Key IndIcators

for

AsiA And the PAcific

2011
42nd Edition

SPECIAL CHAPTER

Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia

August 2011

© 2011 Asian Development Bank All rights reserved. Published in 2011. Printed in the Philippines. ISBN: 978-92-9092-369-5 Publication Stock No. FLG113759 Cataloging-In-Publication Data Asian Development Bank. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Asian Development Bank, 2011. 1. Economic indicators 2. Financial indicators 3. Social indicators 4. Energy and environmental indicators 5. Millennium development goals 6. Infrastructure indicators 7. Governance indicators I. Asian Development Bank. The views expressed in this book do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Governors, or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. By making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area, or by using the term “country” in this document, ADB does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. ADB encourages printing or copying information exclusively for personal and noncommercial use with proper acknowledgment of ADB. Users are restricted from reselling, redistributing, or creating derivative works for commercial purposes without the express, written consent of ADB. Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel +63 2 632 4444 Fax +63 2 636 2444 www.adb.org

iii

Foreword
The Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 (Key Indicators 2011), the 42nd edition of this series, is a statistical data book presenting economic, financial, social, and environmental indicators for the 48 regional members of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). This issue of the Key Indicators presents in Part I a special chapter—Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia—followed by statistical tables in Parts II and III with short, nontechnical commentaries on economic, financial, social, and environmental developments. Part II comprises the first set of statistical tables and commentaries, which look at the MDGs and progress in the region toward achieving key targets. The second set of tables, which are in Part III, is grouped into seven themes providing a broader picture of economic, financial, social, and environmental developments. The aim of the publication is to provide the latest key statistics on development issues concerning Asian and Pacific economies to a wide audience including policy makers, development practitioners, government officials, researchers, students, and the general public. This year, the ADB also presents the Framework of Inclusive Growth Indicators, a special supplement to the Key Indicators. The special chapter discusses the transition to higher quality employment in developing Asia, a transition that still has far to go in spite of the region’s tremendous economic growth. This trend is of special concern because employment is the critical link between economic growth and poverty reduction. In addition, rebalancing from export-led to domestic consumption-led growth will depend on increased consumer spending, which in turn depends on the growth of good (i.e., stable and well-paid) jobs. Most developing Asian economies either have not yet completed the transition to higher quality, predominantly formal sector employment, or are in the very early stages of this transition. Thus, the special chapter discusses the importance of generating higher quality employment in Asia. It identifies some of the major constraints and challenges that countries may face in improving and increasing the quality of employment and policies that could be used to resolve or mitigate some of these challenges. This issue of Key Indicators contains statistics that convey good news of economic recovery in the region in 2010 after exhibiting remarkable resilience through the crisis years of 2008 and 2009. In almost all economies, gross domestic product (GDP) grew robustly after lower growth, or an actual contraction in some countries, during 2009. Exports have rebounded with continued growth of trade within the region. Migrants’ remittances have started rising in economies where remittances were affected by the crisis in 2009. International tourist arrivals and tourism receipts are back on their precrisis growth track. On the downside, inflation, especially food item inflation, has risen in many countries with pressure from commodity prices, threatening the poor at the margin. Money supply is growing faster than nominal GDP and real interest rates are negative in several countries, thus adding to inflationary pressures. As the target date of 2015 for achieving the MDGs approaches, the available data suggest that a majority of economies in the region are expected to meet the poverty target. Targets on enrolling children in schools, achieving gender balance in schooling, and providing safe drinking water are on track. Though progress has been made, most economies in developing Asia lag in meeting the hunger target, as well as targets to reduce maternal and child mortality, and access to improved sanitation. Improved access to tuberculosis treatment has saved many lives and HIV/AIDS sufferers now have better access to antiretroviral treatment, although universal access for all those who need it is still a long way away. The growth in the region, however, comes at the cost of increased carbon dioxide emissions and rates of deforestation in many countries, which need to be addressed for environmentally sustainable growth. New statistical indicators in this edition include road safety indicators—for both accidents and deaths on the road, to highlight concerns on road safety—and the amounts of energy used by each country, to complement the statistics on energy supply. Part III’s regional tables are based largely on a comprehensive set of country tables. These country tables are provided on a CD-ROM and at ADB’s website (www.adb.org), rather than in print. We appreciate the cooperation of the governments and international agencies that provided data, enhancing this year’s issue. We hope Key Indicators will remain a valuable resource for monitoring the region’s progress and addressing its development challenges.

Haruhiko Kuroda President

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

v

Acknowledgments
The Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 (KI 2011) was prepared by the Development Indicators and Policy Research Division (ERDI) of the Economics and Research Department (ERD), Asian Development Bank (ADB). A team of economists and statisticians of ERDI led by Douglas Brooks, assistant chief economist, contributed to and coordinated the production of the publication. The topic for the theme chapter (Part I) for the KI 2011 is “Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia.” The initial draft was written by Anil Deolalikar. Natalie Chun led the process of initiating, developing, and finalizing the chapter with extensive technical support from Glenita Amoranto. The chapter was based largely on contributions and background papers prepared by Mulubrhan Amare, Glenita Amoranto, Fang Cai, Natalie Chun, Lawrence Dacuycuy, Anil Deolalikar, Du Yang, Avraham Ebenstein, Robert Flanagan, Andrew Foster, Lena Hohfeld, Niny Khor, Dalisay Maligalig, Arturo Martinez, Jr., Trilok Singh Papola, Devanto Pratomo, Muhammad Raden Purnagunawan, Yue Qu, Hyun Son, Guntur Sugiyarto, and Hermann Waibel with technical assistance provided by Marife Lou Bacate, Eugenia Go, Arturo Martinez, Jr., and Eric Suan. Valuable suggestions and advice were provided by the participants of the Workshop on Creating Quality Employment in Asia held on 17–18 May 2011, including Lourdes Adriano, Ma. Socorro Gochoco Bautista, Bart Edes, Shanti Jagannathan, Patricia Imrana Jalal, Brajesh Panth, Ernesto Pernia, Sungsup Ra, Arief Ramayandi, Gyorgy Sziraczki, Myo Thant, Norio Usui, Peter Warr, Yuqing Xing, Juzhong Zhuang, Joseph Ernest Zveglich, Jr., as well as Guanghua Wan and Paul Vandenberg. Jill Gale De Villa edited the chapter and typesetting was carried out by Rhommell Rico. Contributions from ERD’s statistical partners—regional members and international organizations—that shared their data for the statistical tables on the Millennium Development Goals Indicators (Part II), regional tables (Part III), and country tables in the CD-ROM version are greatly appreciated. ADB resident missions in Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Cambodia, the People’s Republic of China, Georgia, India, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Thailand, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Viet Nam provided support in compiling the data from their respective countries. ADB’s Japanese Representative Office, Pacific Liaison and Coordination Office, Philippines Country Office, South Pacific Subregional Office, and Special Office in Timor-Leste also provided invaluable help in data compilation. The statistical tables for Parts II and III, including the country tables in the accompanying CD-ROM, were prepared by ERDI staff and consultants under the general guidance of Kaushal Joshi and Dalisay Maligalig with the technical assistance of Modesta de Castro, Pamela Lapitan, and Melissa Pascua. The research team included Glenita Amoranto, Nalwino Billones, Eileen Capilit, Barbara Dizon, Karen Firshan, Eugenia Go, Maria Kristine Manalo, Marymell Martillan, Laura Prado, Iva Sebastian, Dennis Sorino, and Eric Suan. Proofreading of statistical tables was done with the assistance of Ma. Roselia Babalo, Alma Rose Roxas, and Clarita Dalaguit-Truong, with Barbara Dizon as lead. The commentaries for Parts II and III were prepared by Derek Blades under the direct supervision of Kaushal Joshi. The commentaries and statistical tables were reviewed by Kaushal Joshi, Niny Khor, Dalisay Maligalig, Chellam Palanyandy, Guntur Sugiyarto, and Guanghua Wan, with Cherry Lynn Zafaralla as copy editor. Typesetting was done by Joe Mark Ganaban and Rhommell Rico, who also prepared the web files and the CD-ROM. The publication would not have been possible without the cooperation of Vic Angeles, Sophia Cho, Robert Hugh Davis, Anna Juico, and Miguelito Maximo Paulino of ADB’s Department of External Relations (DER), and Gregg Garcia, Wyn Lauzon, Victor Lo, Cesar Lopez, Jr., and Judy Yñiguez from the Logistics Management Unit of the Office of Administrative Services. DER’s Sean Crowley, with the assistance of Gilda Nanquil, planned and coordinated the dissemination of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011.

Changyong Rhee Chief Economist

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 33 Trade and Globalization.......................iii Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Broad Trends .............................................. 55 PART I: Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ........................ 40 Active Labor Legislation ................................................................................................ 22 Lessons in Developing Asia............................................... 15 Selected Experiences .................................................xxvi SPECIAL CHAPTER Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Introduction and Background ................................................................ 11 Patterns and Trends in the Quality of Employment ................................................................................................................ 43 Social Protection .. 3 What is Higher Quality Employment? ...............................................................................................xxiv Highlights of Key Indicators 2011 ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 34 The Role of Migration ............................................................................... 48 References Appendix ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................xvii Guide for Users ............................................................................. 38 Human Capital .............................................................................................................................................................. 48 Conclusion ................................................ 6 Why is the Quality of Employment Important? ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 46 Right to Work and Employment Guarantees ................................................................................................................... 42 Labor Unions ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 36 Raising Rural Labor Productivity .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. v Statistical Partners .......................................................xxii Abbrevations and Acronyms ..................... 32 Selected Interventions to Promote Higher Quality Employment ...............................................................................................vii Contents Foreword ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 50 Cross Country Regression Models of Poverty Changes and Formalization of Employment ..................................

....... 2000–2008 ............. 56 Tables Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21 Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24 Figure 25 Distribution of Workers by Employment Status and by Geographical Region ........................................................................................................ 27 Classification Table ... Indonesia.................................................................. and Employment Security among Migrants and Local Workers..................... 2001–2010 ................. 12 Well-Being of Workers by Employment Status in Advanced Economies and Worldwide................................................. 33 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ...... 1993–2010 ...................................................................................... 1993–2010 ..... India.................. 1972–2004 ......................................................................................... 1980–2008 ........ 1993–2009 .................................................................. 2001................................ By Country..... 21 Evolution of Real Average Wages of Workers in the Formal Sector.... 1990–2009 ....................... 29 Informal Employment Rates by Gender (%)........................ 2000–2008 ............. 20 Unemployment Rate (%).................. 15 Distribution of Labor Force by Status of Employment in Selected Asian Countries (%) .. 1993–2009 ............................................................. 1978–2008........................................... 25 Share of Informal Employment in Total Employment. by Region ................. Developing Asian Economies....................... Social Security................. Urban PRC................................... 21 Annual Growth of Labor Productivity and Wages (%).......................viii Tables............................................................................................................... 29 Informal and Formal Employment Rates (%)........ 9 Population Reporting the Most Important Attributes in Selecting a Job.. 19 Percent of Informal Employment and Per Capita GDP.................... 29 Per Capita GDP and Labor Force Statistics................................................ 2000–2008 ................ Selected Developing Asian Economies .......................................... 2000–2010 . 2005................. 22 Value Added per Worker......... Figures....... 1999 and 2004 .................... 2009–2010 .. and Boxes Appendix Tables Appendix Table 1 Countries and Period Spells ........... 25 Share of Employment by Sector............... 2000–2008 ................................................ Public............ Selected Asian Economies... 1993–2009 ........................................................................... Urban PRC...................... and 2010 ....................... 25 Job Quality................................. 56 Appendix Table 2 OLS Estimates of Cross-Country Changes in Poverty Incidence and the Ratio of Top 20% to Bottom 20% ....................................................... 3 Labor Force Statistics for Selected Developing Asian Economies ....................................... Banten and Yogyakarta (Rp million) ... 21 Vulnerable Employment as a Share of Total Employment (%)...................... 2010.......................................... 23 Employment and Real Wages of Urban Migrants............................ PRC...... Selected Developing Asian Economies ........... Indonesia.................................................. Selected Asian Economies.................................................. 17 Informal Sector Employment in Latin America and Asia................. 18 Percent of Total Employment by Employment Status and Real Per Capita GDP............... 13 Change in the Share of Total Employment by Employment Status..... Indonesia. 2008–2010 ....... 22 Shares of Employment in Agriculture.. 18 Summary Statistics ........................................... India................... 27 Distribution of Workers by Type of Employment and Economic Activity (%)............... Indonesia...................................................... and Private Industrial Sectors...................................... 4 Distribution of Workers by Sector of Employment and by Geographical Region.......................... 29 Average Real Monthly Wage of Employees by Gender (Rp ‘000)................................................................................ 2007–2010 . 29 Informal Employment Rates by Residence (%)....................................... 23 Distribution of Workers by Category of Employment (%).......................................... the PRC................... 2001–2010 .. 10 Cross-Country Relationship Between Changes in Poverty and Changes in Employment Status.............. 17 Change in the Sectoral Share of Employment.................... by Per Capita GDP...... Indonesia..... 5 Population Reporting Job Attributes as Important in Selecting a Job.......................

........................................................ 1960–2003 .............. 36 Labor Rights in Open versus Closed Non-Asian Economies ............................................ 1997–2009 ............................ and Services...................... 11 Share of Decent Jobs as a Percentage of Total Labor Force ....... 32 Technical and Vocational Education and Training .......................... 43 The Minimum Wage in Indonesia .......................... 1980–2009 ........................... 2000–2030 ................. 7 Share of Jobs by Industry as a Percentage of Total Labor Force ................ 20 Demographic Change and the Quality of Employment ............. 1983–2009 ......................................................3 Box Figure 10................................. Indonesia................ 1997–2009................ 28 Migrant Workers from the Philippines ....................................... 44 The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory and the Wonjin Rayon Company................................1 Box Figure 1....... Industry.... 1993–2009................ 44 Non-Compliance with the Minimum Wage.............. Bangladesh.................................2 Box Figure 2................. 2009 ....................................................... Selected Asian Economies......................................................Tables............................ 45 Non-Compliance with the Minimum Wage by Sector.............. 11 Informal Employment and Poverty ..... 31 Trends in Real Labor Productivity in Special Economic Zones and All Other Cities................................................ 1993–2009..................................................... 1999–2008 ..................................... 28 Selected Statistics on Migrant Workers from the Philippines .................................................................................. 24 Minimum Wage....2 Box Figure 10........................ 36 Working Conditions in Open versus Closed Asian Economies ...... Indonesia......................................... Median Wage.......... Philippines.............. 46 Sectoral Share of Total Employment.......................1 Box Figure 10....................... 7 Benefits Received by Formal and Informal Wage Workers ...........3 Box Figure 3......................... 34 Trends in Prices in Special Economic Zones and All Other Cities................................ 30 Unemployment Rate in Selected ASEAN Countries... and Mean Wage..................................... 32 Employment and Benefits of Workers: Armenia....................... 1988-2008 ............... PRC............................................................... 36 Labor Rights in Open versus Closed Asian Economies .000).... Philippines............4 Type of Worker (‘0.................. and Boxes Figure 26 Figure 27 Figure 28 Figure 29 Figure 30 Figure 31 Figure 32 Figure 33 Figure 34 Figure 35 Figure 36 Boxes Box 1 Box 2 Box 3 Box 4 Box 5 Box 6 Box 7 Box 8 Box 9 Box 10 Box 11 Box Tables Box Table 6................. Regular Employees.... 11 Poverty Incidence by Nature of Employment ........... 34 Working Conditions in Open versus Closed Non-Asian Economies ..................................................... 13 Dependency Ratios of Major Developing Asian Countries.... 36 Value Added per Worker in Agriculture.......................1 Box Figures Box Figure 1.................. Figures.....................1 Box Figure 10........................................................................................................................... and Casual Labor in Total Employment.. and Indonesia...... 31 Unemployment and Underemployment Rates................ 1988–2001 ...... 11 Share of Salaried and Wage Workers as a Percentage of Total Labor Force ..........................................................................................................................1 Box Table 7....................................... 13 Outsourcing Industrial Production to Small Rural Enterprises in Meiji Japan .................. 41 India’s Small-Scale Industry Reservations. PRC............................................................................................................. 45 Employment in Information Technology Services.... 30 Share of the Self-Employed..2 Box Figure 2.......... 45 Non-Compliance with the Minimum Wage by Educational Attainment............................ Indonesia............................................................................................1 Box Figure 2...... Indonesia......... 37 ix Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ............................................................ 1980–2009 ............................................................. 7 Labor Market Changes: Sectoral Shifts and the Creation of Decent Jobs in the Republic of Korea... India........... Philippines...1 Box Figure 5............ 24 Information Technology in India.................

.........................................1 Target 5... 114 Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development ............................................... 100 Table 6....... by 2015.......... and Boxes Millennium Development Goals PART II – Introduction to the Millennium Development Goals .... 92 Table 5............................... 71 Table 2............................ 103 Table 7.................... by 2010. 99 Table 6.......... Figures................ 74 Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women .......... boys and girls alike.........................................B: Reduce biodiversity loss................... by 2010.... 88 Table 5.............................................. especially information and communications .. 118 Table 8.......C: Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the incidence of malaria and other major diseases ................. 87 Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health .......... a significant reduction in the rate of loss .................................................... Malaria........................D: Deal comprehensively with the debt problems of developing countries through national and international measures in order to make debt sustainable in the long term .......................................... the proportion of people who suffer from hunger............ 81 Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality ... between 1990 and 2015..................... and Other Diseases .................................x Tables..1 Target 7....................... 68 Table 1.1 Target 8... 112 Table 7...........1 Target 6.. the under-five mortality rate ........................A: Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes and reverse the loss of environmental resources ........ between 1990 and 2015................................C: Halve............1 Target 4..................A: Ensure that.................... universal access to reproductive health............................. make available the benefits of new technologies..........................................................................2 Target 7.................................. 69 Table 1...D: By 2020..................................................................................... 59 Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger ................ and in all levels of education not later than 2015 .B: Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all........................................... 93 Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS................A: Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education...............4 Target 7..B: Achieve...........................3 Target 1.............. universal access to treatment for HIV/AIDS for all those who need it .................B: Achieve.... achieving.........2 Target 5... 111 Table 7............................................................................ the proportion of people whose income is less than one dollar a day .. 83 Table 4.........F: In cooperation with the private sector....... 63 Table 1.A: Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS ....3 Target 7..........................................1 Target 3................................................... including women and young people ........ the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation ........... 77 Table 3.........1 Target 1........ preferably by 2005............................ to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers .....2 Target 6........... 115 Table 8.................................................... 95 Table 6.................................................................. 109 Table 7.... between 1990 and 2015.................................................................................... by 2015....A: Halve...............2 Target 1.....................A: Reduce by three quarters............................................... the maternal mortality ratio .C: Halve................ 70 Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education ....... 119 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .......A: Reduce by two-thirds...3 Target 6..1 Target 2.......................................................................................................... children everywhere......................... will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling ............................... 101 Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability ... between 1990 and 2015........... by 2015...........................2 Target 8.................................................

......... 2008 Compared with 1990 .................... 1990 and 2010 ........25 (PPP) a Day. 64 Figure 1. 1990–2009 (%) ..............................................2 Poverty Gap Ratio...... 1999 and 2009 or Nearest Years ...... 96 Figure 6..........95 or Less.................................. Latest Year (%) ....1 Total Net Enrollment Ratio in Primary Education below 95%.................................................. 1991 and 2009 or Nearest Years .................25 (PPP) a Day ........ Correct Knowledge about HIV/AIDS....................... 2009 or Nearest Year ........2 Percentage of Protected Terrestrial and Marine Areas.................000 population) ..3 Percentage Change of Per Capita Emissions of Carbon Dioxide..........4 Percentage of Women in Nonagricultural Wage Employment. 104 Figure 7.......................... and Boxes Millennium Development Goals—Figures Figure 1.... 2008 or Nearest Year ................................6 Proportion of Population Using Different Sources of Drinking Water........................5 Percentage of Seats Held by Women in National Parliaments...... 91 Figure 6.....000 Women Aged 15–19 Years...............2 Percentage of the Population with Advanced HIV Infection with Access to Antiretroviral Drugs.. 1991 and 2009 or Nearest Years ................................................... 116 xi Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ..... 108 Figure 8........................ 73 Figure 3........ 1990 and 2010 ................. 105 Figure 7................ Latest Year .Tables........................ 107 Figure 7............ Figures........ 2008 ...... 2008 (million metric tons) .. 63 Figure 1......... Earliest and Latest Years .........3 Percentage of 1-Year-Old Children Immunized against Measles........................1 Under-Five Mortality Rate.................. 88 Figure 5........ 2008 ............................... 1990..............1a Economies with More than 10% of Population Living on Less than $1..............................8 Proportion of Slum Population in the Five Most Populous Countries of Asia..... 77 Figure 3.. 83 Figure 4...... Percent Reduction between 1990 and 2009 ....................1 Percentage of Land Area Covered by Forest....4 Proportion of Employed People Living Below $1...................... 97 Figure 6........ 2000.....3 Percentage of Literate 15–24-Year-Olds.... 1990...............95 or Less. 106 Figure 7..7 Proportion of Population Using Different Types of Sanitation Facilities... 65 Figure 1...... 2000..1b Annual Percentage Point Reductions in Population Living on $1........................................1 Primary Education: Female–Male Enrollment Ratios 0..... 2009 (per 100.. 2000 and 2011 or Nearest Years .......................... 86 Figure 5...............000 live births) ............................................. 1990 and 2009............................................ 65 Figure 1..........................4b Per Capita Emissions of Carbon Dioxide in Five Industrialized Economies and the Five Most Populous Countries in Asia................3 Incidence and Death Rates Due to Tuberculosis.... 2004 and 2009 .. 115 Figure 8....2 Infant Mortality Rate by Lowest and Highest Wealth Quintiles in Various Years..4a Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Five Industrialized Economies and the Five Most Populous Economies in Asia................ 72 Figure 2....................................................................2 Fixed Telephone lines....2 Antenatal Care Coverage as a Percentage of Live Births.........3 Live Births per 1........... 103 Figure 7........1 Maternal Mortality Ratio.... 1991 and 2009 or Nearest Years ..........................................................25 (PPP) a Day......................... 105 Figure 7................................. 97 Figure 7.................. Latest Year ........ 84 Figure 4......................................1 Percentage of the Population with Comprehensive...3 Tertiary Education: Female–Male Enrollment Ratios 0... 78 Figure 3......... and 2009 ... 2008 (metric tons) .........2 Percentage of Children Starting Grade 1 and Reaching Last Grade of Primary...................................................1 Debt Service as a Percentage of Exports of Goods and Services............ 1990 and 2008 (deaths per 100............... 80 Figure 4..................................... 1990 and 2007 (% of total population) ... 90 Figure 5........................................... Latest Year ....5 Urban/Rural Ratio of the Proportion of Population Using an Improved Sanitation Facility.. 67 Figure 2... 96 Figure 6....2 Secondary Education: Female–Male Enrollment Ratios 0........................... 1990 and Latest Year ................................ 78 Figure 3................ 106 Figure 7.....4 Change in Tuberculosis Incidence Rate..............3 Proportion of Underweight Children under Five Years of Age Earliest and Latest Years (%).... 1990 and 2008 ......................... 104 Figure 7...................... 71 Figure 2. 79 Figure 3................... and 2010 (per 100 population) ....... Earliest and Latest Years .... 1996–2009 .........95 or Less..............................................

.12 Employment in Industry .... 140 Labor Force and Employment Table 1............................. 134 Table 1...........................................................21 Health Care Resources ...............2 Box 3............................................................................................................... 95 Incidence of Malaria................................ and Boxes Millennium Development Goals—Boxes Box 1.. 85 Progress toward Target for Maternal Mortality Rate ................................................... 153 Table 1.........4 Population Aged 0–14 Years ....................................13 Employment in Services ...... 149 Table 1...........16 Life Expectancy at Birth ............. 72 Progress toward Target for Survival to Last Grade of Primary ..... 89 Progress toward Target for Birth Attendance by Skilled Health Personnel .........................18 Primary Education Completion Rate ...................................................................................... 135 Table 1............................................... 144 Table 1.................................................................................................................. 127 Population Table 1..............................1 Box 6............................................................................................1 Box 7.....................................1 Box 2.......................................................xii Tables...... 2008 (per 100.................8 Labor Force Participation Rate ............................................................................19 Adult Literacy Rate ...... 78 Progress toward Target for Gender Equality in Secondary Education ........................22 Estimated Number of Adults Living with HIV ....................................................2 Box 3.........................5 Population Aged 15–64 Years .....................................................................000 population)............................2 Box 8.....................................2 Growth Rates in Population .................................2 Box 5............. 89 Progress toward Target for at Least One Antenatal Care Visit...........................................................................................................11 Employment in Agriculture .............. 151 Table 1.............. 155 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ..............................................17 Births.. 148 Social Indicators Table 1.............................................. 137 Table 1................................................................ 84 Progress toward Target for Infant Mortality Rate ............... 136 Table 1.7 Age Dependency Ratio ........................ 152 Table 1.................................................................. 98 Progress toward Target for Proportion of Population with Access to Improved Drinking Water ........... Figures.............................................1 Box 4...........................................3 Box 6.......................................................................................... 2009 .........................................................2 Box 5......................................3 Box 4.................................. 107 Progress toward Target for Proportion of Population Using Improved Sanitation Facilities ....... 141 Table 1.............................................................................1 Box 3............................ 107 Internet Users per 100 Population.....................15 Human Development Index ......................... 78 Progress toward Target for Gender Equality in Tertiary Education ................9 Unemployment Rate .................................................... 123 People............. and Fertility Rates .........................1 Midyear Population ...................................................................14 Poverty and Inequality ............................ 142 Table 1..................................................................................................... 73 Progress toward Target for Gender Equality in Primary Education ........................................................... 147 Table 1....... 64 Progress toward the Hunger Target ......... 150 Table 1......6 Population Aged 65 Years and Over .................................... 146 Poverty Indicators Table 1.......................... 154 Table 1...2 Box 2............................ 145 Table 1.. 143 Table 1................................................1 Box 5.................... 79 Progress toward Target for Under-Five Mortality Rate .........................................................................................20 Education Resources .......................................................................................................1 Box 1....................... 138 Table 1............. 90 Percentage of Population 15–49 Years with HIV................................ 139 Table 1.........................................................................................1 PART III – Progress toward Achieving the $1.....2 Box 7........... 66 Progress toward Target for Primary School Enrollment .................................................... Deaths............3 Migration and Urbanization ... 2010 .............10 Unemployment Rate of 15–24-Year-Olds ..................................................25 (PPP) a day Target ..................................... 117 Regional Tables Introduction to Regional Tables ............................................................................................................................................

...1 Table 2............................ 203 Table 3................. 161 GDP Per Capita at PPP ....................................................................................................................................................... and Prices ............ 196 Table 3................................................................................. 195 Table 3..................................................... 181 Growth Rates of Real Imports of Goods and Services ..................................................... 192 Table 3.......................................................12 Bank Nonperfoming Loans ........................................................................................ 174 Growth Rates of Agriculture Real Value Added ...1 Growth Rates of Consumer Price Index ...............................................24 ...... 215 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .......................................................................19 Table 2.......................................... and Boxes Economy and Output National Accounts Table 2....15 Table 2.....................................................................17 Table 2.7 Table 2. 199 Table 3.8 Interest Rate on Time Deposits of 12 Months ....................................................................................................................... 200 Table 3.........................9 Table 2.......................................................................... 184 xiii Money.............3 Growth Rates of Wholesale/Producer Price Index .........16 Official Exchange Rate ..... 163 Agriculture Value Added ...14 Stock Market Capitalization (US$ million) .......................... 204 Table 3.......20 Table 2................................................................................................................................ 168 Gross Domestic Capital Formation ............12 Table 2.......................................................................... 170 Imports of Goods and Services ...............................................................................1 Trade in Goods Balance ................. 191 Table 3................................................................. 166 Private Consumption Expenditure .................. 176 Growth Rates of Services Real Value Added ...........................................4 Table 2...... 173 Growth Rates of Real GDP Per Capita ............. 182 Growth Rates of Agriculture Production Index .................2 Table 2.............Tables............................. 167 Government Consumption Expenditure ........................5 Growth Rates of Money Supply (M2) .....................................................................................................................................13 Table 2................................................................................................................................................................................... 180 Growth Rates of Real Exports of Goods and Services .......................................6 Money Supply (M2) .... 165 Services Value Added ........... 162 GNI Per Capita............................... 164 Industry Value Added .................... 205 Exchange Rates Table 3.................................................... 178 Growth Rates of Real Government Consumption Expenditure . 207 Table 3............................... 185 Prices Table 3................................... Atlas Method ...................6 Table 2...13 Growth Rates of Stock Market Price Index ...8 Table 2................................... 208 Globalization .................................................................18 Table 2........................2 Trade in Services Balance ..........................................................................................................22 Production Table 2................ 209 Balance of Payments Table 4.. 175 Growth Rates of Industry Real Value Added ... 214 Table 4......11 Table 2.........................................2 Growth Rates of Food Consumer Price Index .........................................................................................................18 Price Level Indexes .................................... 193 Table 3............... 201 Table 3... Figures.............................. 177 Growth Rates of Real Private Consumption Expenditure ...................................................................................... 172 Growth Rates of Real GDP ......................................................... 197 Table 3...... 194 Money and Finance Table 3...............................................................10 Table 2........................................................................................ 179 Growth Rates of Real Gross Domestic Capital Formation ..................................3 Table 2........................... 156 Gross Domestic Product at PPP ....................11 Domestic Credit Provided by Banking Sector .................................................................................................................................................................................. Finance... 171 Gross Domestic Saving ............................................................................. 183 Growth Rates of Manufacturing Production Index .......................................5 Table 2............................................................................ 206 Table 3.... 198 Table 3.................21 Table 2....................................16 Table 2.............14 Table 2......................................................................................................15 Stock Market Capitalization (percent of GDP) .......4 Growth Rates of GDP Deflator ..................... 202 Table 3....7 Interest Rate on Savings Deposits........................................9 Lending Interest Rate .................................................................................................10 Yield on Short-Term Treasury Bills ................23 Table 2........... 169 Exports of Goods and Services ............17 Purchasing Power Parity Conversion Factor .......................

....16 Ratio of International Reserves to Imports .................7 Telephone and Internet Subscriptions .................. 226 Table 4............................................14 Direction of Trade: Merchandise Imports .......xiv Tables................................................... 228 Table 4........................... and income) . 219 Table 4....23 Total Debt Service Paid by Developing Member Economies (US$ million) ................................................8 Merchandise Exports ..6 Deforestation and Pollution .........19 Aggregate Net Resource Flows from All Sources to Developing Member Economies ...... Electricity..........................................................................................................................15 International Reserves .....................................................................17 Official Flows from All Sources to Developing Member Economies ....... 221 Table 4.................................. 216 Table 4.........................24 Total Debt Service Paid by Developing Member Economies (percent of exports of goods.............22 Total External Debt of Developing Member Economies (percent of exports of goods.................................... 220 External Trade Table 4...........21 Total External Debt of Developing Member Economies (percent of GNI) .............. 249 Table 5...........12 Trade in Goods ............................................................. services................................................................... 262 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ...........................6 Foreign Direct Investment............... 234 Table 4........... 223 Table 4.................................................. 260 Environment Table 6...........20 Total External Debt of Developing Member Economies (US$ million) .........3 Current Account Balance .............4 Energy Use ........ 222 Table 4.......................9 Growth Rates of Merchandise Exports ............................................ 237 Tourism Table 4.........4 Workers’ Remittances and Compensation of Employees................................. and income) ......................................................... 246 Table 5....25 International Tourists (thousand) . 258 Table 6......... 248 Electricity Table 5................................................................ 261 Table 6.... Receipts (US$ million) .................................26 International Tourism............................................................................. Net Inflows (percent of GDP) ............................................................................. 224 Table 4........ 247 Table 5.................5 Agriculture Land Use ...........................................10 Merchandise Imports ........................................... Net Inflows (US$ million) ...... Receipts (percent of GDP) .................................2 Road Indicators: Vehicles .. Net ....2 Energy Production ....................................................... 251 Energy and Environment ................1 GDP Per Unit of Energy Use .....................5 Electricity Production and Sources ........................................................................................ 238 Table 4............................................. 252 Energy Table 6..........................................................................18 Net Private Flows from All Sources to Developing Member Economies ............ 227 International Reserves Table 4...........................................................................11 Growth Rates of Merchandise Imports ........................................6 Electricity Consumption and Electrification ..................................... 217 Table 4.......... 233 Table 4.......................................1 Road Indicators: Network ..................................................................................................................13 Direction of Trade: Merchandise Exports ........................ 259 Table 6...................................................................... Receipts (US$ million) ...3 Road Indicators: Safety .............................. and Boxes Table 4..........5 Workers’ Remittances and Compensation of Employees....... 245 Table 5.. 235 Table 4........... 257 Table 6............................. and Communications... 250 Communications Table 5. Figures.............. 218 Table 4....................................................................................................................................7 Foreign Direct Investment..... 236 Table 4.......................... 232 External Indebtedness Table 4................ 231 Table 4................... services.............. 225 Table 4.............................................. 230 Table 4..4 Rail Indicators ................................. 229 Capital Flows Table 4........................................ 240 Transport Table 5................ 239 Transport.....................................................................................................................................................................................3 Energy Imports...........................................................................................

2010–2015 (annual average) ........... 264 Government Finance Table 7............ 159 Top 10 Economies in the World in Terms of GDP at PPP.....................................3 Figure 4.7 Government Expenditure on Social Security and Welfare .....................................1 Figure 5...................................................... period averages) ...............................................4 Figure 1................................................................. 2010..................................................................................................5 Government Expenditure on Education ......................... 157 Indices of Per Capita GDP.....................................................6 Figure 3..... 2010 and 2050 ............................................. 2009 and 2010 (annual percentage change) ..............1 Fiscal Balance .... 2009 and 2010 (percent per annum.................... 2009 and 2010 ................................................................ 274 Governance Table 7.................................................................5 Figure 4.......... 1995 and 2010 (distance from Australia)........................4b Figure 4........... 188 Percentage Change in Dollar Exchange Rates..................... 158 Top 10 Economies in the World in Terms of GDP at PPP. 210 Workers’ Remittances per Head........................................................................................................................ Figures................................... and Boxes Government and Governance ..2 Figure 2..........4 Total Government Expenditure ... 2010 (United States = 100)....1a Figure 4................................................... 273 Table 7...........................5 Figure 1.......................................... 2010 (regional average = 100) .............. 187 Interest Rates on Time Deposits of 12 Months......... Latest Year ...................... 185 Price Increases for All Items and Food Components....................................................................... 160 Consumer Price Indexes................. 2050...... 2008–2010 .............................. 2000 (regional average = 100) ...............2 Figure 3. 272 Table 7...........................................................................1 Figure 3................ 127 World Population..............6 Figure 2...... 2008–2010 (% of total gross loans) .............................. 159 Gross Domestic Capital Formation as a Percentage of GDP............................. 276 Regional Tables—Figures Figure 1............................................3 Figure 1....5b Figure 2......................................................6 Government Expenditure on Health ................................... 187 Domestic Credit Provided by the Banking Sector......... 209 Annual Percentage Growth of Merchandise Exports................................................ 129 Net International Migration......................... 128 Net Reproduction Rate.... 211 Workers’ Remittances per Head: South and Southeast Asian Economies (US dollars)...........................................................................2 Tax Revenue ................... 2010 (%) ..............1 Figure 1.............................. 2009 and 2010 (%)........................4 Figure 3.............................................. 2009 and 2010 (change over previous year) . 2005–2010 (numbers per 1.............. 275 Table 7......... 2010 ... 130 Human Development Index...................1 Figure 2.......................................................................................................................7 Figure 2........... 240 Average Annual Percentage Increase in Road Networks.........................................3b Figure 2........................ 1990 (%) ........... 156 Percentage Distribution of GDP in PPP Terms in Asia and the Pacific...................... 271 Table 7. 2009 (% of global GDP) .................................................. 2009 and 2010 ...............4a Figure 4..............................6 Figure 1.... 2010 and 2050 ..... 268 Table 7................ 186 Percentage Growth in Money Supply...8 Doing Business Start-Up Indicators............... 129 Percentage of Total Population Aged 65 or Over........4 Figure 2.............. 2000 (% of global GDP) ...... 2010 ..7 Figure 5...................................................... 127 Population by Region.................. 2010 (annual percentage change) ..5a Figure 2...................2 Figure 4..........................6 Figure 4...............................3 Figure 3...Tables.....8 Figure 4............. 2009 ............................ 188 Bank Nonperforming Loans.................. 270 Table 7.............. 189 Price Level Indexes..3 Total Government Revenue .............................................................. 211 Tourism Receipts per International Arrival (US dollars) ......... 209 Destination of Merchandise Exports from Asia and the Pacific..9 Corruption Perceptions Index ..7 Figure 3.. 158 Real GDP Growth.... 1990 to Latest Year ..... 240 xv Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .........................................3a Figure 2..................................... 269 Table 7............................................5 Figure 3.... 132 Percentage Distribution of GDP at PPP: Asia and the Pacific in the World Economy....... 212 Percentage Breakdown of Rail Networks in Asia and the Pacific........................................................................2 Figure 1.000 population annual average) .... 2008–2010 (average in US dollars) ............................. 210 Workers’ Remittances per Head:Central and West Asian Economies (US dollars) ...................... 211 International Tourist Arrivals (thousands)..... 1995 and 2010.... 2008 and 2009 (% of GDP) .........7 Figure 3... 212 Foreign Direct Investment as a Percentage of GDP.............................. 159 Private Consumption Expenditure as a Percentage of GDP............. 157 Indices of Per Capita GDP.............1b Figure 4.... 190 Destination of Merchandise Exports from Asia and the Pacific..........................2 World Population.........................................

.......xvi Tables.. 2008 (kilotons of oil equivalent) ........2 Figure 7......................................3 Figure 7................................................ 2008 (percentage shares) ... 2000 to 2010 . 255 Average Annual Deforestation Rates....................... 243 Box 5.....................2 The Human Development Index ..........................1 Figure 7.................................................................................... 254 Box Table 6... and Boxes Figure 5..................................................................................2 Figure 6.................. 255 Per Capita Emissions of Carbon Dioxide................4 Figure 5.....................1 Asia and Pacific Economies Ranked by the Human Development Index............... and Nitrous Oxide..................................................... 252 Average Annual Percentage Growth of Energy Production and Energy Use...................1 Box 1..............................................7 Figure 6............................ 1995 and 2005 (metric tons) ..............................1b Figure 6............. 2010 or Latest Year ......................... 265 Government Expenditure on Education and Health as a Percentage of GDP.................................... 254 Corruption Perceptions Index Ranking of Economies in Asia and the Pacific............................................ 253 Net Energy Imports as a Percentage of Energy Use................................... Figures.............. 279 Regional Tables ...........................3 Figure 5...... 133 Nuclear Energy for Electricity .........................................1 Census Reference Years in the Countries of the Asia and Pacific Region ...................................... 2010 .... 253 Percentage Change in GDP per Unit of Energy Use between 2000 and 2008 ........................1 World Energy Forecasts: India and the PRC Now the Key Players...................... 243 Regional Tables—Boxes Population Censuses in the Asia and Pacific Region ....... 2000 and 2008 or Nearest Years ...............................................6 Figure 7............................ 244 Percentage Breakdown of Energy Use by Region..... 285 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ................................... 2008 .........000 Population.............. 266 Number of Days Required to Register a Business................... 1990 and 2008 (per capita kilowatt-hour) ........... 2008 (percent) .....................4 Figure 6......................................... 1990–2000 and 2000–2010 (%) ............ 264 Government Expenditure on Social Security and Welfare as a Percentage of GDP.............................................. 1990 and 2008 ................................5 Figure 5............. 244 Average Annual Percentage Growth in Cellular Phone Subscriptions.. 241 Road Accident Deaths per 100.....4 Figure 7........................................................................................................ 267 Box Figure 1................ 2009 and 2010 ... 242 Per Capita Consumption of Electricity................... 131 Box Figure 5................. 242 Sources of Electricity Production........ 2000 and 2010 or Latest Year ................................... 243 Box Figure 5...1 Box 6... 2006–2008 ...............3 Figure 6... 2010 Box 7..................... 265 GDP per Capita against Corruption Perceptions Index...5 Motor Vehicles per 1..6 Figure 5.............1 (total of 178 economies worldwide) ............. 256 Fiscal Balance as a Percentage of GDP..................................................................................................... 1990 and 2008 or Latest Year ..................1 Forecasts of Primary Energy Demand up to 2035 (million tons of oil equivalent) ......................1a Nuclear Energy as a Percentage of Total Electricity Generation......................1a Figure 6.. 266 PART IV – Definitions Millennium Development Goals ......... 2000–2008 (kilotons of oil equivalent) ..................000 population..........5 Figure 6............. Methane. 2010 ................... 131 Box 1.... 133 Box Table 1......1b Electricity Generation by Source..................... 252 Percentage Shares of Total Energy Use in Asia and the Pacific............................... 2006 and 2010 ................................

xvii Statistical Partners The preparation and publication of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 would not have been possible without the support. and cooperation of the Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) partners among its regional members and in international. and other data users a better understanding of the performance of countries in Asia and the Pacific so that better policies can be formulated to improve the quality of life of people around the region. and other information. help provide ADB. Republic of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . assistance. private. expertise. These partners. policy makers. and nongovernment organizations. knowledge. People’s Republic of Cook Islands Fiji. REGIONAL MEMBERS Afghanistan Central Statistics Organization Da Afghanistan Bank Central Bank of Armenia National Statistical Service of the Republic of Armenia Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences Australian Bureau of Statistics Reserve Bank of Australia Central Bank of the Republic of Azerbaijan State Statistical Committee of the Republic of Azerbaijan Bangladesh Bank Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics Ministry of Finance Ministry of Finance National Statistics Bureau Royal Monetary Authority of Bhutan Ministry of Labor and Human Resources Department of Statistics Ministry of Finance Ministry of Economy and Finance National Bank of Cambodia National Institute of Statistics National Bureau of Statistics People’s Bank of China State Administration of Foreign Exchange Cook Islands Statistics Office Ministry of Finance and Economic Management Bureau of Statistics Reserve Bank of Fiji Armenia Australia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Bhutan Brunei Darussalam Cambodia China. who shared their data.

xviii Statistical Partners Georgia National Statistics Office Ministry of Finance of Georgia National Bank of Georgia Census and Statistics Department Hong Kong Monetary Authority Central Statistical Organization Ministry of Finance Reserve Bank of India Bank Indonesia Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS-Statistics Indonesia) Bank of Japan Economic and Social Research Institute Ministry of Agriculture. Forestry and Fisheries Ministry of Economy. Overseas Development Assistance and Compact Management Bank of Mongolia National Statistical Office of Mongolia Hong Kong. Planning and Statistics Office Division of Statistics Office of Statistics. Budget and Economic Management. Republic of Micronesia. China India Indonesia Japan Kazakhstan Kiribati Korea. Republic of Kyrgyz Republic Lao People’s Democratic Republic Malaysia Maldives Marshall Islands. Federated States of Mongolia Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Trade and Industry Ministry of Finance Japan Statistics Bureau Agency of Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan National Bank of Kazakhstan Kiribati National Statistics Office Bank of Korea Ministry of Strategy and Finance Statistics Korea National Bank of the Kyrgyz Republic National Statistical Committee of the Kyrgyz Republic Bank of the Lao PDR Department of Statistics Ministry of Finance Bank Negara Malaysia Department of Statistics Maldives Monetary Authority Ministry of Finance and Treasury Department of National Planning Economic Policy.

China Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Accounting and Statistics Ministry of Education Ministry of Finance xix Nauru Nepal New Zealand Pakistan Palau Papua New Guinea Philippines Samoa Singapore Solomon Islands Sri Lanka Taipei. Ministry of Finance Bank of Papua New Guinea Department of Treasury National Statistical Office Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Bureau of the Treasury Department of Budget and Management Department of Energy National Statistical Coordination Board National Statistics Office Bureau of Local Government Finance Central Bank of Samoa Economic Policy and Planning Division.Statistical Partners Myanmar Central Bank of Myanmar Central Statistical Organization Ministry of National Planning and Economic Development Nauru Bureau of Statistics Central Bureau of Statistics Ministry of Finance Nepal Rastra Bank Ministry of Economic Development Reserve Bank of New Zealand Statistics New Zealand The Treasury Federal Bureau of Statistics Ministry of Economic Affairs and Statistics Ministry of Finance State Bank of Pakistan Bureau of Budget and Planning. Ministry of Finance Economic Development Board International Enterprise Singapore Ministry of Finance Ministry of Manpower Monetary Authority of Singapore Singapore Department of Statistics Central Bank of Solomon Islands Central Bank of Sri Lanka Department of Census and Statistics Central Bank of China Directorate-General of Budget.

Ministry of Economy of Uzbekistan Central Bank of Uzbekistan Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Uzbekistan State Committee on the Republic of Uzbekistan on Statistics Ministry of Finance and Economic Management Reserve Bank of Vanuatu Vanuatu National Statistics Office General Statistics Office Ministry of Finance State Bank of Viet Nam Thailand Timor-Leste Tonga Turkmenistan Tuvalu Uzbekistan Vanuatu Viet Nam Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Government of Uzbekistan Center for Effective Economic Policy.xx Statistical Partners Tajikistan National Bank of Tajikistan Agency on Statistics under President of the Republic of Tajikistan (Tajstat) Bank of Thailand Ministry of Finance National Economic and Social Development Board National Statistical Office Banking and Payments Authority of Timor-Leste Ministry of Finance National Statistics Directorate National Reserve Bank of Tonga Ministry of Finance and National Planning Statistics Department National Institute of State Statistics and Information (Turkmenmillihasabat) Central Statistics Division. Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning Cabinet of Ministers.

AND NONGOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS xxi CEIC Data Company Ltd. Energy Information Administration European Bank for Reconstruction and Development Food and Agriculture Organization German Agency for Technical Cooperation International Energy Agency International Labour Organization International Monetary Fund International Road Federation International Telecommunication Union Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Secretariat of the Pacific Community Standard & Poor’s Transparency International United Nations Children’s Fund United Nations Development Programme United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific United Nations Economic Commission for Europe United Nations Educational. Scientific and Cultural Organization United Nations Industrial Development Organization United Nations Population Division United Nations Statistics Division United Nations World Tourism Organization United States Bureau of Economic Analysis United States Department of Energy World Bank World Health Organization World Resources Institute World Values Survey Organization Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .Statistical Partners INTERNATIONAL. PRIVATE.

This year’s Key Indicators 2011 includes as many of the indicators for the new targets as possible. access to reproductive health. and New Zealand. such that full comparability of data may not be possible. definitions. the aggregates for developing and regional members shown in some tables are treated as approximation of the actual total or average. No attempt has been made to impute the missing data. East Asia. access to treatment for HIV/AIDS. Indicators are shown for the most recent year or period for which data are available and. as agreed on by member states at the 2005 World Summit. Southeast Asia. Electricity. they are subject to variations in the statistical methods used by regional members. Energy and Environment. Globalization.org/Documents/ Books/Key_Indicators/2011/default. II. and country tables are obtained mainly from two sources: ADB’s statistical partners among its regional members.adb.” used interchangeably with “economy. Tables in Part II present each MDG target and contain indicators associated with that target. Data obtained from the regional members are comparable to the extent that the regional members follow standard statistical concepts. and Communications.” is not intended to make any judgment as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. namely. definitions. Thus. Central and West Asia. in most tables. or development challenges. Part III consists of 112 tables that are not part of the MDG framework. Part II comprises the data tables on indicators for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). III. These variations are reflected in the footnotes of the statistical tables or noted in Data Issues and Comparability. which was expanded in January 2008 to include new targets for full and productive employment and decent work for all. regional tables. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. and Government and Governance. but is not classified as a developing member. Each theme is further divided into subtopics. or growth rates. Economy and Output.xxii Guide for Users The Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific has the following structure. and estimation methodologies to suit their individual circumstances. however. both developing and developed. The four parts and the individual statistical tables of the 48 regional members are also available at ADB’s website at www. and protection of biodiversity. To help readers identify the indicators more easily. The accompanying statistical tables are presented for 48 economies of Asia and the Pacific that are members of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). and Prices. the regional tables are grouped into seven themes: People. Accompanying tables in Part III contain indicators related to a subtopic. This year’s special chapter discusses the importance of generating higher quality employment in Asia. due to missing data from the primary source. even though attempts were made to present the data in a comparable and uniform format. Economies are listed alphabetically in each group. and these may not necessarily comply with recommended international standards. Part I contains a special chapter that varies every year and deals with a topic on key policy issues. and the Pacific. The Highlights section presents key messages from various parts of the publication. Transport. Moreover. The publication also has a CD-ROM containing Parts I. Finally. The term “country. The latter refer exclusively to the three economies of Australia. The term “regional members” used in some tables refers to all 48 regional members of ADB. Money. the data for Brunei Darussalam are presented under the group of developing member economies. The MDGs and themes in Parts II and III start with a short commentary with charts and boxes describing progress made by countries toward selected targets and key trends of selected indicators. and IV. and estimation methods recommended by the United Nations and other applicable international agencies. for an earlier year or period (usually 1990 or 1995). plus individual tables for the 48 regional members of ADB. The remaining 44 developing members and Brunei Darussalam are further grouped into five based on ADB’s operational regions. The 48 economies have been broadly grouped into developing and developed members aligned with the operational effectiveness of ADB’s regional departments. The indicators are presented according to the United Nations revised MDG framework. Data for the MDG indicators. South Asia. measurement issues. Nevertheless. and international statistical agencies. Finance. Japan.asp. regional members invariably develop and use their own concepts. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Part IV defines the indicators in the MDGs and regional tables.

China (until 1999) 16 July 2009–15 July 2010 = 2010 Nepal 1 October 2009–30 September 2010 = 2010 Lao People’s Democratic Republic (after 1992). Marshall Islands. Myanmar. India. New Zealand. Whenever the statistical series (for example. Federated States of Micronesia. as follows: Fiscal Year and Year Captions for the Regional Members 21 March 2010–20 March 2011 = 2010 Afghanistan July 2009–30 June 2010 = 2010 Cook Islands (after 1990) 1 April 2010–31 March 2011 = 2010 Brunei Darussalam (after 2002). Nauru.xxiii Fiscal Year The data cutoff date for this issue is July 2011. Thailand Key Symbols … – 0 or 0. Japan. China. these are presented under single-year captions corresponding to the period under which most of the fiscal year falls. Singapore 1 April 1999–31 March 2000 = 1999 Indonesia (until 1999) 1 July 2009–30 June 2010 = 2010 Australia. Bangladesh. Samoa.0 * | > < ≥ ≤ na Data not available at cutoff date Magnitude equals zero Magnitude is less than half of unit employed Provisional/preliminary/estimate/budget figure Marks break in series Greater than Less than Greater than or equal to Less than or equal to Not applicable Measurement Units kg km kWh kt kilogram kilometer kilowatt-hour kiloton Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Tonga 1 July 1999–30 June 2000 = 2000 Taipei. Twenty-four regional members have varying fiscal years not corresponding to the calendar year. Pakistan. Palau. national accounts or government finance) are compiled on a fiscal year basis. Hong Kong. Bhutan.

insurance. China Household Income Project Survey cost. and freight carbon dioxide yuan consumer price index Development Assistance Committee developing member country Directly Observed Treatment Short Course employment guarantee scheme Employees Provident Fund Organization freedom of association and collective bargaining Food and Agriculture Organization foreign direct investment free on board free trade zones gross capital formation gross domestic product gross national income human development index human immunodeficiency virus Inter-American Development Bank International Comparison Program International Labour Organization International Monetary Fund International Standard Industrial Classification Integrated Service Solutions information technology International Telecommunication Union kebutuhan fisik minimum (minimum physical needs) Key Indicators of the Labour Market Latin America and the Caribbean Lao People’s Democratic Republic local currency unit Labor Force Survey Labor Force Survey public use file Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .xxiv Abbreviations and Acronyms ADB ADB SDBS AIDS ADO AMD APO ARIS/REDS ASI BOD BOP BPNG BPO BPS CEIC CHIPS CIF CO2 CNY CPI DAC DMC DOTS EGS EPFO FACB FAO FDI FOB FTZ GCF GDP GNI HDI HIV IADB ICP ILO IMF ISIC ISS IT ITU KFM KILM LAC Lao PDR LCU LFS LFS-PUF Asian Development Bank Asian Development Bank Statistical Database System acquired immunodeficiency syndrome Asian Development Outlook Armenia Dram Asian Productivity Organization Additional Rural Income Survey and Rural and Economic Demographic Survey Annual Survey of Industries biochemical oxygen demand balance of payments Bank of Papua New Guinea business process outsourcing Badan Pusat Statistik CEIC Data Company Ltd.

“$” refers to United States dollars. Scientific and Cultural Organization United Nations Children’s Fund United Nations Human Settlements Programme United Nations Industrial Development Organization United Nations Statistics Division United Nations University–World Institute for Development Economics Research United Nations World Tourism Organization United States United States dollar World Development Indicators World Health Organization World Values Survey xxv Unless otherwise indicated. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .Abbreviations and Acronyms Log(perCapGDP) MDG MENA MOF. Government of India National Bureau of Statistics National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganized Sector National Rural Employment Guarantee Act National Statistics Office National Sample Survey National Sample Survey Organization National Statistical Service of the Republic of Armenia National Sample Survey Employment-Unemployment Survey Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ordinary least squares price level index purchasing power parity People’s Republic of China Reserve Bank of Fiji Reserve Bank of India renminbi Indonesian rupiah Indian rupees National Labor Force Survey of Indonesia special economic zones System of National Accounts Secretariat of the Pacific Community Sub-Saharan Africa small-scale industry National Socioeconomic Survey tuberculosis technical and vocational education and training United Nations on HIV/AIDS United Nations Development Programme United Nations Economic Commission for Europe United Nations Educational. GOI NBS NCEUS NREGA NSO NSS NSSO NSSRA NSS-EUS OECD OLS PLI PPP PRC RBF RBI RMB Rp Rs SAKERNAS SEZ SNA SPC SSA SSI SUSENAS TB TVET UNAIDS UNDP UNECE UNESCO UNICEF UN-HABITAT UNIDO UNSD UNU-WIDER UNWTO US USD WDI WHO WVS logarithm of per capita gross domestic product Millennium Development Goal Middle East and North Africa Ministry of Finance.

Nontechnical explanations and brief analyses of the MDG achievements and economic. Data are grouped under MDG and Regional Tables. The country tables are not available in printed form but are available in CD-ROM and at ADB’s website. financial. social. It identifies some of the major constraints and challenges that countries may face in improving and increasing the quality of employment and potential policies that can be used to resolve or mitigate some of these challenges.e. and environmental developments are included. The special chapter in Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 “Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia” looks at the importance of growth of good quality (i. environmental. It presents the latest available economic. social.xxvi Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 The Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 is the flagship annual statistical data book of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). The regional tables are based largely on a comprehensive set of country tables. financial.. stable and well-paid) jobs. and Millennium Development Goals (MDG) indicators for regional members of ADB. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .

facilitating migration of labor from rural to urban areas. Middle-income countries that have a sizable modern sector and are starting to face reduced surplus labor from the traditional sector may wish to consider the following: • They will need to continue to promote trade and foreign direct investment (FDI) while devising ways to move up the value chain in the modern sector. India (4. informal workers are more vulnerable to poverty and have little or no social protection coverage compared with workers in the formal sector. If left unremedied. While the share of informal work has decreased. and hence. they will each face a different set of constraints and challenges in generating higher quality employment. Thus. the transition. and providing social protection. strengthening the business climate with infrastructure and moderate regulation. remained stable and lackluster compared with that in other regions (Figure 2). as proxied by the share of employers and salaried and wage workers in the number employed. poor environmental conditions. However. and examines patterns and trends in employment and the quality of employment in Asia. The chapter argues that active public intervention may be needed to enhance the quality of employment on a sustained basis. policies should be tailored to each one’s context. or in some cases even started. Such intervention may include opening the economy to trade and competition. Generating Higher Quality Employment in Asia Remains a Challenge Asia’s remarkable 6. The chapter details the importance of the quality of employment to social and economic outcomes. developing skills and human capital through education and training. Policies for Generating Higher Quality Employment in Asia Countries in Asia and the Pacific are at different stages of development and the structure of their labor markets. the creation of higher quality employment. as shown in an examination of a select set of countries within Asia. Middleincome economies that have successfully made the transition from traditional to modern economic sectors still pay low wages. thereby endangering the sustainability of growth. investing in innovation. economic landscapes. This will create greater productivity growth so both wages and other employment benefits can rise. and the Republic of Korea (4.9%).6%). and mismatches between jobs and skills persist in the work place. wages and working conditions. presumably. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . which has been remarkably higher than in all other regions in recent decades.1% yearly growth in real gross domestic product per capita (in 2005 purchasing power parity terms) between 1990 and 2008 was led by the People’s Republic of China (9. Improving the quality of employment is therefore a critical and necessary task for continuing progress toward sustainable and inclusive economic growth in Asia. focusing on more complex industrial products and services. Structural transformation has led to a huge shift from employment in the lower productivity agriculture sector to the higher value-added industrial and services sectors (Figure 1). The chapter clarifies the current state of development and identifies which countries may face particular constraints or need further interventions to improve the quality of their employment. This special chapter emphasizes the crucial role of higher quality employment as the critical link between economic growth and poverty. Because of the differences between countries. and there are various means by which these can be achieved. Most policies and recommendations are intended to increase productivity. was accompanied by strong employment growth and poverty reduction. while other economies have not yet completed. Uncertain incomes.Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 xxvii Part 1: Special Chapter Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia The impressive economic growth experienced by developing Asia. creating inefficiencies that reduce social welfare and result in lower productivity. and population growth are varied. these issues may ultimately impede economic growth as they can cause income inequality and lead to social tensions. But behind this rosy picture is the daunting fact that the quality of jobs in Asia remains inadequate and that the region lags far behind more advanced economies in providing workers with higher quality employment.1%). it continues to comprise the majority of employment opportunities in many countries throughout developing Asia. This is a concern because.

will need to increase the quantity of employment offered. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . organized through regional cooperation. technological innovation. building human capital through general and higher quality secondary and tertiary education will become crucial. • Informal workers need to be provided with a basic level of social protection that is financially sustainable and can allow them to maintain a minimal level of welfare and protection against severe adverse shocks. Much of the shift has been enabled by policies that have facilitated structural transformation without neglecting the welfare of the rural workers. Generally. reduce technological innovation. Low-income countries that have large traditional sectors. using agricultural products as inputs. and lower productivity. may be especially key to raising overall employment and income prospects for rural people. may offer a mechanism to balance the disequilibria between countries that have expanding labor forces and countries with increasing labor needs. Such social protection will enable workers to be more productive and resilient to unexpected downturns. Rising incomes are often accompanied by highly unequal growth. Thus. these economies can help speed up the rate of structural transformation and create higher quality and more productive employment. Carefully targeting and training the youth so they have the skills and expectations that meet the labor market’s demands will be necessary to capitalize on this demographic dividend and to ensure that the youth immediately become productive members of the labor force.and supply-side policies and some level of social protection. • International migration. thus creating greater growth of employment in the modern sector. high rates of informal employment. Developing value-added manufacturing in the rural areas. • Countries with a contracting labor force—many people reaching retirement age and fewer youths entering the labor force—may need to reformulate the concept of what constitutes higher quality employment to entice the older population to remain in the productive work force. people from the rural sector may gain access to higher quality employment while the manufacturing sector can capitalize on lower labor cost. and market competitiveness will need to be addressed. • The large population that will remain informally employed could benefit from access to high quality technical and vocational education and training programs so they can develop specific skills and the human capital that will allow them to leverage their skills into higher incomes. This may require more flexible work hours and other nonpecuniary benefits. • By facilitating rural-to-urban migration. which allows monopolists to fully capture gains from higher productivity while wages stagnate. often in specific skills areas. Many countries in developing Asia have made substantial progress in shifting their workers to higher quality employment. Uncompetitive markets dominated by monopolists or oligopolists deter other firms from initiating or increasing production. issues of demographics.xxviii Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 • • Moving up the value chain and into a more industrialized and service-oriented economy. because the majority of workers will remain in the large traditional sector. will require a work force that has increasingly flexible skills and that brings innovative thinking to the table. such as pensions. Restrictive labor legislation can create disincentives for firms to enter the formal sector and may impede FDI and domestic investment. however. labor legislation. This will require diversifying the types of social protection measures provided from basic health care into more varied products. Asian countries can make substantial progress toward developing higher quality employment that will enable them to continue reducing poverty and achieving stable and inclusive economic growth. the level and breadth of social protection coverage will have to be built up to ensure that worker’s conditions meet minimum standards and that social stability is maintained. • Productivity in rural areas needs to be improved. With appropriate demand. Demographics will play a substantial challenge in moving toward higher quality employment. and a large mass of youth reaching working age. and labor forces with low levels of education may need to consider the following: • By increasing trade and FDI in the modern sector. Relaxing and reforming such legislation so firms will enter the formal sector is crucial to their gaining greater access to capital so they can grow and take advantage of economies of scale. Breaking monopolies and oligopolies and inducing competition into markets is especially crucial in countries with a highly skilled labor force and an excess supply of labor. • Countries with an expanding labor force. and infrastructure. therefore. This may be done by developing financial services.

