~~ II DRAWN. u..,,.. H POPULATION, PER CAPITA PRODUCT AND GROWTH RATES JLC G 1046.Gl W World bank atlas 19...

Transcription

1 JOINT BANK-FUND UBRARY losure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized G Hll46.Gl W C:2 JLC G 1046.Gl W World bank atlas u..,,.. H ~~ II DRAWN POPULATION, PER CAPITA PRODUCT AND GROWTH RATES publlahecl by the lnternauon.. Bank lor Reconelructlon and Development 1970

2

3 world Bank Atlas 1970 his is the fifth edition of the World Bank Atlas. The tables of gross national product and population again evidence considerable economic expansion in most developing countries. They also show that much of the advance is being absorbed by high rates of population growth. In interpreting these figures, a word of caution is necessary. Taken by themselves, changes in gross national product per capita are far from adequate as indices of development progress. They tell only a part of the story of economic growth and say nothing about social and cultural change. It must also be underlined that they are in many cases based upon data which are approximate at best; and their conversion into US dollars introduces yet another source of error. Despite their limitations, the figures of gross national product are useful as indicators of levels of national income and of the pace of economic development. They are presented as such and highlight both the very real economic progress that has taken place in the developing world and the tremendous inequalities in wealth that exist between nations. These stark figures should bring home the need for an increasing world commitment to assist the developing countries in their efforts to improve the condition of life of their peoples. The tables were prepared by the National Accounts and Data Analysis Unit of the World Bank's Economics Department. A technical note discussing the methodology employed and explaining the tentative nature of the estimates is given on the last page. September 1970

4 Population (mid-1968) and Average Annual Growth Rate ( ) Countries with populations ot l million or more. COUNTRY POPULATION GROWTH RATE COUNTRY POPULATION GROWTH RATE COUNTRY POPULATION GROWTH RATE (thousands) (percent) (thousands) (percent) (thousands) (percent) CHINA (Mainland) 730, ALGERIA 12, HONG KONG 3, INDIA 523, PERU 12, NORWAY 3, USSR 237, NETHERLANDS 12, NIGER 3, UNITED STATES 201, TANZANIA 12, GUINEA 3, PAKISTAN 123, AUSTRALIA 12, SENEGAL 3, INDONESIA 112, CEYLON 11, CHAD 3, JAPAN 101, NEPAL 10, BURUNDI 3, BRAZIL 88, MALAYSIA 10, RWANDA 3, NIGERIA 62, HUNGARY 10, ELSALVADOR 3, GERMANY, FED. REP. OF 60, KENYA 10, IRELAND 2, UNITED KINGDOM 55, VENEZUELA 9, NEW ZEALAND 2, ITALY 52, BELGIUM 9, LAOS 2, FRANCE 49, PORTUGAL 9, URUGUAY 2, MEXICO 47, CHILE 9, SOMALIA 2, PHILIPPINES 35, GREECE 8, ISRAEL 2, THAILAND 33, IRAQ 8, PUERTO RICO 2, TURKEY 33, GHANA 8, LEBANON 2, SPAIN 32, BULGARIA 8, DAHOMEY 2, POLAND 32, CUBA 8, SIERRA LEONE 2, UNITED ARAB REPUBLIC 31, UGANDA 8, HONDURAS 2, KOREA, REPUBLIC OF 30, SWEDEN 7, PAPUA AND NEW GUINEA 2, IRAN 27, AUSTRIA 7, PARAGUAY 2, BURMA 26, MOZAMBIQUE 7, JORDAN 2, ETHIOPIA 24, SAUDI ARABIA 7, ALBANIA 2, ARGENTINA 23, CAMBODIA 7, SINGAPORE 1, CANADA 20, MALAGASY REPUBLIC 6, JAMAICA 1, VIET-NAM (North) 20, SWITZERLAND 6, NICARAGUA 1, YUGOSLAVIA 20, SYRIA 5, LIBYA 1, COLOMBIA 20, ECUADOR 5, TOGO 1, SOUTH AFRICA 19, CAMEROON 5, COSTA RICA 1, ROMANIA 19, YEMEN 5, CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC 1, VIET-NAM, REP. OF 17, ANGOLA 5, PANAMA 1, GERMANY (Eastern) 17, UPPER VOLTA 5, MONGOLIA 1, CONGO,DEM.REP.OF 16, SOUTHERN RHODESIA 4, SOUTHERN YEMEN 1, AFGHANISTAN 16, DENMARK 4, LIBERIA 1, SUDAN 14, GUATEMALA 4, MAURITANIA 1, MOROCCO 14, MALl 4, TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO 1, CZECHOSLOVAKIA 14, FINLAND 4, CHINA, REP. OF 13, BOLIVIA 4, KOREA (North) 13, HAITI 4, TUNISIA 4, MALAWI 4, IVORY COAST 4, ZAMBIA 4, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 4,

