Q&A: Digging Into China’s Distorted Data
Chinese economic indicators can be among the most influential of news headlines, moving markets worth trillions of dollars in the blink of an eye. They also can be among the least reliable.
When China's exports recorded sharp falls in February and March of this year, it seemed the world's second-largest economy was experiencing a sudden loss of momentum -- perhaps the sort of 'hard landing' that's among global policy makers' worst-case scenarios.
In fact, it was nothing of the sort: It simply reflected a rampant problem of fake invoicing a year earlier, when companies who saw the yuan as a sure bet to appreciate sought to get money into the country around Beijing's strict capital controls. The numbers this year -- after authorities cracked down on the practice -- paled by comparison.
Private estimates on exports proliferated, trying to get a handle on what this key sector was really saying about the health of China's economy. The true figure? Take your pick.
Economic data anywhere carry distortions and imprecisions. But the problem is magnified in China, both by the sheer size of the economy and by the myriad of reasons that millions of officials at various levels of the Communist Party and Chinese society might have to misrepresent the facts -- ranging from rewards for breakneck growth to an imperial tradition of deception among bureaucrats.
Matthew Crabbe has spent a lifetime trying to understand what's really going on in China. His interest dates a Chinese theme at the 1984 theater festival in his native Edinburgh, Scotland, and continued when -- out of school and out of work -- he began learning Mandarin from a second-hand textbook.
Twenty years ago Mr. Crabbe helped research firm Euromonitor compose its first reports on China's billion-strong consumer market. In 1997 he and a friend formed their own research company, Access Asia, which they sold in 2011 to Mintel Group Ltd.
Today Mr. Crabbe, 46, is Mintel's Asia-Pacific research director, based in Kuala Lumpur. His book, 'Myth-Busting China's Numbers: Understanding and Using China's Statistics,' published last month by Palgrave Macmillan, looks at two decades of lessons learned navigating the world of Chinese economic and corporate numbers.
Understanding China is 'more about understanding the reasons why statistics are collected and published, what numbers are not published and why, and what the published figures actually represent,' Mr. Crabbe writes in the introduction to 'Myth-Busting.' 'As China's economic star continues to rise, the number of people who need to understand this also rises.'
A redacted version of our telephone interview follows:
Q: You've been following China, and particularly Chinese consumers, for 20 years. How has the nature of the work changed in that time?
A: When I started, mostly I was just sort of looking around at what people were buying, going to shops, looking to see what people were really doing. You couldn't do questionnaires back then because it was still politically sensitive, you had to observe and make pretty big judgments about what was really going on. At the time, the amount of information on markets in China was pretty scarce, it was very difficult to compile data -- which are the biggest companies, what are they producing -- it was tough. Things have certainly improved on that side, there's a lot more information now.
Q: There's a lot more information but as you point out in your book, it's not always reliable.
A: There are an awful lot of problems. There are three main things that people get wrong when they look at markets in China. First, they don't scrutinize the definitions that are used. People talking about markets are using all kinds of different definitions.
Second, they don't look at the methodology behind the information being produced, and the limitations. When you're talking about any emerging market, there are going to be discrepancies in the information, things just aren't well organized. When you're talking about China, it's so big that those discrepancies get magnified.
Third, you have to look at the reason why any piece of information is produced, whether by governments or trade associations or companies -- they all have a political motive. You have to read between the lines. You can't take any number at face value.
Q: Is it your sense that the government is willfully manipulating the data, or do they not have accurate information themselves?
A: A lot of people point the finger at the Chinese government and say they're being deceptive in the data they put out. I don't think they are, I don't think it's in the Chinese government's interest to have bad data; they have to deal with whatever they get, and if the data isn't good it makes it harder for them to work out their economic policy, to work out their collection of taxes and so on.
Look at tax avoidance: Companies are sort of lining their pockets when they should be lining the coffers of government, which would then help pay for social programs that are sorely needed. So the anti-corruption drive is not just to root out corruption, it will also hopefully reduce the deception and you'll get better data.
It's easy to point a finger at the NBS [National Bureau of Statistics] and laugh at them, but given the fact that it's a rapidly emerging economy and the size of the economy, it's very difficult for them to keep up. Given all the problems they're probably doing a pretty good job of it. And they're getting better.
Q: Is faulty data more of a problem in China than in other emerging markets?
A: It's not just China, I think it applies to all emerging markets. But I think what's significant about China is that because it's so big the discrepancy gets amplified, and because it's so big everyone wants to know about it, the information about China is so important, not just to China but to the global economy. Especially as China shifts to more of a domestic-consumption economy, understanding the Chinese consumer becomes much more important. So understanding the data about those markets becomes crucial.
Q: How can a company doing business in China adjust? How can you make business plans and strategy with such poor information?