CHIPS 1988. Sources: Staff estimates using interpolated data from ILO LABORSTA and ILO KILM.8 16. by region.2 61. except that NBS.2 4.5 7.2 0.3 Developing Asia Developing Europe 1990 Latin America and the Caribbean 2008 OECD OECD = Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.3 Figure 2 Distribution of Workers by Sector of Employment and by 40 Percentage of industry employment in total employment.5 31.3 86.2 28.2 12.9 65.3 100 80 60 40 20 0 Percentage of salaried and wage workers in total employment.9 67. by region. 1990 and 2008 31.1 3.2 33. by region.9 Percentage of agriculture employment in total employment. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .4 26. 1990 and 2008 71.5 30.9 57.3 54.7 20 17. 2002 and Employment census 2004 and 2008 were used for the People's Republic of China and NSSO.9 8. 1990 and 2008 81.4 83. by region.8 62.4 17.8 14.1 13.0 3. 1990 and 2008 5. CHIPS 1988.2 24.0 xxix Figure 1 Distribution of Workers by Employment Status and by 80 60 40 20 0 30. NSS-EUS for India.8 82.6 59. 1990 and 2008 66. 1995.9 Developing Europe 1990 4.7 36.4 29. Figure 2 Distribution of Workers by Sector of Employment and by Geographical Region Geographical Region 80 60 Percent 40 20 0 43.7 Developing Asia 0.2 2. 2002 and employment census 2004 and 2008 were used for the People's Republic of China and NSSO. by region.3 18.0 Percent 23. 1990 and 2008 68.6 24.8 Latin America and the Caribbean 2008 OECD OECD = Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Sources: Staff estimates using interpolated data from ILO LABORSTA and ILO KILM. by region. NSS-EUS for India.6 80 60 Percent 40 20 0 32.Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Geographical Status Figure 1 Distribution of Workers by EmploymentRegion and by Geographical Region Percentage of informal workers in total employment. except that NBS.8 10 8 6 4 2 0 Percentage of employers in total employment. 1995.4 0 Percentage of services employment in total employment.9 31.0 5.9 16.

there has been no meaningful improvement among children in the poorest 20% of households while underweight prevalence has fallen by almost a third for children from the richest 20% of households. it is likely that both Bangladesh and India might miss the poverty target. While this is a 70% success in terms of the number of countries. The region will contribute significantly to achieving the global poverty target. Most economies are likely to miss the target of cutting the proportion of underweight children by half. India.xxx Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Part II: Millennium Development Goals A large majority of economies in Asia and the Pacific have made substantial progress in achieving most of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). • MDG 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education Enrollment ratios in primary schools are 95% or higher in 18 economies but in Nepal and Pakistan. hunger is still widespread. Bangladesh has done best among the five most populous economies in reducing child mortality by 65%. followed by Indonesia. a lot needs to be done to promote inclusive growth. Strong economic growth and rising household incomes in the region will allow most countries to meet the poverty target. reduce disparities in income. Despite these gains. with more than 40% of children in Bangladesh and India being underweight. There is less success in tertiary education. and Pakistan. gains are not enough to meet the target of reducing the rates by two-thirds. Substantial progress has also been made in achieving the targets for school enrollment. gender parity in education. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . • MDG 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women Most economies have or are expected to reach the target of gender parity in both primary education (37 out of 43) and secondary education (33 out of 42). the People’s Republic of China is next with a drop of 58%. Enrollment is only the first step to formal schooling and progress in completing a full course of primary school is slow in many economies. most countries lag behind in achieving the target. This is an achievement in itself even though overall progress toward most of the targets continues to be mixed and uneven across countries. reducing maternal and child mortality. in South Asia. Income disparities within countries may exacerbate the problems. although in most economies. There are wide disparities in women’s and men’s access to wage employment outside agriculture. For example. • MDG 4: Reduce Child Mortality Good progress has been achieved in reducing under-five child mortality rates. 45%. tuberculosis. Bhutan. On the hunger target. Only 13 are expected to meet the target—and Bangladesh. With 2015 approaching in less than 5 years. and India. 17 out of the 24 economies for which data are available are expected to achieve the poverty target by 2015. and other diseases. and providing improved sanitation. India. 21 out of 35 economies have already achieved parity or are expected to do so by 2015. with particularly low rates in Afghanistan. such as keeping the children in school to complete a full course of primary education. and Indonesia are among those making slow progress. Underweight prevalence in South Asia is highest in the world and almost twice as high as in Sub-Saharan Africa. 55%. But slow progress has been made in MDGs that require better quality of service delivery. across goals. 33%. the ratios are below 80%. and within countries. Only 10 economies are likely to meet the target. and achieve health and hunger targets even in countries with high economic growth. and access to safe drinking water. International cooperation and sustained donor funding are halting and reversing the spread of HIV/AIDS. Bangladesh. • MDG 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger Extreme poverty declined substantially in the region and given current trends. nevertheless. while some progress has been made. with sharpest reductions in the People’s Republic of China.

Twelve economies still have above 100 maternal deaths per 100. with less than 10 users per 100 population in 17 economies. On the other hand. including Bangladesh. and Pakistan are lagging. Malaria. • MDG 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development In most economies of the region. Only four economies. deforestation increased in several economies. debt service as a percentage of exports of goods and services has fallen substantially. • MDG 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability Between 1990 and 2010. Cambodia.Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 • MDG 5: Improve Maternal Health Progress to reduce by three-quarters the maternal mortality ratio has seen some success but wide disparities remain. and Other Diseases HIV/AIDS is particularly a problem in Southeast Asia. The target to reduce by three-quarters the number of births not attended by a skilled health professional has been achieved by 11 economies. India. among them the People’s Republic of China. These included Thailand. percentages of land and marine areas protected to maintain biological diversity increased in almost all. but disparities between the rich and the poor economies are striking.000 live births in contrast to often less than 10 per 100. which has the highest rate of HIV infection in the region.000 live births in developed economies. and the Republic of Korea. New Zealand. Economies are having more success with providing improved drinking water than with improved sanitation. xxxi • MDG 6: Combat HIV/AIDS. and only 50% of the population in Asia and the Pacific uses improved sanitation facilities. and five more are expected to do so. Japan. Others. There has been substantial improvement in providing access to antiretroviral treatment since 2004 but no economy has achieved universal access and only four economies had achieved 60% or better coverage by 2009. are expected to achieve the target. compared to 75 users per 100 population in Australia. Improved sanitation is much less accessible in rural areas. Fixed telephone line subscriptions have also grown along with enormous growth in cellular phone subscriptions. and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Internet use has grown considerably.

The unweighted average growth for 37 economies went up from 1. Japan. the slow recovery in the industrial economies of North America and Europe may falter. Migrant workers’ remittances recovered in economies where they were affected by the economic crisis in 2009 and international tourist arrivals and tourism receipts have also rebounded.xxxii Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Part III: Region at a Glance Throughout Asia and the Pacific. and fourth largest of the world’s economies. the recent fall in foreign direct investment appears to have been halted.” Asia and the Pacific generated one-third of the global GDP (in purchasing power parity terms) in 2009. Since 2000. more than a fifth of the population could be 65 or over by 2050 in several economies. third. But with the fall in birth rates. while another five were in the bottom group of “Low Human Development. and international tourist arrivals have also risen sharply. affecting recovery in this region. increasing the vulnerability of the poor in these countries. Finance. In 2010. In current dollars. per capita GDP of Singapore—the richest country—was 45 times that of Nepal—the poorest. This was in contrast to an equally sharp depreciation for most currencies in 2009. Intra-Asian exports accounted for nearly 54% of total exports of Asia and the Pacific in 2010.9% in 2010. Most Asian currencies appreciated sharply against the United States dollar in 2010. Overall. Asia’s economic progress. migrants’ remittances have resumed their upward trend.1% and this rose to 4. there has been considerable convergence of per capita GDP in Asia and the Pacific. affecting consumer purchasing power. respectively the second. seven economies from the region including Australia. with the People’s Republic of China. the simple average inflation rate for 43 economies was 4. In most economies of the region. Consumer prices edged up in 2010. There are fears that the recovery may stoke inflation as consumer prices generally edged up further in 2010 and food prices in many countries continued to rise faster than those of other items. The year 2010 also saw a strong recovery in GDP growth throughout the region as developing Asian economies proved their resilience after the 2008–2009 crisis. although there are still some striking disparities across economies. In 2009. and Prices • Globalization Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . comes at the cost of rising emissions of greenhouse gases and loss of forest cover in many countries. however.8% in 2010. • Economy and Output • Money. In only four economies was growth of GDP slower in 2010 than in 2009. • People Population growth rates in most economies of Asia and the Pacific are declining. posing threats to environmentally sustainable growth. food prices continued to rise faster than those of other consumer items. gross domestic product (GDP) growth in 2010 has recovered significantly after the economic downturn of 2008–2009. and India. populations are still quite young with less than 15% aged 65 or over. and the United Nations’ latest population projections indicate that the share of Asia and the Pacific in the global population will decline to 50% in 2050 from its present share of 56%. The 18% fall in the dollar value of all exports in 2009 was replaced by 30% growth in 2010 and all major exporters benefitted. exports rebounded in 2010 after a sharp fall in 2009. Japan. Although the recovery in 2010 demonstrates the resilience of Asia and the Pacific. Measured by the Human Development Index. and New Zealand were among the “Very High Human Development” group. especially that of the poor.4% in 2009 to 5. with an appreciation in excess of 5% in the currencies of more than 20 economies. Trade within the region is steadily growing but much of it is in parts and components: Europe and North America are still the main customers for the final output of factory Asia.

per capita emissions have risen in 16 of the 20 economies for which data are available. most economies have managed to improve their business environment by shortening the registration process. and by 2008. • Government and Governance Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . The days needed to register a new business vary enormously within the region—from 1 day to more than 100 days. Since 2000.Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 xxxiii • Transport. In 2008. most economies in the region were generating more GDP from a given input of energy than in 2000. the People’s Republic of China consumed nearly half of Asia’s energy. and New Zealand. Higher vehicle use comes with a cost and road accident deaths are rising in many economies. and Communications Vehicle ownership is growing rapidly together with expansion of road networks in the region. But in the last 5 years. though wide disparities exist in per capita consumption between the rich and poor economies in the region. Fiscal balances improved in 2010 as economies throughout the region recovered from the financial crisis. calling for action to make roads safer. the ratios are still mostly below 3% and well short of the 8%–14% ratios in the developed economies of Australia. although in these economies. • Energy and Environment With one-third share in global GDP. Energy productivity continues to rise. Asia’s economic progress brings rising emissions of greenhouse gases. Asia and the Pacific also uses over one-third of the world’s energy. Government spending on social security and welfare as a ratio to GDP has been rising in many economies. Electricity. Japan. Increasing industrialization and household electrification rates are leading to large increases in per capita electricity consumption.

Rep. of Georgia Viet Nam 0 20 40 60 80 Progress in poverty reduction in the region is encouraging. Thailand.25 (PPP) a day in 15 countries. States of Cambodia Bhutan Turkmenistan Philippines Pakistan Mongolia Tajikistan Indonesia China.25 (PPP) a Day. the Philippines. and Viet Nam. Fed. Earliest and Latest Years Nepal Bangladesh Uzbekistan India Timor-Leste Papua New Guinea Lao PDR Micronesia. of Mongolia Kazakhstan Uzbekistan Armenia Singapore Kyrgyz Republic Georgia Samoa Tuvalu 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Proportions of underweight children have been falling almost everywhere since the 1990s. Indonesia. However. 40% or more children are still underweight in India. Earliest Year Latest Year Figure H2 Percentage of Underweight Children. Earliest and Latest Years India Timor-Leste Bangladesh Nepal Afghanistan Lao PDR Pakistan Myanmar Cambodia Maldives Sri Lanka Philippines Viet Nam Indonesia Papua New Guinea Malaysia Tajikistan Bhutan Vanuatu Solomon Islands Turkmenistan Azerbaijan Thailand Fiji. Southeast Asia has done particularly well—Cambodia. and Viet Nam. India. Earliest Year Latest Year Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . of China. Nevertheless. The same is true for Bangladesh. including Bangladesh. more than 20% of the population still live on less than $1. People's Rep. despite a drop of 23 percentage points between 1992 and 2007.xxxiv Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Figure H1 Economies with More than 10% of the Population Living on Less than $1. with large reductions in the number of poor achieved in the People’s Republic of China. and Pakistan. People's Rep. Pakistan.

but in some. Twenty-nine countries have already achieved gender equality in secondary education. Only three countries are expected to miss the target—Afghanistan. of Mongolia Indonesia Hong Kong. These include Bangladesh. and Indonesia. Proportion of Pupils Starting Grade 1 Who Reach Last Grade of Primary Total Net Enrollment Ratio Figure H4 Progress toward Target for Gender Equality in Secondary Education Early Achievers Armenia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Bhutan Brunei Darussalam China. China Indonesia Kazakhstan Kiribati Korea. the ratios are below 80%. India and Pakistan are among them. Rep. of Kyrgyz Republic Uzbekistan Bangladesh Cambodia Bhutan Azerbaijan Lao PDR Marshall Islands Nepal Pakistan 0 20 40 60 80 100 xxxv Enrollment ratios in primary schools are 95% or higher in 18 countries. of Georgia Hong Kong. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Five more are expected to do so by 2015 at the latest. China Tajikistan Vanuatu Brunei Darussalam Tonga India Sri Lanka Georgia Viet Nam Malaysia Armenia Philippines Fiji. Economies where less than 80% of the children complete the course include Bangladesh. Rep. and Pakistan. India. not as many children complete the full course of primary education. and Tajikistan. People’s Republic of Cook Islands Fiji.Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Figure H3 Primary School Enrollment Ratios and Percentage of Pupils Starting Grade 1 Who Reach the Last Grade of Primary. While enrollment is the first step to schooling. Latest Year Japan Kiribati Kazakhstan Korea. Rep. Republic of Kyrgyz Republic On Track Cambodia India Nepal Slow Progress Lao People’s Democratic Republic No Progress/Regressing Afghanistan Tajikistan Pakistan Solomon Islands Malaysia Maldives Marshall Islands Mongolia Myanmar Nauru Palau Philippines Samoa Sri Lanka Thailand Tonga Uzbekistan Vanuatu Gender equality in secondary education has become a reality in the region. the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. the People’s Republic of China.

China. Cambodia. however. the risk of death is much higher for infants in poor families especially in Armenia. Overall. the progress made so far means that nearly 6. men hold more than 60% of wage jobs outside agriculture. Lowest Quintile Highest Quintile Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . the Kyrgyz Republic. Rep.xxxvi Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Figure H5 Percentage Share of Women in Wage Employment in the Nonagricultural Sector Mongolia Kyrgyz Republic Kazakhstan Hong Kong. where they are more than twice as high. Only in the Maldives does family income seem not to matter greatly. Figure H6 Infant Mortality Rates. In 17 economies.000 fewer infants in the region are dying each day now compared with 1990. Indonesia. India. and Viet Nam.China Thailand Singapore Cambodia Azerbaijan Korea. an infant’s chance of survival depends on the parents’ income. Four economies had ratios around 50%—Hong Kong. and Mongolia. the job market is open equally to women and men. China Georgia Taipei. of Bhutan Bangladesh Afghanistan India Pakistan 0 10 20 30 40 50 Wide gaps continue in women’s access to paid employment outside agriculture. the Philippines. India. and Pakistan are striking cases: here men outnumber women by four to one. of Philippines Viet Nam Armenia Uzbekistan Malaysia Vanuatu Kiribati Tajikistan Tuvalu Indonesia Lao PDR Sri Lanka Brunei Darussalam Maldives Fiji. Rep. Bangladesh. Elsewhere. Highest and Lowest Wealth Quintiles Cambodia Pakistan Turkmenistan Kyrgyz Republic India Nepal Kazakhstan Bangladesh Timor-Leste Indonesia Uzbekistan Azerbaijan Armenia Philippines Viet Nam Maldives 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 In most developing economies. Afghanistan. Kazakhstan. In these economies.

respectively. 2004 and 2009 Cambodia Lao PDR Georgia Thailand Papua New Guinea Philippines Viet Nam Fiji.200 Figure H8 Percentage of the Population with Advanced HIV Infection Having Access to Antiretroviral Drugs.000 live births) Lao PDR Nepal Timor-Leste Bangladesh Cambodia Pakistan Papua New Guinea Myanmar Indonesia India Bhutan Solomon Islands Philippines Kyrgyz Republic Turkmenistan Mongolia Tajikistan Viet Nam Thailand Georgia Kazakhstan Sri Lanka China. Afghanistan (not in the graph) and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic had ratios of 1. Countries with coverage of 60% or more include Cambodia. Most countries have seen major gains in providing antiretroviral treatment to those in need since 2004. of Singapore Taipei. Rep. Ten others have rates between 100 and 580 in contrast to often less than 10 in developed economies. of Brunei Darussalam Korea. and Thailand. China xxxvii Maternal mortality ratios have declined substantially but are still unacceptably high in many economies. the ratios are still below 40%. of Kazakhstan Armenia Malaysia Bangladesh Indonesia Azerbaijan Sri Lanka Myanmar Maldives Bhutan Kyrgyz Republic Nepal Tajikistan Mongolia Pakistan 0 20 2004 40 60 2009 80 100 Some Southeast Asian countries have the highest HIV/AIDS infection rates in the region. Rep. Rep. of Azerbaijan Maldives Malaysia Uzbekistan Armenia Fiji. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .400 and 580.China Hong Kong.Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Figure H7 Maternal Mortality Ratio. 1990 and 2008 (deaths per 100.000 1. the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. For most countries. People's Rep. 0 200 1990 400 600 800 2008 1.

People's Rep. 00 0 6. of United States India Germany Canada United Kingdom Indonesia France Pakistan Bangladesh Emissions in developing economies are rising with economic growth. 00 0 4. States of Cambodia India Pakistan Lao PDR Kiribati Azerbaijan Mongolia Afghanistan Timor-Leste Nepal Indonesia Palau Papua New Guinea Bhutan Marshall Islands Viet Nam Vanuatu Armenia Philippines China. Figure H10 Urban/Rural Ratio of the Proportion of Population Using an Improved Sanitation Facility. In the Asia and Pacific region. 00 0 7. Rep. 00 0 Per Capita Emissions (metric tons) On a per capita basis. United States Canada Germany United Kingdom France China. People's Rep. of Myanmar Tuvalu Bangladesh Maldives Georgia Tonga Turkmenistan Kyrgyz Republic Tajikistan Malaysia Uzbekistan Samoa Korea. only 50% of the population have improved sanitation facilities and 23% still defecate in open areas. of Indonesia India Pakistan Bangladesh 0 5 Industrialized 10 15 Most Populous 20 0 1. 2008 Solomon Islands Micronesia. although the People’s Republic of China is getting close to France. while India has overtaken Germany as the third largest. The People’s Republic of China is now the biggest emitter of carbon dioxide. of Japan Cook Islands Australia Kazakhstan Thailand Sri Lanka 0 2 4 6 Improved sanitation is considerably less accessible to rural areas.xxxviii Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Figure H9 Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Five Industrialized Economies and in the Five Most Populous Economies of Asia Total Emissions (million metric tons) China. People's Rep. the five industrialized economies are ahead of the five large Asian economies. Fed. 00 0 3. 00 0 2. 00 0 5. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . 00 0 8.

Net reproduction rates range from 0.5%) and Taipei. States of Tonga Kiribati Kyrgyz Republic –16 –12 2009 The year 2010 saw a strong recovery throughout the region. China Viet Nam Georgia Korea. Pakistan.30) Low Fertility (0.5 in Taipei.95–1. Fed. of Japan Korea. People’s Rep. People's Rep. of Kyrgyz Republic Nepal Lao PDR Kazakhstan Mongolia India Sri Lanka Cambodia Turkmenistan Uzbekistan New Zealand Bhutan Bangladesh Indonesia Brunei Darussalam Azerbaijan Australia Myanmar Viet Nam Maldives Armenia Thailand Georgia China. up from 1.China (10.5%) continued to grow strongly. of Maldives India Uzbekistan Sri Lanka Lao PDR Thailand Philippines Malaysia Solomon Islands Papua New Guinea Kazakhstan Hong Kong.China to 2.China 0.95) Figure H12 Percentage Growth of Real Gross Domestic Product. China Taipei. with Singapore (14.0 0. Fed.5 2. 2009 and 2010 Singapore Taipei. India. of Mongolia Indonesia Timor-Leste Cambodia Bangladesh Azerbaijan Nepal Japan Pakistan Vanuatu Brunei Darussalam Australia Armenia Samoa Micronesia. Rep. The People’s Republic of China (10. States of Philippines Tajikistan Pakistan Malaysia Fiji.China Myanmar China. The high-fertility economies include seven Pacific island economies and Afghanistan.5–0.8%) reporting a striking turnaround from negative growth in 2009. and Tajikistan.Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Figure H11 Net Reproduction Rate: Expected Numbers of Daughters per Woman Timor-Leste Afghanistan Solomon Islands Tonga Samoa Vanuatu Papua New Guinea Micronesia.5 1. High Fertility (more than 1. The unweighted average growth for 37 economies in the region was 5. Rep. and Indonesia—are in the medium-fertility band. The People’s Republic of China is in the low-fertility group while the other three most populous economies—Bangladesh.0 1.30) Intermediate Fertility (0.0 2.0 xxxix Asia and the Pacific contains some very high-fertility and some very low-fertility economies.5 daughters per woman in Timor-Leste. –8 –4 0 2010 4 8 12 16 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Only two economies reported negative growth in GDP in real terms as against 15 economies in 2009.9% in 2010.5 3.3%) and India (8. Rep. the Philippines. of Singapore Hong Kong.4% in 2009.

35%. China New Zealand Malaysia Palau Taipei. People's Rep. food prices continued to rise faster than those of other consumer items but the differences were not usually large. States of Thailand China. Australia. of Indonesia Maldives Turkmenistan Cambodia Philippines Tonga Micronesia. Rep. of Australia Singapore Vanuatu Hong Kong. India recorded a growth of 40%. Most of these countries had seen their merchandise exports contract by 15% or more a year before. 38%. Fed.China India Australia Malaysia Thailand Indonesia Viet Nam Kazakhstan Philippines New Zealand Azerbaijan Pakistan Bangladesh Uzbekistan Brunei Darussalam Myanmar Sri Lanka Papua New Guinea Cambodia Mongolia Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Georgia Tajikistan Armenia Nepal Fiji.xl Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Figure H13 Consumer Price Indexes. 31%. 33%. Overall.8% in 2010. 2009 and 2010 Asia and Pacific Region China. Rep. In 2009 the simple average inflation rate for the 43 economies was 4. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Rep. the 18% fall in the dollar value of exports in 2009 was replaced by 30% growth in 2010. 2009 and 2010 (annual percentage change) Pakistan Georgia Mongolia Myanmar Tajikistan Nepal Uzbekistan India Armenia Kyrgyz Republic Bangladesh Bhutan Kazakhstan Papua New Guinea Lao PDR Sri Lanka Azerbaijan Fiji. Japan. –5 0 2009 5 10 2010 15 20 25 Figure H14 Percentage Growth of Merchandise Exports. food prices actually rose more slowly than the all-items index.China Solomon Islands Viet Nam Samoa Brunei Darussalam Timor-Leste Cook Islands Japan Consumer price inflation edged up in 2010 along with higher commodity prices and the economic recovery after 2009. The sharp fall in merchandise exports in 2009 became strong growth in 2010. For Asia and the Pacific as a whole. People's Rep.1% and this rose to 4. Indonesia. China Singapore Taipei. of Bhutan Solomon Islands Maldives Vanuatu Timor-Leste Palau Samoa Tonga –60 –40 2009 –20 0 20 2010 40 60 80 The year 2010 saw a dramatic turnaround in Asia’s exports. Rep. and in several economies. of Korea. and the People’s Republic of China. of Japan Korea. of Hong Kong.

000 population) Malaysia Kyrgyz Republic Mongolia Kazakhstan Georgia Thailand Bhutan Brunei Darussalam Viet Nam Turkmenistan Armenia Azerbaijan Korea. Arrivals registered growth of more than 8% in each of the major destinations except for Malaysia (4%).000 50. By comparison. Figure H16 Road Accident Deaths. and the Republic of Korea (13%). of Sri Lanka Samoa Cambodia India Lao PDR Taipei. Eleven economies reduced their death rates over the period.000 30. 2000 and 2008 (deaths per 100. Fed. the Republic of Korea.Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Figure H15 International Tourist Arrivals. of Singapore Japan Solomon Islands Papua New Guinea Vanuatu Nepal Myanmar Pakistan Maldives Hong Kong. States of Philippines 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Vehicle ownership is rising throughout Asia. with particularly large percentage growth in Singapore (22%). of Tonga Uzbekistan Australia Kiribati Tajikistan Afghanistan China.China achieved reductions of 30% or more while Malaysia. People's Rep.000 10. only reduced road accident deaths by 6%. Among the economies with high vehicle ownership.000 population.000 20. the four largest countries in Western Europe. Hong Kong.000 40. Rep. and Taipei.China Indonesia New Zealand Fiji. of Indonesia Singapore Hong Kong. all with high vehicle ownership. China Korea. Rep. Rep. 2000–2010 (thousands) 60.000. Five economies had 20 or more fatalities per 100. 2000 2008 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . had fatality rates of less than 8 per 100. with the highest rate in the region. People's Rep. Japan. China (19%).000 0 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 07 20 08 20 09 20 10 xli China. but it comes with a cost. of Thailand India Malaysia International tourist arrivals in the eight most popular destinations of Asia and the Pacific were up by 11% in 2010 after falling by 1% in 2009. China Bangladesh Micronesia.

States of Uzbekistan Taipei. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . of Bhutan Viet Nam Vanuatu Philippines China. Rep. the region will soon become the dominant consumer in world energy markets. Figure H18 Number of Days for New Business Registration. of Mongolia Kyrgyz Republic Samoa Maldives Azerbaijan Afghanistan Hong Kong.China Armenia Korea. at more than 2% annually. to 105 days in Brunei Darussalam. 2000–2008 China. China Georgia Singapore New Zealand Philippines Uzbekistan Japan –2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Asia consumed over onethird of the world’s energy in 2008. with the highest growth of above 8% recorded by the People’s Republic of China. Between 2006 and 2010. Rep.China Turkmenistan Indonesia Myanmar Korea. from 1 day in New Zealand. of Sri Lanka Thailand Nepal India Palau Tajikistan Tonga Japan Pakistan Kiribati Kazakhstan Bangladesh Marshall Islands Malaysia Micronesia. of Nepal Australia Kyrgyz Republic Azerbaijan Tajikistan Sri Lanka Hong Kong. Fed. China Singapore Georgia Australia New Zealand 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2006 2010 The number of days needed to register a new business is one test of being “business–friendly. the increase in energy use is related to the increase in GDP. 2006 and 2010 Lao PDR Cambodia Timor-Leste Solomon Islands Papua New Guinea Indonesia Fiji. of Kazakhstan Viet Nam Malaysia Bangladesh Armenia Thailand Brunei Darussalam India Mongolia Cambodia Pakistan Taipei.xlii Highlights of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Figure H17 Average Annual Percentage Growth in Energy Use. People's Rep. Rep.” The time taken to register a new business varies enormously within the region. If the economies of Asia and the Pacific continue to grow as they have in the past decade. most economies in the region managed to improve their business environment by shortening their registration procedures. People's Rep. Energy use grew in most economies between 2000 and 2008. In general.

PART I SPECIAL ChAPtEr Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia .

.

Dominican Republic. with 4. As such. in turn.448 1. high population growth exacerbates the low earnings received in the traditional sector. Canada. Estonia. significantly faster than the OECD at 0. Guatemala. at 2.176 1. Belgium. Bolivia.963 246. with 9.031 7. and ILO (2011c). Czech Republic. and the Republic of Korea. job creation. [2]-[4] and [6]-[8] ILO (2011b).25 per day in purchasing power parity terms fell from 903 million to 754 million just between 2005 and 2008. or accurately quantifies differences in subjective evaluations. Denmark. Many low-income economies in Asia have barely begun their transition from the traditional to the modern sector. Nepal (67%). PPP = purchasing power parity.5%.4% per year between 1990 and 2008. Israel. Panama.2.516. Italy.9%.071 6. Colombia.6 1. in some emerging economies.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia 3 SPECIAL CHAPTER Introduction and Background Of all the regions in the world. Even in emerging economies that have experienced substantial job creation. Iceland. poverty reduction. World Development Indicators. Thailand. Latin America and The Caribbean: Argentina. and poverty reduction. Paraguay. Ecuador. and the Republic of Korea have grown by 5.6%. Peru. In these economies. China. Philippines.0 0. of.587. Employment in developing Asia grew by an average annual rate of 1. KILM. Indonesia. Luxembourg. and developing Europe at 0. In these economies.2. Slovenia. Malaysia. as the pressure to remain competitive has created even greater incentives to keep the cost of labor low and employment relations informal.8 0. New Zealand. Sources: Staff estimates using interpolated data from [1] and [5] World Bank (2011b).150 1. While informal employment offers a cushion to workers during economic Table 1 Per Capita GDP and Labor Force Statistics. For the purposes of this chapter. at 1. and developing Europe.1 0. The region has enjoyed tremendous economic growth. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Latin America and the Caribbean. Notes: Developing Asia: Bangladesh.540 1. during this period.9%. Switzerland.9 GDP = gross domestic product.833 6. France. India. by Region Levels (2008) Compounded annual growth (1990–2008) Real GDP per Region GDP per capita Labor force Unemployment Employed capita (2005 $ PPP) (in '000) rate (in '000) (2005 $ PPP) Population Labor force Employment [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Developing Asia 4. The strong economic growth has been accompanied by growth in employment and. Poland. Norway. CHIP 1988. LABORSTA except that NBS (various years). 2002 and employment census 2004 and 2008 were used for the People's Republic of China and NSSO (various years). Maldives. Finland. Moreover.5 Developing Europe 12.1 128. 1995. Greece. respectively. with real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (in 2005 purchasing power parity terms) growing by an average of 6. Germany. where “unlimited supplies of labor” from the traditional sector are attracted to the modern sector (Lewis 1954). Netherlands.5 2. Dominica. Brazil. Wan and Sebastian (forthcoming) estimated that the number of people in developing Asia living on less than $1. the Lewis model of development applies. Republic of Korea. It is difficult to measure the quality of employment in a manner that takes into account all possible tradeoffs between its different dimensions. Spain. Hungary. Developing Europe: Lithuania.551 138.5% (Table 1). The modern sector in these countries will need to move to higher valueadded production to ensure that the quality of employment continues to rise. Due to the low opportunity cost of this surplus labor. the quality of employment is primarily measured by the status of employment and/or the ratio of employment in the informal sector. Living standards have improved for billions of people. at 1. and Viet Nam (58%). it has largely been driven by massive structural transformation (the PRC is a good example) from the low-productivity traditional sector to low-cost manufacturing created by high exportled growth.9%. Examples include Cambodia. OECD = Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Nepal. Chile. Belize.5 2.234 515. Costa Rica. the Lewis model may soon no longer hold as the supply of labor from the traditional sector dwindles.1% average annual growth in real per capita income. substantially faster than in countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Globalization has added to the challenge. United States. While structural transformation from the traditional to the manufacturing sector increases society’s welfare. India. Mexico. Portugal. 2. Honduras. and thus make further investments.5 OECD 34. Russian Federation.8%. Sweden.3 1. and 2.4 1.9 1.8 0.1% (Table 1). is the reality that these achievements have been largely unequal and the quality of job creation in Asia has been inadequate. overall quality of employment remains low. Asia’s growth has been led by the People’s Republic of China (PRC). OECD: Australia.1 Latin America and The Caribbean 9. Austria. although not as rapidly as in Latin America and the Caribbean. the modern sector is able to obtain large profits. Romania. India.9 485. Ireland.6 230.6 0. People's Rep. NSS-EUS for India. Kazakhstan. United Kingdom.5 1.743 5.2 times. Japan. El Savador. Many lowincome economies have had only mild poverty reduction and job creation. developing Asia has experienced the most momentous change over the last five decades.1%. with 4. Per capita incomes of the PRC.545 4. at 1. in general the transformation has failed to significantly improve the quality of jobs in the modern sector. Pakistan. where 78% of the employed still work in agriculture.1 0. Behind this rosy picture of economic growth.

1 This study finds that Asia lags far behind other regions (e. Due to greater social awareness and the rapid spread of information technology (and social networking).e. By 2030. growth in employment has not kept pace with growth in the labor force and the unemployment rate has been rising.0 crises. Thus. The quality of jobs is also important in noneconomic frontiers. When economic growth creates more and better (higher paying) jobs. NSS-EUS for India.2 4.8 82. Instead. by region.4 17. poverty reduction usually stalls. which has been a key driver of the global 1 Considerable research has used informal employment status as a signal of worse or lower quality employment and recognizes it is a rough proxy.e. Having a more diversified growth will also serve to reduce Asia’s vulnerabilities to external shocks. especially in the PRC and India. KILM and ILO (2011c). Japan. CHIP 1988. and mismatches between jobs and skills availability in informal sectors also create inefficiencies in the workplace that reduce social welfare and lower productivity. it continues to have one of the largest shares of informal employment in the employed population. by region. People are also demanding more transparency and responsiveness from their governments. Improving the quality of employment is important to sustain Asia’s growth and stability.2 2. poor environmental conditions. the benefits of informal employment may not be sufficient to achieve an acceptable standard of living because informal employment rarely comes with adequate wages. good working conditions.. 1990 and 2008 10 8 6 4 2 0 Developing Asia Developing Europe 1990 Latin America and the Caribbean 2008 OECD 0. even though Asia has been catching up in recent years.3 Percentage of salaried and wage workers in total employment. such as social cohesion and political stability.0 5.9 5.. they are now more concerned about relative income and social standing.5 Sources: Staff estimates using interpolated data from ILO (2011b). stable and well-paid) jobs (Kharas and Gertz 2010).9 65. informal employment can be taken as a rough proxy for lower quality employment. and the United States).4 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia economy. and assume the role that the American and European middle classes have traditionally played in the world order.8 30. The growth of higher quality employment in Asia also has an important role to play in “rebalancing” the global economy.8 81. 1995. Developing Asia’s informal employment share at 67% is over twice that of Latin America and the Caribbean and almost 9 times that of the OECD (Figure 1).8 62. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . The quality of jobs is important for reducing poverty and income inequality. While the region’s employment growth rate has exceeded its population growth.. Europe and North America) in generating quality jobs. Europe. Rebalancing Asia from an export-led to a more diversified growth will depend on the growth of domestic spending. there is an immediate effect on poverty reduction. (2009) and the ILO (2002). can become the next leading global consumers. LABORSTA except that NBS (various years). Relevant papers include Jütting et al. and social protection (e.3 86.4 29.. 2002 and employment census 2004 and 2008 were used for the People's Republic of China and NSSO. The demand for consumer goods in the developed world (e. Pratap and Quintin 2006). developing Asia may comprise 43% of worldwide consumption (ADB 2010).2 12. which in turn will depend on the growth of good (i. without inclusive growth it will be difficult to maintain stable economic growth in Asia.g.1 13.2 0. Figure 1 Distribution of Workers by Employment Status and by Geographical Region Percentage of informal workers in total employment.0 4. 80 60 40 20 0 30.g. 1990 and 2008 100 80 60 40 20 0 Percentage of employers in total employment. by region. although the share of workers in informal employment has decreased in developing Asia.9 67. However. When there is jobless growth.2 33.7 3. will likely remain sluggish as households in these countries are engaged in a long and painful process of deleveraging—i.. 1990 and 2008 68.4 83.g. increased saving in an effort to reduce their high levels of debt and to rebuild lost wealth. Uncertain incomes.9 8. generating more and higher quality employment is a continuing challenge for Asia and the Pacific. While there are clearly exceptions. The emerging middle class consumers of Asia. Thus. people are less satisfied with just having more income.

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .3 32.5%) than other regions (Figure 2). LABORSTA. investing in innovation.7 54. It contains low income. 1995. considering the significant amount of time needed to achieve this transition. It also contains some of the most modern cities and economies in the world. by region. and inclusive economic growth.6 59.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Asia is a region of tremendous cultural.1 3. and economic diversity. This breadth of experiences and characteristics requires that any policy prescription to improve the quality of employment must be carefully tailored to the particular economy where it is to be applied. At the same time.9 36.9 OECD = Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. CHIPS 1988. the next section discusses various aspects of employment quality.3 18.0 31. this chapter argues that active public intervention may be needed to create higher quality employment on a sustained basis. 1990 and 2008 40 31. For countries that still have a large traditional sector and high rates of population growth. strengthening the business climate with infrastructure services and moderate regulation. 1990 and 2008 66.2 61. through opening the economy to trade and competition. The last section explores a range of policy interventions aimed at raising the quality of employment in different developing Asian economies.8 16.5 7. except that NBS (various years).8 14. These economies also need to enhance the quality and safety of employment in general. which is one way to avoid the middle income trap and allow the emerging economies to achieve high-income status. such countries also need to enhance the quality of current employment and protect minimum workers’ rights in the traditional sector.9 Percent 23. By trying to develop higher quality employment and ultimately improving productivity.5 31.4 26. In general.2 0 Percentage of services employment in total employment. historical. 2002 and employment census 2004 and 2008 were used for the People's Republic of China and NSSO (various years). 1990 and 2008 80 60 Percent 40 20 0 Developing Asia Developing Europe 1990 Latin America and the Caribbean 2008 OECD 16. Figure 2 Distribution of Workers by Sector of Employment and by Geographical Region Percentage of agriculture employment in total employment. In other words. agrarian economies with high rates of population and labor force growth.4 28. as developing Asia has a much higher share of workers that remain employed in the lowproductivity agricultural sector (43. and ILO (2011c). and providing social protection. The third section details the importance of the quality of employment to social and economic outcomes. an important challenge is how to relocate employment away from low-wage manufacturing jobs toward more high-paying jobs. some general principles can be derived to help this enormous and diverse region move toward higher quality employment. the challenge is to create enough productive jobs to absorb new entrants into the labor force and promote transition from the traditional to the modern sector (which itself may improve the quality of employment).2 24. Asia can continue to achieve progress toward more sustainable. NSS-EUS for India. by region. developing skills and human capital through education and training. The fourth section examines patterns and trends in employment and the quality of employment in Asia to clarify the current state of development and identify which countries may face particular constraints or need further interventions to help the quality of employment.6 24.6 71. However. stable. Productivity growth and speeding the structural transformation are potentially keys to achieving higher quality employment. by region.3 57. As trying to capture the quality of employment is not straightforward.7 20 17. and then concludes. promoting rural–urban migration for labor. such economies need to go beyond the Lewis model and find ways to further increase labor productivity. The relocation will necessitate greater industrial diversification and promotion of industries with higher value added. Sources: Staff estimates using interpolated data from ILO (2011b).9 5 SPECIAL CHAPTER For countries with low population growth and that have successfully transformed their economies from the traditional to the modern sector. 80 60 Percent 40 20 0 Percentage of industry employment in total employment. KILM.3 43.

the definition tends to vary highly across. (2) employers. where the majority of work entails low-skill. social protection to ensure safe working conditions. Obviously. the “decent jobs” agenda can be more comprehensively implemented.. workers may be willing to give up extensive health insurance coverage for higher cash wages. The ILO’s decent work agenda comprises four goals: job generation. low-wage jobs. 2010). while own-account workers and contributing (unpaid) family workers have lower quality jobs. Informal employment.g. and what constitutes higher quality employment. In general. has lower productivity. ILO 2005. In all likelihood. “decency” remains very much an issue for the majority of workers. severance benefits. It is assumed that salaried and wage employees hold higher quality jobs. work-life balance. and job security. workers may be willing to trade off certain attributes against others. In addition. however. and is less likely to be covered by social protection programs than formal work. and even within. However. Even within developing countries. While informal work is sometimes taken up by choice rather than by circumstance. If such countries required all employers to provide full benefits. the countries’ competitiveness would be seriously eroded. countries. which have a larger proportion of high-skill and high–value-added jobs. and most informal workers are provided with few benefits (Maligalig and Martinez 2011). for that matter—that is able to provide all of the aspects of “decent work” in every job. for example salaried and wage employees working for small enterprises (fewer than 10 workers) rarely receive nonpecuniary benefits. the concept of the quality of employment. (4) contributing family workers. there are strong reasons why the quality of employment should be a focus of policymakers (Anderson et al. and adequate compensation in case of lost or reduced income. (3) own-account workers. in which case it might not be efficient for firms or the state to insist on providing all the attributes in one job. a rough definition of informal employment is used. in middle-income countries. and worker representation. This encapsulates measures of stable income as well as nonmonetary measures such as health insurance and other protection that minimize adverse shocks. In most developing countries. and is defined as people who are employed. For example. However. Decent work. workers are categorized as (1) salaried and wage employees. it is on average lower paid. and social protection. and data on job security are nearly impossible to come by except from detailed longitudinal data sets. most studies use employment status as a proxy for job quality. In the data. for this chapter. in particular.6 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia nonwage benefits. but are not employees or employers. access to health care. the concept of quality employment is likely to vary by income level. In the absence of this information. In many developed countries that tend to have strong labor market institutions with strict provisions for humane treatment of workers. is probably very different for a person in a developing economy than one in a developed economy. Another proxy for quality employment that is used in the literature is formal-sector (or organized-sector) employment. such as wage levels and degrees of employment security. it may be impractical— and onerous—for employers to provide extensive Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . in which case their welfare would be enhanced if employers were to offer them that alternative. serves as an indicator of the quality of employment generation. The quality of employment can take on a variety of dimensions. Much of the employment data used for cross-country comparisons are based on ILO LABORSTA. The biggest challenge to understanding and promoting quality employment is measuring it. such as pension. Moreover. this is not completely accurate. which includes salaried and wage employees working in registered (typically large) private companies and in the public sector (both government and publicsector enterprises). Few labor force surveys collect information on the nonpecuniary benefits of jobs. 2010). What is Higher Quality Employment? Trying to define the quality of employment is in some ways very subjective. informal employment dominates the labor markets of both Bangladesh and Indonesia. depending on average income levels and income inequality. a legislatively guaranteed right to work. In very low-income countries. A number of recent papers have used the term “decent” jobs or work driven mainly by initiatives set forth by the International Labour Organization—ILO (e. trying to develop decent work opportunities is not much of an issue beyond the ability to create opportunities for work for all skill levels. As Box 1 shows. sufficient leave time. It is nearly impossible to find a labor market in any developing country—or developed country. and (5) workers not classifiable by status (ILO [2011c] LABORSTA).

fewer than 45% of the formal workers in Bangladesh. few benefits were given to informal workers in Bangladesh. The estimated total number of workers for Bangladesh is preliminary. While sick leave was the most common type of benefit received by informal workers in Bangladesh. Formal workers were contracts. 7 SPECIAL CHAPTER Box Figure 1. Further.1). The minimal coverage of informal workers thus reflects the highly vulnerable nature of their employment. The same is true for provision of severance pay in Banten and Yogyakarta.1 Type of Worker (’0. Indonesia Formal. and severance pay) was considerably higher under formal employment (Box Figure 1. for Indonesia. Based on the definition of formal and informal workers. Bangladesh (BBS 2009 for both surveys). unpaid family work was generally dominated by females in the pilot areas. Banten. Unsurprisingly. men Informal workers were more exposed to risk than formal-sector workers. Yogyakarta Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Yogyakarta Armenia Banten Armenia Banten Armenia Banten . survey estimates showed that a large proportion of the working population in the three countries worked under informal employment arrangements (Box Figure 1. women 0 20 40 60 80 100 Bangladesh Banten.000 1. about three in five formal workers received prior notice of termination. it refers to receipt of compensation or severance pay on termination.2 Benefits Received by Formal and Informal Wage Workers (% of total formal/informal wage jobs) Pension 80 100 Sick leave Maternity/paternity leave Vacation leave Others 0 20 40 60 Armenia Bangladesh Banten Yogyakarta Armenia Bangladesh Banten Bangladesh Yogyakarta Bangladesh Yogyakarta Bangladesh Formal Notes: Informal For Bangladesh. and Indonesia (BPS 2010 for both surveys).2). only one in five informal wage jobs was eligible for paid leave during illness. Sources: Staff estimates based on unit record data from labor force survey and informal sector surveys of Armenia (NSS 2009 for both surveys). Also. In Bangladesh.500 2. a wide discrepancy existed between the percentage of formal and informal workers receiving benefits between the economies.000 Formal.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Box 1 Employment and Benefits of Workers: Armenia. those with verbal agreement or employment arrangements that were not subject to contractual agreement as well as employers and own-account workers who only maintained informal financial records for personal use. men Informal. “Others” refers to the receipt of prior notice of termination. Banten and Yogyakarta. all types of jobs were dominated by informal workers in Bangladesh and Indonesia. as the likelihood of receiving nonincome benefits (such as pension. In fact. Further. detailed bookkeeping Informal workers were defined as wage workers who had written and own-account workers who maintained records were considered formal workers. Bangladesh. women 0 50 100 150 200 250 Informal. and two provinces of Indonesia—Banten and Yogyakarta. The expanded labor force surveys were conducted in 2009 and 2010 in Armenia. Box Figure 1.000) Armenia Employees Own−account workers Unpaid family workers Employers Others 0 20 40 60 80 0 500 1. employers. Bangladesh. Indonesia Yogyakarta. and Yogyakarta were covered by pension. and Yogyakarta. All unpaid and contributing family workers were considered informally employed. Banten. while only one in five informal workers receive such employment security. and Indonesia An Asian Development Bank technical assistance project for measuring the size of the informal sector assisted three countries in Asia to include questions related to informal employment in their regular labor force surveys. maternity leave. sick leave.

better protection of workers’ rights by labor regulation. This resulted in coverage of 68 countries with survey years of 2000–2008. well-defined and agreed-on working hours. and others (not classified). for the Netherlands. On the other hand. social. There are no clear associations between per capita GDP and job safety and security and between per capita GDP and working with colleagues whom one likes. who are employed and are classified as own-account workers. were analyzed because the variable of interest is available only in those waves. But how exactly do the workers themselves value the different attributes associated with jobs—good wages. • “a safe job with no risk of closing down or unemployment. but that job security (outside of the type of contract that a worker has) does not impact job satisfaction. (Data on Gini inequality coefficients for OECD countries were merged in from the UNU-WIDER world income inequality database. the proportion of people saying that a feeling of accomplishment was the most important job attribute increased sharply with per capita GDP.8 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia One can use data from the World Values Surveys to derive subjective notions of what is considered higher quality employment. need to be met before self-employed workers become more satisfied with their jobs. job security. data from “waves” 3. De Graaf-Zijl (2005) showed that job satisfaction depends mainly on job content. wages. or • “doing an important job that gives you a feeling of accomplishment”? The data from the World Values Surveys were merged with cross-country data on GDP per capita. Cassar’s work suggests that. Delfgaauw (2006. He found that semiskilled workers with the more complex jobs were more likely to quit than workers with simpler jobs. the surveys collect information on the socioeconomic characteristics of individuals and their cultural.) The data suggest that workers generally regard having a good income as one of the most important attributes of a job (Figure 3). such as health insurance. as representing lower quality employment. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . in Chile. based on satisfaction measures. basic requirements. pensions. and disability and unemployment insurance? A strand of literature concerned with job satisfaction indicates that there is considerable heterogeneity in what is considered a higher quality job. Weiss (1985) analyzed job complexity and its effects on job satisfaction using absenteeism and quit rates as proxies. in developing countries with large informal sectors where the majority of jobs have no protection and a high degree of occupational hazard. While this rough approximation of employment quality is necessitated by data availability. and safe working conditions.000 observations. as representing higher quality employment. and population from the World Bank’s World Development Indicators for each year of the World Values Surveys. and political values. and job benefits. For this chapter. Subjective measures of the quality of employment. unpaid family workers. among other things. Cassar (2010) found that. nonwage benefits. In addition. The surveys were started in 1981 with 14 countries and were expanded to capture a larger number of countries in each successive wave. However. However. These surveys obtain information from individuals on a range of job-related issues. This section focuses primarily on (1) the share of the employed population that are employers and salaried or wage employees. and (2) the share of informal workers. that job tasks and who is managing employees matter and can affect quit rates. and greater voice for workers. and 5. greater employment security because of written contracts. the employees and employers categories tend to exhibit well some of the key elements of “decent jobs”—high productivity (and therefore high wages). employment security. which gave approximately 30. 2007) has shown. workers are probably largely unsatisfied with their jobs and would not consider them to be good. As noted earlier. Five waves have been covered through 2008. • “working with people you like. 4. employment quality is a multidimensional concept that encompasses. Gini inequality coefficients. The survey question on job characteristics was: “Which [of the following items] would you place first [in importance] if you were looking for a job? • “a good income so that you do not have any worries about money. most empirical analysis of employment quality is predicated on the assumption that all of these job traits are valued by workers. such as income security and occupational hazard. The analysis focused on individuals aged 25–55 who responded to the question on job characteristics. the percent of the population indicating that a good income was the most important aspect of a job declined significantly with the average living standard in each country (log of per capita GDP).

This suggests that salaried and wage employment. This is understandable. by Per Capita GDP. The World Values Surveys revealed that. In general. is a potentially valid proxy for measuring and assessing the quality of employment in developing countries. Still. other job attributes. and the sense of accomplishment in a job become increasingly important to workers. and Viet Nam seem more concerned with having safe and secure jobs. While good income and job safety and security are the primary concerns for most individuals. reflecting that there may be a relative lack of security in many jobs in these countries. people in developing Asian economies put more weight on good income than do people in the OECD countries. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . people in the OECD are much more likely to cite a job in which they feel they can accomplish something as the most important attribute in a job than are their counterparts in developing Asia. Figure 4 shows the aspects of job quality reported within developing Asian economies. for many developing countries. which typically provides a minimum standard of income that is stable and consistent. as the marginal utility of income is high at lower income levels. this means that no single measure of employment quality is universally appropriate. 2000−2008 Good income as the most important attribute 80 80 Safety and security as the most important attribute Percent 60 Percent 4 6 8 Log(perCapGDP) Working with likeable people as the most important attribute 10 12 40 0 20 0 20 40 60 4 6 8 Log(perCapGDP) 10 12 Job accomplishment as the most important attribute 80 60 80 Percent Percent 4 6 8 Log(perCapGDP) Central Asia Latin America and The Caribbean South Asia 10 12 40 20 0 0 20 40 60 4 6 8 Log(perCapGDP) 10 12 East Asia and The Pacific Middle East and North Africa Sub-Saharan Africa Developing Europe OECD Fitted values GDP = gross domestic product. At higher incomes. For example. there are differences across countries. perCapGDP = per capita gross domestic product. having a good income and job security seem more critically important than other aspects of the work environment. In turn. the Philippines. OECD = Organisation for Economic Development and Co-operation. people in Malaysia are more likely to emphasize income over other attributes. and workers at such levels care more about the wages they earn in a job than anything else. the quality of coworkers.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia 9 SPECIAL CHAPTER Figure 3 Population Reporting Job Attributes as Important in Selecting a Job. such as safety. Source: Staff estimates based on unit record data from the World Values Survey (various waves). Individuals in Indonesia.

2000−2008 Good income as the most important attribute Safety/security as the most important attribute Azerbaijan Malaysia Armenia Bangladesh Thailand Georgia Kyrgyz Republic India PRC Philippines Viet Nam Indonesia OECD Viet Nam Philippines Indonesia India Georgia Bangladesh Thailand PRC OECD Malaysia Kyrgyz Republic Armenia Azerbaijan 0 20 40 Percent of population 60 80 0 20 40 Percent of population 60 80 Working with likeable people as the most important attribute Job accomplishment as the most important attribute Kyrgyz Republic PRC Azerbaijan OECD Armenia Thailand Georgia India Philippines Viet Nam Malaysia Indonesia Bangladesh OECD Kyrgyz Republic Armenia Indonesia PRC Georgia Malaysia India Philippines Viet Nam Bangladesh Thailand Azerbaijan 0 20 40 Percent of population 60 80 0 20 40 Percent of population 60 80 OECD = Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. By Country.10 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Figure 4 Population Reporting the Most Important Attributes in Selecting a Job. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . PRC = People’s Republic of China. Source: Staff estimates based on unit record data from the World Values Survey (various years).

it is possible to contribute to enhancing personal well-being. manufacturing and service jobs are not homogenous. The figure shows that since the late 1970s the proportion of higher quality jobs has been increasing and now comprises about 30% of the total labor force. the growth then slowed because of the 1997 financial crisis. The crisis led to the elimination of many formal jobs. has also been rapid. As the economy grew. the share of jobs in agriculture declined from 55% to less than 10%.2 shows the trend in the proportion of higher quality jobs. in turn.2 Share of Decent Jobs as a Percentage of Total Labor Force 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1965 1967 1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 Decent jobs Source: Statistics Korea (2010). Box Figure 2. which are in the formal sector. Box 2 Labor Market Changes: Sectoral Shifts and the Creation of Decent Jobs in the Republic of Korea The Republic of Korea has made the successful transition from being a low-income developing country to a high-income country in a relatively short period of time. while the share of service jobs more than doubled (Box Figure 2. Between 1965 and 2007. The growth of salaried and wage jobs. The transition. Source: Ha (2010). Manufacturing Construction Unemployed Salaried and wage workers Regular workers Source: Bank of Korea (2010). driven by modernization and economic growth. The quality of service jobs is particularly diverse. could hinder future progress in reducing poverty and continuing Asia’s recent economic growth patterns.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia 11 SPECIAL CHAPTER Why is the Quality of Employment Important? Developing good quality employment can contribute to more stable. fishery.1 Share of Jobs by Industry as a Percentage of Total Labor Force 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1965 1967 1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 Box Figure 2. which include jobs in manufacturing and certain services (finance. leading to high wage growth (Box 2). This. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . real estate.3 Share of Salaried and Wage Workers as a Percentage of Total Labor Force 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1963 1965 1967 1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 Agriculture. was accompanied by far-reaching structural changes in the composition of jobs in the economy—changes that allowed for the formation of a strong middle class. can enhance and create an environment that results in greater productivity and profits that then feed into greater economic growth. However. inclusive economic growth that leads to greater poverty reduction. By developing higher quality employment. and compared to that in other regions. Asia’s extremely low growth rates of people working as employees compared to Asia’s overall labor force growth and growth of real GDP. the share of salaried and wage employees increased rapidly until the mid-1990s. to middle-. but the growth of formal jobs started to recover in the 2000s (Box Figure 2. and business services).1). The Republic of Korea is a case where the economic evolution was driven by its ability to form decent jobs especially in the service sector. mining Utility Services Source: Statistics Korea (2010). Manufacturing Decent services Box Figure 2. Statistics Korea (2010). Box Figure 2.3). Developing higher quality employment is also potentially very important for a country to make the transition from low-. then to high-income status.

