Partners in Progress: Ghana and Vietnam?
The two foreign countries in which the author has lived and worked for a total of thirty years came to his notice recently because according to World Bank statistics for 2012 they were on parallel courses of development with the same GNI (Gross National Income) per capita.
In these crude economic terms they have kept in step for several years past, rising from about US$1,200 in 2009 to US$1,550 in 2012.
After its recent years of accelerated progress Ghana has claimed to have achieved lower-middle income status amongst the community of nations.
Presumably, this claim is also made by Vietnam, yet to those who know both countries they seem to have little else in common.
One needs to delve much deeper into the available statistics to find the limits of their apparent equality of affluence.
The two countries are very different in population and size.
Vietnam is much bigger with a population of about 91 million in a land area of 332,000 square kilometres, while Ghana has about 25 million people occupying 228,000 square kilometres.
Each Ghanaian has about two and a half times as much space as his Vietnamese counterpart but the difference is lessening because Ghanaians are reproducing almost twice as fast in spite of a three times higher infant mortality rate.
The indication is that the demographic situation is more stable in Vietnam and this stability is also reflected in the economy where the average rate of inflation (1990 - 2012) was 9.
7% as against 25.
4% in Ghana.
It is often observed that crude GNI per capita figures conceal disparities of wealth between the rich and poor.
So it is interesting to compare the share of the nation's wealth enjoyed by the richest 20 percent of the population with what remains for the poorest 40 percent.
In 2012 the balance was 49:15 in Ghana and 43:19 in Vietnam.
Much remains to be achieved in both countries but once again Vietnam is ahead with the richest 20 percent being on average 4.
6 times wealthier than the 40 percent poorest people against a disparity of about 6.
6 in Ghana.
There are many people below the World Bank poverty line of US$1.
25 per day in both countries but the percentage in Vietnam is 16.
9 whereas in Ghana it is 28.
6.
Relatively less poverty in Vietnam is reflected in longevity.
A new-born baby in Vietnam can, on average, expect to live for almost 76 years, whereas his contemporary in Ghana can look forward to only 61.
Of course, climatic conditions and prevalence of diseases affect this issue, but the provision of safe water supplies, sanitation and medical services are even more important.
Whatever the detailed differences might be, there is little doubt that the lot of the poor is somewhat better in Vietnam.
Vietnam seems to be doing better in respect of most socio-economic indicators.
It has an adult literacy rate of 93.
4 percent against 71.
5, primary school enrollment of 99.
4 percent against 84.
3, and a child labour rate of 6.
9 percent against 33.
9.
All developing countries are in receipt of development aid from richer countries so it is interesting to see how much progress depends upon this aid and how much is achieved by the county's own efforts.
In 2012, Vietnam received aid (ODA) of US$3,595.
2m or about 3.
1 percent of GNI, while Ghana received US$1,800m or about 4.
7 percent of GNI.
These data again favour Vietnam which seems to be achieving more with relatively less outside help.
To attempt to explain the correspondence in overall economic performance with the great diversity of detail between these two countries would require much more time, space and skill than is presently available.
Those who know the two countries report the impression that people work much harder in Vietnam and this might explain part of the difference.
Ghana's income is derived mainly from the export of natural resources: cocoa, gold, timber, bauxite and, recently, oil and gas, whereas Vietnam's income comes from the vast output of manufactured goods from the labour of its people in many foreign and domestically-owned factories.
Finally, it must be said that Vietnam's progress under difficult economic and demographic conditions must in large part be due to stability of government and long-term planning.
Ghana's turbulent history with numerous military coups and changes of government made long-term planning impossible.
However, now that stability of government has been achieved it should be possible not only to match Vietnam's overall macro-economic progress but also its achievements in spreading the benefits of development more evenly across the population.
In these crude economic terms they have kept in step for several years past, rising from about US$1,200 in 2009 to US$1,550 in 2012.
After its recent years of accelerated progress Ghana has claimed to have achieved lower-middle income status amongst the community of nations.
Presumably, this claim is also made by Vietnam, yet to those who know both countries they seem to have little else in common.
One needs to delve much deeper into the available statistics to find the limits of their apparent equality of affluence.
The two countries are very different in population and size.
Vietnam is much bigger with a population of about 91 million in a land area of 332,000 square kilometres, while Ghana has about 25 million people occupying 228,000 square kilometres.
Each Ghanaian has about two and a half times as much space as his Vietnamese counterpart but the difference is lessening because Ghanaians are reproducing almost twice as fast in spite of a three times higher infant mortality rate.
The indication is that the demographic situation is more stable in Vietnam and this stability is also reflected in the economy where the average rate of inflation (1990 - 2012) was 9.
7% as against 25.
4% in Ghana.
It is often observed that crude GNI per capita figures conceal disparities of wealth between the rich and poor.
So it is interesting to compare the share of the nation's wealth enjoyed by the richest 20 percent of the population with what remains for the poorest 40 percent.
In 2012 the balance was 49:15 in Ghana and 43:19 in Vietnam.
Much remains to be achieved in both countries but once again Vietnam is ahead with the richest 20 percent being on average 4.
6 times wealthier than the 40 percent poorest people against a disparity of about 6.
6 in Ghana.
There are many people below the World Bank poverty line of US$1.
25 per day in both countries but the percentage in Vietnam is 16.
9 whereas in Ghana it is 28.
6.
Relatively less poverty in Vietnam is reflected in longevity.
A new-born baby in Vietnam can, on average, expect to live for almost 76 years, whereas his contemporary in Ghana can look forward to only 61.
Of course, climatic conditions and prevalence of diseases affect this issue, but the provision of safe water supplies, sanitation and medical services are even more important.
Whatever the detailed differences might be, there is little doubt that the lot of the poor is somewhat better in Vietnam.
Vietnam seems to be doing better in respect of most socio-economic indicators.
It has an adult literacy rate of 93.
4 percent against 71.
5, primary school enrollment of 99.
4 percent against 84.
3, and a child labour rate of 6.
9 percent against 33.
9.
All developing countries are in receipt of development aid from richer countries so it is interesting to see how much progress depends upon this aid and how much is achieved by the county's own efforts.
In 2012, Vietnam received aid (ODA) of US$3,595.
2m or about 3.
1 percent of GNI, while Ghana received US$1,800m or about 4.
7 percent of GNI.
These data again favour Vietnam which seems to be achieving more with relatively less outside help.
To attempt to explain the correspondence in overall economic performance with the great diversity of detail between these two countries would require much more time, space and skill than is presently available.
Those who know the two countries report the impression that people work much harder in Vietnam and this might explain part of the difference.
Ghana's income is derived mainly from the export of natural resources: cocoa, gold, timber, bauxite and, recently, oil and gas, whereas Vietnam's income comes from the vast output of manufactured goods from the labour of its people in many foreign and domestically-owned factories.
Finally, it must be said that Vietnam's progress under difficult economic and demographic conditions must in large part be due to stability of government and long-term planning.
Ghana's turbulent history with numerous military coups and changes of government made long-term planning impossible.
However, now that stability of government has been achieved it should be possible not only to match Vietnam's overall macro-economic progress but also its achievements in spreading the benefits of development more evenly across the population.
Source...