The United States again was named the most productive business environment in the world, holding on to first place with a 5.74 score on the recently published “Global Competitiveness Report 2008-2009.”
“Despite the financial crisis the United States continues to be the most competitive economy in the world,” the report read. Yet, since the survey of executives that resulted in the rating of every country was conducted between January and May of this year, the U.S. may have slipped in the rankings.
The Competitiveness Report is a combination of publicly available information and an executive opinion survey based on information provided by 12,000 business leaders from 134 countries. The survey and research were conducted by The World Economic Forum (WEF), an independent global firm based in Geneva, Switzerland. Its goal is to bring the world’s government, business, economic and education leaders to the table to identify impediments to the growth of industry and economies.
“In an uncertain global financial environment it is more important than ever for countries to put into place the fundamentals underpinning economic growth and development,” said WEF chairman Klaus Schwab in a press release.
The researchers interpret a number of specific factors, called pillars, that affect a country’s economic business climate and include data about infrastructure, macroeconomic strengths and weaknesses, goods and labor market efficiencies, financial market and business complexities, technological advances, market size, and innovation.
The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) researchers suggest that the United States has contributed to macroeconomic imbalances that resulted in higher financial imbalances.
The findings suggest that the U.S. is negligent in planning for future financial obligations, resulting in escalating interest payments that will influence future fiscal policies negatively.
On the other hand, the results deem the country first in innovation among all nations “through their efficient allocation of resources to their most effective use.”
The Global Competitiveness Index scores range from the U.S’s 5.74 to Chad’s 2.85. Among the highest ranked are Switzerland, which achieved second place with a 5.61, followed closely by the Denmark (5.58), Sweden (5.53), Singapore (5.53), Finland (5.50), and Germany (5.46). China ranked 30th with a score of 4.70, moving up a few spots from the 34th place in 2007.
Switzerland remained in second place for the second consecutive year. Like Americans, the Swiss people are innovative and have developed a highly sophisticate business environment. Much effort goes into research.
“Switzerland’s scientific research institutions are among the world’s best and the strong collaboration between the academic and business sectors ensures that much of this basic research is translated into marketable products and processes, buttressed by strong intellectual property protection,” researchers wrote.
Switzerland and Europe’s Nordic cousins, Denmark, Sweden and Finland were given higher marks concerning macroeconomic factors. All these countries have large budget surpluses and very little public debt. The labor force in all these countries is highly educated and highly adaptable to the ever changing technological and business environment. Special mention was given to the countries highly transparent public and private sector organizations, and ranked only behind Singapore.
Germany sank two places from its fifth place in 1970 because of industrial problems and financial market deterioration. Germany’s labor is inflexible, with no wage elasticity and legal nightmares in the hiring and firing environment. On the other hand, its transport and communication infrastructure is considered one of the best in the world.
China moved up four spots since 1970. Weaknesses were seen in the poor regulatory environment, fragile accounting and auditing standards and an unstable financial environment. Rising inflation could affect future rankings.
The financial crisis is affecting all countries. Global growth potentials are on hold, as large developed countries curtail spending and smaller economies lose their export markets.
Rising costs for energy and goods and services have a devastating and possibly long-lasting effect on small growing markets.
“Despite the financial crisis the United States continues to be the most competitive economy in the world,” the report read. Yet, since the survey of executives that resulted in the rating of every country was conducted between January and May of this year, the U.S. may have slipped in the rankings.
The Competitiveness Report is a combination of publicly available information and an executive opinion survey based on information provided by 12,000 business leaders from 134 countries. The survey and research were conducted by The World Economic Forum (WEF), an independent global firm based in Geneva, Switzerland. Its goal is to bring the world’s government, business, economic and education leaders to the table to identify impediments to the growth of industry and economies.
“In an uncertain global financial environment it is more important than ever for countries to put into place the fundamentals underpinning economic growth and development,” said WEF chairman Klaus Schwab in a press release.
The researchers interpret a number of specific factors, called pillars, that affect a country’s economic business climate and include data about infrastructure, macroeconomic strengths and weaknesses, goods and labor market efficiencies, financial market and business complexities, technological advances, market size, and innovation.
The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) researchers suggest that the United States has contributed to macroeconomic imbalances that resulted in higher financial imbalances.
The findings suggest that the U.S. is negligent in planning for future financial obligations, resulting in escalating interest payments that will influence future fiscal policies negatively.
On the other hand, the results deem the country first in innovation among all nations “through their efficient allocation of resources to their most effective use.”
Achievements and Weaknesses
The Global Competitiveness Index scores range from the U.S’s 5.74 to Chad’s 2.85. Among the highest ranked are Switzerland, which achieved second place with a 5.61, followed closely by the Denmark (5.58), Sweden (5.53), Singapore (5.53), Finland (5.50), and Germany (5.46). China ranked 30th with a score of 4.70, moving up a few spots from the 34th place in 2007.
Switzerland remained in second place for the second consecutive year. Like Americans, the Swiss people are innovative and have developed a highly sophisticate business environment. Much effort goes into research.
“Switzerland’s scientific research institutions are among the world’s best and the strong collaboration between the academic and business sectors ensures that much of this basic research is translated into marketable products and processes, buttressed by strong intellectual property protection,” researchers wrote.
Switzerland and Europe’s Nordic cousins, Denmark, Sweden and Finland were given higher marks concerning macroeconomic factors. All these countries have large budget surpluses and very little public debt. The labor force in all these countries is highly educated and highly adaptable to the ever changing technological and business environment. Special mention was given to the countries highly transparent public and private sector organizations, and ranked only behind Singapore.
Germany sank two places from its fifth place in 1970 because of industrial problems and financial market deterioration. Germany’s labor is inflexible, with no wage elasticity and legal nightmares in the hiring and firing environment. On the other hand, its transport and communication infrastructure is considered one of the best in the world.
China moved up four spots since 1970. Weaknesses were seen in the poor regulatory environment, fragile accounting and auditing standards and an unstable financial environment. Rising inflation could affect future rankings.
The financial crisis is affecting all countries. Global growth potentials are on hold, as large developed countries curtail spending and smaller economies lose their export markets.
Rising costs for energy and goods and services have a devastating and possibly long-lasting effect on small growing markets.
Friends Read Free