You are here: Home > Opinion > Columnists

Adjust font size:

There is a strong correlation between a country's level of development, measured by GDP per capita, and its life expectancy – life expectancy tends to lengthen as GDP per capita rises. However other factors (health care, education, environment etc.) can raise or lower a country's life expectancy compared to that which would be expected from its per capita GDP. By comparing a country's rank in world GDP with its rank in life expectancy, it is possible to know whether these other factors are leading to a country's people living longer or shorter compared to what would be expected solely from its economic development level.

For example Zambia ranks 98th in the world in GDP per capita, but 110th in life expectancy – its life expectancy is lower than would be expected given its level of economic development. Spain ranks 27th in GDP per capita but 5th in life expectancy – its people live significantly longer than would be expected given its economic development level. Such differences indicate that the consequences of health care, environment etc. are better in Spain, and worse in Zambia, than would be expected from their overall level of economic development.

Table 2 shows the world ranking of G7 and BRIC countries in GDP per capita and life expectancy. China rates 86th in GDP per capita but 75th in life expectancy – China's life expectancy is higher than would be expected from its level of economic development. Taking other countries, it may be seen the gap between GDP per capita and life expectancy is even more positive than in China in three countries, – Italy, Japan and France, and lower than China in seven countries – the U.K., Canada, India, Germany, Brazil, the U.S. and Russia. The countries which have by far the worst results are the U.S. and Russia.

As people in China live significantly longer than would be expected given its economic development level, any claim that China's rapid rise in consumption is more than offset in terms of rising living standards by health, environmental or other considerations is clearly false. The evidence is clear that environmental, health and other factors affecting health quality are superior in China than would be expected for its level of economic development.

None of this is grounds for complacency. What have been analyzed here are growth rates, not absolute levels. China's life expectancy (73.5 years) is still significantly behind the U.S. (78.6 years) let alone Italy (82.1 years) or Japan (82.6 years). China must still undergo a prolonged period of economic growth before it achieves the highest levels of the developed economies.

Nevertheless, China is developing from a situation where in 1949 it was one of the world's least developed countries. It is therefore ridiculous utopianism, which in practice would lead to the wrong policies, to believe China can in one step achieve the highest levels of the most advanced economies. The relevant question is whether China is developing living standards and consumption more rapidly than other economies, in which case it is catching up with them, or whether it is developing more slowly than other countries – in which case it is falling behind.

But given that China has the world's fastest growth of consumption, why is the totally erroneous statement made that China's consumption is underdeveloped? Such claims commit the elementary mistake of confusing China's growth rate of consumption, the world's highest, with the percentage of consumption in GDP – which is low in China. But for change in the population's living standards what counts is how fast their consumption is growing, not the percentage of consumption in GDP – for example, the percentage of consumption in GDP of the Democratic Republic of the Congo is an extremely high 89 percent but it is the world's poorest country for which data exists!

The conclusion is absolutely clear. China has by far the fastest growth rate of consumption in the world, together with life expectancy significantly above that which would be expected given its level of economic development. China, in short, has witnessed easily the world's fastest rise in living standards.

The author is a columnist with China.org.cn. For more information please visit: http://www.keyanhelp.cn/opinion/johnross.htm

Opinion articles reflect the views of their authors, not necessarily those of China.org.cn

 

Print E-mail

Related

• Maximizing China's living standards

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)

Add your comments...

• User Name Required
• Your Comment
• Enter the words you see:   
  Racist, abusive and off-topic comments may be removed by the moderator.