China's Technological Leapfrogging and Economic Catch-up

After a miraculous economic growth, spurred by the Beijing Consensus, China is now facing a slowdown. This book deals with the interesting issue of the middle-income trap—the phenomenon of the rapidly growing economy of a country stagnating at the middle-income level—in the context of China. It also discusses China’s limitations and future prospects, especially after the onset of a new “cold war” between China and the US, and in particular whether it would fall into the “Thucydides trap,” the conflict between a rising power and the existing hegemon. This book plays around three key terms, the Beijing Consensus, the middle-income trap, and the Thucydides trap, and applies a Schumpeterian approach to these concepts. It also conducts a comparative analysis examining China from an “economic catch-up” perspective. Economic catch-up starts with learning from and imitating a forerunner, but a successful catch-up requires leapfrogging, which implies a latecomer doing something different from, and often ahead of, a forerunner. Technological leapfrogging may lead to technological catch-up, which means reducing the technological gap, and then to economic catch-up in living standards and economic size. This linkage between technological and economic catch-up corresponds exactly with a similar linkage between the Beijing Consensus and escaping (or not) the middle-income and Thucydides traps. The book concludes that China’s successful rise as a global industrial power has been due to its strategy of technological leapfrogging, which has enabled it to move beyond the middle-income trap and possibly the Thucydides trap, although at a slower speed.

Possibility of a Middle-Income Trap in China

Chapter 9 discusses the possibility of China falling into the middle-income trap in terms of three checkpoints: innovation capability, big businesses, and inequality. The main finding is that China is performing well in terms of the first two criteria, but there is some uncertainty in the last criterion of whether it generates Kuznets curve-type dynamics of growth leading to better equality. First, China has increasingly become innovative; thus, it differs from other middle-income countries. It has been pushing strongly for considerable R&D expenditure and has been ahead of the typical middle-income countries. Second, China has many world-class big businesses, which is more than its size predicts, not only in finance, energy, and trading as in the past but also increasingly in manufacturing. Thus, it differs from other middle-income countries with few globally competitive large businesses. Third, China faces some uncertainty in terms of inequality. The Gini coefficient continuously increased from approximately 0.3 in 1981 to reach its peak of 0.49 or so in 2008–2009 but has decreased to 0.42 since then. This recent decrease may be a sign that China is following the Kuznets curve. However, China is now facing new sources of inequality, such as wealth (including financial and real estate assets) and non-economic factors (including corruption).

The middle-income trap in Central and Eastern Europe in the 2010s: institutions and divergent growth models

The paper evaluates the convergence paths of Central and Eastern European member states of the EU during the 2010s, when the main task for these countries was avoiding the middle-income trap—when wages are not so low anymore to compete with less developed countries, while innovation is not developed enough yet to compete with developed countries. Using various statistical indicators, the paper shows that while most countries in the region have been on a convergence path during the decade under analysis, not all succeeded in avoiding the trap. While some countries successfully implemented policies to step on the path of productivity- and innovation-led growth (Czechia, Slovenia, Estonia, and Lithuania), in several other states, growth was supported mainly by low costs and loose monetary conditions including significant transfers from the EU. The comparative analysis of Estonia and Hungary illustrates the different growth models and shows how the institutional system plays a key role in exiting the trap.

Middle-Income Trap - Threat or Reality

The middle-income trap (MIT) describes obstacles to sustainable growth experienced by some middle-income countries. The initial growth of emerging economies is often characterized by reliance on labor intense, import driven factors, facilitated by foreign direct investment (FDI). As it matures, that initial growth becomes more dependent on foreign technology imports to produce exports, which can impede sustained growth. Poland is representative of several middle-income East European countries; after the 1990 transition, Poland had inadequate infrastructure and obsolescent industries, but a work force that was highly educated. Since 1990, relatively low labor costs, technology imports, European Union (EU) funding, and FDI have propelled Poland to middle-income status. However, Poland’s comparative labor advantages have recently diminished, while both the quantity and composition of FDI inflows are changing. In this paper, we examine whether some growth factors have been exhausted, leaving Poland subject to MIT. To answer this question, we assess changes in investment and factor productivity, labor force educational attainments, FDI, new product/technology development, imports, export diversification, product complexity, and other factors. We conclude that in Poland several conditions consistent with MIT are gaining importance and may be an early warning sign of challenges to its future growth.