Gallup’s global surveys indicate that people with “good jobs”—that is. Economic growth is a necessary. The inclusive growth approach focuses on generating more productive (or higher quality) employment—rather than on direct income redistribution—as a means of increasing incomes of traditionally excluded population groups and sharing the benefits of economic growth more widely.5 0 0. 3 To capture inclusive growth. PovCalNet. For growth to be sustainable in the long run. generating higher quality employment is an essential element in any inclusive growth strategy.3 While it is always difficult to infer causality from aggregate cross-country data. World Bank. regressions of changes in poverty on changes in employment status. it needs to be broad-based across sectors and inclusive of the large part of a country’s labor force. Research at the Asian Development Bank (ADB). The results of the ADB project on measuring the informal sector also provide strong evidence that poverty incidence is significantly higher among informal-sector than among formal-sector workers (Box 3). Increases in the share of salaried and wage employees in total employment are associated with more rapid reduction of poverty. and policy failures (Ali and Zhuang 2007). Well-being. The Commission on Growth and Development (2008) defined inclusiveness as a concept encompassing equity. Another reason for the importance of employment quality is that one of the major factors contributing to a person’s well-being is employment status. Indeed. Inclusive growth refers to the pace as well as the pattern of economic growth. confirm the strong effect of labor market formalization on poverty reduction and inclusive growth (Appendix). Gallup gathers information about each respondent’s employment Inclusiveness and poverty reduction. controlling for changes in per capita income as well as initial levels of per capita income. Likewise. Indeed.2 Figure 5 Cross-Country Relationship Between Changes in Poverty and Changes in Employment Status. too.5 Change in % of employers 4 2 0 −2 −4 −4 −2 0 2 4 Change in % of own-account workers 1 0 −1 −2 −3 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 Change in % of informal workers Source: Staff estimates using data from World Bank (2011b). but not sufficient. inclusive growth is one of the three complementary strategic agendas on which ADB rests its current long-term strategy (ADB 2008). The concept of the quality of employment is closely related to the idea of inclusive development or inclusive growth. 1990−2009 Change in % of salaried and wage workers Poverty change (percentage point) 4 2 0 −2 −4 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 2 0 −2 −4 −0. the ratio of the share of income held by the bottom 20% of the population relative to the top 20% of the population is used. institutional. recognizing that unequal opportunities arise from social exclusion associated with market. applying a dynamic model to longitudinal data from Argentina. 2 The Framework of Inclusive Growth Indicators is a special supplement to Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011. condition for poverty reduction and inclusive growth. World Development Indicators (2011a). Thus. the shares of salaried and wage employees and of own-account and contributing family workers in total employment are among the indicators that ADB has introduced in the Framework of Inclusive Growth Indicators. those who are employed full-time by an employer—tended to report the highest well-being of those in the workforce (Clifton and Marlar 2011). Devicienti et al. Similar findings are observed for inclusive growth measures. characterized inclusive growth as creation of and equal access to opportunities. and protection in market and employment.12 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Is there evidence that employment quality is associated with the pace of poverty reduction or the inclusiveness of the growth process? Data for 59 countries during the period 1990–2009 certainly suggest so. equality of opportunity. while increases in the share of informal workers are associated with slower rates of poverty reduction (Figure 5). Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . (2010) found informality significantly raised the probability of becoming poor.

” which is a large difference. and productivity among a firm’s workers. In Armenia. laundry rooms. work effort. The vertical lines in Box Figure 3. There is a large literature in labor economics on the efficiency wage hypothesis. at 42%.” “struggling. The rationale for the “free” fringe benefits is that they encourage greater loyalty. even after controlling for many individual-level characteristics. gymnasiums.g. The efficiency wage hypothesis need not apply only to wages. which is more industrialized than Yogyakarta. dry cleaning. Workforce well-being: percentage thriving worldwide.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Box 3 Informal Employment and Poverty The general perception that poverty is associated with informal employment was validated using empirical evidence from an Asian Development Bank project that included. is rapidly gaining ground (e. or unemployed (Clifton and Marlar 2011). The self-employed are better off in the developed world than in the developing world. questions related to employment in the informal sector in Armenia and Indonesia.1 Poverty Incidence by Nature of Employment Indonesia 20 13 SPECIAL CHAPTER Percent 0 5 10 15 Yogyakarta Armenia 10 20 30 40 50 Banten Percent 0 Yerevan Other urban areas Formal Rural areas Informal Source: Staff estimates based on unit record data from labor force survey and informal sector surveys of Armenia (NSS 2009 for both surveys) and Indonesia (BPS 2010 for both surveys). especially for those in informal employment. Even in developed countries. status through a series of employment questions. the poverty incidence in Banten. and commuting buses. not looking for full time Employed part time. Increased productivity. was lower. but only 14% of the self-employed.” or “suffering. it can also help explain why some employers provide their workers attractive nonwage benefits. looking for full time Unemployed 0 10 20 30 31% 40 50 60 42% 49% 49% 52% large difference between those categorized as “thriving” among the full-time self-employed in advanced countries. Workers residing in a household whose estimated per capita expenditure fell short of the official poverty line were considered poor. in the regular labor force surveys. which states that worker effort and productivity depends positively on wages (Stiglitz 1976). In Indonesia. Google in Silicon Valley). Gallup surveys have found that individuals who are employed full-time with an employer are more likely to be “thriving” than those who are self-employed. direct estimates of employment-poverty statistics could be generated. Because the participants could be classified as formal or informal workers. 29% of people with full-time jobs. and it asks them to evaluate their well-being on a scale of 0 to 10. Globally.” As Figure 6 shows. the poverty incidence was considerably higher in rural areas and cities other than the capital (Yerevan). 2009–2010 Employed full time (by employer) Employed full time (by self) Employed part time. not looking for full time Employed part time.. Monk and Teal (2007) found that the self-employed were more likely to report illnesses than formal-sector workers. versus only 14% worldwide. agricultural employers in developing countries often offer their workers free meals on the farm. This is why some firms find it profitable to pay wages that exceed the market level. the phenomenon of employers offering their employees gourmet (and free) dining facilities. For example. 2009–2010 Employed full time (by employer) Employed full time (by self) Employed part time. Quality employment is also likely to result in concrete economic benefits for firms. Indeed. 29% 14% 26% 22% 22% 5 10 15 20 25 30 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . haircuts. carwashes. There is also a very Figure 6 Well-Being of Workers by Employment Status in Advanced Economies and Worldwide. employed part-time and looking for full-time work. Depending on how respondents rate their current and future lives. they are then categorized as “thriving. Box Figure 3. 2009–2010 Workforce well-being: percentage thriving in advanced economies. considered themselves as “thriving. massage rooms. perhaps because they are likely to be self-employed by choice rather than necessity. The figure shows that the poverty incidence among informal workers in both Armenia and Indonesia was significantly higher than among people with formal employment.1 represent the 95% confidence intervals for the poverty headcount ratios of workers in formal and informal employment. looking for full time Unemployed 0 Source: Clifton and Marlar (2011).

These include basic safety in the work place. bonuses. Thus. restrictive labor legislation that increased the cost of firing workers and imposed restrictions on the type and number of employees firms can hire was potentially impeding the development of higher quality employment. “Patterns and Trends in Quality Employment. more active government enforcement of minimum job quality standards may be both desirable and merited. 5 India has approximately 45 laws at the national level and more than 4 times that at the state level to govern the functioning of labor markets.” ADB (2008). However. Certainly. 2004/05 and 2007/08) of the Annual Survey of Industries in India. 6 7 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . labor productivity. 4 While the Annual Survey of Industries (Government of India various years) covers all units employing 100 or more employees. even after controlling for individual skills. some basic job quality attributes are important for employers to provide irrespective of a country’s level of development. and the proportion of employees with formal employment. as Schaffner (2001) found that lower wages in Colombia were associated with higher turnover rates. given that such enforcement is likely to have only minor impacts on the creation of formal employment opportunities. However. They also found that a higher proportion of employees directly employed by a firm seemed to adversely affect the firm’s average profits. “unregistered” (informal sector) firms and firms employing fewer than 10 employees are not covered. and Hellerstein et al. 2000/01. See the discussion on India’s experience in this regard in the section. It is important to recognize. found that 65% of respondents reported labor regulation as a major obstacle to doing business. Buhai et al. amount spent on workplace welfare per employee. (1999) found this for enterprises in France. Employment quality and development stage. and absence of child labor.6 But in middle. in a survey of chief financial officers. and capital productivity per amount of fixed capital. which is a nationwide census of registered factory and manufacturing units. labor productivity.and upper-middle income countries. In low-income countries. Indeed. it covers only a sample of firms employing fewer than 99 employees because of the very large number of such units. provides some discussion that highlights the need for legislation that is appropriate for improving social welfare. other attributes of job quality.5 This may point to the need to further reform labor markets in India. for example. Moreover. chapter 7. absence of discrimination against women. regulations that ensure basic work place safety are often lax or not enforced. However. and capital productivity—and various measures of employment quality. Teitelbaum (2006). it is unrealistic to expect employers to offer their workers a full suite of attractive wage and nonwage benefits. Many types of legislation have considerable trade-offs. however. bonus provision. suggesting that too much direct employment by a firm resulted in inflexibilities in the firm’s operation and may have kept it from maximizing profits and using labor inputs most productively. Using employer–employee matched data. pension benefits. contribution to provident funds. Using data from four rounds (for 1994/95. contribution to provident funds. (2008) for Denmark. including wages. the problem of employment quality in developing countries is more severe.4 Amoranto and Chun (2011) explored the relationship between firm performance— profits. This may be what has happened in India. for example. gender equality in the workplace. that the optimal mix of employment quality will depend on the stage of a particular country’s development.14 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Amoranto and Chun’s results suggested that the average Indian firm in the formal sector potentially had compensation that was below optimal labor productivity and profit maximizing levels. (1999) for the United States.7 Bloom and Van Reenan (2010) summarized the evidence on aspects of incentives that are associated with good job quality that lead to better firm performance. Abowd et al. labor productivity per person-days worked. to provide greater flexibility for firms to operate efficiently while at the same time improving opportunities for higher quality employment. and capital productivity. such as the level of wages. often depend on labor market conditions. excessive government regulation to force employers to offer unrealistically high job benefits is likely to impede expansion of low-wage industries and restrict formal employment. it focuses on wage measures that capture only a single dimension of employment quality. where the supply of workers in the rural areas is very elastic. Part of the reason for increased productivity may be lower turnover in firms. and job security and tenure. Much of the research in this area of human resource management is based on theory or empirical examinations of firms and employment quality in developed countries. The empirical literature often indicates that firms that provide higher wages are frequently more productive and profitable than other firms. Their findings are interesting: firms with higher wages. and welfare funds per worker had positive and significantly higher profits per person-days worked.

1 … … 1.102 60 251 103. 2002 and employment census 2004 and 2008 were used for the People's Republic of China and NSSO.9 1. of Thailand Azerbaijan Kazakhstan Malaysia Korea.516 2.2 2.002 2.6 2.552 446.0 Table 2 Labor Force Statistics for Selected Developing Asian Economies (most recent year) Economy Employed (in '000) [4] 9. and ILO (2011c) LABORSTA and ILO KILM.3 2004 2.183 3. People's Rep.901 1.9 1.1 3.7 … … 2. 8 The trends in regional aggregates are based on interpolations using a select set of countries.6 2008 48.0 1.0 … … 2.3 … … … … 1.138 2.3 2004 1.389 Start [5] 1991 1991 … … … … 1990 1991 1990 … … 1992 … … … … 1995 1990 … … 1990 1990 … … End [6] 2001 2005 … … … … 2008 2008 2008 … … 2008 … … … … 2008 2008 … … 2008 2008 … … Nepal Bangladesh Cambodia Kyrgyz Rep. and productivity and wage growth.9 … … … … 2.260 1.827 1. and lacks social protection and insurance. Given that agriculture largely provides informal employment while industry and services have higher shares of employees. is exposed to greater risk.654 2.163 11. compared with formal employment.2 0.918 7.0 2.2 2008 7.3 2008 25.9 4. a large shift in the share of employment from the lower productivity agricultural sector to the higher value-added industrial and services sectors over the period 1990– 2008.469 38.253 1.3 2001 3. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .2 2008 8. is typically lower paid. Inevitably.855 8. World Development Indicators.9 4. Many countries in Asia have very high informality rates.765 2.856 4.6 … … Population [8] 2.041 3.384 6.4 … … … … 0. The variation across countries Reference Period Compounded Annual Growth Real GDP Per Capita (2005 $ PPP) [7] 2. [2]-[4] and [8]-[10] ILO (2011b).689 112.3 3.3 … … Employment [10] 2. PPP = purchasing power parity.0 2008 2.4 2006 4. the continuing large amount of informal employment in developing Asia shows that high economic growth and simply increasing employment in the industrial and service sectors may not suffice to generate better employment opportunities.588 2.722 3.796 466.0 2005 3.1 2003 2. regional aggregates do not capture the entire story.528 5.657 35.712 783.258 64 5.726 3.375 7. Viet Nam Mongolia Pakistan India Philippines Samoa Bhutan Indonesia Sri Lanka Georgia Armenia Maldives China. with more than twice the share of the labor force in informal employment compared with Latin America (as shown in Figure 1).8 … … … … 9. Developing Asia as a whole varies substantially from other regions in the quality of its employment. Changes that have occurred over time provide substantial information on the extent to which achievements have been made so far.172 6.934 38.5 2007 5.703 6. Sources: [1] and [7] World Bank (2011b).0 2.069 71. KILM.824 2.270 4. Rep.2 2008 3.2 2008 3. as a result.831 11. 1995.0 … … 2.0 … … … … 0.409 3.6 … … 3.471 259 3.002 42.8 2005 1.240 37.5 2008 2. Because informal employment.241 3.8 Asia’s high growth rate in GDP per capita terms has been accompanied by Most Recent Real GDP Year of Per Capita Labor Force Unemployment Available (in 2005 $ (in '000) Rate Employment PPP) Data [1] [2] [3] 2001 927 10.4 1. except that NBS (various years).2 … … … … 1. with the large majority of countries having informal employment rates exceeding 40% of the working population (based on the latest year of data available).7 1.474 8.5 … … 2. Figures 7–8).489 4.101 4.6 2008 13.6 … … 2. the aggregate change in percent of employees and employers in total employment has been less pronounced than is the case in other regions.9 1. China Singapore GDP = gross domestic product. EUS for India.400 8. a country’s level of development and the current quality of its employment need to be considered.276 16. of Hong Kong.139 113 750.200 41.517 24.335 59.503 1.6 2.0 1.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia 15 SPECIAL CHAPTER Patterns and Trends in the Quality of Employment In identifying ways for a country to promote higher quality employment. the share of people employed in different sectors.5 2006 1.695 132 14.1 … … 3.866 7.4 2008 4. This section first examines some of the broad trends and then selected countries to highlight aspects that have contributed to or served as constraints in moving toward higher quality employment.552 68.303 6.1 2008 10.5 1.2 2008 4. it is not surprising that Asia has made some progress in increasing the aggregate share of employees and employers in total employment.790 4. countries in the region also vary widely in terms of employment status.2 … … Broad Trends Employment status.256 5.215 8.3 2.469 8.590 28.4 2008 5.2 2008 40.261 1. ILO’s LABORSTA and other employment surveys indicate wide differences across countries within developing Asia (Table 2.198 56.599 3.2 … … … … 3. the trends comprise more numbers that are estimated than actual. CHIP 1988.339 23.1 2.7 … … Labor Force [9] 3. Developing Asia has a very high rate of informal employment.4 … … … … 3. However.

while the opposite is the case with contributing family work. The Philippines reduced the share of people employed in agriculture by 9. The uneven ratio of change during the same period show that growth does not always translate into higher quality employment as countries with lower growth than India have made greater progress at reducing the share of informal employment in the employed population. with 10% more females in vulnerable employment than males throughout Asia (ADB and ILO 2011).4 percentage points in the rate of informal employment between 1995 and 2008. during the last three decades. Thailand has done well during 1990–2008. whereas the PRC has recently had proactive labor legislation to promote economic growth while maintaining social stability (Ngok 2008: 45–64). Nevertheless. Pakistan and the Philippines have also had rather large decreases in the percentage of informal workers. the share of informal sector employment in total nonagricultural employment has risen in Asia. Latin America. Employment status and sectoral employment. However. salaried and wage employment prevail. Table 3 shows the distribution of working females and males by employment status in Asia. as in the case of the Philippines.9%). despite rapidly rising per capita GDP. had a corresponding decrease in the share of informal employment in total employment. with an informal employment rate of 54% and an agricultural employment rate of 41% in 2008. which had a larger increase in total absolute GDP per capita than Asia. in countries where large numbers of workers are engaged in agriculture. Surprisingly. Where the workforce is mostly in the industrial and services sectors. ever larger changes in sectoral transformation as well as more active interventions may be needed to generate higher quality employment.6) in the share of people who were informally employed between 1990 and 2008. Indeed. but had a comparatively larger decrease (9. high rates of informal employment do not uniformly correspond to high rates of agricultural employment. Cultural contexts most likely drive some of the differences and disparities in employment between genders. low-income economies have a larger share of the workforce in own-account activities and higher income economies have a larger share who are employees. Indonesia. nearly two-thirds of all women workers are contributing family workers. Formalization of employment may become even more challenging as data from Asia suggest that informal work is actually becoming more ubiquitous in recent years. this is not the full story as even small shifts from agricultural employment can result in comparatively large decreases in shares of informal employment. experienced a 1. The figure shows that. The PRC has had a solid decrease of 5. India decreased agricultural employment by only 9 percentage points. at 58. with Bangladesh having one of the highest rates of informality in 2005 (at 85.1 percentage points. The distribution of workers by employment status appears closely related to the distribution of workers by employment sector. there are large variations among economies. while the informal employment rate in Bangladesh was almost 86%. 9 India is known for restrictive labor legislation. Thus. females are typically in much more vulnerable employment.9% and 81. Approximately 10% of Hong Kong. even in high-income countries. and thus may pose some challenges to generating higher quality employment in an equitable manner.9%) and Malaysia on the low end in 2008 (with only 21. In Bangladesh and Pakistan. as in the region’s higher income countries. in most countries a larger percentage of the male than of the female labor force is in ownaccount work. Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Interestingly. especially in the aftermath of the 2007 global financial crisis. among Bangladesh’s male labor force. Women are significantly more likely than men to be contributing (unpaid) family workers in almost all countries—more than 3 times as likely in Bangladesh.4 percentage points. India. Still. Conversely. However. compared with 27 in the PRC and 22 in Thailand during (roughly) 1990–2008 (Figure 8). its agricultural employment rate was 48%. China’s male labor force are ownaccount workers and 84% are paid employees. 2009). with one of the larger labor forces in Asia. Figure 9 shows the proportion of informal employment in total nonagricultural employment in Latin America and Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . This indicates that some countries have less completely formalized the modern industrial and service sectors. In general.16 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Asia at three points in time between 1980 and late 2000s. Again. informal work is fast becoming the “new normal” (Jütting et al. For example. Both the PRC and India had high rates of informal employment as of 2008. 75% are ownaccount workers and only 15% are employees. own-account and contributing family work are the prevalent forms of employment for both men and women.8 percentage point increase in its informal employment rate (Figure 7). Thailand shows a smaller gap. in many countries the share of female salaried and wage employees in total female workers is similar to that of males. respectively.9 There are strong gender dimensions to the type of employment. This suggests that the degree of structural transformation that has taken place is only one component in the shift of a country’s employment to formal jobs. is wide. The shift in the percentage of the employed population from the agricultural into the industrial and services sectors in some countries may in part have contributed to the extent to which informality persists. by balancing growth while reducing the percentage of informal workers. leading to an overall decrease in the informal employment rate of 16.9%.

6 24.9 70.9 0. and (2011c).4 21.3 3.9 40.0 26.1 46.6 5.2 42.1 10.7 49.3 35.4 41.5 36.9 74.3 64.2 6.2 39.8 2.9 0 25 50 75 100 0.8 31.4 24. of Malaysia Hong Kong.9 19.7 20.6 66. of Singapore Hong Kong.0 37. (2011b). Sources: ILO LABORSTA. except that NBS (various years). 1995.1 64. KILM.1 70.1 43.8 17.2 5.4 24. 1995.6 1.6 3.1 51.6 86.0 3.9 36.1 PRC = People’s Republic of China.2 0 Start 25 50 End 75 100 2.8 21. and (2011c).3 58.1 22.9 62.9 20.0 27.4 60.2 0.4 25.4 1.8 2.9 80.3 35. KILM.7 39.3 54. Selected Developing Asian Economies Percentage of agriculture employment in total employment (1991–2001) (1991–2008) Percentage of industry employment in total employment Percentage of services employment in total employment Nepal India Bangladesh (1991–2005) Pakistan (1990–2008) (1990–2008) (1992–2008) (1995–2008) (1990–2008) (1990–2008) (1990–2008) (1991–2008) (1990–2008) Thailand Indonesia PRC Philippines Malaysia Korea. Figure 8 Change in the Sectoral Share of Employment.2 0.0 14.5 27.0 12.7 35. China 0 25 50 75 100 82.5 2.0 35.2 53.5 57.5 PRC = People’s Republic of China.4 15.4 28.0 41.9 35.7 36.5 21.2 33.8 16.4 28.5 68.5 62.7 66.3 0.2 15. Selected Developing Asian Economies Percentage of informal workers in total employment (1991–2005) (1991–2008) Percentage of salaried and wage workers in total employment Percentage of employers in total employment Bangladesh India Nepal (1991–2001) Indonesia (1992–2008) (1990–2008) (1995–2008) (1990–2008) (1990–2008) (1990–2008) (1990–2008) (1990–2008) (1991–2008) Pakistan PRC Thailand Philippines Korea.4 13. Rep.9 46.9 48.4 74.5 19.7 23.0 27.0 0.6 4. China Singapore 0 25 50 75 100 88.2 63.7 13.0 14. CHIP 1988.9 85.9 21.9 63. EUS for India.2 55.9 6. CHIP 1988.9 26. 2002 and employment census 2004 and 2008 were used for the PRC and NSSO (various years).9 13.2 4.2 53.6 4.7 13.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia 17 SPECIAL CHAPTER Figure 7 Change in the Share of Total Employment by Employment Status.6 21.3 42.6 28.1 1.4 0 25 50 75 100 14. except that NBS (various years).6 45.3 71.8 7.2 10. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 74. EUS for India.0 15.5 67.3 85.1 0.7 67.5 32.4 86.4 43.0 16.1 66.1 18.9 74.5 3.9 4.0 52.7 86.7 8. Rep.2 2.5 13.9 10.7 29.8 1.0 0 Start 25 50 End 75 100 11.6 68. (2011b).1 81.2 37.2 23.9 0. 2002 and employment census 2004 and 2008 were used for the PRC and NSSO (various years).9 30.0 14.6 84. Sources: ILO LABORSTA.

3 72.5 2.8 3.4 3.1 1.1 2.0 68.6 15. Source: Staff estimates using ILO (2011c).1 67.3 28.4 77. constant $ '000) 8 Informal employment (%) 50 6 8 Informal employment (%) 50 6 40 4 40 4 2 30 1980–1985 1990–1995 2003–2008 2 30 1980–1985 1990–1995 2003–2008 Share of informal employment in nonagricultural employment Per capita real GDP (2005 PPP.2 44.1 0.7 86. LABORSTA except that NBS (various years).7 3.7 39.4 4.0 8.9 84.5 0.4 56.2 35.1 33. 1995.4 74.8 3.7 29.9 47.3 37.7 18. China Indonesia Japan Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Malaysia Maldives Mongolia Nepal Pakistan Philippines Korea.7 23.0 94. Rep.4 5.8 29.0 64.8 57.4 14.7 14. of Singapore Sri Lanka Thailand Viet Nam Note: Source: Table 3 Distribution of Labor Force by Status of Employment in Selected Asian Economies (%) Percentage of Percentage of contributing Percentage of employees Percentage of employers own-account workers family workers Year Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Men 2005 11.2 14.8 41.6 56.6 9.3 26.3 17. NSS-EUS for India.7 1.3 8.0 30.7 37.3 1.6 51.9 86.7 1.4 3.4 21. PPP = purchasing power parity.7 2005 2007 2007 2007 2004 2006 1995 2007 2000 2003 2001 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2004 18.5 0.2 0.8 0.8 3.4 60.0 12.2 38. Southeast.1 2.4 28.5 26.7 1.6 51.9 1.7 40.0 12.5 52.6 4. UNSD (2011).8 57.2 51.1 33.9 Source HS PC HS HS HS HS HS PC HS PC HS PC HS HS HS HS HS HS HS HS = household surveys.2 21.7 51.6 22.1 50.1 25.8 32.7 1.0 1.4 4.1 0.6 7.6 1.0 18.18 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Figure 9 Informal Sector Employment in Latin America and Asia.1 0.4 31.7 0.0 5.3 1. 1980–2008 Latin America 60 10 Per capita real GDP (2005 PPP. and East Asia 10 Per capita real GDP (2005 PPP.8 34.5 21.4 4.7 1.3 21.1 7.7 1.9 43.9 4.6 8.2 51.2 0. Economy Bangladesh Bhutan Hong Kong.4 1.0 6.6 9.6 29. 2002 and employment census 2004 and 2008 were used for the People's Republic of China and NSSO (various years).8 60.5 0.8 12.2 27. constant $) GDP = gross domestic product.6 1.9 34.8 1.7 12.9 18.0 22. CHIP 1988.8 24. PC = population census.3 0. The countries used for data in the figure are modified from those in the regional aggregates based on available data for given years.7 6.9 6. constant $ '000) 60 South.1 54.6 13.1 1.7 80.3 20.3 37.2 34.9 3.5 35. Lao PDR = Lao People's Democratic Republic.5 37. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .9 61.3 19.5 0.9 55.5 8.2 11.8 89.1 9.8 0.7 70.6 0.6 0.7 5.1 42.3 18.3 1.0 31.2 3.1 50.

which become larger and more professional as a consequence and begin to employ more salaried workers. however. These enterprises usually offer stable jobs with relatively attractive wages and benefits and with a reasonable degree of protection and rights for workers. Source: Staff estimates based on data from ILO (2011c). This association is also found in Pietrobelli et al. long and variable working hours. Because jobs in this sector are typically outside the purview of the state. the result of the decline in the share of agriculture in GDP and employment with economic growth.10 10 Based on cross-country comparisons. state-owned enterprises. average wages tend to show a similar pattern. Note: Real GDP per capita is expressed at GDP at 2005 PPP (constant international $). PPP = purchasing power parity. of course.000 people. capital becomes more readily available to enterprises. (2004). they are not regulated or protected. 2002. because a worker is classified as an employee whether he or she works for a firm employing 2 or 5. CHIP 1995. the share of salaried and wage employees in the labor force has a strong positive association with per capita income (Figure 10b). Again. 2000−2008 (a) Own-account workers in total employment 100 80 Percent 60 40 20 0 6 7 8 9 10 11 Log (Real GDP per capita) (b) Salaried and wage workers in total employment 100 80 Percent 60 40 20 0 6 7 8 9 10 11 Log (Real GDP per capita) (c) Informal employment in total employment 100 80 Percent 60 40 20 0 6 7 8 9 10 11 Log (Real GDP per capita) Central Asia Latin America and the Caribbean South Asia East Asia and the Pacific Middle East and North Africa Sub-Saharan Africa Developing Europe OECD Fitted values GDP = gross domestic product. the informal sector has a preponderance of lower quality jobs. because the vast majority of own-account workers in a developing country work in the agricultural sector. This can lead to exploitation of workers—low wages. while the latter is likely to be in the formal sector. no overtime pay. World Bank (2011b). Figure 10a shows an inverse relationship between the percent of workers who classify themselves as ownaccount workers and per capita income.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Figure 10 shows the cross-country relationship between employment status and per capita income. The formal sector typically includes government agencies. On the other hand. the former is more likely to be in the informal sector. Loayza (1997) and Ihrig and Moe (2001) observed a negative association between informalization and levels of GDP per capita. there is a sharp reduction in self-employed workers. using data from the ILO and World Development Indicators. Figure 10c shows that the dominance of the informal sector clearly declines as the level of per capita income rises in all major geographical regions. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . The data suggest that as per capita incomes increase. Conversely. Some of it. The relationship is remarkably consistent across geographical groups of countries. much of the trend may be the result of individuals moving out of agriculture as incomes increase. NSSO (various years). Because labor productivity generally rises more slowly in agriculture than in industry. LABORSTA. own-account workers and unpaid family workers all belong to the informal sector. Figure 10b does not necessarily indicate what happens to formal-sector employment as incomes increase. Obviously. Typically. and no benefits. and private enterprises of a certain size (generally employing 50 or more workers). 19 SPECIAL CHAPTER Figure 10 Percent of Total Employment by Employment Status and Real Per Capita GDP. using a set of developing and developed countries from 1960 to 1990. EUS. NSO (various years). A great deal of this decline is. is due to the fact that as incomes increase. OECD = Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

The impact of age shows a concave pattern in which both the young. Japan.000 8. and innovative.000 12. and continues to effectively raise incomes in the rural sector. informalsector firms based in rural areas (Box 4). such as the production of cotton and silk cloth. occupation as professional or clerical staff. PPP = purchasing power parity. who are beyond the statutory retirement age. small-scale. while interlinking commodity trades with credit and other transactions…. Source: Hayami (2006). Thailand has an informal employment rate that is 14–15 percentage points higher than would be expected. The predominance of the informal sector in lowincome countries makes it difficult for employment to be an effective tool for poverty reduction. For these workers. and the old. But what types of individuals obtain formal-sector jobs? Using survey data from the ADB project on measuring the size of the informal sector. The differences across countries might be explained by differences in policies or historical circumstances. and this makes it difficult for them to finance public services adequately.000 India Thailand Kyrgyz Republic Sri Lanka Malaysia 4. the subcontracting system in Meiji era Japan provided an efficient means to produce a variety of products in sufficient quality to meet export demands and raise the incomes and employment prospects of workers in the rural areas. This reduces the impact of the shock on unemployment. and work in industry and in urban areas. they tend to remain small.000 14. What has been happening to unemployment and “vulnerable employment” in the aftermath of the most recent economic crisis in Asia? Data from the ILO on selected developing Asian countries show that Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . 2000–2008 100 90 Percent of informal employment 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 2. Malaysia. the informal sector is more flexible than the formal labor market. and labor market flexibility may be desirable in a developing country.000 Per capita GDP (PPP $) GDP = gross domestic product. such as due to a recession.000 6. the informal sector is a path out of extreme poverty (Garcia-Bolivar 2006).20 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia to a negative shock in the demand for labor. Thus. who are usually considered less skilled. dynamic. Figure 11 indicates that the strong inverse relationship between informal employment and income per capita continues to hold across developing Asian economies. Maligalig and Martinez (2011) concluded that the common significant determinants of participation in formal employment in the three countries that were studied were higher educational attainment. World Development Indicators. beginning in the Meiji period. tend to be informally employed. the Kyrgyz Republic. Likewise. and Sri Lanka have much lower shares of employment in the informal sector than would be expected at their levels of per capita income. At the other end. Precisely because of the lack of regulation. Box 4 Outsourcing Industrial Production to Small Rural Enterprises in Meiji Japan In certain labor-intensive manufacturing activities. However. Wages in the informal sector can adjust downward quickly in response Impacts on employment status. However. Because informal enterprises are often unable to obtain additional capital. Source: Staff estimates using unit data from ILO (2011c). he normally endeavored to establish a relationship of mutual trust with collectors through repeated dealings over time. In general. Governments are unable to collect taxes from the informal sector. and he would lose face among foreign customers. Because of such flexibility. LABORSTA and World Bank (2011b). Hu (2004) has argued that informal employment growth since the early 1990s has been the main driving force behind job creation in the PRC and that the informal sector is flexible. If his collectors violated the contracts by mistake or opportunism. the figure highlights the extent to which different economies are positive or negative outliers.” The outsourcing system became a cornerstone of the modern Japanese industrial system. family-based rural enterprises became more efficient than large factories under hierarchical management. thereby trapping their employees in lower quality jobs indefinitely. Once community sanction reduced opportunism. India has a much higher rate of informal employment (82%) than would be expected for a country at its level of per capita income (about 63%). the informal sector is often the first step for workers who are moving up from lower productivity jobs in agriculture that pay near-subsistence wages. Hayami (2006: 60–1) noted that “The commodities had to meet a quality standard specified by the foreign buyer. formalsector enterprises based in urban areas to small. Developing Asian Economies. employment in the formal sector is preferred over that of the informal sector.000 10. Figure 11 Percent of Informal Employment and Per Capita GDP. has successfully used a system of outsourcing and subcontracting of industrial production from large. the export trader might have been obliged to pay a large cash penalty.

since the height of the crisis in most countries (Figure 12). Rep.2 5.1 21.1 54. Many of the economies were able to maintain 2%–4% annual growth in their productivity.1 63. levels of vulnerable employment have remained the same. If government regulations force them to raise wages. while in countries such as the Philippines. suggesting that labor productivity growth has likely not been a major constraint to offering higher quality employment benefits. data are the registered unemployment rate in urban areas. However. CEIC (2011).9 41. However.5 0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Bangladesh India Indonesia Malaysia Philippines Thailand Viet Nam 2007 2009 2010 PRC PRC = People’s Republic of China. Figure 15 shows the growth of labor productivity and real wages in selected developing Asian economies during the period 2000–2010. for the Philippines. wages in the PRC rose much more rapidly than in other countries. wages remained relatively stagnant. Figure 12 Unemployment Rate.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia unemployment rates have declined. NBS (2010). Sources: ILO (2011c).7 43. The figure indicates that productivity growth did lead to rises in real wages.5 0 10 20 30 2008 Notes: Pakistan (Annual) Indonesia (Aug) Thailand (Q4) Philippines (Q4) Sri Lanka (Q3) Malaysia (Q3) 40 50 2010 60 70 Ages 15+ except in Pakistan and Sri Lanka: ages 10+. and indexed at 2001 = 100.9 2. in most developing Asian economies (Figure 13). in some Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Selected Asian Economies (%). Still. growth in labor productivity allows greater space for firms to provide better wages and working conditions to their workers. Figure 14 Evolution of Real Average Wages of Workers in the Formal Sector. albeit not by much.5 3 2.6 8 7.8 5. Further. National Wages and Productivity Commission. China (Q4) Sri Lanka (Q3) Thailand (Q4) Malaysia (Q3) PRC (Q3) Japan (Q4) New Zealand (Q4) Australia (Q4) Viet Nam (annual) Pakistan (annual Philippines (Q4) Indonesia (Aug) 0. the firms’ profitability and competitiveness will suffer.7 Korea. the growth in wages has been much higher than the growth in productivity. Asia has experienced a continued rise in the average wages of workers in the formal sector.6 54.3 21. for the PRC. 2001–2010 4 3.5 1 10 6. Vulnerable employment is defined as own−account workers and contributing family workers. However. LABORSTA.1 4. there are large disparities in productivity growth and wages across countries in formal sector jobs. 2008 and 2010 63. Note: Wages were converted from local curency units to PPP terms. Sri Lanka excludes Northern Province.2 3. or even increased slightly. PPP = purchasing power parity. Notes: Based on national statistical office definition of unemployment. productivity growth does not guarantee an equal or proportionate rise in wages.5 41.5 3.9 41.5 2 1.7 61.1 2. except in Pakistan and Sri Lanka: ages 10+. employers are unlikely to raise wages and offer nonwage benefits to their workers. of (Q4) Singapore (Q4) Hong Kong. 2007–2010 21 SPECIAL CHAPTER Wages and labor productivity.7 0 6 4. If labor productivity is stagnant. In general.3 63. Source: ILO (2011a). PRC = People’s Republic of China.1 7. Figure 14 shows the evolution of real average wages of workers in the formal sector since 2001. Ages 15+. Ultimately. the quality of employment depends largely on the level and growth of labor productivity. Source: ILO (2011a). Figure 13 Vulnerable Employment as a Share of Total Employment (%). Sri Lanka excludes Northern and Eastern provinces.2 4 0.8 2 3.0 5. In the PRC.

as they account for a large percent of Asia’s labor force. Banten and Yogyakarta (Rp million) Banten. 2000–2010 18 16 14 12 Percent 10 8 6 4 2 0 –2 Korea. Some countries will experience an increasing age dependency ratio. and business activities Transport.China Bangladesh Sri Lanka Brunei Darussalam Hong Kong. relative to other Asian countries. renting. and 31% in Yogyakarta encountered financial difficulty (Maligalig and Martinez 2011). Yogyakarta. survey results showed that 40% of the operators of informal enterprises in Bangladesh. This section examines the PRC. 0 50 100 Formal** Note: Formal** = formal sector + households. etc. and will have to work to increase their rates of productivity. wage growth has lagged behind growth in productivity. storage. and forestry Construction Education and health Financial intermediation Hotels and restaurants Manufacturing Mining and quarrying Other services Real estate. Indonesia Agriculture. Indonesia 150 200 Informal 0 100 200 300 400 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . hunting. In general. such as India and the Philippines. and communications Wholesale and retail trade. ILO (2011c). countries. On the other end are economies such as the PRC. of Singapore Japan Philippines Taipei. For example. 55% in Banten. Productivity in the informal sector is nearly 5–10 times lower than in the formal sector because informally employed people face a variety of constraints (Figure 16). requiring significant schooling to adequately prepare them for the jobs available. repairs. Many countries have relatively low rates of labor productivity. NBS (2010). People’s Rep. Moreover. of China. At one end is India. LABORSTA. but the country’s share of informal employment is large and increasing. Box 5 discusses the changing demographics in Asia and how they could impact a country’s ability to create higher quality employment. Rep. especially in contrast with the developed countries. and the Philippines. Indonesia. CEIC (2011).22 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Indicators impacting the creation of higher quality employment. which accounts for approximately a quarter of Asia’s total labor force. This may reflect that the institutional environment fails to support gains in productivity that can result in higher wages. the expansion of the quality of employment has varied widely over time. and other countries will have a decreased age dependency ratio and an influx of new workers into the labor market. Figure 16 Value Added per Worker. Figure 15 Annual Growth of Labor Productivity and Wages (%). They also present substantially different cases and environments for moving toward higher quality employment. China Indonesia Viet Nam Malaysia Thailand Mongolia India –4 Selected Experiences Among developing Asian economies. and. Some of the major factors that may affect the quality of employment in the future are shown in Table 4. where the sheer momentum of economic growth has moved a great many people from informal to formal employment and Labor productivity Wage Sources: APO (2011). Sources: ADB and BPS (2010). Selected Asian Economies. moving people out of informal employment is highly important. National Wages and Productivity Commission. India. necessitating shifts in the type of employment provided. India has been slow at creating higher quality employment. substantial demographic changes are likely in developing Asia.

0 1. Employment in publicly-owned industries marginally decreased after the mid-1990s as state-owned enterprises began an aggressive effort at downsizing and retrenchment.9 51. but this has resulted in little wage growth in formal employment.3 0.6 0.7 24.7 17.4 26. Figure 17 Shares of Employment in Agriculture. The growth in employment in private industry has been spectacular—from virtually zero in 1978 to almost 30% by 2008.8 1.2 18.2 0.8 0.1 8.0 44.7 5.5 2.3 1.9 0.2 63. This transition to a more modernized labor force was helped substantially by policies that facilitated rural–urban Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 52.0 36. [5]-[6] UNSD (2011).6 22.2 81.2 7.9 34.3 41.7 52.1 23 SPECIAL CHAPTER Economy Percent urban [9] 18.5 0.1 57. CHIP 1988.4 10.2 28.3 48.7 1.3 15.2 26.4 2. The PRC’s decision to open its doors to foreign direct investment (FDI) led to major structural transformation and a shift from the agricultural to the modern sector.4 5. The share of industry and services in total employment increased from about 30% in 1978 to about 60% by 2008 (Figure 17). 1978–2008 0.5 Nepal Bangladesh Cambodia Tajikistan Kyrgyz Rep.4 68. 1995.1 11.7 57.6 60.8 4.9 46.4 63.1 2.2 57.3 72.5 12.7 0. [8] Barro and Lee (2010).1 13.4 57.2 27.6 54.7 19.0 10.2 18.5 1. PPP = purchasing power parity.6 60.1 38.9 10.4 49.1 2.4 8.5 58.5 49.9 75.3 0.2 4.0 36.2 1.0 0.5 54. Sources: [1]-[4] World Bank (2011b).5 0.7 38.4 4.7 4.2 3.6 22.9 9.8 32.1 43.8 31. [7] World Bank (2011a).2 6.8 9.3 –8.9 2.9 22.25 Per years of (’000 2005 $ person per schooling Agriculture Industry Services 2010 2020 PPP per worker) day (%) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] 0.8 45.3 18.0 99.9 28.2 21.6 2.7 1.5 18.5 0.1 8. Source: Staff estimates using data from NBS (various years). China Singapore 0.0 27.4 15.7 50.7 67.8 43.8 36.6 50.1 46. Percent of total employment this has been accompanied by significant rises in overall wages.8 6.0 17.6 50.6 33.8 4.2 3.8 50.2 57. PRC = People's Republic of China.3 0.1 5.9 48.0 45.9 0.7 63.3 50.7 1.0 52.4 3. Lao PDR Papua New Guinea Solomon Islands Pakistan Uzbekistan Viet Nam India Mongolia Philippines Indonesia Samoa Vanuatu Tonga Sri Lanka Georgia Bhutan Armenia Turkmenistan Maldives PRC Thailand Azerbaijan Kazakhstan Malaysia Korea.8 0. Public.3 1.8 63.6 67.8 5.1 4. World Development Indicators and ILO (2011c) LABORSTA.5 76.2 25.2 41.1 32.7 13.9 0.0 55.7 1.3 0.5 42.5 64.0 96.7 1.3 4.4 13.5 4.0 23.0 5.1 7.5 1.9 33.7 1. Rep.5 3.6 6. The Philippines has done relatively well in moving people from informal to more formalized employment and increasing labor productivity.7 2.1 35.3 2.0 26.5 0.9 50. PovCalNet.2 2.3 8.2 0.9 4.9 1.5 42.4 53.8 17.3 44.4 0.4 26.5 0.0 1. World Development Indicators except that NBS (various years).6 13. In contrast.6 1.1 36.5 4.1 48.5 11.5 40.5 0.2 5.0 6.7 68.7 38.0 29.4 4.0 46.7 56.0 9. EUS for India.8 220.1 0.9 193. Lao PDR = Lao People's Democratic Republic. As a result of FDI.9 42.4 22.4 59.1 –6.0 8.0 41.4 49.5 33.6 71. and China Labour Statistical Yearbook.8 0.3 15.0 Low income Lower middle income Upper middle income High income GDP = gross domestic product.7 1.5 44.8 6.2 41.0 1.7 36.2 0.7 37.0 4.4 3.2 12.7 5.0 0. Indonesia has had relatively high wage growth in formal employment compared with labor productivity.7 4.2 16.9 Savings share to GDP (%) [10] 8. but only a very small shift of workers out of the informal sector.6 13. This environment has led to substantial productivity growth.0 Export share to GDP (%) [11] 15.9 52.0 43.8 30.1 0 1978 1980 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Agriculture Public industry Private industry PRC = People’s Republic of China.5 68.9 32.4 72.1 33.4 10.2 1.4 6.5 52.0 71.0 6.7 47.4 52.6 8. the demand for factory workers and other laborers intensified as the urban economy saw substantial expansion.6 0.1 65.3 19. 2002 and employment census 2004 and 2008 were used for the People's Republic of China and NSSO (various years).6 2.6 41.1 67.8 1.0 46.2 40.8 67.4 64.4 1.4 2.0 1.9 33. and Private Industrial Sectors.4 49. which has ultimately translated into both rising wages and the decreased share of informal workers in the employed population.8 25.0 75.5 21.5 10.4 0.3 –21.1 55.9 5.8 46.6 37.0 12.5 5.4 29.3 75.4 9.6 2.1 49.4 38.2 7.5 66.1 41.3 43.1 50.4 54.2 2.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Table 4 Summary Statistics (most recent year) Overall labor Sectoral labor productivity Poverty Age dependency ratio Average productivity (’000 2005 $ PPP per worker) $1.5 49.8 54.6 28.6 18.5 36. especially in manufacturing. China Statistical Yearbook.9 1.2 7.6 1.1 7. PRC.7 23.7 49. of Hong Kong.8 29.6 4.8 46.5 18.8 100.6 13.0 –7. The People’s Republic of China.6 6.0 2.4 –19.6 55.2 11.0 14.7 5.1 24.1 10.8 3.8 52. [9]-[11] World Bank (2011b).4 2.

A different set of work conditions will be needed to encourage the older workers to remain in the labor market and continue to contribute productively to the economy. even though the Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . the increased size of the labor force will not translate into more rapid economic growth unless there is growth in higher quality employment opportunities for these new entrants into the labor force. and Sevilla (2003). migration. Due to the rapid pace of urbanization and facilitation of migration. In the People’s Republic of China. In 2009 alone. the quality of employment Source: Bloom. as shown in the projected decline of their dependency ratios. low-skilled. For this reason.” Moreover. an aging population with a large percent of the work force retiring will increase the dependency ratio and likely open up a large “knowledge gap.1 Dependency Ratios of Major Developing Asian Countries. because the supply of workers will decrease. For example. Maintaining competiveness in such activities may require considerable investment in technology to improve labor productivity and may generate a shift to more skilled. World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision. the aging population is expected to slow labor productivity substantially as older workers are no longer able to work as many hours as they did previously. This may result in rising wages. and highly manual and physically demanding activities. People's Rep. Migrant workers have been a regular and stable source of labor supply in urban labor markets in the last three decades. which encouraged population movement for economic reasons (Xu and Lam 2010). In such countries. the labor force is expected to increase sharply in the coming decades and lead to a “demographic dividend. over 150 million people in urban areas of the PRC were migrants from rural areas. real monthly earnings for migrant workers increased nearly 20% in 2008.24 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Box 5 Demographic Change and the Quality of Employment Box Figure 5. but less labor-intensive industries. In particular. the PRC has been able to capitalize on the spillover effects that arise in urban environments and has provided numerous rural workers with access to substantially higher quality employment opportunities.” However. the migration has led to a significant reduction in overall poverty. the PRC government created the Ten Policies for Rural Economic Development. 2000–2030 90 80 70 Ratio (%) 60 50 40 30 2000 2005 2010 2015 Year Bangladesh Indonesia Pakistan Tajikistan China. At the other end of the spectrum are countries that are in the early stages of a demographic transition. such as India and the Philippines. Canning. employment has grown and migrants’ average monthly earnings have increased rapidly. and may create a sectoral shift in employment shares. from 45% of the population living on income of less than $2 per day in 1995 to less than 7% in 2007 (ADB 2010). In recent years. Further. of Malaysia Philippines Thailand India Nepal Sri Lanka Viet Nam 2020 2025 2030 Source: UNDESA. especially in labor-intensive. A number of countries within Asia are undergoing a demographic shift. In 2009. will become increasingly important for a population of older workers.

25 SPECIAL CHAPTER security—were associated strongly with an individual’s age (improving with age but at a diminishing rate).86 1. and job quality by regressing the scores they calculated for each variable on a number of explanatory variables. locally resident urban workers enjoyed 2–3 times higher job quality.5%.34 3. building site. Job quality is the sum of social security and employment security. (2011) scored migrants and local urban workers on dimensions of employment quality. while local workers have actually seen an increasing share in informal employment. which has risen from 13. and 2010 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2001 Migrant workers PRC = People’s Republic of China. 13.g. Urban PRC. The hukou is a system of residency permits that was introduced in 1958 to control migration of people from rural to urban areas. (2011) explored the determinants of employment security. schooling.7% in 2010. Cai et al. employment security.6 37. and gender (with men enjoying more security and job quality than women). Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . disparities persist within the PRC. Source: Cai et al.78 2005 Year Local workers 2010 All Job quality Social security Migrant workers Employment security Local workers PRC = People’s Republic of China.12 1.5 4 3 2 1 0 2. Source: Cai et al.35 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 CNY Wage (2001 price) Figure 19 Share of Informal Employment in Total Employment. its basic structure remains in place. Note: Social security and employment security were scored on a scale of 0–5.4 30.7 87. Moreover.4% in 2001 to 25. characteristics of the workplace (e. as the share of informal employment has dropped from 87. migrant workers in urban areas have increasingly found more formal employment. using such attributes as holding a formal government job. migrants to urban areas had much lower levels of job quality. 2005. employment security. In general. In 2010.8 29.3 86. (2011).Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia world was suffering from the global financial crisis. From the inception of the system. PRC citizens are classified as urban or rural residents by their hukou. Using data from the China Urban Labor Survey of 2010. and availability of pension and health and unemployment insurance. which distinguishes between migrant and local urban workers. and Employment Security among Migrants and Local Workers. Source: Cai et al. 2001. the average real monthly earnings of migrant workers increased another 15.5 0.5 25.2 30. 2001–2010 160 140 120 Employment 100 80 60 40 20 0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year Employment (million) PRC = People’s Republic of China. This suggests that the quality of employment has improved in urban areas and the disparities between migrant and local workers have decreased. migrant workers living in cities are substantially disadvantaged relative to local workers. and access to social Figure 18 Employment and Real Wages of Urban Migrants. and social security access than local urban residents. Cai et al. This divide between local and migrant workers in urban areas is in part explained by the PRC’s hukou system. Migrants holding rural hukou are not eligible for basic urban welfare and social Figure 20 Job Quality. access to social security. based on this scoring system.3% in 2001 to 60. While the hukou system has been reformed in recent years. Still. the PRC. urban residents received state-allocated jobs and access to many social services while rural residents were expected to fend for themselves. 2010 6 5 5. number of employees in a firm. After controlling for these individual attributes. (2011). Social Security. both employment and real wages of migrant workers continued to grow in the PRC (Figure 18)..8% in 2010 (Figure 19). They found that all three— job quality.7 60. employment security. having an open-ended or fixed contract. and social security than migrant workers in the urban areas. Figure 20 shows that. or outdoors). office or store. (2011). Urban PRC.

the trend of employment growth has been declining: it grew at 2. The PRC has shown great capacity for making progress through creating an environment that is conducive to FDI. the Enterprise Employee Training Regulations of 1996. including public education. the Enterprise Management Training Plan of 1996. the PRC’s increasing aged population will soon increase the age dependency ratio. There are also large disparities across provinces. More worryingly.to highproductivity sectors. a new set of employment opportunities may be needed that can continue the large gains in productivity per person or induce the skilled aged population to continue to work well after the normal retirement age. at 2% in 1983–1993. The Indian economy has been on a high growth trajectory for the last two decades. India. During 1972–2004. Examples of such regulations are the Education Law of 1995. Some of the most important provisions of the Labor Law include (1) the roles of the state. regular employees (who are generally on longer term contracts and are paid a regular salary or wage). The social insurance system is quite complete in the urban areas but still rudimentary in the rural areas. nonagricultural employment grew faster (at about 3. the dibao (a minimum income guarantee scheme that was originally designed for urban residents) has played a dominant role in terms of both coverage and benefits. the proportion of regular employees in the labor force stayed at about 15%. on the degree of structural shift in the work force from low. (2) set provision for determining “regular work hours” and “required overtime pay”. which was lower than the growth rate of the labor force during roughly the same period (Papola et al.8% per annum) than agricultural employment (at about 1%) during the period 1993–2007. The proportion of self-employed people declined slightly. Because most social protection programs are cofunded by the central and local governments. Although some programs. the PRC will be faced with many challenges to continue reaping the same gains as during the last few decades. service programs. and at 1. Thus. and most of them appear to have shifted to casual employment. The PRC’s social protection system consists of social insurance programs (which are characterized as contributory) and social assistance programs (noncontributory). Finally. approximately 45% of the population is in urban areas. Among social assistance programs. the PRC may need to focus more on developing employment in the rural areas to minimize the disparities. The PRC has also committed to protect the rights of its workforce by implementing the Labor Law in 1994 and the new Contract Law in 2008. Much of the benefits however were driven by the PRC facilitating the supply of poor rural workers to urban areas. with a longterm average growth of over 7% per annum and still higher growth at over 8% since 2004. The major component of this shift is out of agriculture. the Vocational Training Law of 1996. and (4) rules to provide special protection for female workers. such as the New Cooperative Medical System and the Rural Pension System. The Indian National Sample Surveys report information on three categories of workers: the selfemployed. three-decade period earlier. and the Higher Education Law of China of 1998 (Xu and Lam 2010). The anemic effect that economic growth has had on the expansion of higher quality employment in India is observed in the shares of employment by type of worker (Table 5). In India. To complement the Labor Law. Job quality depends to a large extent on a country’s social protection system. local governments. (3) the responsibilities of employers and rights of the workers regarding workplace safety. The prospects for faster growth of higher quality employment depend.9% during 1993–2004. and casual laborers (who typically work on a daily basis and do not receive nonwage benefits). the annual growth of employment in India in the decade ending in 2004 averaged only about 2%. they must return to their home village. regulations are issued on job skill advancement and employees’ personal development. Despite this transformation. have been implemented recently for the rural populations. the disparities in social protection between rural and urban areas are still very large. but this growth has not been sufficient to draw workers from agriculture to other sectors on a large scale. At present. The PRC government has vastly increased the resources it spends on social protection. to a large extent. migrants are at a big disadvantage relative to local urban residents.26 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia standards of quality for workers in the formal sector have seemingly been flexible enough so that the modern sector could continue to grow and hence decrease the share of informal workers. and employers in determining and enforcing the minimum wage. Efforts to implement laws to protect workers and guarantee minimum Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . which can drive structural transformation. people in poor provinces are less socially protected due to the constraints of limited fiscal capacity at the local level.5% during 1972–1983. similar to that observed during the longer. 2008). As 40% of the employed people remain in the low-productivity agricultural sector. which is generally lower quality employment. To obtain an education beyond middle school for their children. and has either established or extended social programs to cover an increasing number of vulnerable people. Given the poor quality of schools in the rural areas. In contrast.

The informal sector in Indonesia remains dominant. Employment in the sector has grown rapidly.3 84. disability. finance. it seems unlikely that India can effectively circumvent the normal growth model that has manufacturing encompassing a greater portion of the employed population before the economy becomes more service oriented.6 Electricity 18.2 60.g. Without finding ways to raise productivity.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Table 5 Distribution of Workers by Category of Employment (%). EUS. both launched in 2007). and old age.7 Health 52. India.8 52.5 5. Facilitating a larger shift from the agricultural to the modern industrial sector while focusing substantially on ways to resolve constraints that may create disincentives to formalizing employment may be necessary.2 98.3 18. Practically all the workers in the informal sector.2 0.2 8.5 Education 38.7 17. continue to be very limited. The service sector has shown relatively little promise for expanding sufficiently to provide enough higher quality employment for the influx of new workers into the labor force.. and education—that are overwhelmingly formal in nature. through central and state level legislation on conventional social security (NCEUS 2006). Papola (2011). Further. especially in the manufacturing sector.8 28.4 32. Thus.8 92.9 56.3 Finance 27. Indonesia.5 58. and employs a large proportion of the country’s workers.4 23.1 Mining 71. which employs about 86% of working people. Table 6 shows the proportion of employment that is informal by sector.4 15.7 81.8 1.2 39. India may have problems capitalizing on its massive and relatively well-educated population.g.8 Extra 26.9 95. e.9 Hotels 94.5 99.1 19. employment in the sector amounts to only slightly more than 2 million people—a miniscule number in relation to India’s aggregate employment (Box 6).8 41.1 1. Figure 21 shows that the share of manufacturing in total employment has remained fairly stable between 1993 and 2009. Table 6 Distribution of Workers by Type of Employment and Economic Activity (%).3 Construction 96. the National Health Insurance Scheme and Old Age Pension Scheme.2 Community 91. this promising sector has good potential to generate higher quality employment in the country.7 56.5 47. is substantially lower than that in other countries at a similar level of development.8 81.5 91. the very large share of informal employment in manufacturing (88% in 2004) is surprising.7 82.3 53.8 46.2 61.7 95.9 27. may have impeded the development process and negatively affected the formation of higher quality employment (Bhate 2010).0 Transport 78. While virtually all of the employment in the agricultural sector is informal in nature.4 11.7 32. Agriculture’s decline has been offset by an increase in the share of services in total employment. While this has resulted in a significant transformation of the economy’s structure.3 5. India’s productivity.3 80. administration. maternity. Papola (2011). India. A large number of workers in the formal sector do not have formal contracts with their employers.6 97.4 29.4 7.3 58. the shift in employment patterns has not been as impressive.8 72.6 Sources: NCEUS (2009). The predominance of informal employment is not limited to the informal sector. any statutory social security benefit.2 28. and to extend to informal workers the social security that is available to the formal workers (e.9 1.8 Real estate 83.0 5.7 3.9 13.6 14.3 67.9 Administration 15. India may need extensive reforms and a strengthening of its institutional systems to make a good push toward higher quality employment.6 Manufacturing 83. the Unorganized Workers’ Social Security Act of 2008). But a significant proportion of workers in the formal sector (about 47%) also do not enjoy such benefits.g.3 27 SPECIAL CHAPTER Year 1972 1977 1983 1987 1993 1999 2004 Sources: NSSO (various years).3 21. Some recent initiatives aim to increase universal social protection in health and old age (e. Certainly.4 88.7 Trade 96..5 31. but even after 10 years of very rapid growth.2 57. are without Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .7 13.7 16. The coverage and effectiveness of delivery.5 73. 1999 and 2004 1999 2004 Sector/activity Informal Formal Informal Formal Agriculture 98.5 86.0 5. This is particularly disconcerting because the universalized provisions of social protection for the population at large.3 Total 91. Indonesia has experienced relatively rapid growth during the last 30 years.3 13.7 8. It is largely the utilities and service sectors—electricity. The National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganized Sector estimated that only about 8% of all workers in India enjoyed any statutory protection against risks such as sickness. are very limited and seemingly poorly delivered.0 14.7 16. 1972–2004 Self-employed Regular employees Casual labor 61. however.8 28. which were enacted in the pre-independence era.3 98..6 54.7 13.5 15.3 2.0 Household 94. this share actually increased between 1999 and 2004.2 8. health care. India has received a great deal of attention during the last decade for its booming information technology sector. India’s restrictive labor laws.4 3. public health and old-age pension.

at 90% a year (Ministry of Finance. after which it started to come down again. Sources: Ministry of Finance. male workers are more likely to be self-employed.1 Employment in Information Technology Services.058.9 2003 512. after the onset of the 1997 Asian financial crisis.5 2004 706.5 2000 232.000 316. The entry barriers for these jobs are very low and their home-based locations and flexible working hours fit well with domestic work. various years). NASSCOM. and business services. Consequently.000 71.000 430. One reason is the large number of women in the agricultural sector who are classified as contributing (unpaid) family workers.000 77. which includes IT-enabled services (also referred to as business process outsourcing or BPO).293.000 70. for both females and males.000 700. Employment in IT has grown rapidly. are particularly seen as an important source of higher quality employment. The shares kept increasing through 2003. 1993–2009 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year Agriculture Manufacturing Services Source: Staff estimates using data from BPS (various years). A gender profile of workers reveals that many more females than males work in the informal sector (Figure 23). is an open question. Indonesia.000 in 2005 dollars at purchasing power parity).560.000 670. particularly due to the shortage of skilled workers. be reflecting voluntary mobility of workers. The export of software services. (including Total (2)/(4)*100 ITeS Domestic) 1 2 3 4 5 1999 152. which is double the wages that were paid in the formal manufacturing sector in 2007. and gems and jewelry) declined. The share of informal workers among all workers increased sharply.000 2.000 1. Formal employment is widespread in the sector. constitute about 75% of India’s service exports. while employment in other industries (particularly the export-oriented ones such as textiles. 1999–2008 Employment Software and Services Share of exports in Total Year Exports total Of which. but have declined somewhat since. including social security and generous medical and accident insurance. IT Industry Fact Sheet. The BPO industry also provides liberal benefits.000 76. Box Table 6. Business services.000 in 1999 to about 2.200 52. India. The share of informal workers in total employment increased after the 1997 Asian financial crisis (Figure 22) and continued increasing until 2003.7 2005 928.6 ITeS = Information technology enabled services.000 833. Of particular significance is that.28 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Box 6 Information Technology in India The information technology (IT) services sector is believed to have contributed substantially to India’s economic growth. This shows the resilience and sustainability of the BPO sector in export markets and its potential to continue to generate higher quality employment on a larger scale.000 42.621. 2000).6 2008 1. Government of India.5% per year during 2005–2007.9 2002 385. 45% of people working in export-based IT employment are in BPO. Percent Figure 21 Share of Employment by Sector.8 2006 1.614 77. financial services exports have grown at about 100% a year. has grown by about 33% yearly during 2001–2007. and ensure that the growth is shared more evenly across the population. IT services.000 56.806 2. that in the IT BPO sector increased greatly.000 66. while these jobs provide opportunities for higher quality employment. This indicates limited opportunities for employment in the formal sector (Irawan et al.010.000 106. in fact. even during 2008 when the global financial crisis hit. As indicated in Box Table 6.000 553.000 53.000 1. albeit very slowly. from 284. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .000 1.1. However.2 million in 2008. Wages in this sector average Rs100. Government of India.000 per year (about $10. and invests significantly in training its workers.7 2007 1.000 415.243.000 522.100 53.9 2001 276.000 284. The high rate of attrition observed in the industry may.000 180. the number of such jobs remains small and thus they serve a limited purpose in absorbing new workers into the labor market.000 216. SAKERNAS. leather. of which 78% are estimated to be in the exporting establishments.236.000 61.736. In contrast. Economic Survey. Average wages in the IT sector increased by about 16. which comprises about 40% of service exports. the extent to which IT services can provide higher quality employment opportunities and truly drive the transition process to a high-income country. which constitute about 25% of service exports.615 789.

