韩国经济的PPT
相关主题
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
Korean Economic Development in Historic Perspective
2011.3. 30 South Korea
Contents
1. Overall View of Korea’s Economic Transformation
2. The Overall Picture of Inequality and Polarization Trends
1962 Economic Development
Per Capita GDP Investment (% of GDP) Exports (% of GDP) Imports (% of GDP) $87 (101st) 13.8 5.1 16.8 55 90 $7,527 37.3 26.6 27.7 72 8 $11,176 36.0 32.4 33.0 74 5.8 $20,014 (24th) 29.0 45.6 44.8 79 -
1
Korea’s performance of the growth with equity contradicts Kuznet’s hypothesis.
• Kuznet’s hypothesis: Distribution of income would worsen during the early stage of industrialization.
6
1992
1997
2007
Social Development
Life expectancy at birth Infant mortality rate(per 1000 births)
1970
Years School
Middle school enrollment ratio (%) High school enrollment ratio (%) Tertiary school enrollment ratio (%)
Now we will skim through some pictures in different angles of Seoul, the capital city of South Korea
27 1
income gap
The OECD measured income gap by calculating a ratio of average wages between the upper 10 percent of high -income earners and the lower 10 percent of low-incom e earners. The results are then placed on a scale betwe en 1 and 10, with scores approaching 10 meaning the in come gap is quite wide. In the survey, South Korea's score stood at
Thank you!
4.51
followed by Hungary (5.63) and the United States (4.86)
income gap
In addition, South Korea's income gap has been wideni ng significantly for a decade since 1995. During the peri od, the ratio of South Korea increased by 0.87 points fr om 3.64 in 1995. In term of the degree of widening inco me gap for the past decade, South Korea was also rank ed third,
1. Overall View of Korea’s Economic Transformation
Achiving “shared growth” and democracy
Korea has been able to achieve rapid growth with equity since early 1960s.
7,355
Financial Crisis
1,000(1977) 67 89
1961
100(1964)
1970 1980 1990
OECD Member 1995 1998 2004 2006 2007
Source : Bank of Korea
1945
1953
Changes in Employment Structure
Achieving “shared growth” and democracy
Korea has been able to achieve rapid growth with equity since early 1960s.
• Free from poverty and foreign aid, and becoming selfsufficient economy • Rapid transformation from light manufacturing to HCIs (Heavy and Chemical Industries) • Joining the OECD confirms Korea’s economic advance • Economic development open the way to political democratization, all within one generation
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
ຫໍສະໝຸດ Baidu
Per capita GDP growth rate (%)
Reducing Poverty
Absolute poverty declined steeply from 48% in 1961 to less than 10% entering 1980s.
Gini coefficient
0.7
4
0.6 Colombia Mexico PeruChile Venezuela
Brazil
0.5
Malaysia Argentina 0.4 Philippines Thailand Indonesia
Singapore Hong Kong Korea Taiwan
Rapid Growth and Low Income Inequality
Korea has been cited as one of successful countries with relatively low income inequality and rapid growth.
<Gini coefficient and GDP per capita growth rate: 1965-1990>
1963 2007
Agriculture / Fisheries 7.4% Service 28.3% Manufacturing 17.6%
63.0%
3
7.9% Manufacturing
Service Agriculture / Fisheries 75.0%
Source : National Statistical Office
• Free from poverty and foreign aid, and becoming selfsufficient economy • Rapid transformation from light manufacturing to HCIs (Heavy and Chemical Industries) • Joining the OECD confirms Korea’s economic advance • Economic development open the way to political democratization, all within one generation
1980
7.6
95.1 63.5 15.9
1990
9.5
98.2 88.0 37.7
2000
10.6
99.1 96.4 80.5
5.7
51.2 28.1 8.4
2. The Overall Picture of Inequality and Polarization Trends
7
Recently, income distribution trends of Korea have repeatedly reported increasing inequality of income distribution and included discussions of the “disappearing middle class.” This relatively new concept is typically equated with the concept of increased income inequality.
Per Capita Income (US$)
20,240 18,372 16,291
6 2
Per Capita Income (US$)
14,193
11,432
10,000
Six 5-Year-EconomicDevelopment Plans 5,000 Liberation from Japanese Colonial Rule
followed by Hungary ( 1.67 points) and Poland (0.91 poi nts). Of the 20 countries, only Ireland (3.57) and Spain (3.53) narrowed their income gaps over the past 10 year s
<Absolute Poverty (%) : 1961-1993>
80 70 60 50 40 30 48. 3 20 10 0 1961 1965 1970 1980 1988 1993 40. 9 23. 4 9. 8 9. 5 7. 6 National Urban Ru ral
5
Bird-Eye View of Korean Economy (1962-2007)
1
Korea’s performance of the growth with equity contradicts Kuznet’s hypothesis.
• Kuznet’s hypothesis: Distribution of income would worsen during the early stage of industrialization.
The effect of income gap
• Income gap and economic polarization were worsening South Korea because labor has not benefited appropriately from globalization. While a more open trade and investment policy has increased living standards worldwide, some workers have lost a great deal due to globalization. Over the past two years, the productivity of OECD nations rose by an average 1.5 percent yearly, but average real wages rose only by 0.6 percent in 2009 and 1.2 percent in 2010.