5 oross National Product Per capita (1888) and Average Annual orowth Rate ( ) Countries with populations of l million or more. Note: In view of the usual errors inherent In this type of data and to avoid a misleading impression of accuracy, the figures for GNP per capita have been rounded to the nearest $10. GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH COUNTRY GNP per CAPITA RATE COUNTRY GNP ~r CAPITA RATE COUNTRY GNP gar CAPITA RATE (US dollars) (percent)!u dollars)!e!rcent)!u dollars)!earcant) UNITED STATES 3, YUGOSLAVIA SIERRA LEONE SWEDEN 2, CHILE THAILAND SWITZERLAND 2, JAMAICA CAMEROON CANADA 2, PORTUGAL KENYA FRANCE 2, COSTA RICA VIET-NAM, REP. OF AUSTRALIA 2, MONGOLIAt CAMBODIA DENMARK 2, ALBANIAt CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC NEW ZEALAND 2, PERU SOUTHERN YEMEN NORWAY 2, NICARAGUA UGANDA GERMANY, FED. REP. OF 1, SAUDI ARABIA INDIA BELGIUM 1, MALAYSIA INDONESIA UNITED KINGDOM 1, GUATEMALA LAOS" FINLAND 1, COLOMBIA MALAGASY REPUBLIC NETHERLANDS 1, CUBAt PAKISTAN GERMANY (Eastern)t 1, IRAN SUDAN ISRAEL 1, TURKEY TOGO PUERTO RICO 1, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC CHINA (Ma/nland)t AUSTRIA 1, EL SALVADOR CONGO,DEM.REP. OF CZECHOSLOVAKIAt 1, CHINA, REP. OF GUINEA ITALY 1, HONDURAS MALl JAPAN 1, IRAQ VIET-NAM (North)t USSRt 1, IVORY COAST AFGHANISTAN 80 LIBYA 1, JORDAN DAHOMEY HUNGARYt BRAZIL NEPAL IRELAND KOREA (North)t TANZANIA VENEZUELA PARAGUAY BURMA 70 PO LANDt ALGERIA ETHIOPIA TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO ECUADOR HAITI 70 ARGENTINA SOUTHERN RHODESIA NIGER ROMANIAt TUNISIA NIGERIA BULGARIAt ZAMBIA RWANDA GREECE LIBERIA YEMEN SPAIN PAPUA AND NEW GUINEA CHAD HONG KONG SYRIA SOMALIA SINGAPORE MOZAMBIQUE BURUNDI SOUTH AFRICA ANGOLA MALAWI PANAMA MOROCCO UPPER VOLTA LEBANON CEYLON MEXICO KOREA, REP. OF URUGUAY MAURITANIA PHILIPPINES GHANA Estimates of GNP per capita and /18 growth rats llllj tentative. SENEGAL teat/metes of GNP per capita and /18 growth rata have a wide UNITED ARAB REP margin of error mainly because of the problems In deriving the GNP at factor coat from net mater/a/ product and In converting BOLIVIA the GNP estimate Into US do/lara.