The share of manufacturing in total employment has stagnated at about 15% between 1983 and 2009. which influences wage growth. As noted earlier. SAKERNAS. 1993–2009 90 80 70 Percent 60 50 40 30 50 45 40 35 30 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2007 2008 2008 Year Informal Formal Urban Year Rural Total Sources: Staff estimates using data from BPS (various years). While the share of agriculture has fallen from 52% to 34%. Indonesia. Indonesia. Indonesia’s labor regulations are very rigid and may have contributed to the problem of job creation in the formal sector (World Bank 2010). The highest proportion (more than 30%) of formalsector employment in the urban areas is in manufacturing. SAKERNAS. to encourage the shift to more formal jobs. but has lagged significantly behind the economic growth. Indonesia. The proportion of informal employment has decreased faster in the rural than in urban areas. Manufacturing in the Philippines has been moribund for the better part of the last three decades. SAKERNAS. (Rp ’000). 1993–2010 70 65 60 55 Percent 29 SPECIAL CHAPTER Figure 24 Informal Employment Rates by Residence (%). 1993–2009 350 300 250 200 150 100 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2009 Percent Year Male Female Total Male Year Female Total Sources: Staff estimates using data from BPS (various years). Indonesia.5% per annum. Sources: Staff estimates using data from BPS (various years). has been positive in Indonesia during the period 1993–2009. This suggests that Indonesia may need extensive reforms with policies that provide greater flexibility in the labor market. Figure 23 Informal Employment Rates by Gender (%). at 5% per annum (Figure 25). job quality depends on a country’s labor productivity growth. 1993–2010 70 68 66 64 62 60 58 56 54 52 50 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Figure 25 Average Real Monthly Wage of Employees by Gender. As in other countries. Figure 26 shows the sectoral patterns of employment in the Philippines since 1983. Real wage growth. A substantial amount of the decrease in informal employment has come Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 2009 . The Philippines’ informal sector is smaller than that of many countries in the region at 43. informal-sector employment is dominated by workers in the rural areas and formal-sector employment is found mainly in the urban areas (Figure 24). virtually all of the relative decline went to the services sector. Philippines.5%. possibly reflecting the high rates of migration from rural to urban areas. This may explain the relatively low level of productivity that is observed in the modern sector relative to comparable countries. Minimum wages that are substantially binding may particularly have contributed to the observed high growth in real wages of formal sector jobs relative to the growth of productivity. SAKERNAS. Sources: Staff estimates using data from BPS (various years). at 2.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Figure 22 Informal and Formal Employment Rates (%).

in terms of number. (2) usually males in their prime ages11 (3) with low levels of formal education. the country’s incidence of unemployment has remained higher than that in other ASEAN countries. and (4) more likely residing in the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao and the Cordillera Administrative Region than in other provinces (Dacuycuy 2011). it improved. Philippines. Figure 27 shows the share of selfemployed and casual workers in the work force between 1988 and 2008. Un. Thailand. The under-employment rate is also high. however. In 2009. given that close to 900. especially in key industries. From 1984 to 2000. and Viet Nam (Figure 28). The Philippines’ labor market is also characterized by a stubbornness or relative rigidity of un.7% per annum.1% (Figure 29). one in four employed people was underemployed. The proportion of regular employees in the labor force has risen substantially since 2000. The Philippines’ un. In 1987. indicating that the Philippine labor market has done well in shifting people away from informal employment. rates are higher than those of its Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) neighbors. The finding by Felipe and Sipin (2004) that the extent of monopolies and oligopolies in the Philippines has increased seems to explain the stagnation in real wages that has accompanied labor productivity growth. Singapore. Even at the national level. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 2008 55 0 .and under-employment are particularly high among the youth. Labor Force Surveys. Since 1980. People who remain as informal workers are shown to be (1) mostly agricultural and unskilled workers. Year Agriculture Industry Services Source: Staff estimates based on NSO (various years).and under-employment 11 The rate of informal employment is higher among young and older workers than among prime aged workers. the rate was 19. competition for higher quality positions is fierce and places the power of negotiations and rise in wages in the hands of the monopolies. Regular Employees. Figure 26 Sectoral Share of Total Employment. and Viet Nam (WEF 2010). From 2000 to 2009. the economy’s ability to generate good quality jobs is limited. Labor Force Surveys. The recent World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report ranked the Philippines 82nd in terms of pay and productivity—well behind its ASEAN neighbors such as Indonesia. labor productivity growth has been slow. Malaysia. and Casual Labor in Total Employment. a significant share of informal workers are of prime age.000 individuals enter the labor force each year. average labor productivity growth per annum was only 0. Another disconcerting statistic is the failure of the productivity growth rate to speed up. Singapore. Thailand. but was still only 1. while the shares of self-employed and casual workers have decreased. Given that the Philippines has a relatively stable and overly abundant supply of highly qualified and skilled labor. The latest figures show that more than 7% of the labor force in the Philippines is unemployed.and underemployment. Philippines. 1988–2008 60 in the last 20 years. This trend may explain why efforts to significantly trim the country’s poverty rate and raise average wages substantially have largely failed. as the ability of employers to generate higher quality jobs depends on labor productivity growth. such as Malaysia.30 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Figure 27 Share of the Self-Employed. 1983–2009 50 40 Percent 30 20 10 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2003 2004 2006 2007 50 45 40 Year Self-employed Regular employees Casual labor Percent 35 30 25 20 15 10 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Source: Staff estimates based on NSO (various years). Despite the shift of people from informal to formal employment.7%. wage growth in the formal sector has lagged substantially behind productivity growth and reductions in poverty have largely stagnated (Figure 15). and.

Monopolies may also have a critical role in constraining the overall growth in employment. A great deal of anecdotal evidence suggests that Filipino workers have sought employment abroad because they lack opportunities in the internal labor market. while informal workers can voluntarily subscribe to programs such as PhilHealth. Figure 29 Unemployment and Underemployment Rates. The Philippines has exhibited a comparatively large shift in people from informal to formal jobs. The lack of competition due to monopolies within the country seems the critical constraint to generating additional higher quality employment and to increasing wages. resulting in large disparities in coverage of the informal versus the formal sectors (Orbeta 2011). Underemployment While the Philippines has social protection schemes available to the entire population. and return migration). very few actually opt to enroll. the Philippine manufacturing sector remains very small. including health insurance and life insurance. if the best and most entrepreneurial individuals choose to work abroad. A large number of Filipinos work abroad. 1980–2009 15 14 13 12 11 10 Percent 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 31 SPECIAL CHAPTER Year Philippines Indonesia Malaysia Singapore Thailand Viet Nam Source: World Bank (2011b). Labor Force Surveys . the program is mandatory for formal sector and overseas Filipino workers. but the extensive migration may also underlie a lack of domestic innovation and development. the national health insurance scheme in the Philippines. actual coverage is limited. World Development Indicators. While labor productivity in manufacturing is high compared to that in other countries in the region. Without opportunities abroad. the performance of the domestic labor market could have been much worse. 1980–2009 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 1980 1982 1984 1996 2006 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1998 2000 2002 2004 2008 2010 The Philippines’ management of its labor migration is a good model for providing a means to obtain higher quality employment abroad. which are often referred to as the “3Rs” (recruitment. and remit billions of dollars annually to the country (Box 7). Percent Year Unemployment Source: NSO (various years). Thus. In particular. eliminating monopolies and fostering competition within the country can have substantial impacts on the creation of higher quality employment (Felipe and Sipin 2004). The country has the region’s most sophisticated network of agencies responsible for maximizing the benefits of migration. Philippines.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Figure 28 Unemployment Rate in Selected ASEAN Countries. as the service sector remains dominant in comparison to the manufacturing sector (Usui 2011). remittance. are widely distributed through the world. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . but a rather lackluster growth in wages. However.

In contrast. Millions of Filipinos continue to work abroad. designed to promote public employment services. Between countries in developing Asia.1 Selected Statistics on Migrant Workers from the Philippines Number of deployed workers 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Land-based workers 1.567 1. may indicate increasing challenges. Moreover.422. leaving the negotiation power and provision of work in the hands of the employer.623 1.752 14 0 5 3 42 0 35 0 340. overseas work continues to provide a major opportunity for workers of all skills to obtain better quality employment than is available domestically. Moving toward higher quality employment may thus require enacting a very specific set of policies that are tailored to each country’s context.077. In general. In 2009. through contracts facilitated by private recruitment agencies. the rigid labor laws in India and Indonesia may be constraining FDI and hampering the evolution to a more modern economy. Moreover. the Philippines’ current system for overseas employment relies on an effective partnership between private and public sectors to manage migration. Dacuycuy (2009). a result may also be that many of the best and brightest people who are employable overseas leave the country.000 were in low-skilled service-related work. This dual advantage plays an important role in mitigating unemployment in domestic labor markets and providing better quality employment opportunities. in 2010.32 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia extensive manufacturing sector. the Philippines is a major source of both sea-based and land-based workers.470. While legislation may be the major constraint for some countries that have failed to effectively move people from the informal sector. However. 308. Lessons in Developing Asia Developing Asia has made progress in increasing the share of salaried and wage employees and employers among the employed. an increasing trend of informality in nonagricultural sectors. inducing competition in the economy could increase the number of employment opportunities and shift the power to a better balance between employers and employees.236. Almost 50.062. Thus.279 12 0 3 2 45 0 35 1 Percent 14 0 4 3 35 0 40 3 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . the Philippines’ major failure in creating higher quality employment has been the inability to translate increased productivity into increased wages. but many still remain in informal employment. over 340. with about 1. Box Table 7.266 15 0 5 3 36 0 39 0 331.826 Percent New hires Re-hires Sea-based workers 74 30 44 26 75 29 46 25 79 30 48 21 77 25 52 23 76 23 53 24 Newly hired land-based overseas workers by major occupational category 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Professional Administrative/managerial Clerical Sales Service Agriculture Production Other Source: POEA (2010).013 1. Thus.000 Filipinos were newly hired abroad (POEA 2010). Sources: Amante (2003). which can be both a cause and a consequence of a fairly depressed labor market at home.586 1.122 13 0 3 2 47 0 34 1 306. Initially. To a large extent.47 million people working abroad in 2010 (POEA 2010). The PRC has shown that this movement can be facilitated by providing an environment that is especially attractive to FDI while enhancing the supply of cheap labor through rural-to-urban migration. POEA (2010). the shift away from informal employment is correlated with the degree of structural transformation that has taken place and the movement of employment from the lower productivity agricultural sector into the higher productivity industrial and service sectors. the shifts in the types of employment have varied substantially over the last 20 years. Remittances from abroad contributed 12% of the country’s gross domestic product in 2009 (World Bank 2011b). a large number of informal workers in developing Asia still lack adequate social protection. This can arise when monopolies create an ultra competitive environment for work. almost 332. the mediocre progress in India and the Philippines in shifting toward higher quality employment seems to support the idea that it is not feasible to effectively develop a service sector prior to developing a solid and Box 7 Migrant Workers from the Philippines The Philippines has one of the world’s most sophisticated institutional mechanisms for fostering and managing migration.000 newly hired people were deployed (Box Table). where productivity even in manufacturing and services remains persistently lower than that in developed countries. The wages of people who are able to obtain jobs abroad are many times higher than those of individuals with similar educational backgrounds and skills who remain at home. The deployment of contract workers has been so robust that the Philippines benefits steadily from remittances that are funneled to households all over the country (POEA 2010). So far.383 338. Unlike other labor-sending countries.000 of these were in professional or technicalrelated work and 138.

. Improving the quality of employment can be approached from several directions. X .. their economic landscapes..333 4. .198 3. X .576 4.. Share to of total of total 2005$ PPP 2005$ PPP 2005$ PPP (> 30% Ratio of total of years of GDP employment) employment) per worker ) per worker) per worker) of GDP) (increasing) population) schooling) (< 25%) ... ..724 25.......286 1. X X . Source: Based on summary statistics from Table 4.....813 4..055 4. ..452 12.. This section focuses on some key policy options that can help move Asia toward higher quality employment.. X X X X X X X X X X X X X X .335 4.. including through migration from rural to urban areas... . China Singapore Low income Real GDP Per Capita (2005 $ PPP) 1. X X .. X . PPP = purchasing power parity. industry. .000 (< 5...072 2... .. . . raise wages...791 2.. and the creation of higher quality employment. X X ... Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .794 6.. of Thailand Azerbaijan Kazakhstan Malaysia Korea. X X . The summary in Table 7 identifies indicators that may suggest the types of policies that are needed.. ... X ... a sustainable increase in higher quality employment is possible only with sustained growth of labor productivity.. .. X X Upper middle income High income Lower middle income Notes: . X . GDP = gross domestic product..073 2.. People's Rep. .... X X X X X X X X X . of Hong Kong... Lao PDR Papua New Guinea Solomon Islands Pakistan Uzbekistan Viet Nam India Mongolia Philippines Indonesia Samoa Vanuatu Tonga Sri Lanka Georgia Bhutan Armenia Turkmenistan Maldives China.972 6. X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X . with the interventions determined by country characteristics. X X X X X X X X .752 10.216 3. . . ..000 4... and provide better work environments. X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X . Economy Nepal Bangladesh Cambodia Tajikistan Kyrgyz Rep.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia 33 SPECIAL CHAPTER Selected Interventions to Promote Higher Quality Employment Countries within the Asia and the Pacific region are at widely different stages of development and are quite varied in the structure of their labor markets.978 Table 7 Classification Table (based on most recent year of data available) High High Low Low Small Low Informal Agriculture Low Labor Industrial Services High Urban Schooling Employment Employment Productivity Productivity Productivity Savings Age Population (< 8 Export (> 50% (> 40% (< 5. and services) and a shift of output and labor from lower productivity sectors (typically. . X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X .030 4... X X X . The second is supply-side policies that improve human capital and move people into more productive activities. . People's Rep......970 3.000 Rate Dependency (< 50% average no..260 8. X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X .. .643 4. X X X X X X X . .... X X X X X X X ... X . X . X .599 45.... Ultimately.. Lao PDR = Lao People's Democratic Republic. = data not available. Growth of labor productivity makes it easier for employers to pay higher wages and improve working conditions. ... X .... The third is a broad set of direct social protection policies that allow workers in both formal and informal sectors to raise their living standards and improve the quality of their work conditions.682 2..369 2.049 1... X X X X ...493 40. Aggregate productivity can grow through both increased real productivity per worker in individual sectors of the economy (such as agriculture..048 2...312 2. Some countries may need active intervention and specific labor market policies while others will need to remove constraints on their firms’ productivity in order to generate more and higher quality employment...739 1..200 7.611 2.... The first is indirect demand-side policies that improve productivity and increase the quality of working conditions (Osterman 2008)... agriculture) to higher productivity sectors (industry and services). ... X X .000 (< 5.. . ....

While the areas chosen were convenient to foreign firms. The SEZs were spectacularly successful at attracting foreign investment and cheap migrant labor from nearby provinces almost immediately (Yeung et al. FDI and trade have been important vehicles for East Asian countries to increase their economic growth and employment. Zhuhai (near Macao. and the extent to which firms in them create higher quality employment. Ebenstein found that. the government focused on undeveloped cities to minimize resistance to the new policies. PRC. Part of the reason for this is that the SEZ cities experienced rising prices (Figure 31). 2009). the chosen cities were able to operate with administrative autonomy from the provincial government. Indeed. 150 1988 200 250 300 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 All other cities Special economic zones CPI = consumer price index. is an interesting case in point. Low-income countries with low shares of exports relative to GDP need to capitalize on their cheap supply of labor. Source: Ebenstein (2011). China). In fact. while middle-income countries with a relatively well-developed export sector may need to move up the value chain so that wages can continue to rise. beginning in the 1960s and continuing through today. multinational firms have been a powerful force contributing to its growth. However. The initial SEZs were envisioned as small laboratories to explore the economic potential of a further opening of the PRC economy. including Xiamen (near Taipei. the PRC initiated a policy by which key strategic areas and cities were chosen as experimental zones for FDI with privileged status. they were by no means already developed. as exemplified by the PRC. Figure 31 Trends in Prices in Special Economic Zones and All Other Cities. Ever since the PRC opened its economy in 1978. and that this gap kept widening after 1980. especially those with low skills? Ebenstein (2011) exploited the phased rollout of the PRC’s SEZs and free trade areas across cities as a “quasi experiment” to examine the impact of the SEZs on local labor markets and on the welfare of workers in these cities. the SEZs accounted for more than 20% of the PRC’s FDI. He also found that the productivity of workers in firms in the SEZs was higher than that in firms in other cities (Figure 30). 1988–2001 350 Urban CPI Index (1985=100) Trade and Globalization The modern industrial and service sectors provide jobs for only about 57% of the labor force in developing Asia. Multinational firms have played an important role in the export-led growth model. China. How successful were the SEZs in terms of increasing labor productivity and real wages of the PRC’s workers. compared with more than 96% in industrial nations. 1960–2003 120 100 Per Worker (’000) 80 60 40 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Year firm established Special economic zones PRC = People’s Republic of China. All other cities Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . and to limit damage should the experiment fail. and the most successful SEZ. and foreign firms in the SEZs were allowed tax exemptions. In 1978. PRC = People’s Republic of China. The success of the original four SEZs spurred the government to open 14 coastal cities to foreign investment in 1984. By 1985. many of which have exploited the low-cost labor advantage of East Asian economies.34 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia to islands with capitalist economies. between 1988 and 2001. PRC. Source: Ebenstein (2011). He found large increases in firm openings and employment following a city’s conversion to an SEZ or free trade area. which also began to attract foreign firms attempting to capitalize on the PRC’s cheap labor and goods for lucrative overseas consumer markets. Shenzhen. the real wage premium in the SEZs actually decreased. which capitalized on its proximity to Hong Kong. there is no evidence of real wages being higher in SEZ cities than in other cities. An interesting and important question Ebenstein (2011) posed is: Do multinational firms result in the creation of higher quality jobs in a developing country? The creation of special economic zones (SEZs). The SEZs were strategically located in coastal areas close Figure 30 Trends in Real Labor Productivity in Special Economic Zones and All Other Cities.China). Greater promotion of trade and FDI is important for lowand middle-income countries to effectively raise the quality of employment.

the Philippines. and child participation in the labor force and measures of forced labor are lower in non-Asian open economies. 13 This study did not compare results to assess whether the gap was increasing or decreasing in labor rights between Asia and the rest of the world in open versus closed economies. the fatal on-the-job accident rate in manufacturing and measures of work hours are significantly lower in open economies. but that the differences with the rest of the world have been narrowing over time. but instead workers in the rural areas who might not have migrated to manufacturing jobs in such large numbers were it not for the SEZ experiment. Both sets of firms have the same objective (maximizing profits) and are likely to react to price and wage incentives in the same manner. firms in many Asian countries have started adopting more flexible employment arrangements.13 Nevertheless. such as outsourcing components of production lines that result in pervasive informal employment arrangements. could affect working conditions and wages adversely. Maligalig and Martinez found that about 9 in 100 jobs in Armenia’s formal enterprises were informal. 35 SPECIAL CHAPTER Flanagan and Khor (2011) recently conducted an empirical study to test the causal effect of global trade flows on working conditions. the valid comparison group may not be workers already residing in the SEZ cities. Outside of Asia. the Republic of Korea.China. Indonesia. and Thailand) and 46 developed and developing non-Asian countries in Europe. Labor rights are also generally better respected in open than in closed economies outside of Asia (Figure 33): freedom of association rights are stronger. All of the improvements are attributed to the indirect effect of rising per capita income. Of course. Using unit-level labor force survey data from four developing Asian economies. and were often found in formal-sector enterprises. the Middle East and North Africa. other literature on the impact of multinational companies on host-country labor markets has not provided substantial evidence that multinationals depress average wages (Flanagan and Khor 2011). Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . while in Bangladesh. Ebenstein’s data did not allow him to estimate the welfare gains for these workers. Flanagan and Khor found that countries with open trade policies generally had better working conditions and labor rights than countries with closed trade policies (Figures 32–35). But the general process of globalization. nondiscrimination. and reduction of child labor) advanced in Asia and the rest of the world during this period when both trade and investment flows grew. 12 The study used 11 Asian economies (the PRC. Malaysia. the expansion of international trade and investment during the two decades since 1990 has been associated with a broad improvement in working conditions and labor rights around the world. Latin America.12 They observed that both working conditions (pay. However. In general. abolition of forced labor. In open economies. multinational firms bring enormous firm-specific technical and managerial advantages to developing-country markets that should result in higher levels of productivity in these markets. at a broader level. openness and expansion are found to have no direct influence on labor rights. and North America. open economies in Asia have slightly higher hours of work. In comparison. which in turn should lead to higher wages for workers. However. and in Asia. the proportion was 4 in 100. especially considering the phenomenal reduction in poverty that the PRC has experienced since 1980. Indeed. Kazakhstan. hours of work. even though overall welfare may have increased. Only in the case of gender discrimination is there little difference between economies with open and closed trade policies. it is difficult to see why multinational companies would behave any differently than local firms in terms of promoting higher quality employment and higher wages. which puts pressure on multinational and domestic firms to continually cut costs in order to stay globally competitive. Japan. China. Taipei. it may have contributed to undue resentment toward migrants who may be driving down wages and potentially crowding out locals from jobs. As a region. the incidence was 33% in Banten and 31% in Yogyakarta. Maligalig and Martinez (2011) found that jobs with informal arrangements were not exclusively in informal enterprises. India. Singapore. it is almost nine times higher in open than in closed economies. annual pay per manufacturing worker outside of Asia is almost three times higher than in closed economies. and in two provinces of Indonesia. Asian economies with open trade policies generally had better labor rights than did closed Asian economies by the end of the 20th century (Figure 35). If anything. Asia generally scored lower than other parts of the world on most measures of working conditions and labor rights. However. which is likely to reflect the higher labor productivity in the open economies. the important thing to note is that not all people were necessarily better off from FDI. and job safety) and labor rights (workplace freedom of association.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Ebenstein concluded that the introduction of SEZs in the context of PRC’s huge supply of cheap surplus labor may have led to soaring corporate profits for the multinational companies that operated in the SEZs but provided little real wage benefit to the average worker already residing in these cities. their gains were probably substantial. Hong Kong. As a response to globalization and the pressure to stay internationally competitive. For example. They compared the evolution of working conditions and labor rights in Asian versus non-Asian countries from 1990 to 2008 and analyzed the relationship between labor conditions and international trade and investment flows.

and this effect is found to be uniformly true between Asian and non-Asian economies when weighted by the labor force in each economy. an important means of increasing the productivity of rural workers has been to move them to jobs in manufacturing and services that are often based in the urban areas. Source: Flanagan and Khor (2011). This can be done by increasing urban employment opportunities and easing the transition from rural to urban areas so that more people can take advantage of the benefits that come from urban environments. The Role of Migration Structural transformation plays a key role in providing better employment opportunities as there is a limit to how much agricultural productivity can be raised. Source: Flanagan and Khor (2011). the service and manufacturing sectors have higher rates of labor productivity.36 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Figure 32 Working Conditions in Open versus Closed Non-Asian Economies 300 Figure 34 Working Conditions in Open versus Closed Asian Economies 1. Source: Flanagan and Khor (2011). Figure 33 Labor Rights in Open versus Closed Non-Asian Economies 100 150 Figure 35 Labor Rights in Open versus Closed Asian Economies Percent of closed economies Percent of closed economies Child labor Civil Liberties FACB index Gender Slaves 80 100 60 40 50 20 0 0 Child labor Civil liberties FACB index Gender Slaves FACB = freedom of association and collective bargaining. In Thailand. historically.000 Percent of closed economies 200 Percent of closed economies Fatal accidents Life expectancy Long hours Pay Weekly hours 800 600 400 100 200 0 0 Life expectancy Long hours Pay Weekly hours Source: Flanagan and Khor (2011). to the extent that trade raises per capita income. Indeed. Figure 36 shows the value added per worker in 2009 in each of the three sectors for a number of developing Asian economies. FACB = freedom of association and collective bargaining. than the agricultural sector. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . for example. value added per worker in industry is more than 10 times that in agriculture. In most countries. Thus. it advances both working conditions and labor rights—a trend that is consistent with the general predictions of international trade theories. there is a strong incentive for rural workers to migrate to urban areas. and therefore higher wages. With such large differentials. Low-income countries that suffer from both high rates of agricultural employment and low rates of urbanization may benefit from programs that facilitate migration from rural to urban areas.

Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia
Figure 36 Value Added per Worker in Agriculture, Industry, and Services, Selected Asian Economies, 2009
12,000 10,319 10,000

37 SPECIAL CHAPTER

Constant year 2000 $

8,000 6,416 6,000 5,464 5,543

4,000 2,419 2,000 463 0 Viet Nam 1,555 1,008

3,118

3,601 2,642 846 2,478 1,339 855

Pakistan Agriculture

Indonesia Services Industry

Philippines

Thailand

Note: Value added per worker in each sector, in constant year 2000 $. Source: ILO (2011a).

The Asia and Pacific region has seen massive rates of rural–urban migration during the last four decades. In 1950, only 16.3% of Asia’s population was urban. It had increased to 24% in 1975, 41.7% in 2009, and is slated to increase to 50% by 2025 (UNDESA 2010). The PRC has experienced some of the largest labor migration flows in human history since implementing economic reforms in 1978—by 2009 alone, 153 million migrant workers were living in urban areas. The migration flow has propelled the PRC’s economic and social transition by increasing labor productivity and restructuring society. In addition to the direct effect of improved employment opportunities for the migrant workers, the workers who remain in agriculture also benefit. Their marginal productivity rises, as fewer workers are left in agriculture. Remittances from the urban migrants can help raise investment in the rural areas. And the migrant workers’ families benefit from a substantial decline in their consumption and income risk, as they now have more diversified sources of livelihood. Using a rich panel data set on about 2,000 rural households from three provinces in Northeastern Thailand (surveyed in 2007, 2008, and 2010) and a survey of 643 migrants from these rural households in the Greater Bangkok area in 2010, Hohfeld et al. (2011) found that households whose members migrated to Bangkok experienced a 17%–22% increase in their household income relative to control households whose members did not migrate. Further, the estimated impact was even larger

in the poor provinces of Buriram and Nakhon Phanom, at 35% each, and Ubon, at 47%. This provides evidence that migration can substantially improve job and income prospects for households residing in the poorest provinces. Hohfeld et al. asked the migrants to Bangkok to assess whether their work conditions had improved in their most recent job. Nearly 75% of the sampled migrants reported that their working conditions had definitely improved since their previous job. Each additional year of schooling the migrant had was associated with a 6% increase in the likelihood of improved working conditions. Conversely, indebtedness was associated with a 28% lower probability of improved work conditions. Upon correcting for selfselection, Hohfeld et al. found that migrants were much more likely than nonmigrants (i.e., those who remained in their rural village) to report an improvement in working conditions. This suggests that, based on the migrants’ own perceptions, migration results in jobs with better working conditions for them. Hohfeld et al. also created an index of job quality based on several objective indicators, including job stability; possession of a written or verbal contract; and the availability of life, health, or disability insurance. The empirical results were largely unchanged when they used this index instead of the subjective assessment of improved working conditions as the dependent variable in the analysis. Thus, their analysis indicates that migrants were much more likely than similar people who had stayed in the rural areas to hold higher quality jobs.

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

38

Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia
as physical assets such as land, financial assets such as working capital, human assets such as education, public assets such as access to electricity and other infrastructure, and social assets such as the organization and coordination of people. How the returns to these assets change depends importantly on the composition of local employment and the extent to which product and labor markets are integrated with the wider world. Credit markets, effective transport, and other forms of basic infrastructure are important to the availability of productive employment. Among the most important factors that can hamper growth in rural areas are (1) constraints on the use and availability of technology; and (2) an absence or paucity of the value-added manufacturing sector, financial services, and infrastructure. Alleviating these impediments can lead to enhanced productivity of rural workers (Foster 2011). Technological innovation and value-added manufacturing. Innovations such as a shift to high-value crops, fertilizers that increase agricultural output, and labor saving technology are viable ways to increase productivity in rural areas. Given that there is excess demand for agricultural products outside of the rural market, the improvement in productivity can result in real increases in income for the rural sector. The use of technology potentially has strong distributional implications. Foster and Rosenzweig (2010) explored scale economies in agricultural India. They show that, over the period 1982–2007 in rural India, mechanization increased substantially, particularly among larger scale farmers. While traditionally the view was that small-scale farmers in rural India were more productive than larger ones, Foster and Rosenzweig showed that, during 1999–2008, larger farmers were more profitable than small-scale farmers after accounting for supervisory costs, potential search costs for off-farm employment, and the potential endogeneity of land with respect to productivity. This profitability was found to be largely a result of the labor saving that was possible through increased mechanization. They noted that the maximal profitability was achieved at farm sizes of about 4 hectares. As agriculture innovation may not necessarily be appropriate for the entire rural sector, Foster (2011) suggested that developing a value-added manufacturing sector that is highly productive in the rural area could be a promising way to improve the employment prospects of the rural sector. In a rural economy with no valueadded manufacturing sector, increases in agricultural productivity, where agricultural products are exported, may only lead to minor improvements in overall welfare and could entail adverse effects for some people. This is

In addition to migration within a country, international migration plays a significant role in providing access to higher quality employment for Asian workers. This is especially true when countries fail to provide sufficient employment opportunities for their populations. International migration can help balance disequilibria in the supply of and demand for labor between sending and receiving countries. The migrants often receive higher wages, and their countries of origin benefit from remittances (Lucas 2008). Migration may also have drawbacks. An increased supply of workers in urban labor markets may put downward pressure on urban wages. Urban employers might not be inclined to improve working conditions if the supply of labor from rural areas is elastic; indeed, a very large oversupply of labor could lead to a deteriorating quality of employment. International migration can lead to significant “brain drain” and could depress a country’s productivity and innovation if the country’s best and brightest people are going abroad. In the receiving country, migration can lead to lower wages in jobs where there is an influx of migrants (Lucas 2008). Of course, with appropriate policies and monitoring of migration inflows and outflows, it is possible to improve welfare. Rural– urban migration can speed structural transformation and allow rural workers access to higher quality employment, while international migration provides a means for workers to access higher quality employment when the home country is not capable of generating sufficient employment opportunities.

Raising Rural Labor Productivity
Given that a large proportion of Asia’s poor will continue to live in the rural areas for the foreseeable future, it is important to not neglect policy for improving the quality of jobs in rural areas. Many lower income countries still have large agricultural sectors that employ over 40% of the labor force and have extremely low productivity. While rural–urban migration is an important means to increase productivity and provide access to higher quality employment, it is not an immediate or the most desirable option for the entire rural population. The main ways to expand opportunities for higher quality jobs for people who remain in the rural areas are to (1) enhance the productivity of rural workers who have ownership of productive assets, and (2) provide access to markets that can ensure sufficient demand for their labor. Workers who explicitly or implicitly own productive assets will have a greater likelihood of achieving stable and reasonably well-paid employment than workers who do not. Such assets include workers’ own labor, as well

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia
because, while improved agricultural productivity can increase the prospects and income of people in agriculture, without proportionate increases in the productivity of the nonagricultural sector, it will result in drawing people from the nonagricultural sector. This will then bid up wages in the nonagricultural sector and cause prices to rise. Foster showed that having productivity improvements in a value-added manufacturing sector in the rural area where agriculture provides inputs into the production process (e.g., canned and processed food) can lead to large welfare gains. This result is based on a reasonable assumption that goods are exported and the cost of transporting raw agricultural products is significantly more than the cost of transporting processed goods. In this case, the productivity of value-added production will increase the demand for inputs of agricultural goods and bid up the price of agricultural goods. As a result, workers will be drawn back into the agricultural sector, and the overall gains in wages and profits in both sectors will increase. Foster provided empirical support using ARIS– REDS14 panel surveys of rural India to show that having a value-added manufacturing sector is potentially important for rural economies. He controlled for village fixed effects; fraction of workers employed in each of three occupational categories (traded manufacturing, nontraded services, and value-added in agriculture); the share of income from agriculture, self-employed nonfarm, and salaried work; yields in agriculture; population; and the distance to the nearest town (which changes over time as villages become towns). Using the log income of the corresponding quantile as the left-hand side variable, he found that doubling the population’s share of value added resulted in 8.0% additional income for employees, at the 10th percentile and 8.8% at the 90th percentile of the income distribution. The share of agricultural income was shown to have a negative relationship with overall income, indicating the general importance of nonfarm activity as a source of rural earnings growth. Thus, there is evident support that technological innovation can have positive benefits. In particular, having technological innovation in a value-added manufacturing sector can result in considerable benefits for all workers in the rural economy and thus may be key to promoting the employment opportunities and raising the quality of employment. Financial services. Financial services, and particularly credit markets, can have a profound effect on agricultural productivity and nonagricultural selfemployment by providing working and startup capital. The growing literature on microcredit has shown that access to
14 ARIS-REDS Additional Rural Income Survey and Rural Economic Development Survey.

39 SPECIAL CHAPTER

structured credit can result in higher productivity in small family businesses, and better living standards especially in rural areas. A growing body of evidence suggests that increased access to banks has significant effects on the nature of employment and improves economic activity. Feler (2010) used bank privatization in Brazil to examine the consequences of reducing subsidies to rural banks. Feler found that, in the areas that lost subsidized banks and did not have alternative sources of credit, economic activity decreased and the number of skilled workers declined. Burgess and Pande (2005) examined the effects of India’s social banking experiment, which mandated banks to open branches in underserved areas of India. Their findings suggested significant decreases in rural poverty and increases in nonagricultural output from access to bank services. However, problems of imperfect information plague financial markets, and providing the appropriate financial services may be very costly especially in rural areas. In their detailed study of scale economies in rural agriculture, Foster and Rosenzweig (2010) found that low levels of access to credit seemed to adversely affect the use of agricultural inputs such as fertilizer and, ultimately, the profitability of smaller scale farmers. Townsend (2011) argued that, while financial deregulation has had substantial positive effects on economic growth in Thailand by providing a better match between entrepreneurial skill and access to capital, subsidized credit in some cases led to an inefficient overdispersion of economic activity. Moreover, it is not clear whether the public sector can sufficiently overcome the difficulties to make public financial services a cost-effective mechanism to increase the quality of rural employment. Kaboski and Townsend (2010), for example, found evidence of increased business economic activity associated with Thailand’s Million Baht Fund, but that the social costs of the program exceeded the social benefits. Clearly, ineffective monitoring and inappropriate financial products for certain groups can have adverse effects toward raising the quality of employment. However, there are huge gains from increasing access to financial services in rural areas and it can provide a means for certain business-minded rural workers to increase their profits and improve their circumstances. Infrastructure. Infrastructure plays an important role in determining rural productivity growth and employment. Important infrastructure in rural areas includes irrigation, electricity, roads, transport, and grain storage, among other things.

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

40

Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia
vocational education and training programs. However, middle-income countries that are trying to move up the value chain may require more general tertiary education that allows for the development of innovative ideas. As Foster (2011) noted, the informal labor market in agriculture that exists in many low-income countries may reflect the shifting nature of agricultural labor demand, but it may also indicate a lack of specialization in particular land or tasks. By contrast, most self-employed workers and most factory workers outside of the nonfarm sector may have specific skills that cannot easily be replaced by someone working in another sector. Thus, the rents associated with these skills should appear in terms of labor market earnings. Because specific skills are associated with nonfarm employment, a wage premium is observed for many forms of nonfarm employment (Lanjouw and Murgai 2008), which suggests focusing on training and educational programs that can allow nonfarm workers in rural areas to develop a specific set of skills. Entrepreneurship training is also a potentially useful tool for raising the income of microentrepreneurs. Karlan and Valdivia (2006) used a randomized treatment that added business training to an existing microcredit program in Peru to study the impacts of entrepreneurial training. They found that the training increased repayment and business revenues for the clients. They also found that people showing the most benefit from the training were those who had expressed the least interest in the program. This provided evidence that important management skills can be taught. While the pendulum has swung from an emphasis on technical and vocational education and training (TVET) programs in the 1980s and early 1990s to an emphasis on general education programs since the mid-1990s, there is limited research to firmly resolve the debate on which type of education is more beneficial. Because students who enroll in TVET may have, overall, different backgrounds and educational competencies from those who elect general education, it has usually been impossible to assess which track of education may be better, all else equal. Horowitz and Schenzler (1999), correcting for selection bias, found that general education exceeded returns to TVET in Suriname. Conversely, Malamud and Pop-Eleches (2008) using an education reform that shifted a large proportion of students from vocational training to general education while keeping the average years of schooling unchanged, found that in Romania there were no differences in returns between graduates of vocational versus those of general schools. However, the difference in findings may reflect the quality of the general education versus the technical vocational education institutions.

In particular, infrastructure that improves transport facilitates access to markets outside of the local area. This can lead to increased demands for agricultural and nonagricultural products and to diversification of the nonfarm sector in rural areas. As Felkner and Townsend (forthcoming) found, road infrastructure drove substantial growth in rural areas of Thailand. They found that increased infrastructure, because it provides access to key markets, was also associated with a larger share of enterprises and higher growth of enterprises in rural villages. Donaldson (2010) also found evidence that the introduction of railroads in India led to greater economic activity by exploiting gains from trade between different regions. Electrification can also have positive effects, by expanding the hours during which it is possible to work and accomplish different tasks while enabling microenterprises to diversify. Rud (2011) suggested that firms faced with poor and unreliable electricity supplies must invest in a relatively costly replacement technology. Taking advantage of South Africa’s post-apartheid electrification roll-out in KwaZulu-Natal province (which generated exogenous variation in access to electricity across households and time), Dinkelman (2010) examined the effect of electrification on rural employment. She found that electrification led to an increased supply of labor by women and men in their 30s and 40s who were residing in poor and middle-income communities. Dinkelman also found the increased supply of women’s time used in small-scale family enterprises resulted in a decrease in women’s wages. This emphasizes the need to accompany increased work hours and output with increases in demand for outputs. Thus, rural electrification in itself may not lead to overall improvements in wages, but, particularly when complemented with transport infrastructure, may lead to overall improvements and employment conditions of the rural poor.

Human Capital
Few factors are as important in raising labor productivity as human capital investments. While the average years of schooling in many Asian countries have increased substantially during the last few decades, this has not necessarily led to the workers having the skills and training that help them obtain higher quality employment. Moreover, a low level of human capital may be a constraint to investment and expansion in sectors that require skilled workers. As markets in countries at different stages of development typically demand different skills sets, educational investments and policy should likely vary with these needs. In particular, low-income countries with a high proportion of informal workers may need to consider developing a focused and narrow set of skills through

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia
Box 8 Technical and Vocational Education and Training Efforts to achieve higher quality employment are often constrained by a mismatch between the type of skills needed in the labor market and those available in the workforce. To ameliorate this mismatch, policymakers sometimes consider technical and vocational education and training (TVET) as a way for workers to quickly acquire the skills needed by various industries. The intention is to use vocational training to impart marketable skills so that their graduates will be readily employable, have higher productivity, and earn higher wages, eventually leading to higher economic growth and lower poverty incidence. Early success from TVET in countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and later in Asia—such as in Hong Kong, China; the Republic of Korea; Singapore; and Turkey—helped strengthen the idea that TVET can help fill skills gaps in the labor market and be a good avenue for economic development. Employment and earnings data from the 2008 Viet Nam Household Living Standards Survey show that, on average, workers with vocational education earn 80%–100% higher wages than workers with no formal education, even after controlling for factors such as gender or locality. However, despite the promise of higher productivity due to the acquisition of technical skills, TVET is not an adequate substitute for general education at the tertiary level. While graduates of tertiary-level vocational education can expect 97% higher wages than people who have no education, the wages of people with academic tertiary education are 145% higher. Thus, people with vocational college diplomas earn about one-third less than people with academic college diplomas. In Viet Nam, a major challenge to improving TVET is the lack of coordination between the agencies tasked to overlook it. While
Sources: MOET (2006), Son (2011).

41 SPECIAL CHAPTER

the Ministry of Labour, Invalids and Social Affairs has the primary responsibility for vocational education, the Ministry of Education and Training has overall responsibility for education and the Ministry of Industry and Trade is responsibile for industrial strategy. Thus, the three ministries have overlapping interests in TVET. As a result, the TVET system has lacked resources, administrative and managerial capacity, and qualified teachers, leading to poor quality education that lacks relevance to the labor market’s requirements (MOET 2006). The underperformance of Viet Nam’s TVET system is primarily due to its lack of relevance to the market’s needs. For TVET graduates to find higher quality jobs, the skills taught in the TVET system should be those needed by the labor market. Poor planning and weak labor market linkages could result in graduates being unproductive, jobless, or employed in jobs unrelated to their training. Thus, the TVET system and the industries and firms that may hire its graduates should be closely coordinated. The government could facilitate the needed coordination between vocational institutions and industrial groups through educational and industrial policies. The Republic of Korea provides a good example: due to effective coordination between education and industrial policy, TVET played a key role in ensuring that workers had the skills needed by the burgeoning industrial sector. Thus, TVET provided the skilled work force needed for growth and allowed workers to prosper from the growth through employment. While improving the accessibility and quality of TVET is important, governments also need to assure effective coordination within the TVET sector and between TVET policy and industrial policy. TVET should be integrated into a country’s overall economic growth and poverty reduction strategy.

In general, expanding and strengthening vocational education opportunities can serve an important purpose, especially in a rapidly growing, liberalized economy. Vocational education can also be a powerful tool for improving job prospects and job quality among the poor. For example, in Viet Nam, which still has a large agricultural sector, people with vocational education were shown to have greater success in finding employment and higher wages than people with general education up to the secondary level, but had slightly lower employment and earnings than people who had general tertiary education (Box 8).15 Ultimately, as economies evolve and become more service oriented, promoting TVET may no longer be very useful for the majority of the population. Newhouse and
15 Bassanini (2006) found that training did not help advance wages in developed countries, except among young and highly educated employees, who are the most likely to have higher earning potential and are less susceptible to poverty. However, he found that training could improve employment security for older workers or those who have little education.

Suryadarma (2011) examined the labor market outcomes of Indonesian youths who entered the TVET track and those who entered the general education track for senior high school. They found that female TVET graduates were able to get more jobs and higher wages than males who had general education. They cited concerns over expanding public vocational education and the relevance of the skills taught by TVET, especially for males in an increasingly service-oriented economy. In general, there is a strong role for building human capital to improve employment outcomes, whether through vocational or general education. Both systems and institutions may need to be strengthened. For workers in developing countries who are largely going to become self-employed, having a very specific skill to market seems warranted. However, as countries upscale and evolve, it may be preferable to focus more on general education, which may better impart the flexibility and innovation that is useful for service-oriented economies.

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

42

Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia
or more workers must have government permission prior to retrenching or laying off workers, and before closing (Papola 2011). This has constrained the expansion of output and employment in firms that produce primarily to meet fluctuating export orders. Besley and Burgess (2004) found that, in 1990, formal sector manufacturing output and employment in the state of West Bengal would have been 23%–24% higher had the state not passed pro-worker amendments during 1958–1992. Fallon and Lucas (1991, 1993) also found that formal employment for a given level of output declined by 17.5% during 1977–1982, after the introduction, in 1976, of rigid labor regulation. A host of other studies, such as Ahmed and Devarajan (2007), Ahsan and Pages (2008), Mazumdar and Sarkar (2008), and Hasan and Jandoc (2010), have also come to conclusions that legislation is constraining productivity and growth in Indian manufacturing. In addition, the Indian government had reserved entire swaths of industries to the small-scale sector (Box 9). These reservation policies further impeded the growth of output and employment in labor-intensive industries. Inevitably, this points to the fact that trying to ensure a certain level of quality employment too early in the development process can be detrimental to employment and productivity growth. Minimum wage policy. One labor policy to single out is the minimum wage policy, which is pursued by many countries both in the developing and the developed world. In general, while minimum wage legislation protects formal sector workers by ensuring a certain level of wages, it can result in significant employment losses for the least skilled workers in the formal sector. Minimum wage policy that results in employment loss in the developed world often leads to overall loss in productivity as people become unemployed, and hurts the poorest and most vulnerable workers first and most severely (see Neumark et al. 2004, 2005; MaCurdy and McIntyre 2001). Similar findings are observed for developing countries. Indonesia’s experimentation with minimum wage policy (Box 10) has made it a prime country for researchers to examine the impact of the policy on labor market outcomes. Exploiting the significant changes in minimum wages, Rama (2001) found the minimum wage had a significant adverse effect on employment among small firms (although not among large firms), with minimum wage increases resulting in a 5%–15% increase in prevailing urban wages but also leading to a decline of up to 5% in urban wage employment in Indonesia. Suryahadi et al. (2003) also found that employment in the urban formal sector was adversely affected by minimum wage increases, with every 10% increase in the real

Active Labor Legislation
To protect the rights of workers and ensure that employers follow minimum safety and other regulations, most governments have pursued active labor legislation. The intention has been to enforce minimum quality standards in organized sectors of the economy. However, such legislation often is associated with substantial costs that can negatively impact the quantity and quality of employment that is created. Overly strict legislation can raise the costs of expanding employment, lower productivity, and impede FDI flows. For countries that are developing and have small numbers of workers employed in the modern organized sector, imposing strict minimum standards of employment quality may result in costs that hamper or stop employment growth and development of the modern sector. However, as an economy advances and a larger majority of workers are in the formal sector, the emergence of active labor legislation that can ensure minimum standards without severely impeding the business processes is important, especially for the most vulnerable workers. Legislation and firm size. An important reason why many enterprises choose to remain small and outside the formal sector is that they can avoid the high regulatory costs that firms in the formal sector face, such as license fees, payroll and corporate income taxes, and adherence to zoning rules and labor codes (such as payment of minimum wage, severance compensation, and contributions to pension and medical insurance). Often, these costs can be substantial, providing a strong incentive for enterprises to remain small and in the informal sector (Pratap and Quintin 2006).16 However, remaining small limits firms from capitalizing on economies of scale and may drive low productivity and thus low investment growth in a country. India is a good case in point. Much of the organized sector is covered by a plethora of legislation on employment protection and labor dispute resolution—India has more than 45 labor laws at the national level and an even larger number at the state level, resulting, in principle, in a broad range of protection for workers. The labor legislation includes provision for contract labor, minimum wages, social security, and unemployment. In addition, under the Industrial Disputes Act, establishments employing 100
16 There are advantages for a firm to be in the formal sector, with one of the most important being access to credit. Informal enterprises have virtually no access to formal credit, as they frequently lack title to their assets and thus cannot enter into formal contracts. This ultimately impedes their growth and makes it difficult for them to capitalize on economies of scale and become more productive. Soderbom and Teal (2000) found that, in Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya, and Zimbabwe, manufacturing firms with more than 100 employees operated on average with 3–4 times more physical capital per employee than firms with fewer than six employees.

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

One example is India’s small-scale industry (SSI) reservation policy. 43 SPECIAL CHAPTER inefficient producers. assuring workers of a decent lifestyle. However. Only in the late 1930s. loyalty. reasonable minimum wage laws may not necessarily be detrimental in developing countries. Anecdotal evidence suggests that unions played an important role in guaranteeing workers’ rights in the United States in the early part of the last century. consumers ended up paying high prices for many consumer goods. automobile industry wages were low and nonsalary benefits were almost nonexistent for auto workers. oilseed processing. Of course. sales. Lemos (2007) and Gindling and Terrell (2005) examined minimum wage laws in Latin America and found they had a positive effect on wages in both the formal and informal sectors in developing countries. For example. In countries of middle income and higher. as a result. workers. such as textiles and toys. the reservation list had included 863 consumer items. labor unions are rarely present in low-income countries. whose growth is based on developing laborintensive manufacturing. The intention was to promote employment opportunities outside agriculture in the rural areas. the United States’ automobile industry grew rapidly in the early 20th century. This may also be one reason why the informal sector continues to be so large in India and completely dominates the formal sector.” Enterprises above a certain size were prevented from operating in more than 500 industries. The smallscale enterprises could not capture economies of scale and were Source: Gupta (2006). Indeed. Moreover. as the studies just cited have shown. minimum wage reducing formal employment by about 1%. They argued that the adverse employment effect in the formal sector resulted in relocating the displaced workers to informal jobs with lower earnings and poorer working conditions. These findings are consistent with the theory that minimum wage laws may serve as a signal of the minimum wage that workers expect for their services independent of whether they are in the organized or unorganized sector. as formal sector employment may provide a host of nonpecuniary benefits. stable. but not of skilled. hand tools. did workers’ wages begin to improve significantly. commitment. However.) The SSI reservation policy. due to a large amount of informal employment and abundant labor. India’s failure to establish a large. the policy ended up stunting the growth of promising labor-intensive industries in which India had a comparative advantage. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . the overall impacts of minimum wage policy in developing countries may be less negative. with slight negative effects on overall employment in the formal sectors. toys. and food processing. service. more than just sustained productivity growth may be needed to assure fair pay and basic worker rights. (By 1986. Freeman (2009) presented evidence that raising the minimum wage can spill over to the informal sector. as many individuals may simply end up in the informal sector. Industries that were affected included garments. leading to increases in earnings in both the formal and informal sectors. India operated an extensive SSI reservation policy as part of its “License Raj. while there are employment losses in the formal sector. unless they exported more than 50% of their output. the formation of labor unions is often inevitable. or fueling of automobiles (Kyvig 2004). when unionization became the norm in the industry. and productivity from the workers in exchange for assuring them good wages and job and retirement security (Freeman and Medoff 1984). Despite the growth. over 10% of all American workers had something to do with the production. combined with trade protection for domestic industries (which India also practiced under the License Raj). Moreover. For example. and secure. Labor Unions Labor unions can play an important role in ensuring workers’ rights are respected and that they receive fair pay. Still. The SSI reservation policy was based on the Gandhian concern for protecting the age-old handicraft and village-based industry in India. An implicit social contract was struck between workers and the automobile companies—the companies would get labor. Until 2001. Thus. resulted in market fragmentation. it is difficult to accurately assess the total impact of minimum wage laws on welfare and more research is needed. which became a major constraint to the export of garments and toys.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Box 9 India’s Small-Scale Industry Reservations Many well-intentioned labor and industrial policies meant to foster good quality employment opportunities for the more disenfranchised workers can end up constraining the growth of higher quality employment. unionization may ensure that the jobs being created are well-paid. competitive manufacturing base in laborintensive consumer goods may be the result of the misguided SSI reservation policy. Sugiyarto and Endriga (2008) found that changes in the minimum wage had an adverse impact on the employment of unskilled. Chun and Khor (2010) found similar results for Indonesia. The small firms were also unable to deliver large volumes of consistent quality. This resulted in large growth in automobile employment: by 1925. As the United States example suggests.

only about 135 waiver requests are typically granted each year in Indonesia. However. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . they can create conditions that diminish or exclude the quality of employment for others. 2009). Major changes in the minimum wage legislation began during 1989– 1990.b With the significant changes. when a poisoning incident led to improved safety laws in the Republic of Korea (Box 11).d More than 18% of paid employees in urban areas receive wages that are below the minimum. Suryahadi et al. d In Honduras. c In principle. and in Costa Rica. while the minimum wage in Jakarta was 75% of the KFM level (Manning 1998). Since 2001. and in 1970. 32% of all employees are paid below the minimum wage level. economic policy and set the minimum wage level based on workers’ needs without considering other economic factors such as local labor market conditions or international competitiveness (Suryahadi et al. SAKERNAS. which has more than 20. Box 10 continued on next page Sometimes. as in most developing countries. In the mid-1970s. labor union representatives. in the 1990s. and Mean Wage. partly due to the introduction of the new severance pay or Labor Law No. The minimum wage has been regulated since the early 1970s. as the noncompliance rates have increased.a In this period.1 Minimum Wage. 2007b). 2007. 1997–2009 90 80 70 60 50 40 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year Ratio of MW to average wage Ratio of MW to median wage MW = minimum wage. more than 25% of full-time paid employees receive less than the minimum wage (Gindling and Terrell 2005. However. tends to be low. 2005). Unionization is attributed to influencing downward wage rigidities in the market that result in less wage flexibility (Dickens et al. as part of a political regime favoring greater decentralization. employer. However. Box Figure 10. most workers do not receive the protection of unions in practice because of improper enforcement or the presence of loopholes (Mazumdar 1976). 2003).000 manufacturing firms (Rama 2001). similar workers (Alby et al. Source: Staff estimates calculated from BPS (various years). the minimum wage was extended to all provinces. Each wage commission comprises a regional manpower office. Indonesia. While many developing countries have collective bargaining agreements in principle. Babecky et al. The combination of local pressures and stronger labor unions below the central level has contributed significantly to a large increase in the minimum wage in most provinces in Indonesia. Some studies have even found that union members tend to earn less than other. The situation has worsened recently. using a measure of minimum physical needs (kebutuhan fisik minimum or KFM) as a benchmark toward the end of 1990 (Manning 1997). minimum wages in all provinces were significantly below the KFM level—some provinces even had minimum wages less than 40% of the KFM. as they require a financial audit from a public auditor (Suryahadi et al.c Another factor is that compliance with the minimum wage policy in Indonesia. 13 of 2003. and some expert advisers (Manning 2003). This has led to some Indonesian experts claiming that regional governments seem willing to support a populist approach to a Minimum physical needs were calculated from the food bundle that fulfilled the minimum recommended calorie intake of 2. and in South Sulawesi it was only 34%.600 per day (Suryahadi et al. Median Wage. This was the case in 1911. Indonesian minimum wages tripled in nominal terms and doubled in real terms (Rama 2001). until the late 1980s. obtaining a temporary waiver is a difficult and costly process. while in rural areas the proportion is even greater (29%). In practice. 2001). 2007a. b For example. with the introduction of legal sanctions for noncompliance and specific guidelines for minimum wage implementation. employers can request a temporary waiver from the minimum wage. the catalyst for respecting workers’ rights may be an accident that draws public attention to the plight of workers and goads the government into regulatory action. Widarti 2006). for example. 2003. especially in comparison to the mean and median wages (Box Figure 10. it was rarely enforced and was not effectively implemented (Rama 2001). the power to set the minimum wage has been transferred from the central government to the provinces and district governments (in consultation with regional wage commissions). particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises. The transfer of power to set the level of the minimum wage to regional governments in Indonesia has had a major effect on minimum wage trends. in 1990 the minimum wage in Central Java was only 31% of the KFM. when a fire in a shirtwaist factory in New York led to better workplace safety laws in factories in the United States.1).44 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Box 10 The Minimum Wage in Indonesia The Indonesian government has had a minimum wage policy since the end of the 1980s (Rama 2001. it was initially limited to certain areas and for construction workers in government projects. 2003). They can also create adverse incentives that can lower overall productivity and cause businesses to become unprofitable (Urizar and Lee 2003). while labor unions can increase the quality of employment for some people who are union members.

