|
For historical country risk data please visit the Euromoney Country risk website |
A surge in political unrest throughout Africa has brought several of its states crashing down in the latest country risk rankings.
Swaziland (117), Togo (143), Mali (147) and Niger (155) have all dropped over 30 places and Tanzania (141) is down 28, indicating that something is not right on the African continent.
Africa has never been noted for political stability, but falls like this indicate that analysts are paying closer attention to just how unstable these countries can be. Investors may be turning their backs on states threatened with continual ethnic and religious conflict, and coups d’états because of weak central governments, and dangerously corrupt militaries.
“It’s political risk and the psychological contagion factor,” says Mike O’Leary, director of the Political Risk Group (PRS). “Because of really horrendous conditions in some headline countries such as Zimbabwe, the whole regions gets bad publicity.” But perhaps the most perplexing twist in this story is hat Zimbabwe (113) only went down one place.
Zimbabwe has been hogging the headlines because of the widepsread seizure of white-owned farmland. President Robert Mugabe has allowed hundreds of farms to be seized as part of a major land redistribution programme. This has led to strikes and political unrest.
But ultimately it was not Zimbabwe’s political woes that caused so many other African countries to drop in the rankings, but the implicit risk of the whole continent. Thus a drop in position in the rankings may just show that people are starting to realize the huge gamble of investing in African countries.
“We have downgraded Tanzania due to the upcoming elections, but most of Africa has remained unchanged. Although there are several African countries that have dropped on the poll, it is important to remember that for the most part, Africa has always been very risky politically,” says O’Leary.
Tanzania recorded losses in the political risk section where its score came down over 20% from last year’s rankings. With elections scheduled for October, the political situation in Zanzibar has been uncertain. Yet Tanzania’s economy is expected to grow nearly 5% in 2001 and 2002.
Many of these countries are experiencing an increase in economic growth, but are plagued by continued political mismanagement. Cameroon (137) fell 11 places. It has been touted as one of the most corrupt countries in the world. But despite this, the World Bank approved a $3.5 billion pipeline project linking it with Chad (148) in attempts to successfully launch private-sector oil exports.
Projects like this will boost economic growth, but critical changes need to be executed in the political arena before a majority of African countries can become competitive in the global economy.
Countries such as Cameroon, Tanzania and Nigeria (122) receive huge amounts of donor aid from the World Bank and IMF. Although this helps stabilize their economies, it leaves them increasingly dependent on aid.
Understanding the diffrences between the political and economic aspects of country risk is vital. O’Leary says, “We tend to downplay the ripple effects in political risk because national changes will not happen in politics like in economies.”
Namibia (162) dropped 19 places, but O’Leary is optimistic about it. Because tourism is contracting in Kenya (98) and Tanzania, Namibia will reap the benefits of the decline. “Fortunately for Namibia, it is like Zimbabwe without Mugabe,” says O’Leary. “They have some of the same structure, but a lot of economic possibility. There is a very interesting tourism sector that is highly beneficial to the economy.”
Russia (95) made astounding progress, largely as a result of higher oil prices. The county may be about to experience substantial change under Putin’s leadership.
Raymond Beimer, economic analyst at ABN Amro, says: “Coming out of the 1998 crisis they have done a lot to improve their situation and were helped quite a bit by the external situation. The economy improved due to import substitution as a result of the devaluation and exports increased due to the high oil prices. A lot of money Flowing into the country allowed the reserve level to increase and improved the liquidity situation.”
Many of the former Russian republics have followed suit. Kazakhstan (81), Kyrgyz Republic (106), Ukraine (115), Turkmenistan (125) and Belarus (129) have enjoyed some of the same growth factors that helped Russia. The countries with natural resources are now generating significant trade surpluses, which will help the internal environment and make possible major infrastructure improvements.
Belarus moved up 11 places despite political instability and weak Fiscal management. “Even with its confederation with Russia, the economy is in an even more parlous state than Russia”, says Richard McGuire, country risk analyst for Dun & Bradstreet. “While Russia is in some ways trapped between a planned and a market economy, in Belarus communism never really went away.”
Belarus may run into serious trouble if it cannot shake off the habit of printing money. McGuire notes that its persistence will cause massive inflation and the economy is in great need of restructuring and reform. “Belarus is high risk. It has very limited democracy, they censor the internet through state modems and there are no means of the economy picking up,” says McGuire.