2011.3. 30 South Korea
Contents
1. Overall View of Korea’s Economic Transformation
2. The Overall Picture of Inequality and Polarization Trends
1962 Economic Development
Per Capita GDP Investment (% of GDP) Exports (% of GDP) Imports (% of GDP) $87 (101st) 13.8 5.1 16.8 55 90 $7,527 37.3 26.6 27.7 72 8 $11,176 36.0 32.4 33.0 74 5.8 $20,014 (24th) 29.0 45.6 44.8 79 -
1
Korea’s performance of the growth with equity contradicts Kuznet’s hypothesis.
• Kuznet’s hypothesis: Distribution of income would worsen during the early stage of industrialization.
6
1992
1997
2007
Social Development
Life expectancy at birth Infant mortality rate(per 1000 births)
1970
Years School
Middle school enrollment ratio (%) High school enrollment ratio (%) Tertiary school enrollment ratio (%)
Now we will skim through some pictures in different angles of Seoul, the capital city of South Korea
27 1
income gap
The OECD measured income gap by calculating a ratio of average wages between the upper 10 percent of high -income earners and the lower 10 percent of low-incom e earners. The results are then placed on a scale betwe en 1 and 10, with scores approaching 10 meaning the in come gap is quite wide. In the survey, South Korea's score stood at
Thank you!
4.51
followed by Hungary (5.63) and the United States (4.86)
income gap
In addition, South Korea's income gap has been wideni ng significantly for a decade since 1995. During the peri od, the ratio of South Korea increased by 0.87 points fr om 3.64 in 1995. In term of the degree of widening inco me gap for the past decade, South Korea was also rank ed third,
1. Overall View of Korea’s Economic Transformation
Achiving “shared growth” and democracy
Korea has been able to achieve rapid growth with equity since early 1960s.
7,355
Financial Crisis
1,000(1977) 67 89
1961
100(1964)
1970 1980 1990
OECD Member 1995 1998 2004 2006 2007
Source : Bank of Korea
1945
1953
Changes in Employment Structure
Achieving “shared growth” and democracy
Korea has been able to achieve rapid growth with equity since early 1960s.
• Free from poverty and foreign aid, and becoming selfsufficient economy • Rapid transformation from light manufacturing to HCIs (Heavy and Chemical Industries) • Joining the OECD confirms Korea’s economic advance • Economic development open the way to political democratization, all within one generation
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
ຫໍສະໝຸດ Baidu
Per capita GDP growth rate (%)
Reducing Poverty
Absolute poverty declined steeply from 48% in 1961 to less than 10% entering 1980s.
Gini coefficient
0.7
4
0.6 Colombia Mexico PeruChile Venezuela
Brazil
0.5
Malaysia Argentina 0.4 Philippines Thailand Indonesia
Singapore Hong Kong Korea Taiwan
Rapid Growth and Low Income Inequality
Korea has been cited as one of successful countries with relatively low income inequality and rapid growth.
<Gini coefficient and GDP per capita growth rate: 1965-1990>
1963 2007
Agriculture / Fisheries 7.4% Service 28.3% Manufacturing 17.6%
63.0%
3
7.9% Manufacturing
Service Agriculture / Fisheries 75.0%
Source : National Statistical Office
• Free from poverty and foreign aid, and becoming selfsufficient economy • Rapid transformation from light manufacturing to HCIs (Heavy and Chemical Industries) • Joining the OECD confirms Korea’s economic advance • Economic development open the way to political democratization, all within one generation
1980
7.6
95.1 63.5 15.9
1990
9.5
98.2 88.0 37.7
2000
10.6
99.1 96.4 80.5
5.7
51.2 28.1 8.4
2. The Overall Picture of Inequality and Polarization Trends
7
Recently, income distribution trends of Korea have repeatedly reported increasing inequality of income distribution and included discussions of the “disappearing middle class.” This relatively new concept is typically equated with the concept of increased income inequality.
Per Capita Income (US$)
20,240 18,372 16,291
6 2
Per Capita Income (US$)
14,193
11,432
10,000
Six 5-Year-EconomicDevelopment Plans 5,000 Liberation from Japanese Colonial Rule
followed by Hungary ( 1.67 points) and Poland (0.91 poi nts). Of the 20 countries, only Ireland (3.57) and Spain (3.53) narrowed their income gaps over the past 10 year s
<Absolute Poverty (%) : 1961-1993>
80 70 60 50 40 30 48. 3 20 10 0 1961 1965 1970 1980 1988 1993 40. 9 23. 4 9. 8 9. 5 7. 6 National Urban Ru ral
5
Bird-Eye View of Korean Economy (1962-2007)
1
Korea’s performance of the growth with equity contradicts Kuznet’s hypothesis.
• Kuznet’s hypothesis: Distribution of income would worsen during the early stage of industrialization.
The effect of income gap
• Income gap and economic polarization were worsening South Korea because labor has not benefited appropriately from globalization. While a more open trade and investment policy has increased living standards worldwide, some workers have lost a great deal due to globalization. Over the past two years, the productivity of OECD nations rose by an average 1.5 percent yearly, but average real wages rose only by 0.6 percent in 2009 and 1.2 percent in 2010.