4). the government has not issued effective sanctions for employers continuing to pay their workers below the minimum wage (SMERU 2002). 1993–2009 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Higher Year Agriculture Industry Services Underprimary Primary Year Junior high High school Source: Staff estimates calculated from BPS (various years). SAKERNAS.4 Non-Compliance with the Minimum Wage by Educational Attainment.and upper-middle income countries where the supply of labor is less elastic and a larger proportion of workers are employed in the formal sector. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Box Figure 10. Indonesia.3). as union coverage is typically limited to a small minority of formal sector workers. unions may misallocate labor. Indeed.3 Non-Compliance with the Minimum Wage by Sector. but lower and roughly equal in manufacturing and services (Box Figure 10. in middle. SAKERNAS. The extent to which unions can result in improved employment will depend on a country’s level of development. 1993–2009 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 Box Figure 10. However. Although the minimum wage policy is applied to all paid employment without considering the firm’s size and sector of activity. can redistribute income toward workers without harming economic efficiency on the basis that negotiations (by unions) reduce some of the transaction costs and leads to lower turnover within firms (Freeman 2009).2 Non-Compliance with the Minimum Wage. In lower income countries with a large surplus of labor. Source: Staff estimtes calculated from BPS (various years). the right to join a union and bargain collectively is an important means of ensuring that workers’ voices are heard. waste resources through rent seeking. Whether this resulted from reduced enforcement or an actual increase in firms’ noncompliance (because of an increasing minimum wage) is unclear. Noncompliance is highest in the agricultural sector. Indonesia. Therefore. it is not surprising that many small enterprises and workers in rural areas are still paid below the minimum wage due to lack of enforcement and labor unions in that group of workers. Thus. 2001). especially after 2003. effectively pushing those who are not hired into the informal sector. Thus. or into unemployment. SAKERNAS. the focus of the government’s enforcement is still limited to the large and medium enterprises and to workers in urban areas (Rama 2001.2 shows that the number and percentage of Indonesian workers earning below the minimum wage has increased. More importantly. however. and impair labor market adjustments to economic shocks. The noncompliance rate is also higher among less-educated workers and young workers (Box Figure 10. 1997–2009 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 45 SPECIAL CHAPTER Year % wage worker earning below provincial MW Source: Staff estimates calculated from BPS (various years).Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Box 10 The Minimum Wage in Indonesia (continued) Box Figure 10. unions can be effective in raising overall wages and working conditions. noncompliance appears to be strongly related to the extent of informal employment in a sector or within a demographic group. Unions. Box Figure 10. unions are also likely to make employers reluctant to hire new workers. By making formal sector workers more costly than informal sector workers. unions are unlikely to be effective in raising overall wages and working conditions. Moreover. Suryahadi et al. unions are likely to exacerbate disparities between workers in the formal and informal sectors. Indonesia.

while courts ruled for the compensation of workers suffering from carbon disulfide poisoning. which eventually became the Wonjin Rayon Company. However. and Kim (2009). social protection systems need to be built gradually based on a country’s development stage. and enhancing their capacity to protect themselves against hazards and the interruption/loss of income” (ADB 2008: 7). the role of protection in maintaining social stability. due to long-term exposure to the chemical during the rayon production process. The rayon industry in the Republic of Korea had started to develop in 1959. a fire broke out at the Triangle Shirtwaist factory in New York. The awareness can then lead to positive changes in policy and practice. In the two cases above. and outlines policy options for reforming them. a massive outbreak of carbon disulfide poisoning occurred among workers at Wonjin. killing 146 of the factory’s 500 employees. poor ventilation. composed mostly of young immigrant women of Italian and Jewish descent. it may be necessary to have a social protection system that can provide all people with a minimum level of health care and ensure that people have enough income for basic subsistence. diminishing people’s exposure to risks. and increased labor market flexibility. Although the factory building was considered modern in its time. Two cases illustrate the point. it can build and diversify its social protection system to raise the level of protection.” However. In response. which has gone a long way toward improving overall working conditions in the Republic of Korea. On 25 March 1911. firms. there is good reason for such countries to have some basic social protection for workers and to ensure efficient allocation of resources that can lead to more stable and greater economic growth. with the establishment of the Heunghan Synthetic Fibre Company. it was overcrowded with workers and lacked an evacuation plan. For example.17 Social protection is considered an essential element of inclusive growth that can ensure social cohesion as well as economic and social stability (Bonilla Garcia and Gruat 2003). In addition. workers at low-income 17 Park (forthcoming) provides a comprehensive overview of pension systems in East and Southeast Asia. The recent global financial crises have reinforced the sense of social insecurity as Asians watch their more affluent counterparts in the West go through a period of slow job recovery. lack of protective gear. the two cases highlight the importance of enforcing preventive measures to ensure workers’ safety and health. Thus. and lack of awareness about the toxicity of carbon disulfide led to the poisoning outbreak. few developing countries have broad-based social protection that universally or adequately covers all types of employment. The interest in social protection stems from several factors. safer working conditions. Other factors identified by Park (2010) include the imminent demographic transition in many countries in the region. having a wellbuilt social protection system is simply not financially feasible. One is the painful experience of some Asian economies during the financial crisis in the late 1990s. groups such as the International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union rallied for better workplace conditions and safety laws. At low-income levels. in practice. such programs and policies range from unemployment and disability insurance to programs to ease the adjustment process and to pensions. and governments to increase awareness of the importance of occupational safety and health. In labor markets. As a country grows and becomes more formalized. In its broadest sense. However. Social Protection The last two decades have brought the issue of social protection to the forefront of the policy agenda in many Asian countries.46 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Box 11 The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory and the Wonjin Rayon Company Workplace incidents can become turning points for workers. For low-income countries with a large share of informal employment. including such products as pensions. but the doors and exits were locked. social protection refers to a “set of policies and programs designed to reduce poverty and vulnerability by promoting efficient labor markets. Park. the erosion of traditional social protection systems based on family and community ties accompanying rapid urbanization. After the incident. A combination Sources: Cooper (2011). but they were eventually acquitted. the speed of structural change in labor markets due to globalization. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . of unenclosed rayon spinning equipment. factory owners Max Blanck and Isaac Harris were indicted for manslaughter. It is often said that “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. This incident eventually led to the enactment of 36 statutes regulating workplace fire safety and ventilation and set minimum standards for working women and children. It also instilled greater awareness of occupational health and safety among managers and policymakers alike. despite Asia’s rapid and sustained growth. In the 1980s. the government created the Special Committee for Wonjin Rayon Measures to investigate the outbreak. Most of the victims died trying to escape the fire that engulfed the building. unfortunate incidents—a fire and an outbreak of carbon disulfide poisoning—eventually led to greater awareness of hazards. both of which are crucial for workers’ morale and for increased productivity. lack of awareness and the drive toward economic development sometimes leads firms and governments to overlook occupational health and safety issues in order to increase productivity. Outraged by the tragedy and the ensuing verdict. Hisanaga. This outbreak helped bring about positive changes that strengthened measures to prevent occupational health and safety problems in the workplace. and changes in policy or regulations. The poisoning helped spur the enactment of the Industrial Safety and Health Act of 1990.

including job security measures (e. Building a sustainable and broad social protection system is neither straightforward nor easy. Group rates for health insurance coverage are typically only available to workers from their employers. and then to 1 or more in 2002 (and finally to the agricultural. and old age. but need to find appropriate means and methods for implementing them. however. only 56 million of the country’s approximately 750 million rural residents had joined voluntary pension programs and the average pension was less than CNY100 ($15) per month. Hu and Stewart (2009) contended that. Thailand provides a good example of a country that has. this may change and a pension system can have substantial impacts on workers’ well-being in retirement by forcing them to save a minimum amount of their earnings. The United States is an obvious case in point.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia levels may be unable to save for retirement. in most developing Asian economies. For example. as early as the 1990s.g.g. If universal health coverage were available. Special pension schemes should be carefully designed to suit workers’ profiles. Compulsory participation in the program was extended from establishments with 20 or more workers in 1991 to 10 or more in 1993. basic old age pension paid by employers based on employees’ wages.. expanded the coverage of its social security program as it became more developed. and the Workmen’s Compensation Scheme. maternity. However. Thailand’s program was initially set up to provide benefits for illness. invalidity pensions were extended to life. In 1998. workers’ mobility would increase and this would improve efficiency in the economy. and forestry sectors in succession). in the case of the working poor. the Social Security Scheme. Instead. in the Philippines. such benefits are available only to workers employed in the formal sector. such as the Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme. In 1995. they recommended using flexible pension terms for the working poor. especially among the working poor. in providing informal workers with more access to health insurance. the program covered only about 15% of the workforce. own-account and other informal sector workers are covered under the program. which offered care to families for an annual fee of B500. Thailand’s informal-sector workers enjoy much greater social protection than such workers in other lowand middle-income countries. over time. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . A more active government role may be needed to increase the coverage of such social protection systems without overly burdening workers or employers (Leckie forthcoming). By the end of 2008. Extensive pension 47 SPECIAL CHAPTER reforms have been instituted to create a broader level of coverage for urban workers that includes several pillars that provide a minimum level of economic support. Similarly. infirm and elderly) workers in the informal sector will fall into poverty. and other schemes. unemployment insurance). Clearly. However. The universal government provision of social protection benefits such as health care and pensions can bridge the disparity between workers in the formal and the informal sectors. until 2000. mandatory individual accounts requiring a contribution of 8% of monthly salary. but due at least partly to low incomes in the rural sector. Thus. few people are covered. Thus. Additionally. and survivor grants were added. on the basis of seasonality and level of earnings. Thailand also became one of very few lower middleincome countries in the world to provide universal health care coverage when it introduced the 30-Baht Health Scheme in 2001 (Hughes and Leethongdee 2008). as incomes grow. enterprise annuities that are voluntary retirement plans set up by employers. a fully funded pension arrangement may not be the best solution because the primary concern of the poor is to sustain their very basic needs. disability. allows workers to enter more economically risky job activities where they may be more productive (Boyer 2008). About a fifth of the population was covered by the subsidized voluntary Health Card Scheme. the provision of universal social insurance. the set of social protection measures that a government provides should differ depending on the wealth of its workers and the economy’s overall stage of development. death. maternity benefits were extended from 60 to 90 days. more than a voluntary contributory pension system is needed. Because of the near-universal provision of social security and health insurance.. This restricts job mobility and prevents workers in lowproductivity jobs from moving to more productive jobs simply for fear of losing their health insurance coverage. There is also a voluntary rural pension system. the national health insurance that is universally accessible to all workers is disproportionately held by workers in the formal sector (Orbeta 2011). Governments cannot delay introducing social safety nets until they become high-income economies. the right mix of price and coverage must be identified. The country had provided comprehensive health care to public servants and workers in large enterprises through several schemes. old age pensions and child allowances were added as well. The PRC has built its pension system as its work force has become increasingly wealthy and more aged. This widens the inequality between informal and formal sector workers and increases the likelihood that vulnerable (e. The 30 Baht Health Scheme extended coverage to the entire registered population. fishery.

Demand-side policies that can increase trade and structural transformation can promote higher quality employment and move countries toward full employment. The NREGA scheme is too recent to have been subjected to rigorous impact evaluation. irrigation and water conservation. as countries become more developed. The EGS showed that trying to implement such a scheme is difficult and. in part. Still. the NREGA scheme is one of the largest public employment programs in the world (Sjoblom and Farrington 2008). However.. which was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. The transition to the modern sector is not necessarily rapid and many people will remain in the rural areas. like many other policies. such as roads. However.5 billion.48 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Maharashtra—the Employment Guarantee Act that was enacted in 1977 and brought into force in 1979. their social protection programs should evolve. Still even low-income countries should provide some basic social safety nets. they need policies and approaches tailored to their particular stages and requirements in order to move toward providing higher quality employment. The NREGA guarantees 100 days of employment a year to at least one member of any rural household who is willing to perform unskilled labor for the minimum wage. Evidence on this earlier employment guarantee scheme (EGS) showed that it did not create new employment opportunities.e. they can provide a safety net for people who are largely self-employed and in informal sector work by providing them with a guaranteed minimum level of earnings. i. However. as they often have a large agricultural sector. Low-income countries need to increase the quality of employment by increasing trade that can attract FDI to build up their productive modern sector and create more and higher quality employment opportunities. Conclusion Much of developing Asia continues to have a large informal sector and overall levels of productivity that are well below those of the developed world. This may be done. in large part because EGS projects often paid above the prevailing agricultural wages. which will hamper long run growth.1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However. Many Asian countries find that continuing the transition to industrialization and building the modern industrial sector while creating higher quality employment is challenging. by improving infrastructure in rural areas to extend the working hours and reduce the transport costs for developing strong market linkages between the rural and urban areas. to just and favorable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment. India legalized the right to work. To ensure that the disparities between rural and urban areas do not give rise to social and political tensions. and flood control and drought proofing measures. Enforcement of these rights is a moral imperative. More importantly. land development. In other words. Fostering value-added manufacturing that effectively Right-To-Work and Employment Guarantees Article 23. it was built on an earlier program in the Indian state of Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . introducing advanced social security systems too early will invite fiscal difficulties. to free choice of employment. by diversifying the set of products and raising the minimum level of protection provided. where there is no involuntary unemployment (for example.” While many countries espouse the right to work in principle. However. Because Asian countries have widely varied levels of development. inefficient labor allocation will result in slower growth and may lead to social tension and instability. states that “everyone has the right to work. Thus low-income countries should work to ensure that all workers can have a very basic minimum level of protection. by passing the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) in 2005. see Felipe 2010). Diversification into additional nonfarm activities that have greater value added and can raise incomes can be facilitated through development of access to financial services. Without proper social safety nets. EGSs do have the potential to move people into more productive and useful activities. demand-side policies cannot explicitly guarantee that everyone who wants to work for a decent wage will be able to work. sound policies are needed for improving employment in the rural sector. good policy will facilitate the shift to the modern sector through migration to urban areas and will allow such countries to effectively capitalize on their supply of relatively cheap labor. The employment provided is typically on rural works projects that are designed to create public infrastructure in rural areas. With a budget of about $2. it “crowded out” private employment and induced workers to shift from private agricultural employment to EGS projects. is costly and with potentially minimal welfare gains. While the evidence on whether restrictive labor regulation reduces the flexibility of labor markets and reduces overall employment is mixed. they have found it more difficult to implement in practice. there is little disagreement on the importance of protecting workers’ basic rights at all income levels. and there is evidence that provision of such basic rights improves productivity in the workplace (ILO 2002).

g. continuing to move toward higher quality employment will not be an easy task. possibly organized through regional cooperation. Explicit policies to regulate the quality of employment are generally too difficult and costly to implement effectively in low-income countries. may provide a mechanism to balance disequilibria among countries lacking sufficient demand or supply for certain types of labor. so that the most vulnerable workers are protected while the more entrepreneurial workers contribute to the social protection schemes. This will require increasing the quality and quantity of education and training to ensure that people who have the skills required by the market are available. This will require increased human capital accumulation that may be better provided by increased and more generalized training that provides for greater flexibility and diversification of skills as well as development of innovative thinking. Other countries (e. Overall. These countries will need to substantially increase the quantity and quality of employment or they will miss the opportunity to capitalize on this demographic 49 SPECIAL CHAPTER dividend. trade and investment will continue to be important. In countries with a fairly large and stable formal sector. If governments can afford to provide basic safety nets for informal workers. Some countries have had difficulties developing higher quality employment. However. the types of manufacturing and services they provide may need to evolve as the supply of cheap labor from rural areas dwindles. However. For such countries. it may be possible to implement labor legislation that can ensure minimum standards of job quality while providing enough flexibility for firms to increase their productivity and continue to upscale their activities. India and Indonesia) will continue to experience an influx of labor. resulting in increasing informal employment or depressed growth in wages even in the organized sector. it may require an evolution in the thinking of what qualifies as higher quality employment. However. Countries in developing Asia are clearly heterogeneous. In general. It may also entail greater mechanization and capital investments that can effectively use this skilled labor. This may be partly due to minimal progress in structural transformation and to employment policies that are restrictive given the country’s stage of development. with much of this occurring through policies that have facilitated structural transformation without neglecting the welfare of the rural workers. This may require active intervention by policymakers to release the constraints on creating employment internally. International migration can thus provide workers with access to higher quality employment and increased income while the remittances they send home support an improved standard of living for their families and opportunities for them to generate additional income through businesses and by learning marketable skills. many countries have made substantial progress in shifting their workers into higher quality employment. Some countries (e. Restrictive labor legislation and uncompetitive markets can also diminish prospects for raising the quality of employment. with appropriate demand. international migration.. the social protection system should become more developed than in lower income countries.g. in low-income countries that have many informal workers with relatively low levels of schooling. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . In particular.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia uses agricultural inputs in its production process is highly important to raising the overall incomes of the rural sector. countries can make substantial progress toward developing higher quality employment in Asia. they will have to move up the value chain to higher value-added manufacturing and services for the quality of employment to continue to rise. Social protection allows informal workers to release some of their consumption expenditures and invest in more productive activities. as the highly skilled aged population may require more flexible work hours and incentives to entice them to remain in the labor market and contribute to the economy’s productivity. which will enable it to continue its achievements in poverty reduction and stable and inclusive economic growth. For countries that are unable to sufficiently restructure their economic environment to generate better employment. this can have substantial benefits. In middle-income countries. Changing demographics will add to the challenge. building specific skills through TVET may be especially important for the majority of workers. resulting in a drop in overall economic output and growth unless there is an increase in productivity. ensuring that productivity and formalization of employment is not impeded may be the better avenue. On the supply side.and supplyside policies and some level of social protection. building human capital will remain important. the PRC) will experience a rise in the age dependency ratio due to an increasingly aged population.. Middle-income countries that have already built a substantial modern sector. Finally.

2008. 2011. Training.. Minimum Wages and Changing Wage Inequality in Indonesia.adb. J. and C. various years. F. Canning. Creating Quality Employment in China: A Country Case Study. Wages and Employment Security: An Empirical Analysis on European Data.com/ accessed July 2011). Chun. Social Protection: A Life Cycle Continuum Investment for Social Justice. Econometrica 67:251–333. D. 2008. and J. Lawless. Joint publication of the ADB and BPS. Cai. Frankfurt: European Central Bank. Bangladesh. World Bank: Washington. L. Key Indicators 2010: The Rise of Asia’s Middle Class. MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Manila. 2011. 2009. July. India: Public Policy. N.. 2004. S. 2008. R. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . The Demographic Dividend: A New Perspective on the Economic Consequences of Population Change. N. Oped Special to The Economic Times. 2010.pdf). Ali. Rõõm. Background paper for the UN Research Institute for Social Development Project on Poverty Reduction and Policy Regimes. 2010. Labor and Wage Statistics. Santa Monica. Pande. (http://dds. Sevilla. Zhuang.id/eng/aboutus. Philippines. Kramarz. MA: The Sloan Center on Aging and Work at Boston College. and J. 2010. The Impact of Workplace Conditions on Firm Performance. Erekat. India. Ahmed. Jakarta. Bassanini. Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) Discussion Paper No. D. S. J. DC. L. Tinbergen Institute. and J. F. S. Geneva. References Abowd. Reform Labor Regulations. CEIC Data Company Ltd. Kosma. 2011.. Economic Statistics System. Alby.50 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia ______. The Informal Sector and Informal Employment in Indonesia: Country Report 2010. Oxford: Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative. Babecky. Asian Development Bank and International Labor Organization (ADB and ILO). High Wage Workers and High Wage Firms. php?tabel=1&id_subyek=13). ______. and L. ______. Working Paper No.. Bangladesh. Messina. Monograph Report (MR-1274). 2010. 196. Gruat.worldbank. Cassar. 1999. Girdwood. Revisiting Informality: Evidence from Employment Characteristics and Job Satisfaction in Chile. Garmise. 2010. Anderson. Bonilla Garcia. D. Working Paper Series. N. A.. Azam. 97. NBER Research Working Paper No. Women and Labor Markets in Asia: Rebalancing for Gender Equality.bps. C. Besley. The Netherlands. Y. Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper No.. Labor Laws: To Create Good Jobs.M. Thorstensen. Asian Development Bank. Mimeo. P. Cottini. Caju.org/Documents/ Books/Key_Indicators/2010/pdf/KI2010-SpecialChapter. The World Bank. ERD Working Paper No. Mimeo. Do Rural Banks Matter? Evidence from the Indian Social Banking Experiment. Labor Institutions. 2006. Dimon.. Geneva: International Labour Organisation. Rospabe. Employment.. Bloom. June 23. J.N. CA: RAND Corporation. TI 2008077/3. various years. and D. 18–19 May. P. 2007. F. Can Labor Regulation Hinder Economic Performance? Evidence from India. 2003. and D. and Y. 2008. and R. Strategy 2020: The Long-Term Strategic Framework of the Asian Development Bank 2008–2020. Devarajan. Asian Development Bank and Badan Pusat Statistik Indonesia (ADB and BPS). Inclusive Growth toward a Prosperous Asia: Policy Implications. Qu. Formal Sector Job Growth and Women’s Labor Sector Participation: The Case of Mexico. 1999. 2011. 2005. R. National Labor Force Survey– SAKERNAS. Manila. Manila. A. Ahsan.ceicdata. Boston. 2010. Bank of Korea. J. Manila: ADB. Manila. Tokyo: Keiyo University Press. Applied Economics Letters 13(8): 523–27. ADB Economics Working Paper No. T. and S. Human Resource Management and Productivity. S. Paper presented for the ADB Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Theme Chapter: Creating Quality Employment in Asia. 2010. A. Bloom. ADB. 2005. 41. Anderson. (http://go. R. I. International Development Economic Council. Are All Labor Regulations Equal? Evidence from Indian Manufacturing. Poverty Reduction and Sustainable Development. (http://www. and T. Burgess. Philippines. Bhate. Bangkok. (http:// www. and J. 2003. Margolis. Du. E. Creating Quality Jobs: Transforming the Economic Development Landscape. Downward Nominal and Real Wage Rigidity. Badan Pusat Statistik (BPS). 6019. T. Asian Productivity Organization (BAPO). Cambridge. Quarterly Journal of Economics 119: 91–123. Informal Sector Surveys. J.go. 2011. M. Van Reenen. Growth Strategies and Poverty Reduction: The Institutional Complementarity Hypothesis. Pages. and S. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS). American Economic Review 95(3): 780–95. Burgess. 2007. Labor Management Relations and Social Dialogue.org/8DBED1XFT0). various years. Labor Force Surveys. Khor. D. APO Productivity Databook 2011. and N. 12. and R. Manila. Asian Development Bank (ADB). No 1105. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance 39: 169–91. C. Buhai. Westergaard-Nielsen. Boyer. Mulclaire. Ghosh. 3394. Global Policy Brief no. Clogston. Global Database. 2009.

Legal Minimum Wages and the Wages of Formal and Informal Sector Workers in Costa Rica. Fernando. 2011. J. Foster.edu/news/Documents/ 51 SPECIAL CHAPTER Spring%202010%20Speaker%20Papers/FelerAEW%20paper-2-3-10. Creating Good Employment Opportunities for the Rural Sector. R. NBER Working Paper No.edu/ rpds/papers/dinkelman_electricity_0810. October. Job Market Paper. 2004. In J. Flanagan. Cambridge. Manila. and R. umn. and A. Good Jobs: The New Global Standard. Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper 2005-097/1. Zhuang. Hasan. 16487. Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper 2005-119/3.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Clifton. (http://bpub. Felipe. J. Goette. a Solution. J. Minimum Wages and the Welfare of Workers in Honduras. New Delhi: Centre for Civil Society. 2006. and J. Felipe. Volume 18). 100 Years Later. The Winners and Losers of Multinational Firm Entry into Developing Countries: Evidence from China’s Special Economic Zones. ______. Competitiveness. and K. (http://www. or Both? The perspective of the informal business. 53. The Anatomy of Job Satisfaction and the Role of Contingent Employment Contracts. (http://www. The Geographic Concentration of Enterprise in Developing Countries. Paper presented on the Conference on International Collaborative Initiative on Trade and Employment.princeton. Townsend. Manila: ADB. Groshen. 2010. Germany. S. Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). J. Railroads of the Raj: Estimating the Impact of Transportation Infrastructure. 2007b. ed. Is There Surplus Labor in Rural India? Economic Growth Center Discussion Paper No. O. Journal of Development Economics 40:214–275. 2009.1991. Holden. 1984. Bangkok: ILO. 18– 19 May. Princeton University. Poggi. R.. Sipin. Felkner. Freeman. G. Brown University. 171. ADB. 21 March 21. ADB. Amsterdam: Tinbergen Institute. Devicienti. Manila.pdf) Donaldson. CT. 2010. Gupta. Studies in Applied Welfare Analysis: Papers from the Third ECINEQ Meeting (Research on Economic Inequality. forthcoming in the Quarterly Journal of Economics.. A. 2010. E. Labor Regulations. Manila. F. Inequality. Trade and the Quality of Employment: Asian and Non-Asian Countries. and Inclusive Growth in Asia. C 2011. Informal Economy: Is It a Problem. and R. _____. R. Washington.22. and M. The Effect of Job Satisfaction on Job Search: Not Just Whether but also Where. Cambridge: NBER. 213. ADB. January 15. M. Jandoc. Paper presented during the Workshop on Creating Quality Employment in Asia. 17–18 May. 991. The Berkeley Electronic Press.edu/95273). J. and J. How Wrong has the Indian Left been about Economic Reforms? CCS Working Paper No.upenn. 2007. Ebenstein. Schweitzer. 2892. Dickens. The Impact of Changes in Job Security Regulations in India and Zimbabwe. Economics and Research Department. and M. 2006. The Effects of Rural Electrification on Employment: New Evidence from South Africa. 2010. 2009. A. 2007a. 2010. Delfgaauw. Terrell. Khor. Dinkelman. ———. Medoff. World Bank Economic Review 5 (3): 395–413. Income Distribution and Growth in the Philippines: What Does the Long-Run Evidence Show. In J.org/articles/wnyc-news/2011/ mar/21/100-years-later-remembering-triangleshirtwaist-factory-fire). 100 Years Later. How Wages Change: Micro Evidence from the International Wage Flexibility Project. ed. Gindling. Labour Economics 14: 485–511.wnyc. Ward. DC: Gallup. 14789. MA: National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). New Haven. Working Paper No. World Development 33(11): 1905–21. Bishop. Garcia-Bolivar. L. Manila: Anthem and ADB. T. Are Informality and Poverty Dynamically Interrelated? Evidence from Argentina. The Effects of Multiple Minimum Wages throughout the Labor Market: the Case of Costa Rica. 2011. 2011. WNYC News. UK: Emerald Group Publishing. Feler. What Happens to Local Economies When StateOwned Banks are Privatized? Evidence from Brazil. (http://purl. Best Practices in Fostering Migration Opportunities: Do They Work? ILO Asian Regional Program on Governance of Labor Migration Working Paper No. Fallon. and N. de Graaf-Zijl. Manila: ADB. M. Lucas. Remembering the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire. D. 2010. IZA Discussion Paper No. Cooper. Northwestern University School of Law: Law and Economics Papers. and Social Protection in Developing Countries: Market Distortions or Efficient Institutions. 2011. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . ERD Working Paper Series No. J.. 2006. 2011. What Do Unions Do? New York: Basic Books. Amsterdam: Tinbergen Institute. A. Remembering the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire. Paper presented for the ADB Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Theme Chapter: Creating Quality Employment in Asia. L. L. W. and G. Journal of Economic Perspectives 21(2): 195–214. Unions. Turunen. R. 18–19 April. Rosenzweig.wharton. WNYC News. Marlar. Dacuycuy. Inclusive Growth through Full Employment: The Role of Investment and Industrial Policy. Job Security Regulations and the Dynamic Demand for Industrial Labor in India and Zimbabwe. and K. P. A. T. 2005. 21 March 21.1993. The Distribution of Firm Size in India: What Can Survey Data Tell Us? ADB Economics Working Paper Series No. C . 2005.pdf). J. Cooper. 2010. Foster. Messina. Freeman. R. 2011. A. Poverty.

Washington.htm). General Education vs. P. Lurking in the Shadows: The Informal Sector and Government Policy. Agricultural Wages and Non-Farm Employment in Rural India: 1983-2004. 2007. (http://www.org/global/about-the-ilo/ decent-work-agenda/lang--en/index. Charmes. 2004. 2008. Kaboski. Kucera. and H.org/empelm/what/lang--en/ WCMS_114240). ______. T. International Labor Migration in a Globalizing Economy. eds. Hu. Chicago: Ivan R.. Wages. 2002. R. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. ADB. 1920–40: How Americans Lived through the Roaring Twenties and the Great Depression. and K. forthcoming in Econometrica. P. Decent work and Poverty Reduction Strategies. Malamud. Pension Systems and Old-Age Income Support in East and Southeast Asia: Overview and Reform Directions. International Labour Organization (ILO). Huang. ed. Productivity. and Worker Characteristics: Evidence from Plant-Level Production Functions and Wage Equations. J. Pai. and S. ed. Gagnon. (http://www. The Economics of the Informal Sector: A Simple Model and Some Empirical Evidence from Latin America.org/ global/about-the-ilo/decent-work-agenda/lang--en/ index. Education Economics 7(1): 5–20. Is Informal Normal? Towards More and Better Jobs in Developing Countries.pdf). Stanford.ilo. Ihrig. Leckie.K. and F. Leckie. ______. O. East Asian Visions: Perspectives on Economic Development. Toward Rural-Based Development in East Asia under Globalization. Economic Growth and Employment Growth in China (1978–2001). University of Leicester. Troske.. D. In D. and S.edu/karlan/ papers/TeachingEntrepeneurship. Townsend. J. B. Returns to General. Gill. LABORSTA Online Statistics. J. and R. (http://www. 2005. Hu. (http://aida. J. Poverty Decline. An OECD Development Centre Perspective. Stewart. Hong Kong. A Structural Evaluation of a Large-Scale Quasi-Experimental Microfinance Initiative. Lemos. Kyvig.ilo. 2010. Park. Washington.yale. J. Finding Quality Employment through Rural Urban Migration: A Case Study from Thailand. DC: Federal Reserve Bank. K. D. P. Waibel. Working Paper No. Moe. S. 2000. Employment and Social Cohesion. A. Hellerstein. S. 0807. 2006. M. 2001. 92. Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). McIntyre. and I. Paper presented during the Workshop on Creating Quality Employment in Asia. 2011a. International Finance Discussion Paper 2000-664. Y. J. Loayza.ilo. 2009. Winners and Losers of Federal and State Minimum Wages. Cambridge.. Vocational Training: Evidence from an Economy in Transition. and H. 2011b. Amare. 31. Key Indictors of the Labor Market (KILM) Online. 2005. I. H. Washington DC: World Bank. Policy Research Working Paper Series 1727. Pension Funds in China: a New Look. Washington. China’s Emerging Middle Class: Beyond Economic Transformation. ______. CA: Stanford Center for International Development. Washington. Yujiro. 2008. Bangkok: ILO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific. Teaching Entrepreneurship: Impact of Business Training on Microfinance Clients and Institutions. Kharas. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. R. MaCurdy.html). MA: Harvard University Press. Decent Work and the Informal Economy: Report VI on the International Labor Conference 90th Session. 2006. 2008. 2004. The Challenges of Growth. Washington. China: ISI Publications.52 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia International Labour Organization and International Monetary Fund (ILO and IMF). 2008. Irawan. Hughes. Abingdon: Routledge. 1997. Y. DC: World Bank. Ahmed. Lanjouw.org downloaded June 2011). Chicago. 2010. Working Paper No. Asian Economic Papers 3(2): 166–76. Gertz. 2011c. Labor Market Dynamics in Indonesia: Analysis of 18 Key Indicators of the Labor Market (KILM) 1986–1999. Hohfeld. 2001. Carnegie Papers No. Pension Coverage and Informal Sector Workers: International Experiences. 2010. 17–18 May. A. Islam. Asia-Pacific Labor Market Update. and M. Murgai. Available: (http://laborsta. and J. A Survey of the Effects of the Minimum Wage in Latin America. and R. Journal of Labor Economics 17(3): 409– 46. de Laiglesia. Health Affairs 26(4): 999–1008. Kharas. Leicester: Department of Economics. Forthcoming. In I. 437. D. Geneva. and F. IL: Hayami. Horowitz. 2011.. T. Lucas. and C. Technical and Vocational Education in Developing Countries: Recent Evidence from Suriname. and G. L. 2010. Daily Life in the United States. Manila. 1999. Jakarta: ILO. 1999. The New Global Middle Class: A Cross-Over from West to East. Valdivia. DC: Employment Policy Institute. DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Neumark. and Y. Universal Coverage in the Land Of Smiles: Lessons from Thailand’s 30 Baht Health Reforms. ______. Xenogiani. Karlan. 2008.. Schenzler. Jütting. International Labor Organization. D. and C. 2009. Beyond Facts: Understanding Quality of Life. S. Dee. Working Papers on Insurance and Private Pensions No. In Cheng Li. ______.econ. N. Decent Work Agenda. D. Discussion Papers in Economics 07/04. Pop-Eleches. Leethongdee. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .ilo. People’s Republic of China: Pension System Overview and Reform Directions. DC: Brookings Institution Press. A.

Journal of Human Resources 40(4): 876– 94. Journal of International Development 16(6): 803–20. Ministry of Finance. 2011. (NSSO) National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). Minimum Wage Effects throughout the Wage Distribution.” International Labor Review 147(2-3):115-134.. 2004. The Effects of Minimum Wages on the distribution of Family Incomes: A Nonparametric Analysis. D. Mazumdar. ———. National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector. Globalization. American Journal of Industrial Medicine.org/statistics. Labor Markets and Inequality in India. National Statistics Office (NSO). National Sample Survey Office (NSSO). International Labor and Working-Class History 73: 45–64. NSO. 2010. 2008. NASSCOM. (http:// www. Helsinki: Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Papola. Technical and Vocational Education and Training in Vietnam. epsilon accessed April 2011). The Changes of Chinese Labor Policy and Labor Legislation in the Context of Market Transition. Beijing: China Statistics Press. S. D. 8–9 June. Job Quality. Orbeta. 2010. 2008. 52:625–32. Assets and Employment. Philippines Overseas Employment Administration (POEA). Washington. T. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Chinese Household Income Project (CHIP). Bonn. Ministry of Education and Training (MOET). M. Maligalig. ______. ______. 1997. 2011. Economic Surveys. ______. 2005. Beijing: China Statistics Press. Aquilina. P. IT Industry Fact Sheet. Germany.pdf). Labor Policy and Employment Creation: An Emerging Crisis? Partnership for Economic Growth (PEG) Paper prepared for Badan Perencanaan dan Pembangunan Nasional. ______. Suryadarma. Report on Social Security for Unorganised Workers. Schweitzer. China Statistical Yearbook 2010. (http://www. Mazumdar. The Urban Informal Sector. University of Chicago. various years. Chinese Urban Household Survey. 2011-02. and E. R. Rabellotti.. Manila. 2006/13. Teal. New Delhi: Government of India. Neumark. National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector. 2011. Deutsche Post World Net Headquarters. ______. London: Routledge. ______ . National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganized Sector (NCEUS). Regional Labor Markets During Deregulation in Indonesia: Have the Outer Islands been Left Behind? Policy Research Working Paper Series 1728. Sahu. Social Protection in the Philippines. 2006. 2006. C. Pais. various years. New Delhi. Labour Regulation in Indian Industry: Towards a Rational and Equitable Framework. S. ———. 1998. Journal of Human Resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Philippine Labor Force Survey. Ngok. and F.moet. Current State and Challenges.ph/stats/2010_Stats. Quintin. Sarkar. Manila: Philippine Institute for Development Studies.Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Harris School of Public Policy Studies. 2004. 53 SPECIAL CHAPTER National Statistical Service (NSS). Forthcoming in World Bank Economic Review. 2011. Armenia: NSS. 2003. Asian Development Bank.. Hisanaga.. Transfer of Occupational Health Problems from a Developed to a Developing Country: Lessons from the Japan-South Korea Experience.. D. D. and M. Government of India (various years). Martinez. Osterman. Pietrobelli. New Delhi: Ministry of Statistics and Programme and Implementation. ed. Beijing: China Statistics Press. 39(2): 425–50. Paper presented at the Asian Development Bank Regional Conference on Enhancing Social Protection in Asia and the Pacific. Forthcoming. Report on Social Security for Unorganised Workers. and Self-Employment in Africa. Armenia: NSS. Research Paper No. C.oecdilibrary. 1976..gov. The Value of Vocational Education: High School Type and Labor Market Outcomes in Indonesia. Newhouse. and W. and A.poea. ______. (http://en. Beijing: China Statistics Press. Park. 2008. Determinants of Participation in Formal Employment . Employment and Unemployment Survey. Improving the Quality of Low-wage Work: The Current American Experience. An Empirical Study of the Determinants of SelfEmployment in Developing Countries. and D. OECD. Informal Sector Survey. D. ADB. 2011. Integrated Labor Force Survey. Annual Survey of Industrial Firms. and Y. various years. 2010. K. Paper presented during the IZA–World Bank Conference on Employment and Development. New Delhi: Government of India. Overseas Employment Statistics 2010. Pension Systems and Old-Age Income Support in East and Southeast Asia: Overview and Reform Directions. and S. Indonesian Labour in Transition. Discussion Paper Series no.7&view=4403). Kim.Stat. World Development 4: 655–79. D. and P. C. 2007. 2009. Monk. 2003. 18–19 May. A. New Delhi: New Delhi Institute for Studies in Industrial Development and Bookwell. DC: World Bank. The Informal Sector in Developing Countries: Output. Pratap. 21–22 April. Paper presented for the ADB Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Theme Chapter: Creating Quality Employment in Asia. Wascher. J.gov. 2009. Manning.jsessionid=da9actohb4q7. Abingdon: Routledge. Park. Manila. 2006.vn/?page=6. N. 2008. Health Shocks. J. East and Southeast Asia’s Pension Systems: Overview and Reform Directions. various years. various years. various years.

(http://kosis. 2009. 2003. various years. (http://www. 22–23 September. 1976. 2003.un. Soderbom.worldbank. Lam. (http://web. Usui. A. ———. Job Stability in Developing and Developed Countries: Evidence from Colombia and the United States. (http:// go. Endriga. G. Jakarata: SMERU Research Institute. Sumarto. (http://www. G. Surplus Labor. 2008. forthcoming.C. J. Inter-American Development Bank Research Network Working Paper R-473. D. Does Successful Reform Require a Race to the Bottom? Evidence from the Indian states. 2011. 18–19 May. 2006.html accessed May 2011)..htm) United Nations Statistics Division. Wan.8. United Nations University-World Institute of Development Economics. Rud.. ADB Working Paper Series No. 252. D. Vienna International Center and University of Oxford.contentMDK: 21867101~pagePK:64168427~piPK:64168435~theS itePK:5280443. UNSD Statistical Databases.54 Toward Higher Quality Employment in Asia Townsend. and J. 2011b. Jakarta: SMERU Research Institute. 2001. M. Role of Minimum Wage in Informal Wage Determination in Indonesia. 2001. Stiglitz. W. and the Distribution of Income in LDCs. Statistics Korea. World Development Indicators. World Values Survey Organization. World Bank. Inequality. Vocational Education. Weiss. org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/ EXTRESEARCH/EXTPROGRAMS/ EXTPOVRES/EXTPOVCALNET/0. World Economic Forum (WEF). Chapel Hill. Teitelbaum. 2011. 113. D. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . 7. and Poverty in Thailand. The Indian National Rural Employment Guarantee Act: Will It Reduce Poverty and Boost the Economy? Overseas Development Institute Project Briefing No. 2011a. 2001. (http://esa. ADB. and Surabaya During the Freedom to Organize Era. MA: The Sloan Center on Aging and Work at Boston College. ———. and I. J. H. uk/resources/download/440. and F. World Value Survey. 2008. 2006. 2002. Bandung.worldbank. M. Geneva: World Economic Forum. D. Widarti. 2011. Cambridge MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Electricity Provision and Industrial Development: Evidence from India. Son. Industrial and Labor Relations Review 54: 864–81. (http://unstats. The Effect of Job Complexity on Job Satisfaction: Evidence From Turnover and Absenteeisim. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 39(1): 29–50. Jakarta: ILO. and W. and Employment by Income Classes: A Case Study of Viet Nam.un.: World Bank.. Paper presented for the ADB Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 Theme Chapter: Creating Quality Employment in Asia. C. Washington. N. NBER Working Paper No. Rama. Teal. R.kr/eng accessed June 2011). Global Policy Brief no. and S.org.org/undp/wpp/index. Sugiyarto. Forthcoming in Journal of Development Economics. Q. Wage and Employment Effects of Minimum Wage Policy in the Indonesian Urban Labor Market.odi. Do Minimum Wages Reduce Employment and Training? ERD Working Paper No. Korean Statistical Information Service. China’s Special Economic Zones at 30. Poverty in Asia: An Update. Maxwell. A. and G. 2010. Boston. 267. Perwira. World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision. Human Capital.00. K. Suryahadi. United Nations Industrial Development Organization and Centre for the Study of African Economies. 2010. University of North Carolina. DC: Inter-American Development Bank.org/unsd/databases. ADB Economics Working Paper Series No. Industrial Relations in Jabotabek. United Nations. 1597. Farrington. Urizar. Lee. The Effects of Unions on Productivity: Evidence from Large Coffee Producers in Guatemala. Lee. S. and B. 2010. 2011. Joseph. New York: Oxford University Press. Sjoblom. Indonesia Jobs Report: Towards Better Jobs and Security for All. Investment and Exports from Manufacturing Firms in Africa.worldvaluessurvey. Eurasian Geography and Economics 50(2): 222–40.A. 8. The Consequences of Doubling the Minimum Wage: The Case of Indonesia. Schaffner. Widyanti. Kee. Finance in Developing Economies: Evaluation of Policy on Growth.org accessed May 2011). A. and S. Xu. CSAE-UNIDO Working Paper Series No. Manila: ADB. Washington. Minimum Wage Policy and Its Impact on Employment in the Urban Formal Sector. China: Public Policy. Skills. Sebastian. J. Manila. A. PovcalNet. Economic Development and Cultural Change 49(3): 511–35. and J.. 2011. 2000. SMERU. Yeung. The Efficiency Wage Hypothesis.pdf). The Global Competitiveness Report 2010–2011. Manila: ADB. 2011.org/092X1CHHD0 accessed May 2011). Manila: ADB. Emmanuel. Oxford Economic Papers 28(2): 185–207. Paper presented during the Workshop on Labor Rights and Multinational Production.htm accessed April 2011). Suryahadi. Y. Transforming the Philippine Economy: Walking on Two Legs. Sumarto. 1985.

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . y. and ρ is the marginal effect of initial per capita income on y. j = j + β j* employment statusi. whereas changes in the proportion of employers and proportion of other workers are not. Results. then higher increases (decreases) in the proportion of own-account/informal workers result in lower (higher) decreases in poverty/ inequality. The data in the analysis come from various sources. Moreover. and informal workers. which covers the period 1990–2009. then higher increases (decreases) in the proportion of employees result in higher (lower) decreases in poverty/inequality. contributing family members. 1999/2000. 1995. proportion of own-account workers. The general specification regressed changes in employment status on outcomes of interest. the positive coefficients for the change in the proportion of own-account workers and proportion of informal workers have implications that also depend on whether poverty/inequality has been decreasing or increasing and whether the changes in the employment status have been increasing or declining. own-account workers. if the proportion of employees has been increasing (decreasing). unpaid workers. To investigate whether there is a relationship between the formalization of employment and poverty reduction and inclusive growth. Similarly. SPECIAL CHAPTER number of years in between. Changes in the proportion of employees. simple ordinary least squares (OLS) regression models were used to determine the significance of the association between poverty changes. except for the People’s Republic of China and India. countries have different spells within this period. Appendix Table 1 lists the countries in the analysis and their respective period spells. To test the robustness of the results. changes in the proportion of employees have negative coefficients when regressed on either change in poverty or change in inequality. while inequality is measured as the ratio of income share of households in the top 20% to income share of those in the bottom 20% using data from WDI. Cross-Country Regression Models of Poverty Changes and Formalization of Employment Methodology. • In the case of declining poverty/inequality. • In the case of declining poverty/inequality. The average annual change in the proportion of employment status is calculated the same way.55 Appendix. Per capita real gross domestic product at constant $ prices (2005 PPP) from WDI is used to measure per capita income.25/day poverty line from the World Development Indicators (WDI) and PovcalNet. Poverty is measured by the headcount poverty index at $1. then higher increases (decreases) in the proportion of employees result in lower (higher) increases in poverty/inequality. The specification can be written as change in yi.1 The average annual change in y is calculated as the difference of the y at the beginning and end of the period spell divided by the 1 Informal workers comprise own-account workers. and 2002. if the proportion of employees has been increasing (decreasing). Employment data is sourced from Table 2D of the International Labour Organization’s LABORSTA. • In the case of increasing poverty/inequality. other workers. The negative coefficient for the change in the proportion of employees has implications that depend on whether poverty and inequality have been decreasing or increasing and whether the change in the proportion of employees has been increasing or declining. if the proportion of own-account/informal workers has been increasing (decreasing). which provides data on the number of workers by employment status. and proportion of informal workers are significantly related to changes in poverty and inequality. and 2004/05. employers. ρ j* where β is the marginal effect of changes in employment status j in country i on changes in y. and India’s National Sample Survey–Employment and Unemployment Surveys of 1993/94. variants of the model that controls for per capita income growth were used. The types of employment status in the analysis refer to the employees. and changes in the proportion of employment by type of status while controlling for initial per capita income. while changes in the proportion of own-account workers and proportion of informal workers have positive coefficients. inequality changes. Missing data on employment were imputed by using interpolation/extrapolation from available employment data. whose employment data are estimated from their labor force surveys—the Chinese Household Income Project Surveys of 1998. Due to the sparseness of data on poverty and income share of the top 20% and bottom 20%. Appendix Table 2 presents the regression results. and other workers that are neither employees nor employers. There are 59 countries in the analysis. representing changes in poverty and changes in the ratio of the top 20% to the bottom 20% while controlling for initial per capita income. j + initial per capita incomei + ε j.

except for the coefficient of changes in the proportion of own-account workers to changes in inequality.01.322 0. if the proportion of own-account/informal workers has been increasing (decreasing). NSS-EUS for India.541 0.814) -0.171 0.079 (-3.438** (-5.000 0.108* 0. except that NBS.1 Notes: Data for missing employment between 1990 and 2009 are interpolated/extrapolated.025 0. .161+ 0.054 (0.56 Appendix also show that initial per capita income is positively and significantly associated with poverty changes.000 GDP = gross domestic product.433** 0. which becomes insignificant.033 (0.469 (-0. b No poverty data Sources: Staff estimates using data from World Bank (2011b). World Development Indicators.000 0.05.305) 57 0. This implies that.943) -6.151** 0.369 0.000 0. real income . except that NBS.559) 52 0.402 0.033 (0.911) 52 0. t-statistics in parentheses: ** p<0.510) 0.GDP at 2005 PPP constant $ prices.157) 52 0. Sources: Staff estimates using data from World Bank (2011b). with declining poverty.443** (3.592) -0.384** (-5.944) -5.171 0. PPP = purchasing power parity. Per capita income growth. on the other hand.883) -0.586) -0.649** (3.162** (-3. CHIPS 1988. and ILO (2011c) LABORSTA and ILO (2011b) KILM.104 0. but its coefficient is not significant. • In the case of increasing poverty/inequality. 1995.542 0.321* 0.263 (-0. 1995. of observation R-squared F test 0. and ILO (2011c) LABORSTA and ILO (2011b) KILM.315) 54 0. 2002 and Employment census 2004 and 2008 were used for the People's Republic of China and NSSO. * p<0.000 Informal worker 0.25/day poverty line) Type of employment status Employees Employers Own-account worker Other -0.064) (1. Latvia Lesotho Lithuania Macedonia Madagascar Malaysia Maldives* Mexico Moldova. then higher increases (decreases) in the proportion of own-account/informal workers result in higher (lower) increases in poverty/ inequality.112 0. Initial per capita income is also positively related to inequality.250 (-0.413 (-0.101) Log(initial per capita real income) Constant No. 2002 and Employment census 2004 and 2008 were used for the People's Republic of China and NSSO.709** (4.679** (4. + p<0. These results show that the formalization of employment has nontrivial effects on the reduction of poverty and inequality. higher initial per capita income results in higher decreases in poverty. CHIPS 1988.655) -6. of Morocco Nicaragua 1996–2008 1990–2007 1993–2007 1990–2005 1990–2009 1990–2005 1990–2004 1993–2007 1993–2007 1996–2004 1993–2003 1993–2008 2000–2008 1993–2005 1992–2009 1998–2004 1992–2008 1992–2008 1991–2007 1993–2005 Economy Pakistan Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Romania Russian Federation Slovakiab Slovenia South Africa Sri Lanka Thailand Tunisia Turkey Ukraine Uruguay Viet Nam Zambia Period spell 1991–2006 1991–2009 1990–2008 1990–2009 1991–2006 1992–2008 1992–2008 1993–2008 1992–1996 1993–2004 1993–2006 1991–2007 1992–2009 1990–2000 1994–2005 1992–2008 1992–2009 1993–2008 1991–2004 a No data on income share of top 20% and bottom 20%.747** (4. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .267 0.842) (0. Republic ofa Colombia Costa Rica Croatiaa Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Estonia Period spell 1992–2009 1995–2008 1992–2005 1995–1999 1991–2007 2001–2007 1990–2009 1994–2007 1994–2007 1996–2007 1990–2009 1990–2005 1991–2006 1990–2009 1998–2008 1992–2007 1994–2009 1991–2005 1995–2008 1993–2004 Appendix Table 1 Countries and Period Spells Economy Period spell Georgia Honduras Hungary India* Indonesia Iran Jamaica Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Rep.751) (3.773** (-5. of observation R-squared F test Dependent variable: Annual percentage point change of poverty incidence ($1.610) -0.201** (-5. The results are robust when we control for per capita income growth. Our results Economy Argentina Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belize Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bulgaria Cambodia Cameroon Chile China.179) (0.417 0.944** (-4.103 (1.480) (2. has negative coefficients.713** (4. NSS-EUS for India.900) -6. but they are not statistically significant.870 (-1.835) 52 0.132 0.088 0.425) 53 0.615) 54 0.660) (0.675) -6. Rep. World Development Indicators.010 Change in employment status Log(initial per capita real income) Constant No.518) 0. Appendix Table 2 OLS Estimates of Cross-country Changes in Poverty Incidence and the Ratio of Top 20% to Bottom 20% Dependent variable: Change in the ratio of the income share of top 20% to income share of bottom 20% Type of employment status Employees Employers Own-account worker Other Informal worker Change in employment status -0.539) 55 0.764) (2.071) 53 0.082 0.008 0.048 (0.

PART II Millennium Development Goals .

.

4 1. between 1990 and 2015.10 Proportion of tuberculosis cases detected and cured under directly observed treatment short course continued.3 4.9 2.1 1.5 1. and protection of biodiversity.1 4.C: Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the incidence of malaria and other major diseases 6.1 2.2 1.A: Ensure that.B: Achieve.5 5. by 2010. and in all levels of education no later than 2015 Goal 4: Reduce child mortality Target 4.8 Proportion of children under 5 with fever who are treated with appropriate antimalarial drugs 6. In 2007.5 Indicators for Monitoring Progress Proportion of population below $1 (PPP) per day1 Poverty gap ratio Share of poorest quintile in national consumption Growth rate of GDP per person employed Employment-to-population ratio Proportion of employed people living below $1 (PPP) per day Proportion of own-account and contributing family workers in total employment Prevalence of underweight children under-five years of age Proportion of population below minimum level of dietary energy consumption Net enrollment ratio in primary education Proportion of pupils starting grade 1 who reach last grade of primary Literacy rate of 15–24 year-olds. full and productive employment and decent work for all.A: Halve. will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower women Target 3. boys and girls alike.2 5. preferably by 2005.A: Reduce by two-thirds.4 5.7 Proportion of children under 5 sleeping under insecticide-treated bednets 6. The indicators for these new targets became effective in January 2008. committing their nations to a new global partnership to reduce extreme poverty.A: Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education. access to reproductive health. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .4 Target 6. between 1990 and 2015.8 1. prevalence.2 3.3 6.A: Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS Proportion of population with advanced HIV infection with access to antiretroviral drugs 6. by 2015. and this is the framework used here to monitor progress toward achieving the MDGs.2 2. the largest gathering of world leaders in history adopted the United Nations Millennium Declaration. the maternal mortality ratio Target 5. malaria and other diseases Target 6. access to treatment for HIV/AIDS.3 3.6 6.3 1. including women and young people Target 1. namely. between 1990 and 2015.B: Achieve. universal access to treatment for HIV/AIDS for all those who need it Target 6.9 Incidence. Box 1 lists the eight MDGs and the corresponding targets and indicators for monitoring progress. Box 1 Millennium Development Goals Goals and Targets (from the Millennium Declaration) Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger Target 1. children everywhere.1 6. by 2015. the proportion of people whose income is less than one dollar a day Target 1. and setting out a series of targets with a deadline of 2015. These have come to be known as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). universal access to reproductive health 1.1 5.A: Reduce by three quarters.2 6.1 3.B: Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all. women and men Ratios of girls to boys in primary. secondary and tertiary education Share of women in wage employment in the non-agricultural sector Proportion of seats held by women in national parliament Under-five mortality rate Infant mortality rate Proportion of 1-year-old children immunized against measles Maternal mortality ratio Proportion of births attended by skilled health personnel Contraceptive prevalence rate Adolescent birth rate Antenatal care coverage (at least one visit and at least four visits) Unmet need for family planning HIV prevalence among population aged 15–24 years Condom use at last high-risk sex Proportion of population aged 15–24 years with comprehensive correct knowledge of HIV/AIDS Ratio of school attendance of orphans to school attendance of nonorphans aged 10–14 years MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS.7 1. between 1990 and 2015. the under-five mortality rate Goal 5: Improve maternal health Target 5.3 5. and death rates associated with tuberculosis 6.3 5.C: Halve.2 4. the proportion of people who suffer from hunger Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education Target 2.6 Incidence and death rates associated with malaria 6. the MDG monitoring framework was revised to include four new targets agreed on by member states at the 2005 World Summit.6 1.59 Introduction to the Millennium Development Goals At the Millennium Summit in September 2000.

development and poverty reduction – both nationally and internationally Target 8.A: Develop further an open. The actual proportion of people living in slums is measured by a proxy. and per $1 GDP (PPP) Consumption of ozone-depleting substances Proportion of fish stocks within safe biological limits Proportion of total water resources used Proportion of terrestrial and marine areas protected Proportion of species threatened with extinction Proportion of population using an improved drinking water source Proportion of population using an improved sanitation facility Proportion of urban population living in slums 2 Includes a commitment to good governance. especially information and communications AIDS = acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. indicators based on national poverty lines should be used. Source: United Nations (2011a). make available the benefits of new technologies.D: Deal comprehensively with the debt problems of developing countries through national and international measures in order to make debt sustainable in the long term Target 8.4 ODA received in landlocked developing countries as a proportion of their gross national incomes 8.5 ODA received in small island developing States as a proportion of their gross national incomes Market access 8. 1 2 For monitoring country poverty trends.3 Proportion of bilateral official development assistance of OECD/DAC donors that is untied 8.60 INTRODUCTION TO ThE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Box 1 Millennium Development Goals (continued) Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability Target 7. and more generous ODA for countries committed to poverty reduction Target 8. HIPC = Heavily Indebted Poor Countries.13 Proportion of population with access to affordable essential drugs on a sustainable basis 8. boxes.9 7. and regressing/no progress.8 Agricultural support estimate for OECD countries as a percentage of their gross domestic product 8. to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers Goal 8: Develop a global partnership for development Target 8. total and to the least developed countries.11 Debt relief committed under HIPC and MDRI Initiatives 8.B: Address the special needs of the least developed countries Includes: tariff and quota free access for the least developed countries’ exports.8 7. and tables on the performance of countries toward achieving the goals. sector-allocable ODA of OECD/DAC donors to basic social services (basic education. as percentage of OECD/ DAC donors’ gross national income 8. (c) overcrowding (three or more persons per room).1 7. On the basis of their performance to date.D: By 2020. nutrition. PPP = purchasing power parity.12 Debt service as a percentage of exports of goods and services 8. DAC = Development Assistance Committee. achieving. HIV = human immunodeficiency virus.1 Net ODA.16 Internet users per 100 population Target 8.6 Proportion of total developed country imports (by value and excluding arms) from developing countries and least developed countries.15 Cellular subscribers per 100 population 8.C: Address the special needs of landlocked developing countries and small island developing States (through the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States and the outcome of the twenty-second special session of the General Assembly) Some of the indicators listed below are monitored separately for the least developed countries (LDCs).7 Average tariffs imposed by developed countries on agricultural products and textiles and clothing from developing countries 8. represented by the urban population living in households with at least one of the four characteristics: (a) lack of access to improved water supply.A: Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes and reverse the loss of environmental resources Target 7. per capita. OECD = Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.3 7. GDP = gross domestic product.14 Telephone lines per 100 population 8. a significant reduction in the rate of loss Target 7. slow progress. by 2010. admitted free of duty 8. CO2 = carbon dioxide. landlocked developing countries.4 7. and (d) dwellings made of nondurable material.2 7. as measured by target indicators estimated from data available since 1990: Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . predictable. MDRI = Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative.B: Reduce biodiversity loss. rule-based. the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation Target 7. total. For each goal there is a short nontechnical write-up together with supporting statistical information presented in figures. Official development assistance (ODA) 8.9 Proportion of ODA provided to help build trade capacity Debt sustainability 8. Progress toward Achieving the Millennium Development Goals and Targets The progress toward achieving the MDGs and targets is discussed in Part II.E: In cooperation with pharmaceutical companies. on track.C: Halve.5 7. primary health care. Africa.6 7. countries are classified as early achiever. by 2015. and small island developing States. where available.2 Proportion of total bilateral.F: In cooperation with the private sector.10 Total number of countries that have reached their HIPC decision points and number that have reached their HIPC completion points (cumulative) 8.7 7. provide access to affordable essential drugs in developing countries Target 8. non-discriminatory trading and financial system 7. (b) lack of access to improved sanitation.10 Proportion of land area covered by forest CO2 emissions. enhanced programme of debt relief for heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) and cancellation of official bilateral debt. safe water and sanitation) 8.

and gender parity. The tables that are the sources for the figures in the commentaries show the actual years to which the data refer. and UNDP (2010) report and later. the most recent statistics are revised whenever firmer data became available. However.8 7. secondary.25 a day is reduced to 2%. including different data sources. In addition. ADB. see Annex 1 of the report. different dates when the statistics were collected and published. the target is considered to have been reached even if 2% is not half of the percentage in 1990. and tertiary education Under five mortality rate per 1. school enrollment.5 7.95 none none none 95% none none Proportion of population below $1. or before.1 2.1 1. ADB statistical staff have reviewed the data and have queried some statistics with the international agencies concerned. These are the cut-offs adopted in the UNESCAP. 2015 Slow progress – countries that based on past trends are expected to meet the target after 2015 No progress/regressing – countries that have made no progress since 1990 or have actually slipped backward 61 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Ideally. “cut-offs” are used for several targets (see Table 1). a cut-off of 2% is used for the target “halving extreme poverty between 1990 and 2015. The rate of change is calculated using the linear time trend of a suitable transformation of the indicator values. Data Sources and Comparability with Other Publications Most of the data used in Part II are compiled by the international agencies that have been designated as compilers of the MDG indicators. In many cases the earliest observation is for a year after 1990. For this reason many of the figures illustrating progress on the MDGs refer to the “earliest” and “latest” years.9 Indicator MDG Target Cut-off 2% none 95% 95% 0.1 4. In monitoring progress. ADB. Table 1 Cut-off Values for Selected MDG Indicators Indicator Number 1. new data points for earlier years are added. For a detailed explanation of the methodology. As a result. but in practice some data are only collected every 3 or 4 years. Achieving the Millennium Development Goals in an Era of Global Uncertainty (ESCAP. all countries would have the necessary statistics for every year from 1990 to the current year. maternal and infant mortality. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .000 live births Proportion of births attended by skilled health personnel Antenatal care coverage (at least one visit) Population using improved water sources (urban and rural combined) Population having access to improved sanitation facilities (urban and rural combined) half the 1990 percentage half the 1990 percentage 100% 100% 1 one-third the 1990 percentage one-third the 1990 percentage reduce by three-fourths (without) 100% half the 1990 percentage (without) half the 1990 percentage (without) Source: United Nations (2011a). In addition.25-a-day poverty. and more recent statistics are added as well. the progress classification has been made for indicators that have an explicit target value.25 (PPP) a day Prevalence of underweight children under 5 years of age Total net enrollment ratio in primary education (both sexes) Proportion of pupils starting grade 1 who reach last grade of primary both sexes) Ratios of girls to boys in primary. Some of these statistics end in 2008 or earlier and so do not reflect the impact of the global crisis that erupted in the second half of 2008 and continued through 2009. The classification into the four categories is made only for the developing member economies for which MDG statistics are available in the United Nations Millennium Development Goals Indicators database (United Nations 2011a) following the July 2011 update.8 2.1 4. For example. such as $1. and different methodologies used in assessing the progress.2 5. responsibility for the reliability of the statistics remains with the agencies that are listed as the sources of each table. and UNDP 2010). Differences that exist between this publication and reports from other organizations on the performance of countries in meeting the MDGs may be due to several factors.INTRODUCTION TO ThE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS • • • • Early achievers – countries that have already reached the target On track – countries that based on past trends are expected to meet the target in.” This means that when the percentage of those living on less than $1. the categorization of countries in their progress toward achieving the MDGs in this issue may be revised in future issues of Key Indicators as the 2015 target date draws nearer and more revised statistics become available.2 5.2 3.000 live births Infant mortality rate per 1. and some countries are slower than others in publishing data for the current year. Progress toward achieving the MDGs discussed in Part II is assessed using the indicators available in the official United Nations site for the MDG indicators (United Nations 2011a).