Uzbekistan (110) rose an impressive 54 places, but what’s really behind the boost? McGuire explains that the country has three foreign exchange rates in operation, a very corrupt administration and is a high risk destination for loans. “Uzbekistan’s black market has a strong hold on the domestic economy. This, with the amount of corruption that exists in this country, means I am very surprised to see its risk factors improve.”
Still, many economists remain sceptical of any lasting resurgence in the economies of the region. “The danger facing Russia is capacity constraints. They are not reinvesting the profits of the oil boom,” says McGuire. “Thus the growth will only be short-term.”
Beimer also cautions: “There is ‘Dutch disease’ development in this region [Caspian Sea]. Due to the large inflow of oil-related business, both investments and export receipts, the exchange rate could follow a real appreciation path. This will make it more difficult for other sectors to be competitive in the export market.” Although oil prices and devaluation of the currency have provided the stimulus for the Russian economy, it may not be enough to sustain it without structural reforms.
Shieler says: “It is an ongoing structural reform in the country that is needed. It is a positive sign that they are going in the right direction. By utilizing the high prices of the oil, they could benefit with some real structural changes.”
Elsewhere in eastern Europe, things are heating up. “Eastern Europe has strong scores and we are more positive about this year,” says O’Leary. “Democracy is taking hold, but accommodations are being made for relatively stable governments that are more interested in taking part in the global economy and putting in the legal regimes that will facilitate trade,” says O’Leary.
Albania (135), Armenia (131), Macedonia FYR (100) and the Slovak Republic (62) all rose in the rankings. McGuire attributes the gain for Macedonia FYR to a 36.7% trade increase, and stabilisation agreements with Nato and the EU. “These are the First steps towards EU accession,” he says. “It foresees free trade with the EU, but not for 10 years. The region as a whole will benefit from the possibility that the EU will give tax exemption to 95% of all exports from Balkan countries.”
McGuire raised the potential problem facing eastern Europe when the First wave of countries join the EU. The ones excluded may suffer severe consequences. When First-wave countries such as Poland (42) and Hungary (40) join the EU, this could create a trade deficit for second-wave countries such as Bulgaria (80). Many of these countries trade among themselves and with a few major players missing, those left behind could be devastated.
The leaders of the ranking are the US (3), Canada (17) and the countries of western Europe. But there has been a slight reshuZing among them. Germany (7) rose four places, Austria (9) dropped two, and the UK (10) rose two. Luxembourg and Switzerland steadily held on to the First and second places and the US and Norway Flip-Flopped for third and fourth places. Ireland (15) has one of the highest expected GDP growths in Europe for 2001-2002 at 7%.
One of the issues affecting the eurozone is whether the euro will gain in strength. Han de Jong, economist at ABN Amro, says: “Europeans have been buying non-euro denominated assets.
This has weakened the euro. As the [eurozone] economy improves we should see some change in those Flows. A lot of European countries are buying US companies. Although the US is likely to remain the leading economy for some time to come because the investment Flows are too much in favour of US assets. When it will turn is difficult to know. But the euro is definitely undervalued where it is right now.”
De Jong suggests that the smaller economies such as Denmark (6), Portugal (23), Netherlands (5) and Ireland have done very well for economic growth. “They are growing more rapidly because most of these countries have had more economic policy to mend than the bigger economies. significant policy changes that facilitate growth were made much earlier in these countries. They had no choice and the changes have been successful.”
Although most of the Middle East held steady, Yemen rose 26 places to 111. It has seen significant economic growth because of the increase in oil prices and donor aid from the World Bank, but tribal uprising against the state remains a fairly constant threat.
Even Iraq (183) is feeling the benefits of high oil prices. Economists expect 14% to 16% GNP growth for 2001-2002. But the prospects of UN, US and UK sanctions being dropped, or relaxed, are remote.
In Latin America, Honduras (91), Ecuador (139), Costa Rica (60) and Bolivia (79) all made substantial gains in the ranking. Ecuador has recently undergone the full dollarization of its economy. It has received large amounts of IMF support for the process and the government hopes to arrest the growing inflation rates. This may be having a positive effect on investor confidence, but O’Leary sees it very differently.
“We are very negative about Ecuador,” he says. “The government has a good plan to dollarize the economy and carry out reform, but the ability to carry it through is pretty low because of opposition throughout the country. The political risk is high and the government may pull back on economic reform to keep an overthrow at bay.”
Ernesto Martinez-Alas, analyst at Moody’s Investors Service, argues that the last two decades in Latin America have been about vast structural reform and trying to change the orientation of the economy.
