The World Bank has conducted its “Doing Business” survey since 2006, ranking countries according to the ease of conducting business. The rankings provide a useful comparison between countries, and the survey has enough history to show which countries are implementing the reforms needed to allow entrepreneurs of all sizes to thrive.
The chart below looks at the evolution of the rankings for those countries that are important for emerging market investors. This data covers 10 years, which is, more or less, two full business or electoral cycles and enough time for government policy reforms to have an impact. What we see are dramatic changes, both on the positive and negative sides. On the positive side, Russia, India, Indonesia, China, Poland, Taiwan and Turkey have achieved transformational results. On the negative side, we see a very concerning collapse occurring in South Africa, and significant declines in Colombia, Nigeria, Thailand and Peru.
Change in Ease of Doing Business Rankings. Best to worst over 10 years | |||||
Russia | 89 | ||||
India | 56 | ||||
Indonesia | 49 | ||||
China | 43 | ||||
Poland | 38 | ||||
Taiwan | 33 | ||||
Turkey | 30 | ||||
Vietnam | 24 | ||||
Brazil | 20 | ||||
Philippines | 20 | ||||
S Korea | 14 | ||||
Malaysia | 8 | ||||
Argentina | -1 | ||||
Mexico | -3 | ||||
Chile | -7 | ||||
Peru | -12 | ||||
Thailand | -15 | ||||
Nigeria | -21 | ||||
Colombia | -28 | ||||
South Africa | -48 |
The criteria that the World Bank uses in its Doing Business methodology are shown in the chart below.
The full rankings for the 18 countries that make up the core of our EM universe for investors are shown below. The chart shows the rankings from 2006-2019. The World Bank currently ranks 190 countries, and the full ranking can be found on the World Bank website (Link).
We can consider the top 25 to be the global elite, the absolute easiest places to start and run a business. The top 50 can be considered good; 50-100, mediocre; and 100-130, bad. Any ranking above 130 indicates a very hostile environment for entrepreneurs. Countries above 100 are highly dominated by inefficient bureaucracies and by extractive entrenched interests such as oligarchies and politically connected rent-seeking agents. Typically, in these countries you have to be big and politically connected to be successful, and most entrepreneurs are forced into the underground economy. Four important markets – Brazil, Philippines, Nigeria and Argentina – persistently rank very poorly and show little sign of progress. India, Indonesia and Vietnam in recent years have moved out of this group of “dysfunctionals,” showing clear signs of improvement.
We can dig deeper into the survey by looking at the rankings on a regional basis.
Asia
The evolution of the rankings for Asian countries is shown below. This is the world’s most dynamic economic region and also where we see both the best and the most improving business conditions. We can separate this group into two cohorts: the “Asian Tigers” and the Asian laggards. Of the Asian Tigers, South Korea, Malaysia, Thailand are in the elite and have been so throughout the period. Korea, Malaysia and Taiwan have continued to improve over the period, while Thailand has shown some moderate slippage. China is between the Asian Tigers and the laggards, but appears to be moving rapidly towards the former. We also see in recent years that the laggards are making significant progress. India, Indonesia and Vietnam all have made large leaps forward. The case of India is noteworthy; Prime Minister Modi publicly committed to improving India’s ranking when he took office, and he is delivering through a major deregulation push. (The tweet below from Modi shows the focus that he has on this measure.) The main exception in Asia is the Philippines where we see very little progress. It appears that the all-powerful oligarchs in the Philippines are not being challenged.
Latin America
The evolution of the rankings for Latin America are shown in the chart below. This region is characterized by the “middle-income-trap” malady: after reaching middle-income status, these countries fail to both invest in public goods (human capital and infrastructure) and to implement pro-business reforms. Like Asia, the region is divided into the good (Chile, Mexico, Colombia and Peru) and the laggards (Argentina and Brazil). Of the better-ranked countries, none has made progress over the period. Worse, Chile has seen a worrisome decline from its former elite status, and Peru, after showing signs of improvement, has regressed. On the side of the laggards, Argentina has deteriorated significantly while Brazil is stable.