A: Use as many different sources as possible, and not just take the easy route of taking market reports by themselves and government data by itself. You need to cross-reference with as many different sources as possible to try to reach a consensus. And be a stickler on the definitions, the methodology of the research -- you have to apply forensic due diligence, if you like. It's really important that companies spread their risk by using as many different sources as possible and apply scrutiny to as many different sources as they can.
Q: Do you find that corporate executives coming to do business in China are well-equipped to deal with this environment?
A: Nowadays foreigners doing business in China are much better informed than they used to be. But you still hear about nightmare stories. Caterpillar bought a mining equipment company in China [ERA Mining Machinery and its Siwei Mechanical & Electrical Equipment Manufacturing Co. division, a 2012 deal where Caterpillar ultimately had to write off $580 million] and it was essentially a bogus company -- it's an example of a continuing lack of forensic due diligence.
Generally speaking I think people are getting savvier, but there's still a lot more improvement that can be made. Foreign businesses really need to work harder to understand the market that they're dealing with. One of the reasons for me doing the book is that I continued to see the problems people are dealing with on a personal level. I wanted to put the book out as a warning guide, if you like.
Q: Do you expect you'll face any repercussions in China for publishing a book like this?
A: Everything I write about is openly discussed in the Chinese media. A lot of what I reference is from Chinese media. They're talking about these issues all the time.
Michael S. Arnold
When China's exports recorded sharp falls in February and March of this year, it seemed the world's second-largest economy was experiencing a sudden loss of momentum -- perhaps the sort of 'hard landing' that's among global policy makers' worst-case scenarios.
In fact, it was nothing of the sort: It simply reflected a rampant problem of fake invoicing a year earlier, when companies who saw the yuan as a sure bet to appreciate sought to get money into the country around Beijing's strict capital controls. The numbers this year -- after authorities cracked down on the practice -- paled by comparison.
Private estimates on exports proliferated, trying to get a handle on what this key sector was really saying about the health of China's economy. The true figure? Take your pick.
Economic data anywhere carry distortions and imprecisions. But the problem is magnified in China, both by the sheer size of the economy and by the myriad of reasons that millions of officials at various levels of the Communist Party and Chinese society might have to misrepresent the facts -- ranging from rewards for breakneck growth to an imperial tradition of deception among bureaucrats.
Matthew Crabbe has spent a lifetime trying to understand what's really going on in China. His interest dates a Chinese theme at the 1984 theater festival in his native Edinburgh, Scotland, and continued when -- out of school and out of work -- he began learning Mandarin from a second-hand textbook.
Twenty years ago Mr. Crabbe helped research firm Euromonitor compose its first reports on China's billion-strong consumer market. In 1997 he and a friend formed their own research company, Access Asia, which they sold in 2011 to Mintel Group Ltd.
Today Mr. Crabbe, 46, is Mintel's Asia-Pacific research director, based in Kuala Lumpur. His book, 'Myth-Busting China's Numbers: Understanding and Using China's Statistics,' published last month by Palgrave Macmillan, looks at two decades of lessons learned navigating the world of Chinese economic and corporate numbers.
Understanding China is 'more about understanding the reasons why statistics are collected and published, what numbers are not published and why, and what the published figures actually represent,' Mr. Crabbe writes in the introduction to 'Myth-Busting.' 'As China's economic star continues to rise, the number of people who need to understand this also rises.'
A redacted version of our telephone interview follows:
Q: You've been following China, and particularly Chinese consumers, for 20 years. How has the nature of the work changed in that time?
A: When I started, mostly I was just sort of looking around at what people were buying, going to shops, looking to see what people were really doing. You couldn't do questionnaires back then because it was still politically sensitive, you had to observe and make pretty big judgments about what was really going on. At the time, the amount of information on markets in China was pretty scarce, it was very difficult to compile data -- which are the biggest companies, what are they producing -- it was tough. Things have certainly improved on that side, there's a lot more information now.
Q: There's a lot more information but as you point out in your book, it's not always reliable.
A: There are an awful lot of problems. There are three main things that people get wrong when they look at markets in China. First, they don't scrutinize the definitions that are used. People talking about markets are using all kinds of different definitions.
Second, they don't look at the methodology behind the information being produced, and the limitations. When you're talking about any emerging market, there are going to be discrepancies in the information, things just aren't well organized. When you're talking about China, it's so big that those discrepancies get magnified.
Third, you have to look at the reason why any piece of information is produced, whether by governments or trade associations or companies -- they all have a political motive. You have to read between the lines. You can't take any number at face value.
Q: Is it your sense that the government is willfully manipulating the data, or do they not have accurate information themselves?