Achieving the Millennium Development Goals in an Era of Global Uncertainty. United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. ———. 2011b. New York.mdgasiapacific.pdf. Rationale. Global Monitoring Report 2011.un.” Available: mdgs. Concepts and Methods. Asian Development Bank.org/regional-report-2009–10. and United Nations Development Programme. 2011a.aspx. United Nations Development Group. ADB.org/unsd/mdg/Resources/Attach/ Indicators/HandbookEnglish.62 INTRODUCTION TO ThE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Selected References UNESCAP.un. 2011b. World Bank. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . 2010. World Development Indicators 2011. Washington. Available: mdgs. Downloaded July 2011. DC. 2011a. Available: www. Washington. New York. ———. “Millennium Development Goals Indicators: The Official United Nations Site for the MDG Indicators. The Millennium Development Goals Report 2011. United Nations. 2003. Indicators for Monitoring the Millennium Development Goals: Definitions. Asia-Pacific Regional Report 2009/10. Bangkok.org/unsd/mdg/Default. DC. and UNDP.

7% in 2009 is well below 24. Figure 1. pertain to years 2000 to 2008 for most countries. between 1990 and 2015.25 (PPP) a day.63 Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger Living on less than $1.C: Halve. Here we look at a related indicator. the percentage of workers living on less than $1. Less than half of the countries in the region are expected to meet the target of reducing the proportion of underweight children. Fed.25 (PPP) a day represents extreme poverty. hunger is still widespread. Hunger here is measured by the percentage of children under 5 years of age who are moderately or severely underweight. Vulnerable employment rates remain high.25 (PPP) a day.6% in 2007.1a lists 19 countries where more than 10% of the population live on less than $1. People's Rep.B: Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all. Despite some gains.9%) and Bangladesh the highest (49. rates still exceed 20%. the proportion of people who suffer from hunger. Clearly. such work is not very productive. the proportion of people whose income is less than one dollar a day. of Georgia Viet Nam 0 20 Earliest Year Source: Table 1. 1. MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Introduction Goal 1 has three targets: 1. The latest available data.1a Economies with More than 10% of Population Living on Less than $1. The “dollar-a-day” poverty threshold is a purchasing power parity (PPP) adjusted dollar that has the same purchasing power in all countries. They include the five most populous countries. A family of four must feed. Key Trends Extreme poverty. Figure 1. except for Indonesia where the latest available estimate of 18. 1. But that is the fate of at least 10% of the population in 19 economies of the Asia and Pacific region including the five most populous. has declined substantially. including women and young people. This is a measure of extreme poverty. clothe. Most people in developing Asia live in countries where extreme poverty afflicts more than 20% of the population. Based on the latest estimates. Full and productive employment and decent work for all is a distant dream for most people in the region.6%).25 (PPP) a day. however. or doctor’s bills. education. although people are employed.A: Halve. 40 60 Latest Year 80 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Many countries have their own definitions of poverty and these generally use a higher threshold. between 1990 and 2015.1.25 (PPP) a Day. but in many countries. For convenience it is still referred to by its old name.25 (PPP) a day at 2005 prices. States of Cambodia Bhutan Turkmenistan Philippines Pakistan Mongolia Tajikistan Indonesia China. of which the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has the lowest percentage (15. and house itself on $5 (PPP) a day. with such jobs. Earliest and Latest Years Nepal Bangladesh Uzbekistan India Timor-Leste Papua New Guinea Lao PDR Micronesia. and in many countries the “working poor” constitute more than 30% of total employment. countries that might miss the target include three of the most populous countries in the region. Anything left over can go for transport. Moreover. represented by people living on less than $1. The threshold was reviewed and has been increased to $1.

Indonesia. While this is a 70% success in terms of the number of countries.1 assigns economies to four groups. Pakistan. Papua New Guinea (12. High sustained growth in the recent years has resulted in reducing extreme poverty levels substantially in many countries in the region. the Maldives. having already attained the target of halving the percentage of the population living on less than $1.0 8. Indonesia. but five countries are making only slow progress and might not meet the target by 2015 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 2. and Viet Nam.5).4). Figure 1.25 (PPP) a day Target Early Achievers Armenia Azerbaijan China. People's Rep. respectively) followed by Viet Nam (3.1b shows the annual percentage point reductions between the earliest and latest years. Box 1.25 (PPP) a day.0 0.1b actually saw their poverty shares rising between the two periods. Bangladesh.3 points. the easier it will be for economies to bring people above the $1. Not only have these countries succeeded in bringing many people out of $1. Pakistan.0 –2. The smaller the poverty gap ratio. Depth of poverty had significantly declined in the pre-crisis years. though it may be noted that the latest data on $1. 3.0 points.7). 1. three other countries are on track to meeting the target. Bangladesh (13. Figure 1. the Federated States of Micronesia. The five economies with the largest poverty gap ratios are Nepal (19.0 10.25 (PPP) a day poverty. Source: Table 1. annual percentage point reductions in extreme poverty were: the PRC. and India. Judging by the current trends and data availability.25 (PPP) a day threshold.1. Uzbekistan (15. Georgia and Uzbekistan are regressing and the proportion of their populations living on $1.64 GOAL 1: ErADIcATE ExTrEME POVErTy AND HUNGEr Comparing the earliest and latest years. Turkmenistan and Tajikistan have made the greatest annual gains (annual percentage point reductions of 7. These include the PRC.7 point. of Timor-Leste Indonesia Nepal Cambodia Lao PDR Bangladesh Kyrgyz Republic India Philippines Mongolia Georgia Uzbekistan –4.0 Box 1.1 Progress toward Achieving the $1. 1. The three countries with bars to the left in Figure 1.0 4.3). it is less heartening in terms of population. Several countries have sharply reduced their poverty gap ratios over the period.6. Fourteen of the 24 economies are early achievers.0 percentage points.2 shows the poverty gap ratios that reflect the depth and incidence of poverty. These are from surveys prior to 2009 and therefore do not account for the impact of the global economic crisis.9 points.25 (PPP) a day has actually increased over the period.0). based on trends from available data. To summarize. since both Bangladesh and India are among the seven countries that might miss the target.1b Annual Percentage Point Reductions in Population Living on $1. 17 out of the 24 economies are expected to achieve the poverty target by 2015.3).1). (16. 3. These include two countries—Georgia and Uzbekistan—whose economies were badly affected by the collapse of the former Soviet Union while Georgia had the added misfortune of civil unrest in its border regions. Turkmenistan.7 and 4.3.0 6. Maldives Pakistan Sri Lanka Tajikistan Thailand Turkmenistan Viet Nam Timor-Leste Nepal Philippines Uzbekistan unless they make better progress. Most countries are on track to achieve the poverty reduction target.25 (PPP) a day poverty rates available for analysis for both countries are for 2005. 0. People’s Republic of Indonesia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Malaysia On Track Cambodia Lao PDR Slow Progress Bangladesh India Mongolia No Progress/Regressing Georgia Source: Derived from Table 1. those that still remain are nearer to escaping. and India (10.25 (PPP) a Day Turkmenistan Tajikistan Viet Nam Pakistan China. As regards the largest countries. Figure 1. several countries have obviously made good progress in reducing extreme poverty.

Earliest Year Source: Table 1.9 points. 13.3 shows the percentage of children under 5 years old who are moderately or severely underweight for earliest and latest years for which data are available. Viet Nam. Uzbekistan. States of Uzbekistan Bangladesh Papua New Guinea India Lao PDR Timor-Leste Bhutan Turkmenistan Mongolia Cambodia Philippines Tajikistan Georgia Pakistan China. of Mongolia Kazakhstan Uzbekistan Armenia Singapore Kyrgyz Republic Georgia Samoa Tuvalu 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Earliest Year Source: Table 1.8 points. In countries where open defecation is widespread. and Indonesia. People's Rep. Figure 1. Rep.7 points.1. Cambodia. Fed. 16. Of the 20 countries that reduced their percentages.2 Poverty Gap Ratio. Afghanistan. and many infants are underweight at birth and are never able to catch up in achieving a healthy body weight. Children can be underweight for numerous reasons. 10. Effective nutrition interventions during pregnancy for mothers and for children until 2 years of age—referred to as the 1.0 points.3. Earliest and Latest Years (%) India Timor-Leste Bangladesh Nepal Afghanistan Lao PDR Pakistan Myanmar Cambodia Maldives Sri Lanka Philippines Viet Nam Indonesia Papua New Guinea Malaysia Tajikistan Bhutan Vanuatu Solomon Islands Turkmenistan Azerbaijan Thailand Fiji.GOAL 1: ErADIcATE ExTrEME POVErTy AND HUNGEr 65 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Figure 1. particularly large gains were made by Bangladesh.2 points. 10. Earliest and Latest Years Nepal Micronesia. the percentages actually increased in five countries although the increases were all 2 percentage points or less. Figure 1. People's Rep. of Indonesia Viet Nam Sri Lanka Azerbaijan Armenia Maldives Kyrgyz Republic Kazakhstan Thailand Malaysia 0 5 10 15 20 Latest Year 25 30 Among the 25 countries where data for two periods are available.000-day window of opportunity—are crucial for healthy child upbringing. of China. 12.3 Proportion of Underweight Children under Five Years of Age. Latest Year Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . children constantly suffer from diarrheal diseases. This is estimated according to World Health Organization (WHO) Child Growth Standards. Despite some gains. hunger is still widespread in the Asia and Pacific region.8 percentage points. which reduced the percentage of underweight children by 22. Shortage of quality food and poor feeding practices are also widespread in urban slum areas.

and Pakistan..e. Five countries have achieved the target already. Japan. children from the poorest households are more likely to be underweight than their richer counterparts: “In Southern Asia. Full and productive employment and decent work for all is a distant dream for most people in the region. but the gains are not enough to meet the targets set under the MDG. New Zealand. 14). The situation is particularly bad in South Asia (Bangladesh. and over 90% in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic.2 shows that percentages of vulnerable employment remain high in many economies for which data are available—over 60% for the latest year for Georgia.2 Progress toward the Hunger Target Early Achievers China. India.3. i. Four countries are making no progress or are regressing. and India. A reduction in the percentage of own-account and contributing family workers (vulnerable employment) accompanied by a rise in formal employment is seen as progress toward achieving full and productive employment. Unfortunately. most will apparently miss the hunger target.2 shows the progress made by 24 economies in meeting the hunger target. while underweight prevalence among children from the richest 20 per cent of households decreased by almost a third. those that might miss the target include three of the most populous countries in the region. namely. and Pakistan. These are in contrast to around 10% rates in countries like Australia. Box 1. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Moreover. to halve the proportion of children under 5 years of age who are moderately or severely underweight. the percentages of malnourished children remain unacceptably high in many economies in Asia and the Pacific.”1 Box 1. Despite impressive gains. The United Nations has recently noted that in South Asia. India. Cambodia. Thailand Uzbekistan Maldives Viet Nam Lao PDR Myanmar Nepal Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Vanuatu 1 The Millennium Development Goals Report 2011 (United Nations 2011. Hunger has diminished throughout the region as most countries have made some progress. Table 1. for example.66 GOAL 1: ErADIcATE ExTrEME POVErTy AND HUNGEr To summarize. 70% for Nepal and Viet Nam. Five more are on track including Bangladesh. including the PRC. Indonesia. Bhutan. and Nepal in particular) with the proportion of underweight children almost twice as high as in Sub-Saharan Africa and also the highest in the world. over 80% for Bangladesh. there was no meaningful improvement among children in the poorest households in the period between 1995 and 2009. People’s Republic of Kyrgyz Republic Mongolia On Track Afghanistan Bangladesh Cambodia Slow Progress Azerbaijan Bhutan Georgia India Indonesia No Progress/Regressing Armenia Kazakhstan Source: Derived from Table 1. 10 countries are still making only slow progress and might not reach the target by 2015. and Pakistan. Indonesia. This group includes the other three most populous countries—India. in contrast to the poverty target that most economies are expected to meet. Vulnerable employment rates and the proportion of “working poor” in total employment remain high in many countries. Indonesia. and Singapore.

25 (PPP) per day.” In addition. differences in the coverage of informal sector activities in the statistics of developing member economies may hamper the comparability of estimates of labor productivity growth. Figure 1. United Nations Children’s Fund.4 shows these percentages for 16 countries for various years but mainly between 2002 and 2008.25 (PPP) a day poverty line are missing for most of the Pacific island economies. the best measure of labor input to be used in the computation of labor productivity would be the “total number of annual hours actually worked by all persons employed. Such estimates may have large error margins. The hunger indicators are based on standards that have been devised by the Food and Agriculture Organization. Data based on the $1. over 40% in TimorLeste. Both the measurement of household income or expenditure in national currencies and the calculation of 2005 PPPs will have relatively high error margins in many countries.2.25 (PPP) a Day.GOAL 1: ErADIcATE ExTrEME POVErTy AND HUNGEr Another indicator of decent employment is the working poverty rate or the percentage of employed persons living on less than $1. and 30% or more in Cambodia. which does not take into account the actual number of hours worked. Latest Year (%) Nepal Bangladesh Timor-Leste India Cambodia Tajikistan Indonesia Bhutan Viet Nam Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Mongolia Armenia Kazakhstan Thailand 0 Source: Table 1. Indonesia. The shares of the “working poor” in total employment are over 50% in Bangladesh and Nepal. 10 20 30 40 50 60 67 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Data Issues and Comparability The $1. India. and Tajikistan. and the purchasing power parity (PPP) dollar conversion rate for 2005. Assuming a constant mix of economic activities. These high ratios indicate that a large proportion of employed are working in jobs that are not adequately remunerated to lift them and their families out of poverty. and World Health Organization. Statistical techniques are typically used to extend data collected from household surveys to the full population.4 Proportion of Employed People Living Below $1.25-a-day test for determining poverty and the calculation of poverty gaps require information on household income or household consumption expenditure. The availability of such data will help provide a better comparison of poverty incidence around the region. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . But while countries attempt to use the same standards. comparability is compromised by lack of regular data in many countries. Figure 1. The computation of labor productivity uses data on the number of persons employed.

5 … 8.7a 33.4d 5.25 (PPP) a Day National Earliest Year Latest Year Earliest Year Latest Year Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.3 1.0 5.1a 6.3 0.0 … 28.6 4.1 14.9 … 0.0 8.8 46.5 55.6 … 0.8 13.5 15.2 27.6 (1995) … 21.6c (1993) 50.2 (2005) … 13.8 26.68 GOAL 1: ErADIcATE ExTrEME POVErTy AND HUNGEr Goal 1 Targets and Indicators Table 1.5 28.1 … 8.1 6.6a 7.1c 40.8 9.2 31.3 (1995) 0.9f 22.8 49.2 (2000) … … 35.2 41.5 24.0 7.5 26. country sources. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0f 29.0 38.3 … 31.4 (2008) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2007) (2007) (2006) (2004) (1998) (2003) (2005) (1996) (1998) (2008) (1996) (1995) (1996) (1993) (1993) (1991) (1999) (1993) (1998) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2007) (2007) (2005) (2004) (1998) (2003) (1996) (1995) (1996) (1993) (1993) (1991) (1999) (1993) (1998) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2007) (2007) (2005) (2004) (1998) (2003) 60.5 32.7 44.1 … 1.1 7. of Mongolia Taipei. Sources: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011).3 4.6a 13.2 68.6 7.7 (2004) 1. Refers to rural areas only.9f 37.0 17.7 25.0 (2007) … 6.7 … 5.5a (2005) 0. between 1990 and 2015.7 36. Refers to percentage of population below the basic needs poverty line.7 1.8b … 5.3 26.9 22.1 (2007) 3. Estimate is adjusted by spatial CPI information.1 Proportion of Population below the Poverty Line (%) $1.6 47.1 7.0f 21.9 7.8 8.5 63.4 (2005) … 49.4 23.4f 31.6 92.5 4.1 13.0f … 39.1 21.0f 15.6 … 0.5 … … 9.2 1.6 23.7 22.7 1.3f 15.3 (2000) … … 12.1 … 47. People’s Rep.9 10.6 … 33.8 15.7 0.0 (2008) 0.7 8. of Hong Kong.8d … 49.8 (1995) … 66.5f … … … … … 24.7 29.6d 26.5 (2006) … 0.9a (2005) … … 22.6a 1.6 21.6 … … 4.5 21.8f 20. Rep.5f 26.0 14.0 5.6 64. Defined as percent of low-income population to total population.1 4.4 15.3 (1996) … … 8.4 8.7a (1990) … … 4.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalame Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.0 … 41.4 7.9 25.4 1.1 … 25.9f … … … (2008) (2009) (2010) (2009) (2009) (2008) (2006) (2009) (1998) (2005) (2009) (2004) (2009) (2009) (2005) (2007) (2005) (2004) (2009) (2009) 1.6 28.2 18.6a (2009) 9.0 (2004) 2.4 13.1d … 13.1 34.3 7. China Korea.3a 55. but it is not classified as a developing member.5 6.2f … … … … (1996) (2003) (1994) (1996) (1991) 20.7 2.8 (1996) … … 37.0 1.0 8.6 52.0 26. Fed.1 0.0 … … … 5.8 3.6 … 30.6 … 30.1d (2005) 7.1 31.1 (2004) 19.0 25.3 (2008) … … … … 16.7f 49.0 (2003) 10.6 3.7a 5.1 (2001) … … … … … … (2000) (1996) (2007) (1994) (1993) (1997) Weighted average of urban and rural estimates.0 7. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.7 (1992) (1994) (1998) (1996) (1991) 15.0 … 22.7 … 17.5 8.2 Poverty Gap Ratio Earliest Year Latest Year … 4.6 6.7 4.0 … 48.5 (2005) (1999) (2001) (2002) (1996) (2001) (1993) (1999) (2000) 36.1 Target 1.0 23.0 (2009) … 5. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand a b c d e f … 17.9 0.1 7.9 (2001) … … … … … … … … … … 31.3 18.2a (1990) … … 18.3 8.9 … 6.7 58.8 … 26.1 (2005) (2003) (2005) (2004) (2004) (2007) 6. the proportion of people whose income is less than one dollar a day 1.5 … 5.3 … … … … 1.6 4.0a (2005) … … 6.9f … 24.9 (2007) … … … … … … (2005) (2003) (2005) (2004) (2004) (2007) (1994) (1990) (1992) (1992) (1991) (1992) (1993) (2007) (2009) (2008) (2009) (2006) (2004) (2008) (1994) (1996) (1993) (2004) (1994) (1990) (1993) (2007) (2010) (2008) (2009) (2009) (2009) (2008) (2006) (2009) (2006) (1999) (2005) (2006) (1996) (2008) (2006) (2007) (2002) (2010) (2006) (1994) (1990) (1992) (1992) (1991) (1992) (1993) (2007) (2009) (2008) (2009) (2006) (1998) (2004) (2008) … … … … … … … … … … 52.7 … 40.6 45.3 46.6 5.3 27.9f 22.0 15.A: Halve.1 5.5 9.2 0.6 0.5 63.6a 16.4 (2007) … … … … … … (1996) (1990) (1997) (2001) (1994) … … … … … … … … … … 19.0 54.4a 28.3 Share of Poorest Quintile in National Consumption (%) Latest Year 9.1 … 9.3 33.7 0.0 6.7 … 13. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.8 6.6 (1992) (1994) (1998) (1996) (1991) 4. Rep.0 (1996) … … 36.6 54.4 5.2 13.

8 (1991) … 44.5 (1997) … … … … … … … … … … … … … … Latest Year … … 9.6 (1990) 62.1 (2000) … … … … … … … … … … … … … 22. aged 15 years and over) Earliest Year … 41.4 (2004) … … … 57.B: Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all.9 (2004) … 59. of Hong Kong.4 (2000) 55.8 (2008) 54.1 (1990) 61.6 (2009) 58.4 11.0 (2001) … … … … … … Developed Member Economies Australia 1. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu … 4.6 (2009) –2.3 (2002) … 50.9 (2001) 45.8 (2001) 2.8 (2003) 61.9 (2006) 91.8 (2004) … … … … … … 5.1 (1991) 7.0 (2005) … 26.2 (2004) … … … –2.3 (2006) 63.5 (2002) 64.3 (1991) … … 11. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.7 (2009) 56.9 (2004) 60.3 (2007) 80.0 (2005) 0.6 (1993) –4.6 (2009) … 4.GOAL 1: ErADIcATE ExTrEME POVErTy AND HUNGEr Goal 1 Targets and Indicators Table 1.6 (2003) Georgia –4.5 (2000) 62.7 … 37.7 (2009) 90.7 (2009) 0.6 (2003) 45.0 (2005) 58.3 (1995) 67.6 (2001) 39.5 (2009) 73.1 (2009) 60.7 (2009) 1.7 (2009) 69.1 (2000) Kazakhstan 5.25 (PPP) per Day (%) Earliest Year … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 56. People’s Rep.1 (1991) 6.7 Proportion of Own-Account and Contributing Family Workers in Total Employment (%) Earliest Year … 35.1 (2008) … … … … 7.7 (2009) 4.1 (2006) 42.0 (2009) 10.2 Target 1.9 (2004) … 39.4 (2001) 50.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.5 (2008) 9.2 (2008) 31.1 (2009) 1. Rep.9 (1998) 8.8 (2009) 52.0 (2001) 51.0 (2001) 50.1 (1991) 70.8 (2005) 29.3 (2002) 40.9 (1990) 74. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 (1996) … … … … … … … … … … … … 59.4 Growth Rate of GDP per Person Employed (percent.2 (2009) … –5.6 (1991) 76.6 (2003) 82.9 (2003) … … … 61.1 (2000) … … … … … 48.4 (2003) 53.2 (1996) 38.5 (2009) 59.3 (2005) … … … … … … 4.4 (2009) 23.7 (1991) Latest Year … 37.7 (2003) … 85. Rep.6 (2006) 71.1 (1991) a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.8 (1991) Japan 1.2 (2009) … 5.3 (1990) 19.7 … 0.0 (2002) … 9.1 (2008) 55.1 (1999) 52.9 (1990) 59. at constant 1990 US$ PPP) Earliest Year Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan … Armenia … Azerbaijan 10.0 (1996) 2.2 (2001) 23.8 (2004) 61.1 (2009) 10.5 (2009) 5.3 (2002) … 61.7 (2008) 63.4 (2002) 56.9 … … 1.2 (2009) 61.2 … 50.9 39.2 (2009) –3.6 (2000) … 69.4 (1996) … … 46.6 (1996) 53.6 (2009) 56.7 (1999) … … … … … … … 57.3 (1990) 63.1 (1991) 86.5 (1991) 10.5 (1990) … 59.0 … … … 18.5 20.3 (1994) 51.3 (1990) … 43.0 30. Source: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011).5 (1993) 30.6 Proportion of Employed People Living below $1.9 (2009) 63.5 (1990) 58.7 (2007) 62.8 (1997) … 28.0 (2003) Kyrgyz Republic … Pakistan 9.1 (1997) 7.3 (1999) … –2.9 (2009) 92.7 (2005) 54.2 (1991) Tajikistan … Turkmenistan … Uzbekistan … East Asia China.9 … 19.7 (2008) 12.1 (1995) 21.7 (2004) … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … Latest Year … 3.3 (1991) New Zealand –3.0 (1995) … 3.2 (1991) 69.2 (2005) 66.5 (2006) 60.6 (2005) 57.9 (1998) 40.9 (2008) 47. including women and young people 1.5 Employment-toPopulation Ratio (percent.4 (2005) (2003) (2005) (2003) (2002) (2004) (2002) (2003) (2002) (2006) … … … … … … … … … … 47.1 (2007) –6.6 (2002) 56.0 (2005) 83.5 (1990) 50.8 (2009) 64.7 (1992) 68. Fed.9 (2004) … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 1.1 26.0 (2009) –3.9 (1999) 63.9 (1998) … 68.3 (1996) … 56.3 (2009) 0. China Korea.1 (2001) 64.9 (2009) 69 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS (2004) (2003) (2005) (2003) … … … 11.7 (1990) 55.0 (1990) … 84.1 (1996) … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 10.8 (2009) 4.6 (2009) 72.3 (1990) 82.9 (1995) … … … … 5.1 (1990) Latest Year … 42.7 (2004) 63.0 (2005) … 56.3 33.2 (1990) 12.0 … … 1.3 (2002) … –1. of Mongolia Taipei.0 (2000) 56.8 (2007) 58.5 (2009) … 43.6 (1990) 76.6 (1995) 63. but it is not classified as a developing member.8 (2003) 55.

2 8..8 19.5 4. of Mongolia Taipei...9 Proportion of Population below Minimum Level of Dietary Energy Consumption (%) 1990–1992a 1995–1997 2004–2006 … 45 27 58 <5 17 25 34 9 5 18b … <5 28 … 38 … 20 9 21 28 <5 38 16 31 <5 47 24 … 26 31 … 8 8 … … … … … 9 21 39 … … 10 <5 <5 <5 … 36 27 19 <5 13 20 42 9 5 12b … <5 33 … 41 … 17 9 20 25 <5 40 11 29 <5 35 20 … 18 22 … 5 6 … … … … … 10 13 32 … … 9 <5 <5 <5 … 22 <5 <5 <5 10 26 30 6 11 10b … <5 26 … 27 … 21 7 16 19 <5 22 13 23 <5 16 15 … 16 11 … <5 <5 … … … … … <5 10 31 … … 7 <5 <5 <5 15. the proportion of people who suffer from hunger 1.6 20.8 29.7 38. but it is not classified as a developing member. .3 7.7 8. Rep.8 … 16.5 44. Macao. .9 2.8 21.8 (2002) … … 5.2 … 6. Source: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011).9 2.. China.0 20. People’s Rep. 18.8 Prevalence of Underweight Children under Five Years of Age (%) Earliest Year Latest Year Total Total Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.6 29..3 (1992) … … 10..8 39. .7 31.7 11. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 44. 1.7 32.6 16.3 4.7 8.4 2...3 14.6 11. China Korea.2 39.China.1 1.9 10.0 … … 15.1 50. of b Hong Kong. b Includes Hong Kong.9 4.9 (1992) (1999) (1992) (1994) (1995) (2006) 6.1 … 42..6 31. between 1990 and 2015.7 .70 GOAL 1: ErADIcATE ExTrEME POVErTy AND HUNGEr Goal 1 Targets and Indicators Table 1. Fed.6 … 28. and Taipei..C: Halve.3 (1997) (1998) (1996) (1999) (1995) (1997) (1990) (1996) 32.8 2..5 25. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .3 (2005) … 41.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamc Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.5 .8 … 28.3 36. (2007) (2008) (2005) (2001) (2006) (2009) (1996) (1992) (1993) (1990) (1992) (1993) (1992) (2008) (2007) (2006) (1999) (2003) (2003) (2000) (2005) (2006) … … … … … … … … … … 40..3 Target 1.8 (1992) … 64.7 6.. data refer to the period 1993–1995.5 41. .4 (2004) (2005) (2006) (2005) (2006) (2005) (2001) (2005) (2000) (2006) 1. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. Rep.6 (1996) … … … (1993) (2005) (1999) (2006) (2003) (2007) (2007) a For Central and West Asia except for Pakistan.0 43.9 … .1 21. China.7 29..6 (2002) … … 10..3 12. c Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.1 14..7 3. .

Data are available for 30 economies on how many pupils who start Grade I reach the last grade of primary education.4 85.1 Total Net Enrollment Ratio in Primary Education below 95%.7 94. Rep. For 18 of the economies in Table 2. of Kyrgyz Republic Thailand Uzbekistan Bangladesh Cambodia Bhutan Azerbaijan Timor-Leste Lao PDR Solomon Islands Marshall Islands Nepal Pakistan 0 Source: Table 2. The declines are usually small and some of the economies concerned are still above the 95% target.5 83.1 91. bringing the success rate for the region to only 50%.0 90. countries with relatively high rates of illiteracy include three of the most populous—Bangladesh. Table 2. second. as discussed below.1 lists the 19 economies whose ratios for the latest year Figure 2. 2009 or Nearest Year Georgia Viet Nam Malaysia Armenia Philippines Fiji. boys and girls alike. Unfortunately. or 15 economies out of 30. only 18 have so far achieved 95% enrollment. that they all complete the course. Key Trends Primary school enrollments are rising but some economies record declines. and Pakistan. by 2015.1 92. Indonesia. countries need to ensure that all primary school-age children are enrolled in school.5 94. While in principle the goal is to achieve universal primary education. provisionally. To achieve this target. hence the measure is the adjusted net enrollment ratio. the People’s Republic of China (PRC) for which the only data available is for 1991. In the commentary that follows.1 contains data for 37 developing economies and the latest data available range from 2001 to 2009. Only 13 have achieved the target to date and only two more are expected to do so before 2015.6 88. MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Introduction The target of Goal 2 is to ensure that. and only one more is expected to do so based on recent trends.4 80.71 Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education Primary school enrollment ratios have been rising in most economies although out of 37 developing economies. One test of the success of primary education is provided by literacy rates for persons in the 15–24 age group. Included are children of primary school age who are enrolled in secondary schools. first. implying that more children are out of school now. which means they have achieved the target cut-off of 95%. Net enrollment ratios are the percentages of all children of primary school age who are actually enrolled in school. while ratios for the Marshall Islands and Sri Lanka are both down by 5 points.4 88. over 95% of 15–24-year-olds are literate. although age requirements differ among countries. Figure 2. These include India.1 89. will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling. However.3 73.6 80.9 89.4 60 70 80 95 90 100 94. Enrollment ratios have been rising in most of these economies since 1999 but they have fallen in 12 economies. In most economies in the region. These rates show how well the basic reading and writing skills learned in primary school have been retained at the time young persons are either joining the work force or entering higher technical or university education. Primary education usually starts at 5 or 6 years and continues through to 11 or 12 years. 10 20 30 40 50 66.1.1.9 92. and.7 91. the tracking of progress toward attainment of the MDG target is a cut-off ratio of 95%. India. the enrollment ratios are 95% or higher.0 82. children everywhere. some decreases were more substantial: the Republic of Fiji’s latest ratio is 7 percentage points lower.6 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2010 . the progress made by economies for these two components are considered separately.

Box 2. Indonesia (80%). Regrettably none of the four is expected to reach the target by 2015. are progressing but too slow to meet the target. Ten economies. Box 2. while Solomon Islands is on track to meet the target by 2015 if present trends continue.1 categorizes the 31 economies into four groups of MDG achievements.72 GOAL 2: AchIEVE UNIVErSAL PrIMAry EDUcATION most populous countries are in this group. Nepal (61. Figure 2.4 97.4 89. which in fact is close to the 95% target and might well achieve it by 2015.9 75. India (69%).5 69. and Indonesia.2 96.2 because insufficient data are available for Kiribati. however.2 54. 2008 or Nearest Year Hong Kong. Figure 2. Georgia.7 98. In 2008. of Tonga Bhutan Viet Nam Marshall Islands Indonesia Kiribati Philippines Vanuatu Myanmar India Lao PDR Bangladesh Nepal Pakistan Cambodia 0 Source: Table 2.6 98. Two economies are on track. and the Philippines.4 83. that these include Malaysia.5 67.8 98. Rep.4. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2010 . They include both Bangladesh and Pakistan—the latter with the lowest ratio of all. and Viet Nam. Pakistan. Republic of Maldives Mongolia Samoa Sri Lanka Tajikistan Tonga Vanuatu Lao PDR Pakistan Timor-Leste Marshall Islands Philippines Thailand Enrollment is a first step but not many children survive to the last grade of primary. Four of these had ratios substantially less than 95% for years near 2008. namely Bangladesh (67%).6 68. Four economies are actually regressing— Cambodia.5%). the Republic of Fiji and Viet Nam. Three countries with lowest survival rates are Cambodia (54. Note.4 92. the latest available estimate is 89% for 1991. They include seven economies from the former Soviet Union where education has traditionally enjoyed high priority.5 80.0 78.7%).5 98. Seven economies including Pakistan are making progress but too slowly to achieve the target. China Cook Islands Georgia India Indonesia Kazakhstan Kiribati On Track Solomon Islands Slow Progress Armenia Bhutan Cambodia Kyrgyz Republic No Progress/Regressing Azerbaijan Bangladesh Fiji. Uzbekistan. Sixteen economies are early achievers.1. for which data are insufficient for trend analysis.0 66.5 95 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 available are less than 95%.5 85.2 shows the progress toward the target of surviving to the last grade of primary until 2015. and Pakistan (60.2%). 66.6 94.4 98. Nepal.9 94.8 98. 13 economies had expected cohort survival rates of at least 95%. of Kazakhstan Tajikistan Singapore Sri Lanka Azerbaijan Uzbekistan Armenia Brunei Darussalam Kyrgyz Republic Malaysia Georgia Mongolia Fiji. Korea. None of the five Box 2. This does not include economies such as the PRC.8 90.1. 99.2 Percentage of Children Starting Grade 1 and Reaching Last Grade of Primary. The box only covers 27 of the countries shown in Figure 2.7 98. Another seven economies are shown making no progress or regressing. China Korea. Rep.7 60.3 71. of Malaysia Source: Derived from Table 2.6 61.2 shows for 30 economies how many of the children who have enrolled in the first grade are expected to reach the last grade of primary education.7 96. Singapore. For the PRC. and Pakistan (60%). India. and Tonga. including Bangladesh. Rep.2 95.1 Progress toward Target for Primary School Enrollment Early Achiever Brunei Darussalam Hong Kong.

this will only show up after when data for 2009 become available.GOAL 2: AchIEVE UNIVErSAL PrIMAry EDUcATION Note that the data shown here are expected survival rates. Figure 2. of Slow Progress Bangladesh Bhutan India Indonesia Lao PDR No Progress/Regressing Cambodia Georgia Source: Derived from Table 2.1. in Bhutan this is 12%. Box 2. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2010 . both female and male. India. not actual survival rates. Kyrgyz Republic Malaysia Sri Lanka Tajikistan Uzbekistan 73 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS the difference is somewhat larger for Mongolia and Bangladesh. female literacy is slightly higher than that of males. Figure 2. Enrollment statistics are likely to be accurate in many countries. Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) sources. Republic of On Track Fiji. in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic and in Nepal. Rep. China Kazakhstan Korea. although Data Issues and Comparability The statistics for Goal 2 are mostly taken from the United Nations Educational.3 shows literacy rates of youths. in India 14%. In particular. These statistics may also not reflect actual attendance or dropout rates during the year. 10% more males are literate compared with females. Statistics on school enrollment are typically obtained from ministries of education while literacy rates are from household surveys or censuses. literacy rates for the 15–24 age group are around 95% or more and.2 refers to the data for 2008 or nearest years and so does not reflect the full impact of the global economic crisis. In 23 economies.2 Progress toward Target for Survival to Last Grade of Primary Early Achiever Armenia Azerbaijan Brunei Darussalam Hong Kong. 1999 and 2009 or Nearest Years Solomon Islands Azerbaijan Uzbekistan Tajikistan Kazakhstan Georgia Turkmenistan Singapore Armenia Kyrgyz Republic Brunei Darussalam Samoa Indonesia Tonga China. and Pakistan. when times are hard. some parents may no longer be able to keep their children in school.China Sri Lanka Philippines Viet Nam Mongolia Myanmar Vanuatu Cambodia Lao PDR Nepal India Bangladesh Bhutan Pakistan Papua New Guinea 0 20 1999 Source: Table 2. The percentages of those starting first grade who will continue on to the last grade of primary school are essentially forecasts based on recent experience on dropout rates.3 Percentage of Literate 15–24-Year-Olds. Actual survival rates may turn out differently as they are affected by economic conditions. but rates are low in three of the largest—Bangladesh. there is some evidence of a bias against females. but may be over reported in others. For example. for 33 economies in 2009 or latest available year. in most of these. Literacy rates are usually based on oral responses from the households about their literacy status. of Maldives Malaysia Thailand Taipei. However in eight economies where the literacy rates are below 90%. 40 60 2009 80 100 Viet Nam Marshall Islands Mongolia Myanmar Nepal Vanuatu Pakistan Philippines Literacy rates are high in most economies of the Asia and Pacific region.1. Box 2. People's Rep. with countries trying to adhere to UNESCO classifications and definitions. and in Pakistan 18%.

2 97.6 83.1 … 90.1 89.4 (1991) 97.8 86.0 100.7 … 90.5 99.7 59.5 81.8 85.7 … 80.6 91.3 … 95.3 91. Rep. boys and girls alike.3 98.9 … 93.9 (2005) 88.2 … 91.2 97.8 88.8 … 94.2 97.6 97.8 92.4 94.3 99.2 … 91. will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling Total Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. of Mongolia Taipei.9 85.5 99.7 86.7 91.7 (2007) 99.3 80.6 Boysa 1999 … 92.2 (2008) 98.3 59.5 80.8 98.9 99.0 … … 99. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.0 66.6 67.9 … 97.0 … 92.6 … … 98. by 2015.2 93.4 88.0 81.0 57.5 … 99.4 86.1 66.5 77.0 … 93.9 … 97.1 94. China Korea.0 96.6 (2000) 95.3 … 85.0 … 93.9 89.8 2009 … 91.6 … 88.3 96.2 70.2 … 89.1 Target 2.74 GOAL 2: AchIEVE UNIVErSAL PrIMAry EDUcATION Goal 2 Target and Indicators Table 2.1 60.1 94.1 … 90.3 99.4 98.2 … 84.4 95.2 … 87.4 … 94.8 … 99.5 (2001) 98.5 98.4 96.4 … 84. Fed.4 … 96.8 94.2 63.2 … 93.1 … 92.6 93.2 … 85.5 2.5 98.3 99.3 95.1 99.9 … … 94.1 … 92.9 88.9 91.8 80.0 98.9 62.3 … 96.5 88.4 … 74. People’s Rep.8 (2001) 96.7 97.5 94.2 (2008) 73.5 97.1 96.9 (2008) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2001) (2007) (2008) (2002) (2007) (2000) (2007) (2007) (2004) (2005) continued Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2010 .2 92.9 … 93.0 (2010) 89.4 … 98.5 99.9 … 98.5 64.5 (2005) 55.4 97.1 97.5 97.4 82.A: Ensure that.8 (2001) (2004) (2000) (2001) (2001) (2007) 97.2 88.1 … 91.0 99.0 95.0 99.5 … 99.9 … 94.1 96.2 67.4 90.6 … 79.8 88.2 100.1 … … 93.3 97.8 92.0 100.9 67.6 98.6 86.3 97.5 93.4 45.6 97.3 98.2 90.2 84.7 92.9 93.0 90.4 94.9 98.9 52.0 (2000) 97.3 91.6 95.1 (2001) … … 96.5 98.3 91.4 91.7 99.1 93.2 … 92.1 98.9 87. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1999 … 93.5 (2008) … 89.6 … 98.2 95.3 … 80.0 99.8 94.0 87.7 … 99.7 92.7 88.9 … 98.3 … … 96.8 … 80.4 … 90.1 Total Net Enrollment Ratio in Primary Education (%) Girlsa 2009 1999 2009 … 92.7 94.2 (2003) 68.2 96.7 96.1 97.2 87.2 (2006) 95.4 84.9 (2005) 83.8 90.1 95.9 97.5 … 99.6 94.0 … 94.1 … 98.7 97. Rep.0 … 91.9 98.4 97.8 72.6 79.0 85.4 94.5 (2007) 96.1 80.3 (2000) 77.3 … 96. of Hong Kong. children everywhere.7 98.9 (2007) 85.2 75.1 … 97.7 … 90.5 94.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.5 99.7 … 89.

5 68.6 98.3 71.1 … 45.2 80.7 29...7 85.3 … 99.1 98..0 … 59.9 69.7 53.3 (2002) 99.6 … 98.5 (2007) 98.9 95.7 99.4 96.6 95.0 … 99.2 78.7 … 85. People’s Rep.2 54.5 … … … … … … … 91.7 … … … … 71.4 66. children everywhere.8 (2003) 78.7 87.3 97. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.3 98.0 .7 … 52.2 Proportion of Pupils Starting Grade 1 Who Reach Last Grade of Primary (%) Total Girlsa Boysa 2008 1999 2008 1999 … 97. Fed.0 … continued Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2010 .5 … 47. 93.0 95.4 99.5 … … … … 67.7 … 96.1 … 82..4 (2005) 97.9 70.9 54.5 … 100.0 63.1 54.8 96.5 97. 85.2 57.6 85..8 … 82. by 2015.6 97.7 … … … 68.5 98.9 (2003) 83.5 … 21..4 … 69.4 42.4 … 25. 85.6 93. 66.4 92.7 95..5 (2006) … 61.5 62. 91.4 94. of Hong Kong.1 96.2 … 82.1 55.4 84.4 … 46. Rep.1 79...7 … 57. China Korea.1 70. Rep.2 79.0 … … 95.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.3 … … … … … … … 89.9 … 100.7 .9 98.2 87.0 96.0 … … … … 97.8 55.4 99.2 75.9 … 82.0 67.3 82.9 72.A: Ensure that.7 2008 … 98.5 55..8 99. of Mongolia Taipei.2 … 54.2 … 30.4 … 99.0 … … … 75 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.0 63.2 71.6 89.9 93.3 55.0 67.. 67.5 80.8 98.8 96.1 89.0 94.9 .0 … 97.8 … 79.2 95.3 96.5 93.4 (2005) … 71.GOAL 2: AchIEVE UNIVErSAL PrIMAry EDUcATION Goal 2 Target and Indicators Table 2.4 95.7 59.7 94.8 .9 98.4 … 73.4 90.5 … … … … … … … 90.2 61.7 60. 59.5 … 100.8 96.5 (1991) 99.6 (2006) 96.0 .6 100.0 … (2002) (2000) (2004) (2000) 89.9 … … … (2003) (2000) (2001) (2002) (2000) (2001) (2007) (2001) (2002) (2001) (1991) (1991) … 92.8 98.4 93.8 67.8 … 97.0 77.5 69.1 Target 2.4 (2007) … 66.3 99.3 98.4 … 62.2 91.2 99...3 99.8 92.7 95.8 94.5 88..2 98. 63.1 53.8 … 99.3 52.6 75.4 95.8 60.6 97.5 … 86.2 69.1 83.8 (2005) 81.2 60.1 94..4 (2007) (2007) (2007) (2007) (2007) (2007) (2002) … 95.3 … 56.0 56.8 96..1 69.0 . States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1999 … 95.1 88.9 72.0 100.6 70.7 (2007) 98.5 97. boys and girls alike.7 99.5 98.1 67.6 86.0 94.4 67.7 (2006) 98. will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling (continued) 2.7 (2005) … 98.3 … 100.3 .1 84.0 93.7 … 98.1 95.1 98.5 .0 99.

1 (2008) 99.4 99.7 98.4 .6 98.8 61.7 97.9 99.6 99.4 … … 99.5 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.2 80.1 98.2 94.3 Literacy Rate of 15–24-Year Olds (%) Girlsa 2009 1999 2009 … 99.0 98.5 99.7 87.9 99.7 55.0 88..9 88.6 97.8 99.4 76.1 98.8 100...3 99.3 … 93.0 99. will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling (continued) Total Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.2 99.4 (2004) 85.6 95..1 96.2 98.4 98. 60.1 (2004) … … … … … … … … … … 67. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2010 .9 71.6 85.4 99.0 .9 97.7 95. Rep.0 99.7 43. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.9 98.6 97.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.3 90.9 99.7 80.3 99.8 … 99.4 … … 96.1 … … … Boysa 1999 … 99.1 94.3 63.9 99.6 .3 60.7 98.5 98. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1999 … 99.4 99.2 70.0 99.76 GOAL 2: AchIEVE UNIVErSAL PrIMAry EDUcATION Goal 2 Target and Indicators Table 2.9 76.0 98.9 98.9 99..9 96.7 99.8 … 99.1 97.6 97.0 99.9 (2001) (2001) (2000) (2001) (2001) (2001) (1998) (2004) (2000) (2000) (2000) (2000) (2000) (2000) (2005) (2006) (2006) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2005) (2008) (2005) … … … … … … … 66.2 … 84.2 … … 97.8 99.7 (2000) 99.4 (2006) … 94.6 … 94.9 99.8 99.5 99.5 99.6 … … 99.4 78.5 … … 98.2 97.0 93..4 .9 2.China: economy sources. Rep.0 … … … 92. 74.8 100.4 … … … … … … … 70.5 95.8 97.1 80.9 100. boys and girls alike.2 95.5 74.7 99.9 … … … (2001) (2002) (1998) (2000) (2000) 98.5 95. children everywhere.0 (2010) 75.0 80.4 99.5 … … 99.8 94.7 (2000) 95.9 99.0 99.0 (2007) 99. 76.1 97.3 82.9 99. Sources: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2009).6 95.1 Target 2.9 81.0 … … … a Figures refer to the same year as indicated in the column for "total".3 99.8 99..8 99.5 83.8 99.8 99. of Mongolia Taipei.1 99.7 89.8 99.4 81.8 99.9 99.9 99.7 79.8 93.2 86.8 99.1 99.1 99. People’s Rep.8 98.3 98.5 … … 94. Fed.0 74. 67. but it is not classified as a developing member.2 98.0 … … … 91.1 95.8 99..1 99.6 … … … … … … … 64.1 98.2 … … … … … … … 69. China Korea.3 93.8 99.1 98.9 99.9 … 99.1 99.7 67.8 99.8 … 99. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.8 68.2 … … … 2009 … 99.4 96. of Hong Kong.A: Ensure that.3 … 67.4 98.5 89.9 (2000) … … 97.1 96.7 100.3 … … … … … … … 64.5 99. by 2015.7 98.3 … … 97.9 … … … … 99.7 98.6 … 76.8 98.0 … … … 92. for Taipei.5 73.3 98.8 71.

It is shown under no progress/regressing.0. Women are now better represented in most national parliaments and hold 20% or more of the seats in 12 national parliaments across the Asia and Pacific region. Figure 3. secondary.4 0.6 0.1 shows the 11 economies where the female–male ratios in primary education were only just at the 0.67. Key Trends Girls’ participation at the primary level achieved in most countries.1. Afghanistan has made slow progress and recorded the lowest ratio at 0.95 0.e.93 0. For primary and secondary education. 2015 is targeted. Goal 3 also tracks gender parity in nonagricultural wage employment and women’s political empowerment.0 0.0 means equality of both genders in school enrollments.87 0. with most economies having ratios of 0.0 mean that a higher percentage of males (females) are enrolled.93 0. in practice. It will need to move much faster to achieve the target.95 or higher. While in theory the target is complete equality (i. MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Introduction The target for Goal 3 is to obtain equality of males and females in primary.0 Source: Table 3. which is the latest year available.84 0.95 or higher.84 1991 or Nearest Year 1. only Pakistan is included in Figure 3.96 0. In most countries women hold less (and sometimes much less) than 40% of the wage jobs outside agriculture.1.0).95 level or below it.8 1.86 0.94 0.2 0. 1991 and 2009 or Nearest Years 2009 or Latest Year Tuvalu Maldives Vanuatu Viet Nam Timor-Leste Cambodia Lao PDR Nepal Papua New Guinea Pakistan Afghanistan 0. the preferred target date was 2005.95 ratio by 2009 are shown in Box 3. cut-off ratios of 0..91 0.95 0.67 0.79 0. many economies report ratios well above 1.02 1. But fewer economies achieve gender equality for secondary and especially tertiary enrollment. and tertiary education enrollment. 0. ratios of 1.00 0. while for tertiary education.68 0.95 0. Ratios below (above) 1.85 in 1991 but this had slipped back to 0.1 Primary Education: Female–Male Enrollment Ratios 0. Four of these are on track to reach the target by 2015 judging by their progress so far.1. Gender equality is measured by dividing the gross enrollment rate of females of the relevant age group in each educational level by the corresponding gross enrollment rate of males.95 or Less.84 in 2006.95 0. the others having achieved gender equality in primary schools.85 0.77 Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women Gender equality in primary school enrollment is high.95 and above are accepted as sufficient approximations for tracking progress. The six economies that had not yet reached the 0.95 0.55 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . By 2009 (or the nearest year available) 37 out of 43 economies had achieved female–male ratios in primary education of 0. Papua New Guinea’s ratio was 0. For secondary and particularly tertiary education. Of the five most populous countries. Figure 3. but these high ratios in favor of females are not interpreted as gender bias to the detriment of males.63 0. but a few economies lag behind.95 0. A ratio of 1.

04 0.46 0.57 0.34 0.2 Progress toward Target for Gender Equality in Secondary Education On Track Cambodia India Nepal Slow Progress Lao PDR No Progress/Regressing Afghanistan Source: Derived from Table 3. Rep.35 0. and Pakistan. Tajikistan (0. Figure 3.3 Tertiary Education: Female–Male Enrollment Ratios 0.79 1991 or Nearest Year 0.87 0. the Figure 3.89 0. Box 3.95.2 shows how eight of these nine economies are expected to fare between now and 2015 if present trends continue. Nepal (0.2 Secondary Education: Female–Male Enrollment Ratios 0.56 0. 1991 and 2009 or Nearest Years 2009 or Latest Year Viet Nam Nepal India Tajikistan Solomon Islands Cambodia Lao PDR Pakistan Afghanistan 0.54).33 0.81 0.76 1.56).28 Box 3.41). Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .49 and it appears unlikely to achieve gender parity by 2015. 0. Figure 3.90 0.1. only 20 had achieved ratios of at least 0. 1991 and 2009 or Nearest Years 2009 or Latest Year Samoa Japan Pakistan Lao PDR Viet Nam 0.49 0.92 0. The Lao People’s Democratic Republic and Tajikistan are making progress.84 0.48 in 1991 to 0. Timor-Leste.49 0.1. high ratios in favor of women are observed in Kazakhstan (1.95 0.73 0.0 0.24 0.2 0.58 0.59 0.4 0. Nepal Pakistan Pakistan Solomon Islands Tajikistan Less gender equality at the secondary level.49 0.) Five of the eight are expected to meet the target by 2015 on the basis of progress to date.3 have ratios below 0.81 0.40).78 1991 or Nearest Year 1.79 in 2009.1 Progress toward Target for Gender Equality in Primary Education On Track Cambodia Lao PDR Slow Progress Afghanistan No Progress/Regressing Papua New Guinea Source: Derived from Table 3.1 shows progress toward gender equality in secondary education.8 1. Pakistan’s ratio will be 0.8 1. If female enrollment continues to rise as in the past.48 0. 33 had achieved ratios of 0.71 0.95 or Less. India and Pakistan are in this group.0 Source: Table 3.4 0.53 0.89 0.88 0.95 or more by 2009. These include Bangladesh. Afghanistan’s latest ratio was 0.95 in 2009 or latest available year for tertiary level education.93 0. of Vanuatu Bhutan Bangladesh Cambodia Tajikistan Nepal Afghanistan 0. but if past trends continue.95 0.0 0.1. Pakistan has made very impressive gains from 0.24).78 GOAL 3: PrOMOTE GENDEr EqUALITy AND EMPOwEr wOMEN Box 3.1 shows that out of 35 developing economies.70 0. Timor-Leste Uzbekistan India Korea.82 0. and Uzbekistan have current ratios below their 1991 levels. Cambodia (0. Of the 42 economies for which data are available.41 0. India.99 in 2015.6 0.2 lists the nine economies that are still below target.49 0.82 0. and Bhutan (0. they will fall short of the 0. On the other hand.40 0. Samoa. Ratios are particularly low in Afghanistan (0.2 0.61 0.51 Education at the tertiary level is less genderinclusive in many countries though some countries have high favorable ratios too.1.85 0.95 ratio by 2015. Sixteen other economies shown in Figure 3.27 0.70 0.54 0.69 0.70 0.95 or Less. Table 3.59 0. Bangladesh (0.54 0.6 0.45). Table 3. While most countries in this group show improvements from their 1991 levels.70 0.59).0 Source: Table 3. (Too few data are available to make an assessment for Viet Nam.65 0.86 0.

Japan. Palau (2. the Marshall Islands (1. and New Zealand for comparison. Brunei Darussalam (1. its ratio will be around 0.75. Afghanistan. and given current trends will fall short of achieving the target by 2015. Mongolia (1. India.32). China. In most cultures wage employment outside of agriculture is much sought after by both men and women. Bangladesh.30).24). only the Lao People’s Democratic Republic is likely to achieve the target of gender equality in tertiary education. Kazakhstan. Of the others.4 Percentage of Women in Nonagricultural Wage Employment. Box 3.1. China Georgia Taipei. Figure 3. Rep.76).3 shows that given current trends among economies that have not yet reached the target. the Kyrgyz Republic.93 by 2015. along with percentages for Australia. the Maldives (2.1. Box 3. and based on past trends. and Pakistan are striking cases: here men outnumber women by at least four to one.China Thailand Singapore Cambodia Azerbaijan Korea. In the remaining 17. and the Pacific island economies of the Republic of Fiji (1. and Mongolia.4. Four developing economies have ratios around 50%—Hong Kong. men are in the large majority. Latest Year Mongolia Kyrgyz Republic Kazakhstan Hong Kong. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . of Philippines Viet Nam Armenia Uzbekistan Malaysia Vanuatu Kiribati Tajikistan Tuvalu Indonesia Lao PDR Sri Lanka Brunei Darussalam Maldives Fiji. In another 12 economies more than 40% of nonagricultural wage jobs are held by women.20).3 Progress toward Target for Gender Equality in Tertiary Education On Track Lao PDR Slow Progress Bangladesh Bhutan Cambodia India No Progress/Regressing Afghanistan Timor-Leste Source: Derived from Table 3. 10 20 30 40 50 Korea. of Bhutan Bangladesh Afghanistan India Pakistan New Zealand Australia Japan 0 Source: Table 3. Work as farm laborers is physically hard and usually poorly remunerated while self-employment and work in a family enterprise is often precarious and vulnerable. Pakistan is closest to the target. The others have current ratios well below 0. The percentage of wage employment in nonagriculture held by women is therefore taken as an indicator of gender equality in access to paid employment and integration of women in the monetary economy. Rep.04). Thailand (1.40). 79 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Data on female wage employment are shown for 31 developing member economies in the region in Figure 3. and Tonga (1.55).62).GOAL 3: PrOMOTE GENDEr EqUALITy AND EMPOwEr wOMEN Kyrgyz Republic (1. Republic of Nepal Pakistan Tajikistan Uzbekistan Wage employment in nonagriculture is more favorable to men in most economies.