Europe, Middle East and Africa
This region is diverse and shows great divergence in results. Both Nigeria and South Africa are cause for concern. Nigeria has joined the camp of highly dysfunctional economies, and South Africa has gone from elite status to mediocrity and it shows no signs of halting this trend downward. Fortunately, all the other countries in this group show positive trends. Turkey and Russia, both run by nationalistic, pro-business “law-and-order” autocrats, have made remarkable progress. Poland, in line with most countries in Eastern Europe, has also risen sharply in the rankings and now borders “elite” status.
Macro Watch:
- Economic brake-lights (Mauldin)
- Gary Shilling interview on the global economy (Shilling)
- Martin Wolf comments on Paul Volcker’s book (FT)
- MMT and fiscal rules (Philosophy of money)
- Is the Business cycle dead? (Robert Gordon)
Trade Wars
- Henry Paulsen gets negative on China (WSJ)
- U.S. accuses Cina firm of stealing Micron secrets (Wired)
- Asia’s next trade agreement (Brookings
- Wisconsin has econd thoughts about Foxconn deal (New Yorker)
- Australia blocks China pipeline takeover (SCMP
- Firms shifting plants to ASEAN (SCMP)
India Watch
- Can the rupee become a hard currency? (Livemint)
- Can India become the next $10 trillion economy ?(Wharton)
- Apple is losing share in India to Chinese (Reuters)
- India’s central bank under pressure (NIKKEI)
- India-sponsored Iranian port is a problem for th U.S. (WSJ)
China Watch:
- China and Myanmar approve port project (Caixing)
- Four reasons to manage China’s rise (Lowy)
- The reforms China needs (Project Syndicate)
- China’s Eastern Europe push (WSJ)
- Self-reliance is the new mantra in Beijing (Washington Post)
- China’s southern Europe strategy (Carnegie)
- The big story in China; no talk of autumn policy meet (SCMP)
- The world is awash in waste after China ban (FT)
- Trump’s decoupling with China will hurt Asian allies (Lowy)
- Cruise companies rethink China bet (WIC)
China Technology Watch
- Tencent’s social responsibility drive (WSJ) (SCMP)
- China’s giant transmission grid (Tech Review)
- AI will develop under two separate spheres of influence (SCMP
- BAIDU and Volvo team up 0n self-driving cars (SCMP)
- An AI war would be a huge mistake (Wired)
- China robotic firm seeks to buy German competitor (Caixing)
Brazil Watch
- President Cardoso’s speech at the Wilson Institute (Wilson Center)
- Brazil may move embassy to Jerusalem (WSJ
- Brazil’s new president (Wharton)
- Brazil’s economy boss looks to Chile (FT)
- A european view on Brazil’s new foreign policy (GGPI)
- Trumpism comes to Brazil (Foreign affairs)
- How will Bolsonaro deal with China (Caixing)
- Brazil’s new foreign policy (Brookings)
EM Investor Watch
- The age of disruption, Latin America;s challenges (Wilson Center)
- Rwanda, poster child for development (WSJ)
- The passing of the conscience of Venezuela’s left (NYT)
- Poland moving back to the center (NYT)
- Why Mexico and the U.S are getting closer (Wharton)
- The short term case for EM (Disciplined investing)
- China’s inroads in the Andean amazonian basin (Asia Dialogue)
- Are developing countries converging (PIIE)
Tech Watch
- Pathways for inclusive growth (BSG)
- Paraguay is a bitcoin powerhouse (The Guardian)
Investing
- Learning from investment history (Forbes)
- Interview with Doug Kaas (RIA)
- Investment value in an age of booms and busts:
A reassessment (Edelweiss) - Monish Pabrai’s ten commandments (Youtube)
- A profile of Paul Singer (New Yorker)