A: A lot of people point the finger at the Chinese government and say they're being deceptive in the data they put out. I don't think they are, I don't think it's in the Chinese government's interest to have bad data; they have to deal with whatever they get, and if the data isn't good it makes it harder for them to work out their economic policy, to work out their collection of taxes and so on.
Look at tax avoidance: Companies are sort of lining their pockets when they should be lining the coffers of government, which would then help pay for social programs that are sorely needed. So the anti-corruption drive is not just to root out corruption, it will also hopefully reduce the deception and you'll get better data.
It's easy to point a finger at the NBS [National Bureau of Statistics] and laugh at them, but given the fact that it's a rapidly emerging economy and the size of the economy, it's very difficult for them to keep up. Given all the problems they're probably doing a pretty good job of it. And they're getting better.
Q: Is faulty data more of a problem in China than in other emerging markets?
A: It's not just China, I think it applies to all emerging markets. But I think what's significant about China is that because it's so big the discrepancy gets amplified, and because it's so big everyone wants to know about it, the information about China is so important, not just to China but to the global economy. Especially as China shifts to more of a domestic-consumption economy, understanding the Chinese consumer becomes much more important. So understanding the data about those markets becomes crucial.
Q: How can a company doing business in China adjust? How can you make business plans and strategy with such poor information?
A: Use as many different sources as possible, and not just take the easy route of taking market reports by themselves and government data by itself. You need to cross-reference with as many different sources as possible to try to reach a consensus. And be a stickler on the definitions, the methodology of the research -- you have to apply forensic due diligence, if you like. It's really important that companies spread their risk by using as many different sources as possible and apply scrutiny to as many different sources as they can.
Q: Do you find that corporate executives coming to do business in China are well-equipped to deal with this environment?
A: Nowadays foreigners doing business in China are much better informed than they used to be. But you still hear about nightmare stories. Caterpillar bought a mining equipment company in China [ERA Mining Machinery and its Siwei Mechanical & Electrical Equipment Manufacturing Co. division, a 2012 deal where Caterpillar ultimately had to write off $580 million] and it was essentially a bogus company -- it's an example of a continuing lack of forensic due diligence.
Generally speaking I think people are getting savvier, but there's still a lot more improvement that can be made. Foreign businesses really need to work harder to understand the market that they're dealing with. One of the reasons for me doing the book is that I continued to see the problems people are dealing with on a personal level. I wanted to put the book out as a warning guide, if you like.
