[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

China and India compared as investment destinations



---------------------------------------------------------------------
[Topics under debate]: GOOD GOVERNANCE
___Help make this manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!___
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought this piece should be of interest to IPI members.

Ram Narayanan

The Wall Street Journal of June 17, 1999 summarizes the findings of an
interesting survey that gives U.S. companies that operate in both India
and
China a chance to compare the attributes of the two huge emerging
markets.

With U.S. relations with China in turmoil, some U.S. multinationals have

declared India to be a more acceptable investment risk and a comparable
market opportunity, according to a recent survey.

The survey, whose results were presented at a meeting of the U.S.- India

Business Council on June 16, gave U.S. companies that operate in both
India
and China a chance to compare the attributes of the two huge emerging
markets.

Gautam Mahajan, the president of the management consulting firm
Inter-Link
India Ltd., which co-sponsored the survey, said it gives China
marginally
better scores in political stability and market size and rates the two
countries about the same on the level of corruption. "But India wins
hands
down in language, legal system, prices and the quality of management and

work force," he said.

Some 53% of the executives surveyed judged India to have an overall
lower
country risk, while 13% gave their nod to China. The companies that
submitted responses included Motorola Inc., General Electric Co., Compaq

Computer Corp. and Xerox Corp., which also co-sponsored the survey.

The survey was conducted between November 1998 and February, when
U.S.China
relations were already starting to sour over trade and
human-rights issues.

But even before Indian businessmen attending this Washington meeting had
a
chance to gloat, Stuart Eisenstat, the undersecretary of state for
economic
affairs, reminded them that India 's performance still lags far behind
its
potential. He noted that foreign investment in Indian infrastructure,
which
four successive New Delhi governments have identified as a high
priority,
has "remained flat when it should be
soaring."

Mr. Eisenstat called on India to "break out of the vicious cycle" of
outworn infrastructure, inadequate domestic capital formation and high
fiscal deficits. He also warned that India won't begin to catch up with
China in trade until it "accepts the challenge of globalization." The
two-way U.S.- India trade amounts to only a little over $10 billion
annually, while China has a trade surplus with the U.S. approaching $60
billion a year.

Mr. Eisenstat, however, called attention to the fact that when India set

off a series of nuclear tests in May 1998, both the U.S. government and
the
U.S. business community bent over backward to ensure that trade with
India
wouldn't be severely damaged by U.S. sanctions. He said the U.S. is
poised
to give India (and Pakistan, which conducted its own nuclear tests last
year), another yearlong waiver from most of the effects of these
sanctions.






--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------