-being of humankind, the growth of GDP does not necessarily
mean that the national wealth increased simultaneously.
For example, the destruction of wealth may be included in the
gross domestic product. By tearing down a building, we are adding
some value to the GDP because the labor cost of the demolition
workers is included in calculations for the GDP. In addition,
explosives are bought, and their value is also included in the
calculation.
In much the same way, diseases, crimes and national disasters
can also push up GDP figures while bringing down the quality of
social life. Also, the GDP does not mirror the damages wrought by
economic growth to natural resources and the environment. The GDP
figures cannot reflect the structure of income, either.
Overall, the GDP concept is exclusively growth-orientated, to
the neglect of clean air and water, a healthy and secure society,
people's enjoying after-work hours and other respects closely
associated to people's lives.
Taking all this into account, it is still necessary that the
economy develop at a proper pace.
In addition, the slowdown of economic growth does no good to
social stability, in view that economic development is closely
connected to employment. So the speed of the economic advance
remains the focus of macroeconomic decisions, though we discourage
the "GDP cult." And statistical materials and data constitute the
foundation for scientific decision-making. The importance of
accurate GDP calculations to the whole country's development could
never be exaggerated.
By contrast, the inflated GDP figures are bound to color
judgments regarding the economy, ultimately at the expense of
people's well-being.
Now, therefore, methodology becomes extremely important, with
respect to redressing statistical wrongs and improving statistical
techniques.
First and foremost, maintaining the independence of statistical
institutions and their work constitutes the crux of the matter in
redressing the inaccuracy in statistics. The State Council decided
in March 2005 that statistical teams at various levels be organized
and put under the authority of the National Bureau of Statistics
along a vertical line from the top to grass roots.
The bureau also intends to get involved in directly calculating
and examining the economic operations at various local levels. All
this can help, to a certain extent, redress statistical inaccuracy
in localities.
Second, it is important to extend the GDP indicators to cover
wider areas. This means that the quality of economic development
and its efficiency should be monitored; that the concepts of
national wealth and "green GDP" be introduced and that people's
excessive concern for GDP be watered down and their GDP complex be
dissolved.
In this regard, the city of Shenzhen has conducted some useful
probes. Indicators of social results, ecological results and human
development are introduced to the GDP calculation package, which
used to be exclusively geared to economic aspect. Sustainable
development, instead of numerical economics, tops the city
government's agenda.
Finally, and most important of all, the system for evaluating
officials' performance and work records should be overhauled.
By established practice, GDP growth in a locality is used to
gauge the performance of local officials and, therefore,
constitutes a vitally important factor affecting their position on
the hierarchical ladder. To make matters worse, it is up to local
governments to oversee the calculation of local GDP.
Local governments, under such heavy pressure, most likely have
the motivation to stretch GDP figures to their own ends. Indeed,
high GDP growth becomes the most useful tool in the competition
between local governments and between individual officials. In
other words, competition within the government system itself tends
to artificially shove up GDP figures.
In view of all this, merely improving statistical techniques is
not enough, nor is the introduction of a few more individual
indicators. Institutional reform of the statistical system is
called for, instead, and the statistical law needs to be amended.
Those who cook up false statistical figures should be held
accountable for the wrongdoing and be disciplined or punished by
law.
It is high time we got rid of the GDP complex. This is the
prerequisite for rolling back statistical inaccuracy.
The author is a senior economist with the State Information
Center.
(China Daily September 5, 2006)