Q: Do you expect you'll face any repercussions in China for publishing a book like this?
A: Everything I write about is openly discussed in the Chinese media. A lot of what I reference is from Chinese media. They're talking about these issues all the time.
Michael S. Arnold
2014年 06月 05日 07:29
專家解讀中國經濟數據背后玄機
中國經濟數據可以是最有影響力的新聞消息，在眨眼間撬動規模達數萬億美元的市場。但它們也可以是最不可靠的數據。
今年2-3月份出口大幅下降時，中國經濟似乎在突然喪失動能，或許出現了那種在全球決策者眼中屬于最壞情況的“硬著陸”。
越來越多的私營機構對出口數據進行估算，試圖瞭解這個重要領域對中國經濟健康狀況的真實反映。哪個才是真實數字？由你選擇。
任何地方的經濟數據都會存在失真和不精確。但這種問題在中國被放大了，一方面是因為中國經濟規模龐大，另一方面是因為中共和中國社會各層面的數百萬名官員可能有數不清的動機來扭曲事實，從經濟飛速增長帶來的政績到封建時期欺上瞞下的官僚傳統均在其列。
克拉布(Matthew Crabbe)用了畢生時間試圖瞭解中國到底發生了什麼。他對中國的興趣可追溯至1984年在他家鄉蘇格蘭愛丁堡舉行的戲劇節上的一個中國主題。克拉布開始通過一本二手教材學習普通話，從而保持了對中國的興趣。
克拉布在20年前幫助研究公司Euromonitor撰寫了第一份關於中國規模達10多億美元的消費市場的報告。在1997年，克拉布和一位朋友成立了一家名為Access Asia的研究公司。克拉布和朋友在2011年將這家公司賣給了英敏特(Mintel Group Ltd.)。
現年46歲的克拉布目前擔任英敏特亞太區研究總監。Palgrave Macmillan上月出版了克拉布的著作《打破中國數字神話：瞭解和利用中國的數據》(Myth-Busting China's Numbers: Understanding and Using China's Statistics)。該書重點介紹了克拉布20年來研究中國經濟和公司數據所總結的經驗。
克拉布在該書的引言中寫道，瞭解中國更多是要瞭解收集和發佈數據的原因，哪些數據不會發佈以及不發佈的原因，已發佈的數據實際代表什麼。他還寫道，隨著中國經濟之星繼續升起，需要瞭解中國數據的人數也在上升。
以下是經過編輯的本報電話採訪內容：
問：20年來你一直在追蹤中國、特別是中國的消費者，這期間你的工作性質有變化么？
答：開始追蹤時，大多數時間我只是四處看看人們買什麼、去商店逛什麼，只是想看看他們究竟在幹什麼。那時候還不可以進行問卷調查，因為政治敏感度依然很高。你必須去觀察、很大程度上靠主觀判斷來猜想真實情況。在當時，中國的市場信息數量非常稀少，很難做數據的編制工作，例如，哪些公司規模最大、這些公司生產什麼產品等等，都不易整理。不過毫無疑問的是，自那時以來這方面的困難已經有所好轉，現在信息多得多了。
問：儘管現在信息多了很多，但你在書中也指出，它們不總是可靠。
答：問題極其多。當人們打量中國市場時會犯三個重大錯誤。第一，他們不會去詳查所用到的定義。人們在談論市場時，使用的定義五花八門。
第二，人們不去挖掘隱藏在所得信息背後的方法論以及局限性。當論及任何新興市場時，信息的偏差性都是存在的，條理性很差。具體到中國，這個市場實在太大了，偏差也被放大。
第三，你必須探究任何一條信息發布的理由，不論是政府、貿易團體還是企業，他們背後都隱藏著政治動機。你必須體會言外之意，不能只看表象。
問：你認為中國政府是在故意操縱數據，還是他們自己也沒有準確的信息？
答：許多人指責中國政府，稱政府公佈的數據具有欺騙性。我認為事實不是這樣，錯誤的數據並不符合中國政府的利益。中國政府必須依賴這些數據，如果數據不準確，政府將更難制定出經濟政策、開展稅收工作等等。
看看避稅現象。企業將本應上繳政府的稅收裝進了自己的口袋，而政府需要這筆錢支付必需的社會項目。因此反腐行動不僅僅是在根除腐敗，它也有望減少欺騙，從而讓人們獲得更準確的數據。
指責國家統計局或者嘲笑他們很容易，但考慮到中國是一個快速發展的新興經濟體及其經濟總量，統計局也很難跟上它的發展。想想這些各種各樣的問題，也許統計局的工作已經做得相當好了。而且他們還在改進。
問：中國的數據失真問題比其他新興市場更嚴重嗎？
答：不僅是中國，我認為所有新興市場都存在這個問題。但我認為，中國的問題重大，是因為其規模如此龐大，以致于偏差被放大，而且因為其如此龐大，以致于人人都想了解。有關中國的信息實在是太重要了，不僅是對中國來說，也是對全球經濟而言。特別是在中國朝著國內消費驅動型經濟轉變之際，了解中國消費者變得更加重要。因此，理解這些市場的數據至關重要。
問：在中國經營的公司應如何進行調整？在信息如此不準確的情況下，如何制定商業計劃和策略？
答：使用盡可能多的不同信息來源，而不只是看看市場報告和政府數據這種簡單的辦法。你需要相互參照盡可能多的不同信息來源，努力從中找到一致意見。另外，要注重定義和研究方法，這樣你就不得不運用司法盡職調查，如果你愿意的話。企業要通過使用盡可能多的不同信息來源來分散風險，并對盡可能多的不同信息來源進行甄別，這一點非常重要。
問：你認為來中國做生意的企業高管們對於將要面臨的環境是否做好了充分準備？
答：現時今日，來中國做生意的外國人對於情況的瞭解已經遠遠好於過去，但是仍然能夠聽到一些壞消息。卡特彼勒公司(Caterpillar Inc., CAT) 曾於2012年收購一家中國礦業設備公司，即年代煤礦機電設備制造有限公司(ERA Mining Machinery Ltd.)及其旗下分支機構四維機電設備製造有限公司(Siwei Mechanical & Electrical Equipment Manufacturing Co.)。但是由於這項交易，卡特彼勒最後減值5.8億美元，而其收購的這家公司本質上其實可以算得上一家皮包公司。卡特彼勒的失敗顯示出，此類交易一直缺乏法律上的盡職調查。
總的來說，我認為人們變得更有經驗，但是仍有許多需要改進的地方。外國公司確實需要更加努力地瞭解它們所面對的市場壞境。我寫這本書的一個原因在於，我仍然看到許多人面臨這些問題。我希望出版這本書可以作為一個提醒和指引。
問：你認為出版這本書會不會在中國引發一些不好的回應？
答：我寫的所有事情都是在中國媒體上公開討論的。我引用的很多信息也來自於中國媒體。中國媒體一直都在討論這些問題。
Michael S. Arnold
（本文版權歸道瓊斯公司所有﹐未經許可不得翻譯或轉載。）
沒有留言:
張貼留言