2000 and 2011 or Nearest Years Nepal Timor-Leste Afghanistan Viet Nam Lao PDR Singapore Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Philippines Uzbekistan China. but these are not conducted in all countries in the region. People's Rep. of Cambodia Tajikistan Bangladesh Indonesia Kazakhstan Turkmenistan Azerbaijan Korea. The most reliable information on female employment in nonagricultural activities comes from household labor force surveys. in the three developed regional members. population censuses. of Thailand Cook Islands India Malaysia Armenia Fiji. The percentages have fallen in nine developing member economies. and Nepal (+27). Figure 3. but changes greater than this can be interpreted as genuine moves toward more or less gender equality. of Bhutan Maldives Georgia Sri Lanka Kiribati Myanmar Samoa Mongolia Vanuatu Tonga Marshall Islands Papua New Guinea Solomon Islands New Zealand Japan Australia 0 5 10 2000 Source: Table 3. Data Issues and Comparability Enrollment rates generally follow the United Nations Educational. Scientific and Cultural Organization guidelines on definitions of different levels of education and methods of calculation. In some countries.1. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . the Kyrgyz Republic (+22). 15 20 25 2011 30 35 40 There are clear signs of a move toward gender equality in national parliaments. One aspect of women’s opportunities in political and public life—and hence women’s empowerment—is their representation in national parliaments. The comparison is between 2000 and 2011 or nearest years. The percentage of women in parliament refers only to national parliaments. Many of the gains on the other hand were quite substantial. Alternative sources include enterprise employment surveys. and nine economies reported increases of 10 percentage points or more.5 compares the percentages of women parliamentarians in 38 developing member economies and. Changes of around 5% up or down over the period can often be explained by electoral fortunes. but the only substantial fall was 9 percentage points in Turkmenistan.5 Percentage of Seats Held by Women in National Parliaments. Rep.80 GOAL 3: PrOMOTE GENDEr EqUALITy AND EMPOwEr wOMEN Figure 3. and students from these countries receive their tertiary education abroad. at the bottom of the figure. and household demographic surveys. Rep. Many small Pacific island economies do not have facilities for tertiary education. a more relevant measure of empowerment would refer to the numbers of women active in government at the local or community level. including Singapore (+19).

93 … 0.85 (2008) 0.98 1.97 1.A: Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education.40 … 1.95 0.07 1.98 0.04 … 1.01 0.97 0.96 0.01 (2010) 1.98 0.28 1.00 1.06 1.67 1.02 … 1.20 0.03 1.98 0.33 0.45 81 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS (2001) (1999) (1999) (2000) 0.03 … 0.10 0.05 0.81 0.01 0.03 0.67 0.68 0.10 1.11 0.00 (1999) 1.49 (1999) 0.97 (2007) 0.99 1.GOAL 3: PrOMOTE GENDEr EqUALITy AND EMPOwEr wOMEN Goal 3 Target and Indicators Table 3.84 0.99 1.86 (2002) 1.02 1.99 … 0.56 0.30 … … 2.81 1.96 0.53 0.00 1.06 1.99 1.91 1.24 1.04 (2008) (2008) (2006) (2006) (2004) Tertiaryb 1991 0.13 1.99 0.09 … 1.04 1.04 0.57 1.76 0.89 1.14 0.07 1.07 1.19 1.55 1.96 1.98 2009 3.70 2.70 1.95 1.87 (1999) 0.80 (1999) (1999) (1999) (1999) 0.24 0.98 0.48 0.62 1.96 (2008) … 0.49 1.76 … 1.01 1.51 1.24 … 1.01 (2001) (1999) (1999) (1999) 0.07 1.02 0.41 … 0.99 1.09 0.97 1.88 1.96 (1999) 1.45 (2010) 1.15 1.07 1.98 0. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1991 0.81 0.96 (2003) 0. People’s Rep.01 0.76 1.32 0.55 1.35 0.02 0.70 1.00 1.29 0.99 (1999) (1999) (1999) (2004) (2000) (1999) (1999) (2004) (1999) 0.01 0.00 1.00 1.83 (2003) 0.27 1.35 … 0.63 0.99 0.91 0.98 0.05 1. of Hong Kong.93 0.98 0.99 0.02 0. preferably by 2005.59 1.95 0.01 0.41 (2003) 0.73 … 1.00 0.99 0.84 0.03 1.02 (2010) 1.90 1.87 (2008) … 0.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamc Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.04 0.13 0.37 1.08 (2010) 0.61 0.34 0.59 0.99 1.96 1.07 1.98 0.54 2.48 1.87 0.95 0.05 1.00 1. Rep.93 (1999) 0.94 0.99 1.70 1.01 1.96 1.55 1.85 (1999) 0.82 (2003) (1999) (1999) (1999) (2002) (1999) (1999) 2009 0.98 0.95 1.98 0.05 0.09 … 0. Fed.98 … 0.07 1.20 … 1.93 0. and in all levels of education not later than 2015 Primary Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.86 (1999) 0.76 0.09 0.17 1. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.98 1.99 1.1 Target 3.08 0.99 0.09 1.04 1.99 0.71 1. China Korea.86 … 0.83 0.00 (1999) 0.97 (2001) 0.78 1.30 … 0.96 1.97 0.97 0.14 1.02 1.04 (2005) 0.09 0.28 … … 2.97 1.40 0.00 1.01 0.07 0.26 … 1.69 1.98 … 0.98 … 1.95 0.98 0.95 1.96 0.1 Ratio of Girls to Boys in Education Levelsa Secondary 1991 2009 0.98 (2010) 1.23 1.94 0.49 1. of Mongolia Taipei. Rep.96 (2008) 0.03 0.20 … 1.07 0.65 1.03 0.01 (2010) 1.62 … 0.03 0.13 (1999) (2000) (2001) (1999) (1999) (1999) (1999) (1999) (2008) (2007) (2004) (2004) (1999) (1999) (1999) (1999) (1999) (1999) (1999) (2004) (2000) (1999) (1999) (2004) (2007) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2001) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2007) (2008) (2001) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2001) (2008) (2008) (2007) (2008) (2007) (2006) (2007) (2006) (2006) (2008) (2008) (2005) (2008) (2007) (2007) (2005) (2006) (2001) (2003) (2001) (2000) (1999) (1999) (2002) (1999) (2002) (2005) (2003) (2002) (2001) (2004) (2004) 1.04 … 0.00 1.30 1.00 1.02 1.49 1.58 (1999) 0.01 0.85 0.03 0.84 1.75 0.33 0.99 1.46 1.11 1.09 0.02 0.01 1.92 0.04 0.54 0.00 0.79 0.00 1.89 1.99 1.02 1.79 0.12 0.01 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .92 1.82 0.19 0.32 0.

6 38.6 – 3.5 32.2 … 41. and tertiary levels of education. measured as the ratio of female to male value of the gross enrollment ratios at primary.0 25.0 24.8 12.5 49.2 (1991) … 12.5 (1993) 42.7 40.1 39. and in all levels of education not later than 2015 (continued) 3.3 40.8 18.9 … 10.0 26.0 … 34.1 (2008) 46.1 (2002) (2002) (2002) (2001) 18.8 … 3. Rep.4 (2008) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2006) (2007) 3.8 (1993) (1999) … 49.0 4.1 (2005) 26.2 16. Solomon Islands. preferably by 2005. and for Taipei.7 7.9 35.6 14.9 2.5 40.7 … 37.4 42.7 38.6 44.1 (1999) 30.5 17.3 3.4 4.1 51.6 Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.0 6.3 33.9 47.7 30.1 4.8 17.9 … … … 35.0 (2006) … 31. Key Indicators of the Labour Market.5 33.2 10.5 41. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 6.9 … 9.2 3.8 (2005) (2005) (2001) (1999) (2001) (2002) (2004) (2004) (2008) (2003) (2001) a The ratio is a gender parity index.8 26.9 43.3 22.3 25.0 21.2 36.1 18.3 – … – 5.1 … 39. China Korea.3 4.2 20.3 6.9 3.2 19.3 6.2 33.6 (2001) 44.3 (2006) 3.6 12. Fed. b There is no tertiary education in Cook Islands.6 32.7 9.5 7.8 24.6 50.3 33.1 4.9 47.4 2.3 5.4 42.5 (2009) 8.6 49.6 26.4 … 48.9 45.8 35.7 (1998) 40.5 10.0 24.0 6.0 – – – 0.9 … 5.0 (2001) 21.7 38.6 40.1 31.4 14. c Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. Sources: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011).6 29.3 5.7 35.8 22.0 (2001) 30.8 21.3 … 14.4 … 29.0 6.3 30.1 (1999) 44.1 48. People’s Rep.1 … 9.3 41.0 40.7 15.0 6.5 … … … … … … … … … 33. Rep.8 26.0 47. of Hong Kong. Nauru.9 4.1 2.0 11.4 6.4 (1995) (1997) (1997) (1997) 27.8 15.6 12.0 (2001) 5.5 39.4 32.2 Share of Women in Wage Employment in the Non-agricultural Sector (%) 1990 2000 2009 … … 47.1 36.4 40.2 8.7 6.China: Educational Statistical Indicators Online (Ministry of Education 2011).4 45.0 20.1 (2005) 30.3 43. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.9 42.4 1. and Tuvalu. for Cook Islands: National Millennium Development Goals Report (Central Policy and Planning Office 2010).9 4.0 50.7 … 16.9 … … 33.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamc Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.1 37.6 8.6 (1996) … … 43.9 41.4 10.4 1.4 13.8 40.3 37.8 6.6 – – – – … – 7. but it is not classified as a developing member.0 21.9 4.9 38.2 (1997) 22.5 … 29.2 42.4 29.2 38.7 3.0 49.5 27.4 4.6 48.0 7.0 19.3 22.8 8. 6th edition (ILO).5 46. Kiribati.1 12. tertiary education became available only recently.0 16.3 Proportion of Seats held by Women in National Parliament (%) 1990 2000 2011 3.8 41.0 42.1 – 29.1 Target 3.8 13.0 9.3 50.9 … 18.3 2.2 9.1 23.0 47. Pacific Regional Information System (SPC 2010).6 (2003) (2004) (2008) (2005) (2008) (1991) (1991) (1991) (1996) (2004) 38.2 5.3 35.3 … 2.7 36.1 1.6 37.7 11.0 6.2 30.0 5.8 23. secondary.5 (2006) 4.82 GOAL 3: PrOMOTE GENDEr EqUALITy AND EMPOwEr wOMEN Goal 3 Target and Indicators Table 3.6 … 39.1 40.4 (2001) … 12.2 (2001) (2001) 27.8 (1997) 12.2 45.0 8.8 13.1 2.3 … 21.9 20.3 (1999) 2.8 29.9 … 8.2 2.1 48.1 – – – 22.6 (1994) … 39.7 4. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand (1997) (1998) (1996) (1991) (1995) (1991) (1997) (1997) (1997) (1997) (1997) (1997) (2002) 37.0 (1991) 39.0 – – – 1. of Mongolia Taipei. In Maldives.2 10.A: Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education.0 30.9 37.5 45.

and only ten more are expected to do so by 2015. the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is next with a drop of 58%. This translates to a decline from 6. the under-five mortality rate.000 live births in 1990 to 51 in 2009 for developing member economies. While all economies have achieved some reduction.5 million in 2009 or around 9.1 shows the percentage reduction between 1990 and 2009 in the number of deaths per 1. Percent Reduction between 1990 and 2009 Maldives Mongolia Timor-Leste Nepal Malaysia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Singapore Lao PDR Armenia Vanuatu China. Figure 4.9 million deaths in 1990 to 3.000 live births of children under 5 years old. the under-five mortality rate. Two related indicators are: (i) to reduce by two-thirds. Rep. Rep. Infant and child mortality rates are closely related to household wealth.of Cook Islands Tonga Solomon Islands 0 Source: Table 4. 66 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Key Trends Child mortality is declining but still is a long way from achieving the target by 2015. The top three economies in the graph—the Maldives. Figure 4. but only three economies have so far achieved the MDG target of reducing child mortality rates to one-third of the value in 1990. between 1990 and 2015. The Pacific island economies have made particularly slow progress. and the percentage of 1-yearolds who have been immunized is also a good indicator of the quality of the child health care system. followed by Indonesia (55%). Another related indicator considered here is the percentage of 1-year-old children who have been immunized against measles. and Timor-Leste—have already achieved reduction in child mortality by two-thirds of the 1990 levels. between 1990 and 2015. India (45%). of Brunei Darussalam Myanmar Georgia Tuvalu Pakistan Micronesia. Measles immunization programs are having success in many Asian economies but there has been a serious decline in immunization coverage in several Pacific island economies. Mongolia. of Viet Nam Thailand Indonesia Turkmenistan Kazakhstan Uzbekistan Kyrgyz Republic Samoa Sri Lanka Kiribati Tajikistan Bhutan Japan India New Zealand Philippines Australia Korea. with eight of them belonging to the 11 economies that have reduced child mortality by less than a third. Infants in poor households are often less than half as likely to survive beyond their first year of life as those in richer households. and (i) to reduce by two-thirds. MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Introduction The Goal 4 target is to reduce by two-thirds between 1990 and 2015.83 Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality Both infant and child mortality rates have declined throughout the region. Fed.1. and Pakistan (33%). States of Palau Marshall Islands Papua New Guinea Cambodia Afghanistan Fiji. People's Rep.000 fewer child deaths each day. Bangladesh has done best among the five most populous economies in reducing child mortality rates by 65%.1 Under-Five Mortality Rate. Child mortality rates declined from 89 deaths per 1. Immunization against measles has a direct impact on child mortality. the gains have been quite small for many. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . the infant mortality rate.

but not fast enough to meet the target by 2015. and in Armenia.1 Progress toward Target for Under-Five Mortality Rate Early Achievers Figure 4. Indonesia. they are more than twice as high. Rep. Indonesia. Box 4. available: www. including some large economies—Bangladesh. People’s Republic of Cook Islands Fiji. Only in the Maldives does family wealth seem not to matter greatly.84 GOAL 4: REDUcE chILD MORTALITy In many developing economies. Lowest Quintile Highest Quintile Source: Measure DHS STAT Compiler. This is an ambitious target and only the Maldives. The first year of life is the most perilous. and Timor-Leste had achieved the target by 2009. with neonatal causes being the leading cause of death of infants. In Armenia and Cambodia. The PRC. 2011). and the same is true in Brunei Darussalam and the Republic of Korea. This is because their child mortality rates were already low in 1990.measuredhs. Their rates of improvement are quite modest— all around 45%. and postnatal care services. 1996–2009 Cambodia Pakistan Turkmenistan Kyrgyz Republic Maldives Mongolia On Track Timor-Leste India Nepal Armenia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Lao PDR Malaysia Slow Progress Nepal Singapore Thailand Vanuatu Viet Nam Micronesia.1.1 shows progress toward achieving the target of reducing by two-thirds the under-five mortality rate. an infant in the bottom quintile is nearly three times more likely to die in the first year of life. infants in poor households are at a higher risk of dying. India. Australia. Cambodia. Malaysia.2 Infant Mortality Rate by Lowest and Highest Wealth Quintiles in Various Years. and New Zealand are included in Figure 4.com (Macro International Inc. Nepal. provision of safe drinking water. of Georgia India Indonesia Kazakhstan Kiribati Korea. and Viet Nam— are expected to do so by 2015. Figure 4. Based on current trends. and Pakistan are among the 29 economies that are making some progress. the Philippines. Republic of Kyrgyz Republic Marshall Islands No Progress/Regressing Nauru Source: Derived from Table 4. These economies already implement the standard procedures known to reduce child mortality such as vaccination programs. Elsewhere the chances of dying are much higher for infants in poor families. and Viet Nam. Infant mortality refers to deaths of babies under 12 months.2 shows infant mortality rates for the top and bottom quintiles of the household wealth distribution in 16 Asian economies.1. Box 4. States of Myanmar Pakistan Palau Papua New Guinea Philippines Samoa Solomon Islands Sri Lanka Tajikistan Tonga Turkmenistan Tuvalu Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Bangladesh Timor-Leste Indonesia Uzbekistan Azerbaijan Armenia Philippines Viet Nam Maldives 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Afghanistan Bhutan Brunei Darussalam Cambodia China. India. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . only a further 10. Fed. Japan. good sanitation. Thailand. Mongolia.

Republic of Kyrgyz Republic Marshall Islands Micronesia. 85 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Box 4. immunization coverage went up to 76% in 2009 from a low of 20% in 1990. in Cambodia. Overall immunization coverage increased from 68% in 2000 to 82% in 2009 in the developing member economies. Indonesia (82%). and the PRC (94%).GOAL 4: REDUcE chILD MORTALITy The infant mortality rate for developing member economies declined from 65 deaths per 1. This means a reduction to 2. and Singapore have so far reduced their infant mortality to one-third of the rate in 1990. Box 4. Figure 4. Afghanistan Bhutan Brunei Darussalam Cambodia China.000 fewer infant deaths each day. remains a leading cause of death among children. and only eight more are expected to do so by 2015 based on current trends. and Tuvalu. Gains have been particularly high in economies that started from a low base in 1990.2 gives the progress toward attainment of the infant mortality target for 43 economies in the region. Rep. but much larger reductions were reported by five Pacific island economies—Papua New Guinea (–9 percentage points). immunization rates were lower in 2009 than they had been in 1990. and in 36 of them. and in Georgia. from 16% in 1990 to 83% in 2009. This immunization program promoted by the World Health Organization helps keep infants healthy during the crucial first year of life. followed by Pakistan (80%).000 live births in 1990 to 40 in 2009. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . only Bangladesh is likely to achieve the target. New Zealand. In eight economies. Of the five most populous economies. Only the Maldives.3 covers 46 economies. Measles. the immunization percentages were higher in 2009 than in 1990. a highly contagious disease.2 Progress toward Target for Infant Mortality Rate Early Achievers Maldives Mongolia On Track Singapore Armenia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Lao PDR Slow Progress Malaysia Nepal Timor-Leste Vanuatu Myanmar Pakistan Palau Papua New Guinea Philippines Samoa Solomon Islands Sri Lanka Tajikistan Thailand Tonga Turkmenistan Tuvalu Uzbekistan Viet Nam Immunization coverage for measles has made substantial progress in the region.3 shows another indicator of the quality of child health care—the percentage of 1-year-old children immunized against measles. Some of these had extensive immunization programs in 1990 but these had severely deteriorated by 2009. In the PRC. Vanuatu (–14). Fed. from 34% in 1990 to 92% in 2009.1. and Samoa (–40). India has the lowest immunization coverage at 71%. Solomon Islands (–10). For example. Bangladesh (89%). or about 6. however. in Afghanistan. Mongolia. the falls were 5% or less.8 million deaths in 2009 from 5 million in 1990. States of No Progress/Regressing Nauru Source: Derived from Table 4. Among the five most populous economies. Palau (–23). Figure 4. The other four are making progress but at too slow a rate. of Georgia India Indonesia Kazakhstan Kiribati Korea. People’s Republic of Cook Islands Fiji.

People's Rep. 1990 and 2009 Tonga Nauru Brunei Darussalam Turkmenistan Kyrgyz Republic Kazakhstan Thailand Maldives Bhutan Viet Nam Sri Lanka Armenia Singapore Malaysia Uzbekistan Japan Australia Marshall Islands Fiji.86 GOAL 4: REDUcE chILD MORTALITy Figure 4. Rep. Since the surveys may not be held each year. econometric estimation techniques may be used to produce a consistent time series. estimation techniques will often be used to convert partial data into comprehensive estimates.3 Percentage of 1-Year-Old Children Immunized against Measles. more commonly in the Asian region. although there are some limitations as to their quality. Rep. the information is collected from samples of households in health and demographic surveys. For these reasons. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Most developing economies lack fully functional vital registration systems.1. thus household surveys such as Demographic and Health Surveys and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys have become primary sources of data. As with mortality data. mortality data are of varying quality in the Asia and Pacific region. of Cambodia Tuvalu New Zealand Bangladesh Tajikistan Philippines Myanmar Micronesia. of Korea. Data Issues and Comparability In more developed economies. Fed. Data on immunization may be provided directly by the health workers and clinics providing inoculation or.of Mongolia China. States of Georgia Kiribati Indonesia Pakistan Nepal Cook Islands Afghanistan Palau India Timor-Leste Azerbaijan Solomon Islands Lao PDR Papua New Guinea Vanuatu Samoa 0 20 1990 40 60 2009 80 100 Source: Table 4. data on mortality are usually taken from vital statistics registration records.

Accounting and Statistics. ADB staff estimates.2 Infant Mortality Rate (per 1. between 1990 and 2015. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Sources: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011).of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.1 Under-Five Mortality Rate (per 1. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. China Korea.1 Target 4. but it is not classified as a developing member. for Taipei. Rep. China: Census and Statistics Department and Centre for Health Protection.3 Proportion of 1-Year-Old Children Immunized against Measles (%) 1990 2000 2009 … 20 93 (1992) 52 (1992) 16 (1992) 89 (1992) 94 (1992) 50 68 (1992) 76 (1992) 84 (1992) 98 98 … 93 92 … 57 65 93 56 96 57 80 70 99 34 58 32 70 68 85 84 80 88 … 67 84 75 52 81 99 (1997) 98 67 89 70 … 86 95 66 76 86 73 90 … … 72 63 35 92 67 73 99 98 59 88 97 99 84 84 … 95 92 … 54 72 78 50 99 77 98 81 99 65 74 42 88 84 81 96 94 97 59 76 81 80 94 85 8 83 62 93 87 … 95 81 61 95 91 96 85 68 68 71 82 76 96 67 83 99 99 80 89 99 95 94 94 … 93 94 … 73 89 98 71 98 79 96 88 99 92 82 59 95 87 88 95 98 97 63 78 94 82 94 86 99 75 58 49 60 70 99 90 52 94 94 94 89 82 83 82 87 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Developing Member Economies Central and West Asiaa Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asiaa China. Department of Health.China: Directorate-General of Budget.000 live births) 1990 2000 2009 98 167 48 78 41 51 63 101 91 81 61 36 37 6 8 73 5 86 102 91 84 80 99 23 50 9 85 56 108 16 84 41 6 27 39 67 16 19 65 39 45 … 18 67 40 31 138 19 42 33 6 8 5 9 65 64 62 88 148 32 58 31 38 44 85 75 59 53 29 30 3 6 49 6 67 66 68 68 43 63 17 36 6 80 40 64 9 63 29 3 17 24 53 15 16 49 32 38 41 14 57 28 30 84 18 35 21 3 5 3 6 54 53 54 74 134 20 30 26 26 32 71 52 42 32 17 17 2 5 24 4 48 41 52 50 11 39 13 29 5 68 30 46 6 54 26 2 12 20 46 13 15 37 29 32 36 13 52 21 30 48 17 29 14 3 4 2 5 40 39 44 4. Rep. Fed. the under-five mortality rate 4.GOAL 4: REDUcE chILD MORTALITy Goal 4 Target and Indicators Table 4. People’s Rep. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economiesa Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESa REGIONAL MEMBERSa WORLD a Estimated using data on births and survivors to age 1 as provided by the United Nations Children’s Fund. Aggregates are derived for reporting economies only.China South Asiaa Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asiaa Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacifica Cook Islands Fiji. of Mongolia Taipei. for Hong Kong.000 live births) 1990 2000 2009 128 250 56 98 47 60 75 130 117 99 74 45 46 … 9 101 … 121 148 148 118 113 142 28 73 11 117 86 157 18 118 59 8 32 55 89 18 22 89 49 58 10 (1991) 21 91 50 38 184 23 53 40 7 9 6 11 89 87 89 115 222 36 69 35 44 51 108 94 71 62 35 36 … 6 63 … 91 90 106 93 53 85 21 48 8 106 56 86 10 85 38 4 20 29 70 17 19 63 39 47 51 16 77 34 37 106 20 43 25 5 6 4 7 72 70 77 95 199 22 34 29 29 37 87 61 45 36 19 19 … 5 29 … 63 52 79 66 13 48 15 37 7 88 39 59 6 71 33 3 14 24 58 15 18 46 35 39 44 15 68 25 36 56 19 35 16 4 5 3 6 51 50 60 4.A: Reduce by two-thirds. of Hong Kong.

400 in 2008. death due to complications during pregnancy and childbirth is one of the leading causes of death among reproductive women. High rates of births to adolescent women show that more needs to be done to provide information and advice on reproductive matters.China Hong Kong. Introduction Goal 5 has two targets: 5. 5. of Azerbaijan Maldives Malaysia Uzbekistan Armenia Fiji.1 Maternal Mortality Ratio. between 1990 and 2015. only 16 out of 41 economies will have achieved the target of having a skilled professional present in all births. A related indicator is the number of births that are attended by skilled health personnel who have been trained to conduct deliveries and care for newborns. and Pakistan among the economies with the lowest percentages of births preceded by antenatal care. In developing economies. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . universal access to reproductive health services. with Bangladesh. China New Zealand Australia Japan Key Trends Maternal deaths were reduced to half of the 1990 levels but at the regional level. maternal death rates of developing economies in the region fell from nearly 400 per 100. Rep. To avoid distortion.000 live births. wide disparities remain among economies.200 Source: Table 5. by 2015.700 in 1990 and 1. Figure 5. Rates are particularly high in the Pacific island economies. Rep.1.000 live births to just under 200.1 shows the number of maternal deaths per 100. There is no direct indicator for this target and the target is measured by a set of four related indicators— contraceptive use.000 live births) Lao PDR Nepal Timor-Leste Bangladesh Cambodia Pakistan Papua New Guinea Myanmar Indonesia India Bhutan Solomon Islands Philippines Kyrgyz Republic Turkmenistan Mongolia Tajikistan Viet Nam Thailand Georgia Kazakhstan Sri Lanka China. Afghanistan. antenatal care coverage.000 1. with its ratio estimated at 1.88 Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health Between 1990 and 2008. People's Rep. That counts as real progress. adolescent birth rates. is omitted from the graph.000 live births in 1990 and 2008. India. 1990 and 2008 (deaths per 100. and unmet need for family planning. in ascending 0 200 1990 400 600 800 2008 1. the maternal mortality ratio.B: Achieve. Four economies had ratios over 300. by contrast. A key intervention to reduce maternal mortality is to ensure that all births are attended by a skilled health professional. This ratio is calculated as the number of maternal deaths per 100. these are. and advice on transmission of human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. In 12 economies. 20% of births were not preceded by any antenatal care. of Brunei Darussalam Korea. developed economies often have ratios in single-digit figures. Figure 5. These services cover advice on contraceptive methods and family planning. of Singapore Taipei. antenatal care. This is a new target introduced in the revised MDG framework. By 2015.A: Reduce by three-quarters. however.

000 live births since 1990. between 1990 and 2015.000 live births. and Bangladesh at 340. The Republic of Korea and Singapore. By the progress tracking criteria adopted here to reduce by three-quarters the births unattended. despite their low maternal mortality rates of 18 and 9 in 2008. Fifteen economies are making slow progress. Next was Indonesia at 240. Ten economies are shown as making no progress/regressing. but it can be argued that both already have nearly 100% coverage. Republic of Malaysia Mongolia On Track Azerbaijan Bhutan Georgia Slow Progress Afghanistan Bangladesh Cambodia India Kazakhstan Lao PDR Maldives Micronesia. cut their maternal mortality rates by half or more. Rep. Nepal (380). Japan. Hong Kong. Most maternal deaths can be avoided by ensuring that all births are attended by a skilled health professional. States of No Progress/Regressing Cook Islands Fiji. Box 5. The target here is to reduce by three-quarters. including Bangladesh. India’s ratio was more than six times higher at 230. Maldives Viet Nam Mongolia Myanmar Nepal Pakistan Papua New Guinea Philippines Solomon Islands Sri Lanka Tajikistan Thailand Timor-Leste Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Indonesia Viet Nam Myanmar Nepal Pakistan Papua New Guinea Philippines Tajikistan Timor-Leste Samoa Solomon Islands Thailand Tuvalu Vanuatu Singapore Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . respectively. MDG Target 5. between 1990 and 2015. 89 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS are shown as making no progress/regressing.1. Fed. Palau Sri Lanka Tonga Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Box 5. Bangladesh (340).2 Progress toward Target for Birth Attendance by Skilled Health Personnel Early Achievers Armenia Brunei Darussalam China. few economies will meet the target for maternal mortality. China. New Zealand. Viet Nam (67%). Box 5. percentages of 98 and 99.China—had maternal mortality ratios lower than 20 maternal deaths per 100.1) fell from an estimated 397 maternal deaths per 100. Timor-Leste (370). including four of the five most populous economies (with Pakistan as the exception). which includes the Kyrgyz Republic and Thailand with. Republic of Source: Derived from Table 5. In 2008. of Georgia India Indonesia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Malaysia No Progress/Regressing Korea. the seven richer economies of the region—Australia. Bhutan (79%).A is to reduce by threequarters.000 live births to 194.2 shows that only 16 of the 41 economies for which an assessment is possible will achieve the target by 2015 if current trends continue. Box 5. the Republic of Korea. and Pakistan. The large majority of economies are making slow progress. Despite progress. Between 1990 and 2008. Singapore. the maternal mortality ratio. which has increased to a still very low 9 in 2008. and Taipei. Between 1990 and 2008. By contrast. Women should have access to the services of qualified health personnel during pregnancy and child birth to manage complications arising out of pregnancy. Pakistan at 260. India. the maternal mortality ratio for the developing member economies (see Table 5. of Kiribati Kyrgyz Republic Marshall Islands Source: Derived from Table 5.GOAL 5: IMPrOVE MATErNAL HEALTH order. the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had by far the lowest ratio in 2008 at 38 per 100. The 11 early achievers include the PRC and the five economies on track include Indonesia. several economies achieved substantial reductions. and the PRC (65%). both in the earliest and latest years for which data are available. respectively. This is due to the Republic of Korea’s relatively low ratio that has remained unchanged at 18 per 100. Particularly large relative gains were achieved by the Maldives (93%). the percentage of births that are not attended by skilled health personnel. Of the five most populous economies.1 Progress toward Target for Maternal Mortality Rate Early Achievers Bhutan On Track China.1 shows that only two economies have done this and only two more are expected to do so by 2015. People’s Republic of Korea.000 live births in 2008. People’s Republic of Slow Progress Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Brunei Darussalam Cambodia Fiji. and Singapore’s ratio of 6 in 1990. there is no progress.1. and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (580). Thirteen economies. Rep. their share accounted for nearly 38% of the total maternal deaths worldwide.

of which rates of adolescent pregnancy can be taken as one indicator. Afghanistan (36%). People's Rep.2. 0 20 ≥ One Visit 40 60 80 100 ≥ Four Visits Source: Table 5. and from four or more. Adolescent mothers face a higher risk at the time of pregnancy and having children at an early age limits their opportunities for education and work. Sixteen have already reached the target or are expected to do so if they continue to progress at the same rate as in the past. Figure 5. India. For practical reasons of tracking progress. Mongolia Sri Lanka Thailand Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Indonesia Tajikistan Viet Nam Myanmar Nepal Pakistan Papua New Guinea Philippines Timor-Leste High rates of births to adolescent women show that more needs to be done to provide information and advice on reproductive matters. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . People’s Republic of Slow Progress Afghanistan Azerbaijan Bangladesh Cambodia India Lao PDR No Progress/Regressing Georgia Source: Derived from Table 5. of Cook Islands Palau Kazakhstan Mongolia Sri Lanka Maldives Turkmenistan Thailand Tonga Brunei Darussalam Uzbekistan Tuvalu Kyrgyz Republic Nauru Georgia Indonesia Samoa Armenia China. universal access to reproductive health services. Many women are still devoid of minimum recommended antenatal care. In 12 economies including Bangladesh. In the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (35%). Fed. Box 5. the target is deemed to have been reached with 95% coverage. and Bangladesh (51%). antenatal care visits. and Pakistan. and Pakistan. In 14 of 27 economies for which data are available.1. The 13 that are not expected to reach the target include Bangladesh. In both cases access to reproductive health services could have avoided unwanted pregnancies. nearly half or more pregnant mothers did not receive any antenatal care.3 Progress toward Target for at Least One Antenatal Care Visit Early Achievers Brunei Darussalam Kazakhstan Kiribati Kyrgyz Republic Maldives On Track Armenia Bhutan China. WHO recommends at least four such visits. Nepal (44%).2. States of Myanmar Malaysia Papua New Guinea Azerbaijan India Solomon Islands Cambodia Pakistan Bangladesh Nepal Afghanistan Lao PDR Box 5.B is to achieve. Antenatal care coverage provides opportunities for interventions vital to the health of pregnant women and children. while other pregnancies could be unwanted. Latest Year Kiribati Fiji. 90% or more births were preceded by at least one visit. by 2015. MDG target 5. India.90 GOAL 5: IMPrOVE MATErNAL HEALTH The MDG target is that 100% of births should be preceded by at least one antenatal care visit. Figure 5. 70% or more births were preceded by four or more visits. 20% of births were not preceded by even a single antenatal care visit. In some cultures adolescent pregnancies may be due to a tradition of early marriage of girls. Rep. In 23 of the 41 economies in Figure 5.2 shows the percentage of live births that benefited from at least one. Both Indonesia and the PRC are on track to achieve the target.3 shows progress toward this target for 29 economies for which an assessment can be made. of Philippines Viet Nam Tajikistan Bhutan Timor-Leste Vanuatu Marshall Islands Micronesia.2 Antenatal Care Coverage as a Percentage of Live Births. reflecting the lowest coverage in the region.

and Taipei.000 Women Aged 15–19 Years. People's Rep. Data on the adolescent birth rate are derived from vital registration systems or household surveys. for the three developed economies in the region. rates of adolescent pregnancy actually increased between 1990 and the most recent year. Rep. Fed. however. For methodological details. Economies with rates of 50 live births for adolescent women or more in the latest year include several Pacific island economies. and The World Bank (World Health Organization 2010). of New Zealand Australia Japan 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 1990 Source: Table 5.China Hong Kong. Rates fell in the other 39 developing economies and the unweighted average for all 45 economies fell from 56 live births for adolescent women to 43 with reductions of 60% or more being achieved in Armenia. Mortality ratios for these economies are based on household surveys of varying reliability. Afghanistan. UNICEF. The estimates presented are point estimates. Rep. Figure 5. Bhutan.China. UNFPA. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . It is difficult to achieve standardization in the definition of skilled health personnel due to the differences in the training of health personnel in the various economies. 1990 and Latest Year 91 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Afghanistan Bangladesh Lao PDR Nepal Vanuatu Marshall Islands Nauru Solomon Islands Papua New Guinea Timor-Leste Philippines Cambodia Indonesia Micronesia. for comparison. In many developing economies. China Korea. of Kyrgyz Republic Palau Samoa Tajikistan Armenia Uzbekistan Sri Lanka Tuvalu Turkmenistan Mongolia Myanmar Brunei Darussalam Pakistan Tonga Maldives Malaysia China. States of Cook Islands Bhutan India Georgia Thailand Azerbaijan Kiribati Viet Nam Kazakhstan Fiji. and the lower and upper bounds will reflect the range of uncertainty in the estimates. The rates are the numbers of live births to women aged 15–19 as a percentage of all women in the age group. The Maldives has made the most impressive gains. Samoa. and many not being attended to by trained health personnel. refer to Trends in Maternal Mortality: 1990 to 2008. In six developing economies. the Maldives. Estimates developed by WHO. Palau. Pakistan. Lao People's Democratic Republic. Latest year Data Issues and Comparability The most reliable information on maternal mortality comes from vital registration records or other administrative sources. The rates are shown for 1990 and the “latest year. with many births taking place at home rather than in health facilities. In Azerbaijan the rate increased by 60% and there were also substantial rises in Nauru. and Timor-Leste. the PRC. of Singapore Taipei. Data on the proportion of births attended by skilled health personnel and on the proportion preceded by an antenatal care visit are usually collected through household surveys.3 Live Births per 1.3 shows adolescent birth rates for 45 developing economies and. Smaller increases were reported for Nepal and the Philippines. Bangladesh.2. reducing the rate from 106 in 1990 to just 15 in 2008. registration records are not well maintained.” which is largely between 2005 and 2008. and Nepal have the highest rates of above 100 in the region. Data derived from either source may suffer from limitations such as misreporting of the mother’s age and exclusion of previous births.GOAL 5: IMPrOVE MATErNAL HEALTH Figure 5.

States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economiesa Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESa REGIONAL MEMBERSa WORLD a Estimated using data on births and survivors to age 1 as provided by the United Nations Children’s Fund.A: Reduce by three quarters. the maternal mortality ratio 5.000 live births) 1990 2000 2008 495 1700 51 64 58 78 77 490 120 91 53 107 110 … 18 130 12 609 870 940 570 510 870 91 380 28 690 620 1200 56 420 180 6 50 170 320 … 40 … … … … … 340 … 130 650 … … … 12 10 12 18 397 389 400 495 1800 34 59 50 59 81 340 120 95 29 59 60 … 19 93 8 403 500 420 390 110 550 59 233 24 470 350 790 39 290 120 15 63 91 275 … 32 … … … … … 290 … 110 520 … … … 9 9 9 12 291 286 340 397 1400 29 38 48 45 81 260 64 77 30 38 38 2 18 65 8 243 340 200 230 37 380 39 164 21 290 240 580 31 240 94 9 48 56 230 … 26 … … … … … 250 … 100 370 … … … 7 8 6 14 194 190 260 5.2 Proportion of Births Attended by Skilled Health Personnel (%) 1995 Latest Year 12 (2000) 96 (1997) 100 (1998) 91 (1993) 100 98 (1997) 18 (1997) 79 (1996) 96 (1996) 98 (1996) 89 … 98 (1990) 97 (2000) … 10 (1994) 15 (1994) 34 (1993) 90 (1994) 9 (1996) 94 (1993) 98 (1994) 34 (1998) 50 19 (2001) 96 56 (1997) 53 (1993) … 99 (2000) 77 (1997) 100 (1998) 100 (1998) 72 (1994) 95 (1998) 93 (1999) … 100 (1998) 53 (1996) 100 (1998) 85 (1994) 26 (1997) 92 (1991) 99 (1997) 89 100 (1991) 100 (1990) 100 24 (2008) 100 (2007) 88 (2006) 98 (2005) 100 (2006) 98 (2006) 39 (2007) 88 (2007) 100 (2006) 100 (2006) 99 (2008) … 100 (1997) 99 (2008) … 24 (2009) 71 (2007) 53 (2008) 95 (2009) 19 (2006) 99 (2007) 100 (2009) 44 (2005) 75 (2008) 20 (2006) 99 (2007) 64 (2007) 62 (2008) 100 (1998) 99 (2009) 88 (2006) 98 (2006) 99 (2008) 65 (2008) 86 (2007) 92 (2008) 97 (2007) 100 (2008) 53 (2006) 81 (2009) 70 (2007) 29 (2010) 98 (2008) 98 (2007) 74 (2007) 100 (1999) 100 (1996) … Developing Member Economies Central and West Asiaa Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asiaa China.92 GOAL 5: IMPrOVE MATErNAL HEALTH Goal 5 Targets and Indicators Table 5.1 Maternal Mortality Ratio (per 100.China South Asiaa Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asiaa Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacifica Cook Islands Fiji. China and Taipei.1 Target 5. Sources: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011). but it is not classified as a developing member. of Hong Kong.China: economy sources. for Hong Kong. Rep. of Mongolia Taipei. China Korea. People’s Rep. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. between 1990 and 2015. Fed. Rep. Aggregates are derived for reporting economies only. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.

of Hong Kong. People’s Rep.3 Contraceptive Prevalence Rate (% of married women 15–49 years) 1995 Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.B: Achieve. Rep. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 5 (2000) 56 (1991) 55 (2000) 41 (2000) 59 60 (1997) 18 34 (2000) … 56 (1996) 84 (1997) 86 (1997) 77 (1994) 57 (1994) … 45 (1994) 19 (1994) 41 (1993) 42 (1999) 29 (1996) 66 (1993) … 13 54 20 … 33 (1997) 51 65 (1992) 75 (1996) 65 (1994) 63 (1996) … … … … … … 26 (1996) 25 (1998) … 23 (1994) … … 39 67 57 (1996) 75 Latest Year 23 (2008) 53 (2005) 51 (2006) 47 (2005) 51 (2006) 48 (2006) 27 (2008) 37 (2007) 62 (2000) 65 (2006) 85 (2006) 80 (2007) 80 (2009) 66 (2005) … 56 (2007) 31 (2000) 56 (2006) 35 (2009) 48 (2006) 68 (2007) … 40 (2005) 61 (2007) 38 (2005) 55 (1994) 41 (2007) 51 (2008) 62 (1997) 72 (2006) 80 (2008) 43 (1999) … 36 (2000) 45 (2007) … 36 (2007) 33 (2003) 36 (2006) 29 (2009) 35 (2007) 22 (2010) … 31 (2007) 38 (2007) 71 (2002) 54 (2005) … 5.GOAL 5: IMPrOVE MATErNAL HEALTH Goal 5 Targets and Indicators Table 5.000 women 15–19 years) 1990 … 75 26 58 52 46 73 (1992) 41 24 44 16 6 4 37 17 179 120 (1993) 76 (1991) 106 101 35 (1991) 35 90 (1993) 63 (1992) 115 (1992) 20 (1991) 29 52 (1991) 8 44 38 (1991) 82 (1996) 59 43 105 (1995) 54 (1994) 70 (1992) 74 77 (1994) 25 (1991) 80 (1999) 49 (1993) 26 41 (1991) … 21 4 34 Latest Year 151 (2001) 27 (2008) 42 (2008) 44 (2008) 31 (2008) 30 (2008) 16 (2007) 27 (2005) 21 (2006) 26 (2006) 6 (2009) 4 (2008) 2 (2008) 20 (2008) 4 (2009) 133 (2005) 46 (2005) 45 (2006) 15 (2008) 106 (2004) 23 (2006) 17 (2008) 52 (2003) 52 (2005) 110 (2005) 12 (2006) 17 (2001) 53 (2006) 5 (2007) 43 (2005) 35 (2007) 47 (2001) 30 (2004) 39 (2005) 88 (2006) 51 (2003) 84 (2005) 29 (2005) 70 (2000) 29 (2006) 70 (2005) 54 (2008) 16 (2006) 23 (2005) 92 (1999) 18 (2008) 5 (2008) 34 (2008) continued Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . universal access to reproductive health 93 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS 5. of Mongolia Taipei. Rep.4 Adolescent Birth Rate (per 1.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. China Korea.2 Target 5. Fed. by 2015.

China: Directorate-General of Budget. of Hong Kong.2 Target 5. but it is not classified as a developing member.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. China Korea. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. by 2015. of Mongolia Taipei. People’s Rep. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 36 93 77 94 100 97 61 89 99 99 (2008) (2005) (2006) (2005) (2006) (2006) (2007) (2007) (2006) (2006) ≥ Four Visits … 71 45 75 70 81 28 49 83 79 … … … … … 21 … 51 85 29 93 … 27 82 … … 73 78 … 80 29 … … … 77 … 40 88 55 … 65 55 … 67 … (2007) (2008) (2009) (2006) (2007) (2005) (2006) (2005) (1999) (1997) (2007) (2007) (2000) (1996) (2000) (2001) (2000) (1995) (1991) (2005) (2006) (2005) (1999) (1997) (2007) (2000) (1996) 91 (2008) … … 100 (2006) … 51 88 75 99 44 99 99 69 93 35 79 80 91 … 99 91 100 100 100 81 80 95 100 79 93 74 84 99 97 84 (2007) (2007) (2008) (2009) (2006) (2007) (2009) (2005) (2007) (2006) (2005) (2007) (2008) (2009) (2006) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2007) (2008) (2007) (2008) (2006) (2009) (2007) (2010) (2008) (2007) (2007) 3 (1992) … … 10 (1998) … 18 … 19 … 28 18 … 30 14 40 … 21 26 … … 7 (1994) (1993) (1991) (2000) 2 (2001) … … 5 (2003) … 17 … 13 28 25 7 … 25 9 27 … 19 22 … 3 5 … … … 8 … … … … 46 11 31 … 24 … … … … (2007) (2006) (2009) (2006) (2007) (2005) (2007) (2007) (2008) (2009) (2002) (2000) (1991) (2000) (1991) (1993) (1997) (2005) (2007) (2005) (2001) (2008) (2006) (2002) (2007) (2007) (2007) (2006) (2007) (2010) (2007) … … … … … … … … … … 18 (1991) … … … … … … (2007) (2009) (2007) (2010) (2007) 98 (2008) … 95 (1994) 92 (2008) … … a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. Rep. for Taipei.6 Unmet Need for Family Planning (% of women aged 15–49 years who are married or in consensual union) Earliest Year … 12 12 24 16 … 32 … … … Latest Year … 13 15 16 9 12 25 … 10 14 5. Accounting and Statistics. universal access to reproductive health (continued) 5.5 Antenatal Care Coverage (% of live births ) ≥ One Visit Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. Rep. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .94 GOAL 5: IMPrOVE MATErNAL HEALTH Goal 5 Targets and Indicators Table 5.B: Achieve. Fed. Sources: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011).

95

Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and Other Diseases
HIV/AIDS is particularly a problem for countries in Southeast Asia, and in some of these countries, less than 50% of the population at risk have proper information about HIV/AIDS. Antiretroviral treatment for HIV/AIDS is becoming more accessible throughout the region although universal access is still remote. Most economies have made good progress in reducing both death and incidence for tuberculosis. However, incidence rates remain high in several countries and are growing in parts of Central and West Asia.

MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

Introduction
Goal 6 has three targets: 6.A: Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS. This is targeted at the 15–24 age group but for most economies, comparable data on HIV prevalence are available only for those aged 15–49 years. 6.B: Achieve, by 2010, universal access to treatment for HIV/AIDS for all those who need it. No country is yet providing universal access and availability of data has been improving to measure the progress. Data are now available for many countries in the region. 6.C: Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the incidence of malaria and other major diseases. Tuberculosis (TB) is one of the “other major diseases” and several indicators are available for this disease.

Key Trends
Some Southeast Asian countries have the highest HIV/ AIDS incidence rates in the region. Box 6.1 shows the percentage of the population in the 15–49 age group infected with HIV/AIDS in 2009. Thailand, with 1.3% HIV prevalence, has the highest rate followed by Papua New Guinea at 0.9%, Myanmar at 0.6%, then Cambodia and Malaysia both at 0.5%. Of the five most populous economies, India has the highest incidence (0.3%) followed by Indonesia (0.2%), then Bangladesh and the People’s Republic of China (0.1% or less). No country in the region has a generalized epidemic. Disseminating correct information is the first step in halting the spread of HIV/AIDS. The percentage of the population aged 15–24 years with comprehensive correct knowledge of HIV/AIDS is the percentage of young persons aged 15–24 years who correctly identify the two major ways of preventing the sexual transmission and limiting sex to one faithful, uninfected partner; who reject the two most common local misconceptions about HIV transmission; and who know that a healthy-looking person can transmit HIV. This indicator is usually presented for women and men separately.
Box 6.1 Percentage of Population 15–49 Years with HIV, 2009 Less than 0.1% Bangladesh Japan Korea, Republic of Maldives 0.1% – 0.4% Armenia Azerbaijan Australia China, People's Republic of Fiji. Rep. of Georgia Kazakhstan New Zealand Pakistan Singapore 0.5% and above Cambodia Malaysia Myanmar Source: Table 6.1. <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.5 0.6 Mongolia Sri Lanka Philippines <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Uzbekistan Bhutan Indonesia Lao PDR Tajikistan Kyrgyz Republic India Nepal Viet Nam

0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4

Papua New Guinea Thailand

0.9 1.3

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

96

GOAL 6: COMbAT HIV/AIDS, MALArIA, AND OTHEr DISEASES
Figure 6.2 shows the percentage of those living with advanced HIV infection who have access to antiretroviral drugs. Gains since 2004 have been dramatic, and according to the United Nations, “the number of people receiving antiretroviral treatment for HIV or AIDS increased 13fold from 2004 to 2009. As a result, the number of AIDSrelated deaths declined by 19% over the same period.”1 In the Asia and Pacific region, Indonesia is the only country to report less access in 2009 compared to 2004 but in most of the other countries, substantially more AIDS victims are now getting treatment. Despite this, only Cambodia was close to meeting this target in 2009. Georgia, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, and Thailand are now providing access to more than 60% of those infected. At the other end of the scale, less than 20% in eight countries are receiving antiretroviral drugs, and these include three economies with relatively high rates of infection in the region—the Kyrgyz Republic, Myanmar, and Nepal.
Figure 6.2 Percentage of the Population with Advanced HIV Infection with Access to Antiretroviral Drugs, 2004 and 2009 Cambodia Lao PDR Georgia Thailand Papua New Guinea Philippines Viet Nam Fiji, Rep. of Kazakhstan Armenia Malaysia Bangladesh Indonesia Azerbaijan Sri Lanka Myanmar Maldives Bhutan Kyrgyz Republic Nepal Tajikistan Mongolia Pakistan 0 20 2004 Source: Table 6.2. 40 60 2009 80 100

Figure 6.1 shows that in several economies, less than a third of the population most at risk do not have correct information about HIV/AIDS. Young men and women are relatively well-informed about HIV/AIDS in Cambodia, Thailand, and Viet Nam, where HIV/AIDS is a particular problem but despite this, 50% of the population in the age bracket (15–24) most at risk do not have correct comprehensive knowledge. Since 2004, most countries have seen major gains in the numbers of HIV/AIDS victims receiving antiretroviral treatment. Antiretroviral drug therapy has been shown to reduce mortality among those infected with HIV/AIDS, and MDG target 6.B is to provide the treatment to all those in need by 2010.
Figure 6.1 Percentage of the Population with Comprehensive, Correct Knowledge about HIV/AIDS, Latest Year Cambodia Thailand Viet Nam Tuvalu Maldives Mongolia Uzbekistan Solomon Islands Nepal Marshall Islands Armenia Kazakhstan Philippines Kyrgyz Republic India Vanuatu Georgia Bangladesh Nauru Indonesia Turkmenistan Azerbaijan Pakistan Samoa Tajikistan 0 20 Female Source: Table 6.1. 40 Male 60 80

1 The Millennium Development Goals Report 2011 (United Nations 2011, 37).

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

GOAL 6: COMbAT HIV/AIDS, MALArIA, AND OTHEr DISEASES
Efforts to control incidence and deaths due to tuberculosis are showing good results. Figure 6.3 shows the incidence and death rates due to tuberculosis in 47 economies of the region. Death rates for tuberculosis have been falling in recent years in most countries as a result of intensive efforts over the past 15 years to implement the DOTS Strategy (1995–2005) and its successor, the “Stop TB Strategy” launched in 2006. Despite this, incidence rates remain high in several countries and rates are still 400 or more per 100,000 population in Cambodia, Myanmar, and Timor-Leste.
Figure 6.3 Incidence and Death Rates Due to Tuberculosis, 2009 (per 100,000 population) Cambodia Timor-Leste Myanmar Bangladesh Tajikistan Pakistan Afghanistan Viet Nam Philippines Indonesia Papua New Guinea India Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Turkmenistan Nepal Uzbekistan Thailand Solomon Islands Kiribati Azerbaijan China, People's Rep. of Lao PDR Armenia Vanuatu Sri Lanka Malaysia Marshall Islands Bhutan Korea, Rep. of Tuvalu Cook Islands Mongolia Micronesia, Fed. States of Tonga Georgia Hong Kong, China Samoa Palau Maldives Singapore Fiji, Rep. of Nauru Brunei Darussalam Japan New Zealand Australia 0 100 Death Source: Table 6.3. 200 300 400 500 600

97 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

The MDG 6 targets call for halting and reversing the incidence of major diseases including tuberculosis. Figure 6.4 shows the changes in incidence rates reported by 48 economies. In all but seven of them, incidence rates between 1990 and 2009 have either stabilized or declined. The seven include the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Palau, and Turkmenistan where the increases in incidence rates have been very small, and also four others where the percentage growth has been more substantial—Armenia, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, and Tajikistan. Data for more years are required to be certain but on present evidence, it looks as though the MDG target of halting and reversing tuberculosis, one of the major diseases, will be achieved by most countries in the region.
Figure 6.4 Change in Tuberculosis Incidence Rate, 1990–2009 (%) Nauru Maldives Solomon Islands Fiji, Rep. of Japan Micronesia, Fed. States of Korea, Rep. of Bhutan Vanuatu Tuvalu Singapore Mongolia Samoa Hong Kong, China New Zealand Malaysia Tonga Kiribati Marshall Islands Philippines China, People's Rep. of Cambodia Brunei Darussalam Australia Viet Nam

Incidence –150 –100

Papua New Guinea Thailand Myanmar Indonesia Sri Lanka Nepal India Bangladesh Uzbekistan Pakistan Georgia Azerbaijan Afghanistan Lao PDR Palau Turkmenistan Kyrgyz Republic Kazakhstan Tajikistan Armenia –50 0

50

100

150

Source: Table 6.3.

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

98

GOAL 6: COMbAT HIV/AIDS, MALArIA, AND OTHEr DISEASES
Box 6.2 Incidence of Malaria, 2008 (per 100,000 population) Less than 1 Armenia Georgia 1–99 Azerbaijan China, People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Tajikistan 100–999 Bhutan Nepal Thailand 1000 or more India Bangladesh Indonesia Cambodia Afghanistan Source: Table 6.3.

Malaria is mainly a problem in South Asia, Southeast Asia, and some Pacific island economies. There is great variation in the incidence of malaria in the Asia and Pacific region. Box 6.2 groups the 27 economies for which data are available into four categories based on the incidence of malaria per 100,000 population. The incidence of malaria (the number of new cases reported each year) goes from less than one in Armenia, Georgia, the Kyrgyz Republic, and Uzbekistan to more than 1,000 in eight countries, which include Bangladesh, India, and Indonesia. Timor-Leste, with an incidence rate of 46,380 per 100,000 population, has the highest incidence followed by Papua New Guinea at 18,012 and Solomon Islands at 13,718.

0 Kyrgyz Republic 0 Uzbekistan

0 0

1 3 8 9

Sri Lanka Viet Nam Malaysia Philippines

21 55 75 96

100 Lao PDR 103 Pakistan 322

327 881

1,124 1,510 1,645 1,798 2,428

Vanuatu Myanmar Solomon Islands Papua New Guinea Timor-Leste

6,036 7,943 13,718 18,012 46,380

Data Issues and Comparability
Information on prevalence of HIV/AIDS generally comes from a variety of sources covering particular subgroups of the population. Infection rates may be under reported in several countries because of the stigma attached to the disease. In addition, persons with HIV/ AIDS are particularly susceptible to tuberculosis and other opportunistic diseases, and persons with HIV/AIDS may instead be reported as infected by only the opportunistic disease. Data on the estimated number of people receiving antiretroviral therapy are collected by Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) and the World Health Organization (WHO) from various sources such as ministries of health, bilateral partners, foundations, and nongovernment organizations that are major providers of treatment services. These data are combined with data on the number of people who need antiretroviral therapy (which are estimated by WHO and UNAIDS using statistical modeling methods) to derive the data on the proportion of the population who have advanced HIV infection with access to antiretroviral drugs. However, the indicator does not distinguish between the different types of treatments available, nor does it measure the cost, quality, or effectiveness of treatment. Information on the prevalence of tuberculosis may be based on administrative data from clinics or health workers. In many developing countries, however, administrative records cannot be used and the main source will be health and demographic surveys of households. These are not generally repeated annually and may only cover particular target groups. They often have to be extrapolated to adjoining years and to the whole population. Information on incidence of malaria is collected by WHO from ministries of health, which are generally responsible for malaria surveillance in endemic countries. Estimates of the number of malaria cases are particularly sensitive to completeness of the report by the health facilities in a country.

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

GOAL 6: COMbAT HIV/AIDS, MALArIA, AND OTHEr DISEASES
Goal 6 Targets and Indicators
Table 6.1 Target 6.A: Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS
6.3 Proportion of Population Aged 15–24 Years with Comprehensive Correct Knowledge of HIV/AIDS (%) Female Male … 22.6 4.8 15.0 22.4 20.3 3.4 2.3 4.8 31.0 … 15.1 (2005) 5.3 (2006) … … … … … … 7.0 (2002) … … … … … 17.9 (2007) … 36.1 (2006) … 43.6 (2006) … … 45.2 14.7 … … … 17.6 … … 50.3 … … … 39.4 … 9.6 … … 5.8 35.1 … … 60.7 … … … …

99 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China, People’s Rep. of Hong Kong, China Korea, Rep. of Mongolia Taipei,China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. Rep. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia, Fed. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand

6.1 HIV Prevalence (% of population 15–49 years) 2001 2009 … 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 … <0.1 … … <0.1 <0.1 … <0.1 <0.1 0.4 <0.1 0.5 <0.1 … 1.2 <0.1 <0.1 0.4 0.8 <0.1 0.1 1.7 0.3 … <0.1 … … … … … 0.5 … … … … … … 0.1 <0.1 0.1 … 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.2 … 0.1 0.1 … <0.1 <0.1 … <0.1 0.2 0.3 <0.1 0.4 <0.1 … 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.6 <0.1 0.1 1.3 0.4 … 0.1 … … … … … 0.9 … … … … … … 0.1 <0.1 0.1

(2005) (2006) (2005) (2006) (2006) (2007) (2005) (2006) (2006)

… … … 31.4 (2005) … 14.6 … 19.9 35.0 27.6 … … 50.1 9.5 … … … 20.7 … 46.1 43.6 … … … 26.6 … 13.3 … … 3.0 29.3 … … 39.4 15.4 … … … (2009) (2006) (2009) (2006)

(2005) (2007)

(2005) (2007)

(2008) (2006) (2006)

(2003) (2005)

(2007) (2007) (2009) (2007) (2007) (2007)

(2007) (2007) (2009) (2007) (2007)

a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB, but it is not classified as a developing member. Source: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011).

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

100

GOAL 6: COMbAT HIV/AIDS, MALArIA, AND OTHEr DISEASES

Goal 6 Targets and Indicators
Table 6.2 Target 6.B: Achieve, by 2010, universal access to treatment for HIV/AIDS for all those who need it
6.5 Proportion of Population with Advanced HIV Infection with Access to Antiretroviral Drugs (%) 2004 2009 … 0 0 16 1 0 1 0 … … … … … 0 … 1 10 … 0 0 5 … 12 39 26 12 2 10 … 17 1 … 0 … … … … … 3 … … … … … … … … … … 24 21 65 27 12 4 11 … … … … … 8 … 23 14 … 17 11 20 … 94 21 67 23 18 37 … 61 34 … 30 … … … … … 52 … … … … … … … … …

Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China, People’s Rep. of Hong Kong, China Korea, Rep. of Mongolia Taipei,China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji, Rep. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia, Fed. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand

a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB, but it is not classified as a developing member. Source: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011).