“With 20 years of efforts,” he says, “you can look back and begin to assess the changes of this time. We will not see any more cases of these reforms. What we will see is the onstant changes and amendments to details in the forms already in place. Macroeconomics is not enough, it is time for more microanalysis.”
Many of the countries in the region need to sustain stability, help the private sector get linked to the global economy and Finance current account balances. Martinez-Alas predicts that many policy decisions will be based on this and domestic concerns will become increasingly important.
Such countries as Peru (89) and Venezuela (76) are beginning to show an interest in these issues.
Peru is an example of how politics can weaken the state. “Sometimes when the politics takes front seat, the countries begin neglecting the basics of economic management. That could be true in the Peruvian case,” says Martinez-Alas. “The success of Mexico is not easily going to be repeated in much of Latin America.”
The predictions for east Asian countries are upbeat. Max Schieler, senior country risk analyst for UBS says, “This region as a whole is showing an astonishing recovery from the crisis.” China (45), Taiwan (24) and South Korea (37) are expected to have high GNP growth for 2001-2002.
China’s challenge is to make the transition to a liberalized market base, while maintaining its communist government. Its induction into the World Trade Organization will bring foreign investment, but managing the economy will be difficult.
“The old way of managing things is clearly incompatible with the emerging new order. China’s entry into the WTO is in general beneficial to its economy and will also result in accelerating reforms of its banking and state sectors. But a more open economy also presents considerable challenges. When markets open up, you don’t always get the results you want,” says Charles Tan, senior analyst for Moody’s. But China s seems to be taking the necessary steps to ensure a smaller margin, of error in the market transition.
“South Korea (37) has the benefit of a solid industrial foundation and international competitive products, which can help them grow out of their problems. But to build a more sustainable economy they need to increase their transparency and accountability, and to manage their Financials more prudently.
Likewise, the Financial sector’s reform must also advance to reduce Financial risks and improve its competitiveness,” says Tan.
Banks are benefiting from the massive recovery in the Korean economy which is helping the corporate sector get into better shape.
|
|
For historical country risk data please visit the Euromoney Country risk website |
COUNTRY RISK:
|
Methodology To obtain the overall country risk score, Euromoney assigns a weighting to the nine categories listed below. The best underlying value per category achieves the full weighting (25, 10 or 5); the worst scores zero and all other values are calculated relative to these two. The formula used is the following: A – (A / (B-C)) x (D–C), where A = category weighting; B = lowest value* in range; C = highest value* in range, D = individual value.
Economic projections methodology Euromoney received replies from 30 economists at leading Financial and economic institutions. They gave each country’s economic performance for 2001 and 2002 a score out of 100. The world’s fastest-growing, best-performing economy in an ideal year would score 100; the worst economy in a disastrous year would score zero. Respondents were asked to consider economic growth, monetary stability, current-account, budget deficit or surplus, unemployment and structural imbalances. Economists also gave their GNP growth forecasts for 2000 and 2001. Countries which received no votes were excluded from this table. Our thanks go to the 44 political analysts and economists who took part in our surveys. Those who did not wish to remain anonymous were: Dr Michael O’Leary, The PRS Group; Bernard Butticker, UBS AG; Chi-Y Tan, Bank of Taiwan; Conrad Schuller, Erste Bank; Dennis Readman, Barclays; Douglas Porter, Nesbitt Burns Canada; Eva Christina Horwitz, Handelsbanken Markets; Ewoud Schuitemaker, ABN Amro; Nicollas Francois, Crédit Lyonnais; George Samu, Royal Bank of Canada; Gregor Eder, Dresdner Bank; Guy Seyler, Banque et Caisse d’Epargne de l’état; Johan Lumprecht, First National Bank SA; John Krijgsman, CIBC; Karla Schestauber, Creditanstalt; Kurt von dem Hagen, Royal Bank of Canada; Luigi Ruggerone, Banca Commerciale Italiana; Marijke Zewuster, ABN AMRO Bank, Paul Papadopoulos, Arab Banking Corp; Penelope Forde, Central Bank of Trinidad and Tobago; Reijo Heiskanen, Merita Nordbanken; Richard McGuire and Team, Dun & Bradstreet; Shamus Mok, Bank of East Asia ; Sruti Patel, Afrinvest; Stephen King, HSBC; Veronika Lammer, Erste Bank; Elwin De Groot, Fortis Bank; Arjuna Mahendran, SG Securities |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