6

7

8 ~ I ;J

9

10

11

12

13 ~ (lllct-1-), GNP Per Capita (1118) 8lld AWI'tlge Annul Grow11a Raltle ( ) GAOWTH ":iq enpper I'PIR NO. COUNTRY POPULATION CAPITA POPULATION CAPITA (1,o00) (US.) C'-') (%) BIIIAZIL 81, MCIENI1IIA 23, COlO~ 20, PlllU 12, IIEZUELA 8,1M CHILE 8, ICUADOR 5, BOLMA 4, URUGUAY 2, PARAGUAY 2, GUYANA IUIUNAII PRBCH CIUIANA

14

15 Technical Nota or purposes of inter-country comparison, F GNP per capita estimates in US dollar equivalents should be derived, ideally, from national currency figures on the basis of purchasing power parities or through direct real product comparisons. To date, however, a limited number of countries only have been covered by such studies, generally relating to different periods of time, and no framework exists for systematic estimation on a current basis. In the absence of such a framework, the present figures of GNP per capita In US dollars have been converted from the national currency estimates essentially on the basis of exchange rates. It should be pointed out that the use of exchange rates for this purpose may result in a considerable overstatement of product differences among countries, especially as between those in the highest and lowest income categories. A study carried out for India, for example, indicates that whereas at exchange rates US per capita product in 1959 exceeded that in India by a ratio of 30:1, a purchasing power parity calculation yielded a ratio of approximately 12:1. The reason for this lies primarily in the divergent price and product structures of different countries. Exchange rates, even when they approximate balance of payments equilibrium rates, equate at best the prices of internationally traded goods and services only. They may bear little relationship to the prices of non-internationally traded goods and serv Ices, which in most countries form the large bulk of the total national product. Specifically, the prices of agricultural products and of services in developing countries are in most cases considerably lower, relative to industrial prices, than in more developed countries. Moreover, agricultural output generally ac.; counts for the larger part of the overall national product In developing countries, while the opposite is true of developed countries. As a result, the internal purchasing power of the currency of a low income country will generally be greater than indicated by the exchange rate. The use of exchange rates for converting national currency estimates into US dollar equivalents is further complicated by the fact that the official or par value rates do not always constitute equilibrium rates. Countries experiencing substantial inflations frequently maintain pegged exchange rates over long periods, so that a straight conversion on the basis of the overvalued rates would overstate both the absolute level of the GNP in terms of US dollars and its increase over time. In order to try to minimize the possible distorting effect of such rates, the estimates presented here for 1968 have been computed as extrapolations of US dollar estimates previously determined for The 1964 estimates themselves were derived in most cases from the respective national currency figures, on the basis of the then prevailing official or par value exchange rates. In some instances, where the 1964 exchange rate appeared to be significantly out of line due to the effects of Inflation or other causes, rough adjustments were made in order to approximate what would appear to be an equilibrium exchange rate. The 1964 US dollar estimates, thus computed, were raised by the index of real GNP per capita growth in each country between in order to obtain estimates for 1968 In 1964 US dollars. These were then adjusted to current 1968 US dollars on the basis of the Implicit GNP price deflator for the United States. The present estimates may thus differ from those that would be obtained by directly converting the 1968 domestic currency esti mates on the basis of current official or par value exchange rates. Special problems arise with regard to the estimates for the centrally planned (socialist) economies. The national accounts for these countries are compiled originally in terms of "net material product" and adjustments have to be made in order to derive approximate esti mates of GNP at factor cost. There is also the problem of selecting an appropriate exchange rate for conversion of the national currency estimate into US dollars, since the "basic" rates maintained by these countries are frequently far removed from hypothetical "equilibrium" rates. Finally, the indications are that, in the absence of market conditions, the internal cost and price relationships in these countries are even more than usually out of line with international prices. More than usual caution needs to be exercised, therefore, in using and interpreting the figures for these countries. For all countries, the GNP per capita estimates are given at factor cost rather than at current market prices. This procedure is followed in order to minimize as far as possible any distorting effect arising out of differing national taxation policies. The average annual growth rates given for are the compounded rates of growth between the initial and terminal years 1960 and Over an extended period, and except where marked cyclical or irregular factors are present, this method may generally be taken to yield a fair approximation of the trend.

16