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

000 population) 1990 2009 452 56 222 226 255 281 565 171 73 255 280 200 266 909 … 499 495 337 286 335 114 87 1237 419 158 227 924 1003 86 209 395 3 80 1129 753 404 105 224 523 42 630 … 53 327 176 10 73 18 337 107 172 116 211 236 373 373 90 227 138 98 114 323 … 425 179 249 47 240 101 72 693 285 131 109 597 520 43 189 333 54 26 288 231 155 54 83 337 33 185 744 44 194 110 8 26 10 101 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstana Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.b Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. of Mongoliaa Taipei.6 Incidence of Malaria (per 100.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama. Rep.000 population) 1990 2009 189 33 110 107 139 143 231 92 64 128 130 143 186 405 … 225 308 168 150 163 66 70 574 189 88 127 404 393 66 137 204 – 51 513 302 188 85 64 250 32 312 … 34 296 139 7 53 13 189 73 110 107 163 159 231 202 67 128 96 82 90 224 … 225 158 168 39 163 66 60 442 189 89 83 404 280 36 137 200 27 19 351 207 90 2 65 250 18 115 498 23 155 72 6 21 8 6.GOAL 6: COMbAT HIV/AIDS. China Korea. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.9 Prevalence of Tuberculosis (per 100.3 Target 6.000 population) 2008 0 0 0 0 … – 1 0 – – 0 … – … … 3 0 2 … 0 0 … 4 2 1 0 17 0 … 0 0 … … … … … … … 36 … 19 108 … … 7 … … … 6. People’s Rep. Fed.6 Death Rates Associated with Malaria (per 100. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australiaa Japana New Zealanda continued Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Rep.C: Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the incidence of malaria and other major diseases 6. AND OTHEr DISEASES Goal 6 Targets and Indicators Table 6.000 population) 2008 2428 0 1 0 … 0 881 9 – 0 3 … 8 … … 1510 100 1124 … 103 21 … 1798 1645 327 75 7943 96 … 322 55 … … … … … … … 18012 … 13718 46380 … … 6036 … … … 6. of Hong Kong. MALArIA.9 Incidence of Tuberculosis (per 100.

but it is not classified as a developing member. a The indicators incidence and death rates associated with malaria. do not apply to the circumstances of the country.b Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. Rep.C: Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the incidence of malaria and other major diseases (continued) 6.000 population) 1990 2009 66 7 17 14 33 30 82 22 18 22 38 9 20 28 … 68 49 43 35 44 12 2 172 57 18 26 133 34 5 22 48 0 8 154 112 15 6 8 69 3 80 … 5 12 11 0 4 0 38 12 12 5 22 22 38 48 22 19 12 4 8 6 … 51 8 23 3 21 9 2 71 27 12 9 59 35 2 18 36 7 2 12 8 6 2 3 26 4 18 66 5 7 10 0 1 0 6.102 GOAL 6: COMbAT HIV/AIDS. People’s Rep. China Korea.3 Target 6. Fed.10 Proportion of Tuberculosis Cases under DOTS (%) Detected Cured 1995 2009 1995 4 (1997) 77 19 30 51 52 4 38 88 34 37 87 87 39 … 20 83 76 89 56 49 87 (1997) 24 10 20 53 10 47 87 55 37 88 68 92 43 100 90 90 68 98 40 64 67 160 39 87 87 87 48 70 75 100 80 66 63 44 92 50 75 89 89 75 … 44 100 67 83 73 70 89 60 67 68 76 64 57 89 69 54 37 91 81 110 150 420 (2008) 140 73 51 61 84 33 120 78 89 89 89 45 (1997) 55 65 58 74 (1997) 50 (1996) 70 88 73 78 93 85 (1998) 76 74 … 71 97 25 97 73 79 85 (1998) 91 91 70 69 67 60 86 64 89 100 86 87 25 80 83 (1998) 67 56 80 65 81 (2002) 75 100 (1999) 85 55 (1996) 80 (1998) 30 (2000) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstana Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. MALArIA. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. of Hong Kong. Rep.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. as defined for the global monitoring. of Mongoliaa Taipei. AND OTHEr DISEASES Goal 6 Targets and Indicators Table 6. Source: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011). Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australiaa Japana New Zealanda 2008 88 73 56 73 64 84 90 82 83 81 94 68 84 87 … 91 91 87 45 89 85 87 95 91 93 78 85 88 81 82 92 50 90 96 97 47 100 60 (2006) 64 71 94 85 100 78 91 80 48 73 (1996) (1996) (1999) (2002) DOTS = Directly Observed Treatment Short Course.9 Death Rates Associated with Tuberculosis (per 100.

by 2015. of Malaysia Samoa Taipei.A Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programs and reverse the loss of environmental resources.1. In these 20 years. 7. the proportion of land and territorial water set aside for biodiversity protection rose in all the region’s economies. to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers.1 shows the percentages of land area covered by forests in 2010 compared with 1990. of Australia Kiribati Tonga Azerbaijan Bangladesh Armenia Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Mongolia Kyrgyz Republic Maldives Tajikistan Singapore Pakistan Afghanistan Kazakhstan 0 20 1990 Source: Table 7. States of Palau Solomon Islands Marshall Islands Brunei Darussalam Bhutan Japan Lao PDR Cook Islands Papua New Guinea Korea.C Halve. Per capita emissions of carbon dioxide are rising in virtually all economies in the region including in all five most populous economies.China Cambodia Fiji. 7. Seven economies lost nearly a fifth or more of their 1990 forest area—Armenia (24%). and (iv) dwellings made of nondurable material. achieving. 7. Indonesia (20%). Figure 7.B Reduce biodiversity loss. Cambodia (22%). Nepal (25%). Some of the economies reporting gains were small Pacific islands where forest areas are quite small.103 Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability Deforestation continues to be a problem in most of the Asia and Pacific region. Rep. of Indonesia Timor-Leste Myanmar Viet Nam Georgia Thailand Vanuatu Tuvalu New Zealand Sri Lanka Philippines Nepal India China. 40 60 2010 80 100 Key Trends Deforestation is a threat throughout the region. (iii) overcrowding (three or more persons per room). MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Introduction Goal 7 has four targets: 7. This target is for the world as a whole and does not refer to any particular economy.1 Percentage of Land Area Covered by Forest. Myanmar (19%). and Viet Nam. People's Rep. the Philippines. Pakistan (33%). Figure 7. and Timor-Leste (23%). the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation. Many of the losses are substantial. Improved sanitation facilities are gradually being extended to rural areas but many countries still have far to go. Sri Lanka (21%). Rep. although the gainers also included the People’s Republic of China (PRC). a significant reduction in the rate of loss.D By 2020. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Fed. Slums are defined as dwellings in urban areas with at least one of the following characteristics: (i) lack of access to improved water supply. (ii) lack of access to improved sanitation. Between 1990 and 2010. with some of the most valuable hardwood forests shrinking the fastest. by 2010. 20 economies report losses of forest area with only 14 reporting an increase. 1990 and 2010 Micronesia.

and Turkmenistan.China Thailand Nepal Lao PDR China. Taipei. 2008 Compared with 1990 Cambodia Bhutan Viet Nam Lao PDR Maldives Nepal Cook Islands Sri Lanka Thailand Malaysia Myanmar China.2 shows the percentages of land and territorial waters that 41 economies have set aside for the protection and maintenance of biological diversity. the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Rep. States of Samoa Hong Kong. Cambodia was first with per capita emissions of CO2 growing at 12% per year. of Kazakhstan Uzbekistan Bangladesh Papua New Guinea Samoa Marshall Islands Vanuatu Afghanistan 0 10 1990 Source: Table 7. China Brunei Darussalam Bhutan Cambodia Kiribati New Zealand Taipei. Asia is no exception. People's Rep. the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Myanmar (19%). There has been an increase from 1990 to 2010 in the protected areas of all economies except for Afghanistan. Gains of 9–10 percentage points were observed in Mongolia.104 GOAL 7: ENSUrE ENVIrONMENTAL SUSTAINAbILITy large increases were made by Bhutan at 14 percentage points. of Sri Lanka Malaysia Mongolia Australia Japan Pakistan Tonga Armenia Azerbaijan Kyrgyz Republic Indonesia Timor-Leste Myanmar Philippines India Palau Viet Nam Tajikistan Singapore Georgia Turkmenistan Korea. which translates into a large area given the geographical size of the country. It should. Forest losses reported here included Cambodia (22%). The PRC increased its protected area from 13% to 16% percent. Figure 7. On the other hand. and Cambodia (23). Protected areas range from 0.1.4% in Afghanistan to nearly 42% in Hong Kong.3 shows the average annual percentage change in per capita emissions of CO2 between 1990 and 2008. however. China Australia New Zealand Brunei Darussalam Japan Southeast Asia contains much of Asia’s tropical hardwoods. the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (15). Rep. of India Armenia Marshall Islands Pakistan Turkmenistan Fiji. Indonesia (20%). of Philippines Micronesia. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .China. and Viet Nam (all 9%). Sixteen economies have increased their protected areas by 3 percentage points or more.2. the Maldives. 1990 and 2010 Hong Kong. be remembered that these countries started from very low emission levels in 1990. 20 30 2010 40 50 Kiribati Nauru Kazakhstan Mongolia Azerbaijan Uzbekistan Vanuatu Timor-Leste Solomon Islands Palau Papua New Guinea Singapore Kyrgyz Republic Georgia Tajikistan Afghanistan 0 5 10 15 –15 –10 –5 Source: Table 7.2 Percentage of Protected Terrestrial and Marine Areas. The general rule is that rising gross domestic product means rising emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2). Kiribati (22). of Bangladesh Indonesia Tonga Korea. Figure 7. People's Rep. China. Figure 7. Rep. Particularly Figure 7.3 Percentage Change of Per Capita Emissions of Carbon Dioxide. Nepal. and Malaysia (9%). Pakistan. Fed. protecting the natural environment is making progress in the region. and Tonga. followed by Bhutan.

India. Germany.5 compares urban–rural ratios for proportions of the urban and rural populations with access to improved sanitation facilities for both 1990 and 2008. Their CO2 emissions fell sharply after 1990 both because of steep increases in the price of oil and natural gas and because of a collapse in industrial production. 00 0 2. Germany. 00 0 6. Only the PRC is close to France: the others are far behind. the ratios equal to 1 shown in Figure 7. 00 0 105 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Figure 7. Kazakhstan. 00 0 8. 2008 (metric tons) United States Canada Germany United Kingdom France China. Ratios above 2.C is about improving drinking water sources and sanitation facilities in urban and rural areas. Figures 7. Note that a ratio of 1 in Figure 7. however. the United Kingdom. In terms of total emissions (Figure 7. People's Rep.4a and 7. These include Azerbaijan. Figure 7. and Pakistan.4b shows that the five Asian economies are all below the levels of countries of the OECD. Ratios marginally less than 1 are shown for Kazakhstan. Germany. For all other countries.4b Per Capita Emissions of Carbon Dioxide in Five Industrialized Economies and the Five Most Populous Countries in Asia. 00 0 3. Industrialized Most Populous Sources: Table 7. People's Rep. France. Singapore’s per capita emissions were down by 5% per year and it was the only country among the richer ones in the region to reduce per capita emissions. 4%. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . and the United States. and Thailand. 3%. the United Kingdom.5 means only that both urban and rural areas are being equally provided with access to improved sanitation. 00 0 4.4a Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Five Industrialized Economies and the Five Most Populous Economies in Asia.0 were recorded for nine economies in 2008 including Afghanistan. Tajikistan.1 and Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011) for Canada.GOAL 7: ENSUrE ENVIrONMENTAL SUSTAINAbILITy Sixteen economies had lower per capita CO2 emissions since 1990. Georgia.5 were achieved by countries that provide around 100% improved sanitation to both urban and rural households. and Uzbekistan. the per capita emissions went up from 1990 levels. the Lao People’s Democratic Republic.4b compare CO2 emissions of the five most populous countries in the region with emissions by five large Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. and the United States.1 and Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011) for Canada. Figure 7. The targets are to halve the proportion of households without access to an improved drinking water source and without use of an improved sanitation facility. In most economies. 00 0 5. including the PRC and Bangladesh at 5%. Ratios below 1 indicate a higher proportion of rural households using improved sanitation. and Pakistan. 00 0 7. of Indonesia India Pakistan Bangladesh 0 Industrialized 5 10 15 20 Most Populous Sources: Table 7. Figures 7. of United States India Germany Canada United Kingdom Indonesia France Pakistan Bangladesh 0 1.4a and 7. Mongolia. the Kyrgyz Republic. 2008 (million metric tons) China.4b suggest just how catastrophic it could be for the world’s climate if per capita emissions in the most populous Asian countries rise to the levels of OECD countries. In practice. but several countries are working to improve the imbalance.4a) the PRC has overtaken the United States as the largest CO2 emitter and India has now surpassed the largest European economy. Target 7. On a per capita basis however. Figure 7. Ratios above 1 indicate that urban households are being favored over rural households. Sri Lanka. France. improved sanitation is much more likely to be available in urban areas. The main problem in most economies is to provide improved water and sanitation facilities to rural households.

169) Piped Water 47% (1. to a lesser extent. Improved sanitation basically means flush toilets connected either to main sewage pipes or individual cess-pits. States of Cambodia India Pakistan Lao PDR Kiribati Azerbaijan Mongolia Afghanistan Timor-Leste Nepal Indonesia Palau Papua New Guinea Bhutan Marshall Islands Viet Nam Vanuatu Armenia Philippines China.6 Proportion of Population Using Different Sources of Drinking Water. Figure 7. The six economies whose ratios improved and made impressive gains in bridging the rural–urban gap were Afghanistan.6 and 7. Figures 7. Fed. 23% of the population—or 850 million people—practice open defecation. Finally. Other unimproved sanitation (15%) consists mainly of earth latrines defecation. This still leaves 13% of the population. Shared sanitation (12%) is common in urban areas and is also usually waterflushed.106 GOAL 7: ENSUrE ENVIrONMENTAL SUSTAINAbILITy Unimproved water is still used by 13% of the population while 23% practice open defecation. Source: Data from WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation. Open defecation and.417) Between 1990 and 2008. Azerbaijan.454. and provided to 50% of the population.7 show the numbers of people in Asia with access to improved drinking water and sanitation facilities. The data refer to 2008 and are sourced from WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation. Rep.7 shows the sanitation facilities available to the population of the region.3. and Palau. earth latrines and other unimproved facilities. 2008 Unimproved Water 13% (462. are a major cause of water and ground pollution leading to diarrheal diseases. or over 460 million people.732) Note: Values inside the parenthesis are total population (in thousand) using different sources of drinking water. which are a major cause of infant and child deaths. without access to safe drinking water. of Myanmar Tuvalu Bangladesh Maldives Georgia Tonga Turkmenistan Kyrgyz Republic Tajikistan Malaysia Uzbekistan Samoa Korea. Georgia. or recorded no change.715. Kiribati. 1990 and 2008 Solomon Islands Micronesia. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . People's Rep. the Federated States of Micronesia. Piped water and other cleaned water are currently available to 87% of the population of the Asia and Pacific region. Figure 7. of Japan Cook Islands Australia Kazakhstan Thailand Sri Lanka 0 2 1990 Source: Table 7. 4 6 2008 8 10 Other Improved Water 40% (1. all countries except six either improved their ratios. Figure 7.5 Urban/Rural Ratio of the Proportion of Population Using an Improved Sanitation Facility. indicating that they have been giving priority to bringing improved sanitation to rural areas.

486) Note: Values inside the parenthesis are total population (in thousand) using different sanitation facilities. another seven are expected to do so by 2015.828) 107 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Box 7. People’s Republic of Georgia India Korea. More countries will meet the MDG water target than the sanitation target.3. and based on the current trends. People’s Republic of India Indonesia Kazakhstan No Progress/Regressing Azerbaijan Georgia Kyrgyz Republic Micronesia. 11 countries have already halved the proportion of the population with access to basic sanitation. and another five are expected to do so by 2015.1). Indonesia.GOAL 7: ENSUrE ENVIrONMENTAL SUSTAINAbILITy Figure 7. Federated States of Slow Progress Azerbaijan Bangladesh Bhutan Cook Islands Indonesia Lao PDR Maldives No Progress/Regressing Kazakhstan Marshall Islands Papua New Guinea Source: Derived from Table 7. Republic of Kyrgyz Republic Malaysia Nepal On Track Afghanistan Cambodia Kiribati Micronesia. Twenty-two economies are expected to achieve the improved drinking water target but only 16 economies will succeed with basic sanitation (Box 7.2 Progress toward Target for Proportion of Population Using Improved Sanitation Facilities Early Achievers Cook Islands Korea. On the sanitation target.257) Improved Sanitation 50% (1. Singapore Sri Lanka Thailand Uzbekistan Viet Nam Tajikistan Timor-Leste Kiribati Marshall Islands Mongolia Nepal Pakistan Solomon Islands Tuvalu Vanuatu Papua New Guinea Tonga Turkmenistan Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .807.3. Fifteen economies have already halved the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water.7 Proportion of Population Using Different Types of Sanitation Facilities.1 Progress toward Target for Proportion of Population with Access to Improved Drinking Water Early Achievers Armenia China. 2008 Other Unimproved Sanitation 15% (533. None of the five most populous countries are likely to achieve the target of providing flush toilets or other forms of improved sanitation by 2015 unless they improve upon their current rates of progress (Box 7. Republic of Malaysia Maldives Myanmar Samoa On Track Lao PDR Palau Philippines Slow Progress Afghanistan Armenia Bangladesh Bhutan Cambodia China. Singapore Sri Lanka Thailand Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Viet Nam Mongolia Philippines Timor-Leste Myanmar Pakistan Palau Solomon Islands Tajikistan Turkmenistan Samoa Uzbekistan Open Defecation 23% (850.2).989) Shared Sanitation 12% (445. Source: Data from WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation. Box 7. but Bangladesh. Federated States of Source: Derived from Table 7. The early achievers include the PRC and India. and Pakistan are making slow progress and may not manage to halve the proportion by 2015.

cement production.8 Proportion of Slum Population in the Five Most Populous Countries of Asia. Figure 7. Emissions by international carriers (ships and aircraft) are usually omitted because they cannot be assigned to a particular country. other unimproved sanitation generally means earth latrines. Data on housing conditions and access to drinking water and sanitation come mainly from population or housing censuses or from demographic and health surveys and living standard surveys. They are broadly comparable and reasonably reliable. had only cut the proportion by 20% in 2007. more than 30% of the population were classified as slum dwellers in 2007. and rivers. Information on carbon dioxide emissions comes mainly from international agencies and is derived by applying emission coefficients to estimates of fuel consumption. However. 40 60 2007 80 100 Data Issues and Comparability Data on forests and on land set aside for protecting biodiversity come from administrative sources supplemented by satellite imagery. woods. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . and on beaches and riverbanks. By 2007. improved sanitation usually means water-flushed toilets. which is surface water from lakes. of Indonesia 0 20 1990 Source: Table 7.108 GOAL 7: ENSUrE ENVIrONMENTAL SUSTAINAbILITy In four of the five most populous countries of the region. piped water will have been filtered and chlorinated. and gas flaring. in general. The PRC had managed a smaller reduction—down by about 30%—but Bangladesh. As regards sanitation facilities. Indonesia had more than halved the proportion of slum dwellers.4. which started with 87% percent of its population in slums. all five have made substantial progress in reducing their slum populations since 1990. In practice definitions may vary between countries. and both India and Pakistan had cut their proportions by over 40%. 1990 and 2007 (% of total population) Bangladesh Pakistan India China. shared sanitation is also usually water-based. The data are not strictly comparable as definitions may vary between countries but. People's Rep. Other improved water is from wells and boreholes and is regarded as safer than unimproved water. and open defecation is defecation in fields. Available data from United Nations Human Settlements Programme suggest that more than 360 million people lived in urban slums in these five most populous countries in 2007. ponds.

8 0.7 0.3 65.3 7.4 – 82.7 … 0.0 1.5 … 0.6 22.9 7.9 … 63.5 1.3 11.2 1.5 16.8 72.9 7.5 7.9 9. Chinaa Korea.4 75.3 48.3 39.3 2.9 2.1 3.0 1.2 52.1 Proportion of Land Area Covered by Forest (%) 1990 2010 2.9 38.GOAL 7: ENSUrE ENVIrONMENTAL SUSTAINAbILITy Goal 7 Targets and Indicators Table 7.2 4.8 109 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.4 0. metric tons) 1990 2008 1990 2008 2677 3682 44173 15335 261307 10862 68566 7220 28067 114014 2460744 27660 243815 10044 … 15533 128 690577 154 634 3773 6421 451 149566 235 56593 4276 44532 46941 95833 21408 22 818 22 48 55 (1999) 132 235 2142 125 161 161 (2002) 77 … 70 287331 1094706 24023 814 5548 47139 5203 236954 6208 163178 3146 47840 124905 7031916 38573 509170 10895 … 46527 733 1742698 920 3542 11764 10594 4602 406029 1533 208267 12776 83157 32295 285733 127384 70 1254 29 99 62 143 213 2109 161 198 191 176 … 92 399219 1208163 33095 0.6 69.1 0.8 7.2 91.1 0.3 1.3 40.1 68.5 10.3 2.5 33.6 0. of Mongolia Taipei.0 2.5 30.7 15.7 0.0 63.3 25.0 0.7 2.2 16.0 0.1 20.2 5.4 1.1 23.7 … 64.4 68.0 4.2 1.4 15.0 0.9 0.3 30.7 0.4 18.0 68.6 27.6 1. Fed.5 64.4 28.A: Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes and reverse the loss of environmental resources 7.3 36.1 (2009) 11.5 11.5 33.2 62.8 5.5 3.5 0.5 52.2 Carbon Dioxide Emissions (thousand metric tons) (per capita.3 11.1 69.0 2.0 7.1 1.3 36.7 55. of Hong Kong.1 44.1 19.5 8.8 … 0.1 12.4 0.0 0.2 5.3 1. People’s Rep.0 58.8 0.2 7.0 3.2 15.3 1.3 1.1 9.2 (2002) 0.5 4. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand (1992) (1992) (1992) (1992) (1992) (1992) (1992) (1992) (1992) (1992) (1992) (1992) (1992) (1992) (1992) (1992) continued Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .4 60.3 25.9 0.1 … 0.7 0.9 37.8 8.6 1.5 66.5 0.1 0.3 1.1 59.5 9.0 0.1 57.1 10.2 1.8 7.6 21.3 1.0 0. Rep.2 2.5 0.8 0.4 0.8 72.2 14.3 5. Rep.Chinab South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamc Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.3 4.7 4.5 3.9 12.1 0.3 33.8 0.6 1.8 72.4 – 87.1 49.1 0.3 0.1 Target 7.3 0.1 0.0 12.7 21.9 83.2 25.1 5.6 14.9 2.5 14.1 68.2 1.6 4. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.5 (1999) 14.1 0.2 62.4 3.2 0.9 8.4 79.9 15.0 65.4 73.0 51.8 2.9 8.5 3.7 36.9 7.6 5.6 45.8 5.2 91.4 78.4 28.

9 43.6 28.Chinab South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamc Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.6 130.2 35.0 … – (1991) – (1991) … 202.1 – (1991) – 4.8 94.2 4855.4 35.1 3.8 – 4193.1 2.1 9.8 118.5 5.2 2.1 41.3 145.A: Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes and reverse the loss of environmental resources (continued) 7.5 Proportion of Total Water Resources Used (%) 1990 2000 … 37.3 … … 18. China is included in the data of the People’s Republic of China.3 977.5 (2005) … 36.6 0.3 … 19.6 – 0.0 (1991) 218.8 2355.8 93.9 (2000) 3.9 0.4 15. that is the proportion of total amount of water above ground to the annual runoff. c Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.9 1012.2 – – 80.6 36.1 1.4 (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) 17.1 1.9 20.1 … 29. Rep.3 Consumption of All OzoneDepleting Substances (ODP metric tons) 1990 2009 – – 2.0 2.1 374.6 (2010) (2010) (2010) (2010) (2005) (1995) (2005) (2010) (2005) (2005) (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) a The proportion of land area covered by forest in Hong Kong.3 96.4 – – 7434.7 36. of Hong Kong.2 6984.3 … … … … … – … … … … … … 4.2 0.4 226.5 4. Chinaa Korea.1 604.0 17.7 245.8 24.2 7.5 0. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.5 74. for Taipei.7 7.1 – 0.7 … 1.4 120074.0 0.7 69.2 115.110 GOAL 7: ENSUrE ENVIrONMENTAL SUSTAINAbILITy Goal 7 Targets and Indicators Table 7.8 – 1.0 289.4 40.0 5.China: economy sources.9 0.2 699.2 (1995) 15.6 0.0 0.5 (2005) … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 21.6 0.5 (2008) 3.3 … 0.1 57. but it is not classified as a developing member.9 – 0.9 … 195. of Mongolia Taipei.5 43.1 Target 7.8 2. b On proportion of total water resources used. Sources: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011).1 0. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .6 … … 1. Taipei.8 (2001) … … 26.5 1.3 2.1 0.1 74.7 – 3477.1 0.5 5.8 17. Fed.2 – – – 28.8 20371.5 1455.8 100.2 1.9 3.2 0.7 4.2 24.2 430.5 4.1 403.3 0.7 81.2 13.2 4.5 4.2 1195.6 13.3 1. People’s Rep.3 – 7.5 16.4 (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) (1991) 49. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand (1995) (1995) (1995) (1995) (1995) (1995) (1995) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2010) 59674.0 … 13.7 … 16.5 25.China data is equal to the percentage of available resources.5 1.1 15.9 133. Rep.3 Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.2 … 4272.9 2.

0 7.5 0.0 13.0 1.0 2.1 6.1 13.4 16.0 3.8 2. of Hong Kong.5 12.6 3.5 12.1 – 0.3 – 0.3 16.B: Reduce biodiversity loss.2 0.1 2. but it is not classified as a developing member.4 4.8 4.3 4.0 111 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.4 9.1 9. for Taipei.2 1.1 3.2 5.4 14.5 12.0 41. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . by 2010.3 4.5 – 7.4 0.6 0.2 2.8 3.0 – 0.5 10.9 6.7 13.1 0. of Mongolia Taipei.4 7.6 2.8 1.6 13.9 9.9 20.4 6.2 Target 7.China: economy sources.9 (2009) 1.4 0.8 0. Rep. People’s Rep. Rep.8 – 17. Fed.9 3.6 23. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.4 17.4 18.4 1.0 0.0 4.4 2.6 28.9 0.8 7. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand a Total size of nature protected areas (including marine area) as percentage of national territory (excluding maritime area).4 6. a significant reduction in the rate of loss 7.6 15.6 0. China Korea.Chinaa South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. achieving.0 41.4 8.8 24.0 15.1 – 0.2 0.0 2.6 Proportion of Terrestrial and Marine Areas Protected (%) 1990 2010 0. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. Sources: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011).8 3.9 0.6 0.0 29.GOAL 7: ENSUrE ENVIrONMENTAL SUSTAINAbILITy Goal 7 Targets and Indicators Table 7.2 3.7 4.4 9.7 5.4 6.2 22.8 1.0 0.5 6.1 – 4.2 0.0 2.

the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation 7. by 2015.8 Population Using Improved Water Sources (%) Total 3 92 70 81 96 78 86 58 83 90 (1995) (1995) 1990 Urban 12 99 88 94 99 98 96 91 97 97 (1995) (1995) Rural 1 (1995) 78 (1995) 49 66 92 66 (1995) 81 45 (1995) 72 (1995) 85 56 … 67 (1995) 27 … 76 88 (2000) 66 87 74 62 … 33 62 37 (1995) 82 47 76 na 89 51 87 … 33 97 87 na 98 32 89 65 (1995) 47 (2000) 100 (1995) 89 49 100 100 100 Total 48 96 80 98 95 90 90 70 84 (2005) 87 89 … 98 76 … 80 92 88 91 88 90 … 61 80 57 100 71 91 100 98 94 95 … 64 94 94 90 84 40 88 70 69 100 97 83 100 100 100 (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) 2008 Urban 78 98 88 100 99 99 95 94 97 (2005) 98 98 … 100 97 … 85 99 96 99 93 98 … 81 89 72 100 75 93 100 99 99 98 93 77 92 95 90 80 87 90 94 86 100 98 96 100 100 100 (2005) (2000) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) Rural 39 93 71 96 90 85 87 61 72 (2005) 81 82 … 88 49 … 78 88 84 86 87 88 … 56 71 51 99 69 87 na 98 92 88 … 53 99 94 na 94 33 87 65 63 100 97 79 100 100 100 (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. Rep.C: Halve. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand (1995) (1995) (1995) (1995) (1995) (1995) 67 … 90 (1995) 58 … 78 91 (2000) 72 90 76 67 … 35 71 44 (1995) 88 57 84 100 91 58 94 … 48 95 89 90 81 41 91 69 52 100 90 57 100 100 100 97 … 97 (1995) 81 … 88 99 (2000) 90 100 96 91 … 52 92 78 (1995) 94 87 93 100 97 88 99 92 76 94 93 90 73 89 99 94 69 100 92 91 100 100 100 (2005) (2005) (1995) (2000) (1995) (1995) (2000) (1995) continued Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Rep. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. of Mongolia Taipei. Fed. of Hong Kong. People’s Rep.112 GOAL 7: ENSUrE ENVIrONMENTAL SUSTAINAbILITy Goal 7 Targets and Indicators Table 7.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. China Korea.3 Target 7.

People’s Rep.C: Halve. Source: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011). of Mongolia Taipei. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 41 … 100 49 (1995) … 34 62 (2000) 18 69 11 70 … 9 33 18 (1995) 84 49 (1995) 58 99 80 35 96 … 26 64 29 50 69 47 98 30 32 96 80 35 100 100 … 48 … 100 67 (1995) … 57 87 (2000) 49 100 41 85 … 38 58 56 (1995) 88 77 (1995) 70 99 93 61 100 92 36 77 55 50 76 78 100 98 55 98 86 53 100 100 … 38 … 100 25 (1995) … 28 54 (2000) 7 58 8 67 … 5 22 10 (1995) 81 39 (1995) 46 na 74 29 91 … 21 41 20 na 54 42 98 18 (1995) 25 (2000) 96 76 30 (1995) 100 100 88 (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2000) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) (2005) (1995) (2000) (1995) (1995) (2000) (1995) 100 100 88 (1995) a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. of Hong Kong. by 2015. Rep.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.3 Target 7. but it is not classified as a developing member.9 Population Using Improved Sanitation Facilities (%) Total 29 88 57 96 96 93 28 89 98 84 (1995) (1995) (1995) (1995) (1995) 1990 Urban 36 95 70 97 96 94 73 93 99 95 (1995) (1995) (1995) (1995) (1995) Rural 27 75 43 95 97 93 8 87 97 76 (1995) (1995) (1995) (1995) (1995) Total 37 90 45 95 97 93 45 94 98 100 55 … 100 50 … 53 65 31 98 31 91 … 29 52 53 96 81 76 100 96 75 100 … 35 73 25 50 83 45 100 32 50 96 84 52 100 100 … 2008 Urban 60 95 85 96 97 94 72 95 99 100 58 … 100 64 … 55 87 54 100 51 88 … 67 67 86 96 86 80 100 95 94 100 96 49 83 61 50 96 71 100 98 76 98 88 66 100 100 … Rural 30 80 39 93 98 93 29 94 97 100 52 … 100 32 … 52 54 21 96 27 92 … 18 36 38 95 79 69 na 96 67 100 … 22 53 15 na 52 41 100 18 40 96 81 48 113 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. Rep. the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation (continued) 7. China Korea.GOAL 7: ENSUrE ENVIrONMENTAL SUSTAINAbILITy Goal 7 Targets and Indicators Table 7. Fed. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.

. . from UNICEF/WHO were used to compute the estimate.9 … 96.1 … 59. sanitation. .1 (2000) 34.9 24.3 70..7 … … … 43.7 12.1 2.0 … … … 42.5 … 87. The State of Asian Cities 2010/11 (UN-HABITAT 2011). For 2005..5 68.8 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistanb Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.3 … … 38.0 2.9 … 37. b Only two shelter components (water and sanitation) from UNICEF/WHO were used to compute the estimates..7 … 26.9 26.0 … … … … … … 7. of b Hong Kong. .8 2... . .D: By 2020....5 … … … … … 78.4 … … … 23. For 2005. sanitation. . sufficient living.. only two shelter components (water and sanitation) from UNICEF/WHO were used to compute the estimate.. only two shelter components (water and sanitation).3 2.. (ii) lack of access to improved sanitation. and durable housing) were used.10 Slum Population as Percentage of Urban Populationa 2005 2007 88. and (iv) dwellings made of nondurable material... . sanitation.. three shelter components (water.. of b Mongoliac Taipei.1 54. f For 1990.3 79.9 … 19..6 … 68.5 60.6 … … … … … 47. . … … … … … … 47. but it is not classified as a developing member. China Korea...0 41.4 Target 7.. and durable housing) from MICS 2000 were used.0 71.0 … … … 31.. four shelter components (water.. . d Trend analysis was used to estimate 2005 data.6 43.9 … 70..9 … 70.8 … 60.. .5 … … … … … … … … … … 2.8 66.. represented by the urban population living in households with at least one of the four characteristics: (i) lack of access to improved water supply..China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutanb Indiad Maldives Nepald Sri Lankab Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalame Cambodiab Indonesiad Lao PDRf Malaysia Myanmarg Philippinesd Singapore Thailandg Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji..114 GOAL 7: ENSUrE ENVIrONMENTAL SUSTAINAbILITy Goal 7 Targets and Indicators Table 7. g For 1990.0 (2000) 45. People’s Rep.8 … 32. Rep. Rep.3 . States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand a The actual proportion of people living in slums is measured by a proxy. For 2005.. and durable housing) from MICS 2000 were used. e Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.0 (2000) . to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers 1990 98. .8 44. sufficient living. only two shelter components (water and sanitation) from UNICEF/WHO were used to compute the estimate.0 54.0 31.0 (2000) 78. . 12..5 … … … 32. . (iii) overcrowding (three or more persons per room)..0 … … 57.. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ..0 (2000) 57. Sources: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011). of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. . four shelter components (water. c For 1990. Fed.7 50.

If countries are achieving “sustainable levels of debt in the long term” as required by the MDG goal.115 Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development The load of foreign debt service as a percentage of exports has been getting lighter since 1990 in most economies due in large part to the increase in exports. and in nine there are more than 50. 8. People's Rep. Armenia Solomon Islands Kyrgyz Republic Malaysia India Papua New Guinea Fiji.D: Deal comprehensively with the debt problems of developing countries through national and international measures in order to make debt sustainable in the long term. Differences between countries in the numbers of internet users are still large. Table 8. Exports provide the earnings to service the foreign debt without incurring additional foreign liabilities.F: In cooperation with the private sector. These countries started with very low levels of foreign debt in 1990 and their debt levels cannot be considered burdensome either in 1990 or in 2009.1 Debt Service as a Percentage of Exports of Goods and Services. the Maldives. and to 4% in 2009. and 2009 Sri Lanka Philippines Pakistan Nepal Tonga Maldives Indonesia Tajikistan Lao PDR Bangladesh Georgia Samoa Mongolia Key Trends Most economies have much lower debt service load compared with 1990 levels. 8. 2000. MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Introduction Goal 8 has six targets but the first three are directed at developed donor countries and are not considered here. to 7% in 2000. 10 2000 20 30 2009 40 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Comments below are on progress with targets 8D and 8F with respect to selected indicators. although there are signs that growth is leveling off in the face of competition from cell phones and broadband.1. make available the benefits of new technologies. the Kyrgyz Republic. Debt service includes both interest and principal repayments due on loans from nonresidents. 2000. especially information and communications. 1990.1 shows debt service as a percentage of exports of goods and services.1 covers the years 1990. provide access to affordable essential drugs in developing countries. For the 29 countries in Figure 1. the (unweighted) average of foreign debt fell from 11% of exports in 1990. In eight economies there are five or less users per 100 persons. Mongolia. The other three targets that are relevant to developing economies (and developed economies in some instances) are: 8. The number of fixed telephone lines in the region continues to increase. Figure 8. of Kazakhstan Myanmar 0 1990 Source: Table 8. and Tonga. Rep. of Viet Nam Vanuatu Azerbaijan Afghanistan Thailand Cambodia China. the bars should become shorter for each of the years after 1990.E: In cooperation with pharmaceutical companies. and 2009. Figure 8. In 2009 the debt percentages were lower than in 1990 for all economies except Armenia.

2000. Fed. All three show the same pattern— growth up to 2000 followed by a marked decline in the subsequent decade. China Korea.0 in 2000 and 15.84 to 6.0 per 100 population in 1990 to 12. The unweighted average of fixed lines for these 45 developing economies grew from 7. Rep. of Indonesia Maldives Georgia Turkmenistan Thailand Kyrgyz Republic Marshall Islands Micronesia.1 because they enter into the denominator. The debt reduction that has occurred in the Asia and Pacific region reflects the rapid growth of Asian exports during this period. With cell phones and broadband internet. At the same time higher export earnings provide the means to repay foreign debt and reduce the burden of debt service. of Singapore Cook Islands Palau Tonga Kazakhstan China. of Brunei Darussalam Samoa Armenia Viet Nam Nauru Sri Lanka Tuvalu Azerbaijan Malaysia Fiji.2 Fixed Telephone lines. where the number per 100 population fell marginally from 6. Despite the enormous growth of cellular phone subscriptions.116 GOAL 8: DEVELOP A GLObAL PArTNErShIP fOr DEVELOPMENT Figure 8. and New Zealand.0 in 2010. various initiatives have been undertaken by international agencies to help developing countries reduce their public debt.China Hong Kong. 10 20 2000 30 40 50 2009 60 70 80 Particularly large falls were reported by Bangladesh whose foreign debt as a percentage of exports fell by 29 percentage points between 1990 and 2009.2. Aside from their traditional use.2. the number of fixed telephone lines per 100 population was higher in 2010 than 1990 with the single exception of Uzbekistan. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . People's Rep. Rep. Figure 8. In all three economies. telephone lines provide access to telefax and internet services. and 2010 (per 100 population) Taipei. the numbers of fixed telephone lines are growing in most countries of the region. Higher exports automatically reduce the ratios as shown in Figure 8.2 also shows figures for Australia. but these programs were aimed more at the very poor countries in Africa. private households and small businesses in these three countries find they can dispense with fixed telephone lines. These include the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries program of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. In all 45 developing economies in Figure 8. and by 2010. Japan. by India (27 percentage points). States of Philippines Mongolia Uzbekistan Tajikistan Kiribati Bhutan India Nepal Cambodia Vanuatu Pakistan Papua New Guinea Lao PDR Solomon Islands Myanmar Bangladesh Afghanistan Timor-Leste New Zealand Australia Japan 0 1990 Source: Table 8. and debt-relief initiatives of the Club de Paris. and by Indonesia and Myanmar (both 18 percentage points). 1990. there were actually fewer lines per 100 population than in 1990. the decline in lines per 100 population was larger than the increase in the previous decade.79. In the past years.

and industry associations. In the Asia and Pacific region.20 11. and India and Pakistan (7%). Brunei Darussalam and Malaysia (19%).00 26.78 20. and Bangladesh with only 3.00 20.10 10. New Zealand.2.00 80. These reductions may be due to the same reasons as in the three developed economies but in developing economies. Indonesia with 9.82 16. the Federated States of Micronesia (16%). These numbers are more reliable when taken from household surveys.1 Internet Users per 100 Population.8. Among the five most populous economies. Hong Kong. China.00 27. or by other means.GOAL 8: DEVELOP A GLObAL PArTNErShIP fOr DEVELOPMENT Despite overall growth of fixed lines in the region. People’s Republic of Cook Islands Azerbaijan Armenia 50 and more Brunei Darussalam Malaysia Hong Kong. the People’s Republic of China comes first with 34.20 25.55 12. eight developing economies also reported fewer fixed lines per 100 population in 2010 than in 2000.00 55. Fed.00 83. 0.00 9. which are broadly comparable. regulators.00 21.7.00 50.78 7. These were Vanuatu.1. operators.55 3.70 117 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Data Issues and Comparability Data on debt service are compiled by the World Bank according to international standards based on loan-by-loan information. Internet users—the great digital divide. States of Kyrgyz Republic Uzbekistan Thailand Philippines Tuvalu Palau Georgia Viet Nam Maldives Kazakhstan China.00 12. Rep.97 27. in cybercafes.20 3.30 35. but when survey data are not available. the Republic of Korea. Singapore. followed by Pakistan with 16.00 5.00 71. China Singapore Taipei.00 20. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .50 8.28 2. Japan.26 1.60 14.China. there are 50 or more.30 69.00 7. 2010 Less than 10 Timor-Leste Myanmar Cambodia Papua New Guinea Turkmenistan Marshall Islands Bangladesh Afghanistan Solomon Islands Nauru Nepal Lao PDR Samoa India Vanuatu Kiribati Indonesia Between 10 and 19 Mongolia Tajikistan Sri Lanka Tonga Bhutan Fiji.70 4.5. or external debt reported to the World Bank’s debt exporting system by country authorities. Malaysia.00 25. Data on cellular phone subscriptions and internet access are obtained by the International Telecommunication Union through annual questionnaires sent to government telecommunication authorities and operating companies. Data on internet users are less reliable when these are based on number of subscribers.00 6. of Pakistan Between 20 and 49 Micronesia. Solomon Islands (17%). Box 8.3 per 100 population. In 17 economies.China Australia Japan New Zealand Korea. India with 7.30 34.50 76.00 34. Singapore (21%).00 13.00 6. and Taipei. there are less than 10 internet users per 100 persons while in nine economies. the disparities are striking. the expense of installing and maintaining fixed telephone lines are an added reason for governments to encourage the use of cellular telephones rather than fixed lines. These data are supplemented by annual reports and statistical yearbooks of telecommunication ministries.56 28. they are based on the number of internet subscriptions that are then adjusted to include estimates of persons who are not subscribers but who access the internet at their place of work. Brunei Darussalam. The number of internet users per 100 population in 48 economies is shown in Box 8.1.00 83.40 70.00 9.21 0. Republic of Source: Table 8. Common definitions are used and the data are considered to be reasonably accurate and comparable.22 1.71 35. where fixed lines fell by 42% between 2000 and 2010.00 7.99 37. The latter includes economies with high per capita incomes in the region—Australia.

2 (1996) … 9.3 11.1 0.3 … 9.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.4 … … … … … 8.3 7.8 … 3.1 … … 6.9 5.2 25.0 … 10.9 3. China Korea. Rep. Rep.3 (2001) … 0.4 3.5 1. Fed. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .1 3.6 … … … 3.0 14. People’s Rep.2 … 2.7 9.8 4.2 … 15. Source: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011).5 … 0.0 7.8 4.2 … 0. but it is not classified as a developing member.5 … 2.0 3.1 1.8 1.3 13.6 9.D: Deal comprehensively with the debt problems of developing countries through national and international measures in order to make debt sustainable in the long term 8.1 (2008) … 1.118 GOAL 8: DEVELOP A GLObAL PArTNErShIP fOr DEVELOPMENT Goal 8 Targets and Indicators Table 8.7 … 1.7 (1999) 2. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.8 7.1 … 29.8 … 8.0 (2002) 20.6 8.7 0.2 4.2 (2006) 12.6 11.3 10.3 (1997) … 5.3 5.2 13.0 … … 0.5 … 1.6 10.7 … … … … … 1.7 6.3 … 3. of Mongolia Taipei.8 2.6 … 10. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand … 1.9 … … … 1.6 … … 0.8 7.6 18.4 22.4 11.2 (2007) … … … (1993) (1995) (1997) (1995) (1993) (1996) a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.8 1.4 10.1 7.6 3.8 (1992) 25.5 10. of Hong Kong.1 4.9 … 9.0 20.8 … 1.1 Target 8.12 Debt Service as a Percentage of Exports of Goods and Services 1990 2000 2009 Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.5 0.6 … … 4.1 … 5.6 … 11.2 6.8 (2005) 7.0 … … … … … 18.1 10.4 3.3 … 34.2 … 5.7 14.0 5.4 8.

55 2. Fed.42 156.80 8.10 4.59 2.87 56.99 7.30 6.39 114.17 0.97 (2004) 1.86 10.89 8.08 8.40 (2002) 1.49 2.54 15.56 0.00 34.00 80.00 37.00 16.25 3. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .65 8.21 6.11 … 0.24 0.09 (2002) 11.89 2.18 25.78 12.18 5.12 5.87 0.80 0.67 1.35 70.05 0.42 52.73 2.31 6.07 0.70 10.12 39.68 53.44 49.29 15.35 1.63 0.21 (2003) 9.30 69.21 0.09 4.09 119. of Mongolia Taipei.00 25.28 1.82 5.01 28.02 0.79 16.00 8.20 20. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 0.08 1.93 35.89 31.02 0.62 0.34 64.84 1.01 3.59 2.77 19.20 27.56 44.04 190.01 0.40 83.00 5.00 76.21 105.07 57.24 4.61 (2009) 34.05 7.30 0.07 7.06 2.62 0.48 3.21 86.26 9.01 (2003) (1996) (1998) (1997) (1999) (1999) (1997) 4.57 5.11 3.34 0.72 80.19 0.04 95.01 0.86 0.92 4.00 34.76 1.72 64.66 16.03 9.15 16.84 91.22 0.85 3.81 8.28 47.63 1.15 0.16 1.00 10.78 0.10 6.22 0.70 13.09 0.02 0.94 2.74 45.14 18.83 1.03 8.54 1.13 17.05 1.00 1. People’s Rep.53 13.84 0.00 119 MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS 0.87 15.67 143.43 5.45 19. especially information and communications 8.92 8.62 0.00 6.69 83.01 (1996) 3. Sources: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011).77 0.17 0.87 0.39 30.56 121.21 29.00 6.F: In cooperation with the private sector.67 9.26 7.01 0.81 17.72 25.41 81.88 10.09 38.36 0.15 (2003) 0.99 27.30 0.20 44.2 Target 8.42 0.00 0.20 71.36 (2003) 0.19 10.00 55.72 12.01 0.09 24.64 3.04 0.53 6.94 42.50 3.10 1.67 35.18 (2004) 0.15 Cellular Subscriptions (per 100 population) 2000 2010 0.48 0.97 41.01 17.21 4.06 2.38 2.22 (2009) 25.03 0.60 43.22 109.05 1.00 35.24 0.71 14.10 (2002) 0.24 21.35 10.82 9.17 54.37 63.03 2.10 (2000) 0.83 1.01 0.70 13.55 (2009) 20.33 13.34 0.76 0.49 … 4.10 1.60 3.14 Telephone Lines (per 100 population) 1990 2000 2010 Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.26 7.77 19.66 100.04 73.32 1.00 83.24 7.46 116.18 0. China Korea.17 0.20 2.16 Internet Users (per 100 population) 1995 2010 0. Rep.04 0.00 26.03 24.91 46.87 57.60 7.44 119. International Telecommunication Union World Telecommunication/ICT Indicators Database (International Telecommunication Union 2011).15 20.28 2.01 0.31 6.42 76.27 39.79 21.00 70.56 35.32 0.21 12.89 27.00 21.10 0.95 61.96 49.01 70.98 34.81 175.05 101.03 0.41 1.00 20.12 8.86 59.34 9.05 0.88 (1999) (1999) (1996) (1997) (1997) (1998) (2003) (1998) (1998) (1996) (1996) (2001) (2002) (1997) (1997) (2005) (2000) (1996) a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.01 1.60 0.59 52.94 1.82 0.00 50.03 0.88 0.16 8.28 7.03 2. make available the benefits of new technologies. Rep.03 0.10 7.34 2.96 (1995) 0.32 61.GOAL 8: DEVELOP A GLObAL PArTNErShIP fOr DEVELOPMENT Goal 8 Targets and Indicators Table 8. but it is not classified as a developing member.23 31.10 0.54 8.90 0.39 125.63 15.90 7.14 0.26 43.00 3.62 2.35 91.65 91.68 11.14 7.46 70.50 30.97 5. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.57 53.02 0.02 0.50 28.04 2.00 3.18 4.31 58.73 4.01 1.08 16.28 2.95 12.39 0.99 20.61 3.36 123.01 99.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.41 57.56 (2002) 0.99 42.61 18.78 11. of Hong Kong.86 1.61 59.19 0.03 0.60 9.30 38.23 0.78 60.36 91.10 6.30 29.46 0.15 0.24 85.12 0.72 0.07 0.59 4.78 0.

.

PART III Regional Tables .

.

Finance. social. urbanization. The HDI combines a range of economic and social statistics into an index number reflecting the overall level of well-being in each economy. Both total and per capita GDP are included. death. for example. Electricity. employment and unemployment. The seven themes are as follows: People Population Labor Force and Employment Economy and Output National Accounts Money. 2005 or later. The People theme also ranks economies of the Asia and Pacific region according to the United Nations’ Human Development Index (HDI).123 Introduction to Regional Tables This issue of Key Indicators contains 112 regional tables illustrating economic. with information on international migration. and often. These regional tables are grouped into seven themes containing a number of subtopics. the latest year is compared with an earlier year such as 1995 or 2000. It shows how the GDP shares of agriculture. and which economies are consuming more and which are investing more in capital for future growth. Economy and Output focuses on the levels and growth of gross domestic product (GDP). industry. When countries’ national accounts are converted to a common currency using PPPs. differences in purchasing power between countries are eliminated so that comparisons reflect only differences in the volumes of goods and services produced and consumed in each country (see Box 1).” The tables cited as sources for each figure give the actual years used in such cases. and environmental developments in the Asia and Pacific region.g. and services changed since 1990. and life expectancy. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2010 . and Communications Transport Electricity Energy and Environment Energy Government and Governance Government Finance REGIONAL TABLES Poverty Indicators Social Indicators Production Exchange Rates Capital Flows External Indebtedness Tourism Communications Environment Governance People brings together standard demographic indicators such as the size and growth of the population. birth. the title of the figure is indicated as. and health and education resources. and related indicators on production. When data are not available for all countries for the earlier year (and/or for the latest year). and Prices Prices Money and Finance Globalization Balance of Payments External Trade International Reserves Transport.. Each theme has a short commentary highlighting important recent developments. related statistics taken from the national accounts. “1995 or nearest year (and/or 2005 or latest year). e. and fertility rates. These commentaries are illustrated by charts or figures that compare variables for member economies for the latest year available. Poverty reduction is embodied in the Asian Development Bank’s Strategy 2020—a vision of an Asia and Pacific region free of poverty—and statistics on the extent of poverty in the region are included in this theme. This theme compares the relative size of economies both within the region and in the world as a whole using purchasing power parities (PPPs).

interest rates. For example. and Prices contains a wide range of tables on price inflation and on monetary and financial statistics. Note that a parallel procedure is used when comparing real GDP from year to year in a single country. PPPs are calculated for several hundred items covering all the final expenditure components of GDP The . then for Household Individual Consumption and. long-grain.124 INTROducTION TO REGIONAL TABLES Box 1 What are Purchasing Power Parities? Purchasing power parities (PPPs) are currency exchange rates obtained by comparing the prices of identical goods and services in different countries. Globalization gives statistics on balance of payments. external trade. These include money supply. new tables on road traffic injuries and fatalities have been introduced. PPPs are used to measure differences in price levels among countries. international reserves. Official development aid to the region is important for the Pacific island economies and some of the poorer economies in other parts of Asia. This theme shows both the growth Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2010 . FDI is a major source of investment funds.00. which are now established in more than 20 economies in the region. for gross domestic product (GDP) as a whole. white rice costs 24 Rupees in country A and 3 Dollars in country B. Tourism statistics cover international tourist arrivals and international tourism receipts. It also involves international movements of labor and capital. Finance. and Prices theme in this edition for application of price level indexes). Electricity production is growing rapidly in the region to support industrialization and household electrification. and tourism in the Asia and Pacific region. the Uncle Ben’s rice PPP is averaged with the PPPs for several other kinds of rice to obtain a PPP for the Basic Heading Rice. they are used to convert GDP and its expenditure components to a common currency so that GDP comparisons can be made in real terms. In combining PPPs for Basic Headings to form higher levels of the classification. PPPs for individual goods and services are then averaged without weights to obtain PPPs for a first level of aggregation called “Basic Headings. therefore. PPPs for 2005 were directly calculated for 31 ADB regional members while PPPs for 12 additional ADB regional members were estimated mainly on the assumption that PPPs are a function of per capita gross national income calculated using the World Bank Atlas Method. This theme also includes market exchange rates and PPPs. and stock markets. These price comparisons are made by dividing the price of a specific good or service in one country by the price of the same item in another country. Extensive consultations were held with participating economies to ensure the comparability and reliability of the PPP calculations. Market exchange rates are currency convertors that include differences in price levels among countries. These ratios are called price level indexes (see also the Money. the shares in GDP of expenditure on the various goods and services are used as weights. PPPs are used in two ways: • First. • Second. The ratios of PPPs to exchange rates. next Food and Beverages. “Real terms” means that differences in price levels between countries have been eliminated so that it is the underlying volumes of goods and services in each country that are compared. Elsewhere. The Basic Heading PPPs are then averaged with other Basic Heading PPPs to obtain PPPs first for Bread and Cereals. PPPs are currency convertors that exclude these differences. if a 500 gram packet of Uncle Ben’s pre-boiled. The PPPs for Asia were calculated as part of the global 2005 International Comparison Program exercise coordinated by the World Bank with ADB as the regional coordinator for the Asia and Pacific region. which are an important source of foreign exchange for many countries. as foreign direct investment (FDI). eventually. In this edition.” For example. here differences in price changes over time are eliminated by using constant prices. external indebtedness. Capital moves between countries in several ways—as official development aid from richer countries. see World Bank (2008). Finance. The expansion of trade with countries in other regions and within the region itself is a major aspect of globalization. Globalization. Transport. and as short-term capital movements. Money. is not confined to trade in goods and services. the “price-relative” between the two countries is 24/3 = 8. bank lending. capital flows. and Communications covers road and rail networks and statistics on road motor vehicles. For a full explanation of how the PPPs are compiled and aggregated. Electricity. however. Remittances by migrant workers and compensation of employees temporarily working abroad are an important source of income for many Asian economies. measure the differences in price levels among countries. This is the “Uncle Ben’s rice PPP” for countries A and B.

Goal 8 also includes data on internet usage and on fixed line and cellular phone subscriptions. The Asia and Pacific region plays a key role in environmental issues because of its large population. “Tax burdens”—tax revenues as a percentage of GDP—are relatively low in the Asia and Pacific region. and how wide is the digital divide between high. protected areas. Government and Governance contains indicators on the traditional role of government as tax collector and provider of defense. how many days does it take to register a new business enterprise. Government fiscal balance. Governments also play an important role in determining the “business environment. and cleaner nuclear and hydropower sources. Goal 7 also includes data on forests. carbon dioxide emissions. and social services.and low-income countries. Energy and Environment brings together statistics on the supply and use of primary energy and indicators related to the environment. the difference between current receipts and current outlays. The different forms of energy are converted to standard units. “Corruption” is difficult to measure objectively but through surveys. and what are the costs involved? While business start-up is quick and inexpensive in some countries. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2010 . These are threatened by both commercial logging and land clearance. Climate change would sharply accelerate if the region’s per capita emission of greenhouse gases were to approach that of Europe and North America. There is some overlap between this theme and Millennium Development Goal 7: Ensure environmental stability. law and order. which can then be divided into GDP to compare “energy productivity” in each economy. the counterpart being relatively low government expenditures on health and education services and on social security and welfare. others have time-consuming and costly procedures. and consumption of ozone-depleting substances. which seeks to integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programs and reverse the loss of environmental resources. and air and water pollution. This theme shows how computer use and broadband access are growing in the region. is an indicator of how governments manage their budgets. such as carbon dioxide-emitting fossil fuels. There is some overlap between this theme and Millennium Development Goal 8: Develop a global partnership for development. as one of the targets under Goal 8 is to make available to people the benefits of new technologies in communications and information processing. Another reason for the region’s importance in environmental issues is that the countries of South Asia and Southeast Asia contain many of the world’s remaining rain forests.INTROducTION TO REGIONAL TABLES 125 REGIONAL TABLES in electricity generation and the fuel sources used. panels of knowledgeable business people can provide broad indications of which countries are more or less corrupt. forest resources.” How does the government encourage entrepreneurs to start new business ventures. The environment indicators cover land use. A new table is introduced in this issue on the use (or consumption) of energy—energy use in all its forms is growing rapidly to support the record rates of economic growth in the region.

org/ICPINT/Resources/icp-final.org/statistics/icp/icp. 2009.org/unpd/wpp/index. Available: www. Department of Economic Affairs. Manila. 2005 International Comparison Program for Asia and the Pacific: Purchasing Power Parities and Real Expenditures.worldbank. World Population Prospects. siteresources. 1993. 2005 International Comparison Program. World Development Indicators 2011. World Bank.pdf United Nations. DC. Fifth Edition. International Monetary Fund. Washington.126 INTROducTION TO REGIONAL TABLES Selected References Asian Development Bank. Balance of Payments Manual. New York. 2011.pdf ———. Washington. org/external/np/sta/bop/bopman.www. Global Purchasing Power Parities and Real Expenditures. DC. Washington. Population Division. Washington. 2008.imf.htm World Bank. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2011. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2010 . Paris. The 2010 Revision. International Monetary Fund. System of National Accounts 2008. esa. Brussels/Luxembourg. DC. United Nations. DC. 2007.adb.un. New York.asp Commission of the European Communities.

127

People
In 2010, almost 56% of the world’s population lived in Asia and the Pacific. However, population growth rates are falling, and by 2050 Asia’s share is expected to fall to just about 50%. Among the five most populous countries, the People’s Republic of China has the lowest net reproduction rate while others have rates between 0.95 and 1.40 daughters per woman. The population in most economies of the region is still young with less than 15% over 65 years. However, with the rapidly aging population, many countries by 2050 will have more than 20% of their population above 65 years. Based on the Human Development Index, most countries in the region fall under the “medium human development” group, including the People’s Republic of China, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan. Bangladesh has “low human development.”

REGIONAL TABLES

Key Trends
In 2010, almost 56% of the world’s population lived in the Asia and Pacific region, but by 2050, the share is expected to fall to just 50.4%. In Figures 1.1 and 1.2, Europe’s share will fall even faster—from 11.8% now to only 8.7% in 2050. South America’s share will fall from 5.7% to 5.2%, and West Asia’s small share of 3.1% will rise to 4.0% in 2050. North America’s share will fall slightly from 7.9% to 7.6%. Africa is the big gainer: in 2010 it accounted for just 14.8% of the world population but by 2050 the share is expected to rise to 23.6%. The population projections for 2011 to 2100 were recently released by the United Nations Population Division in its World Population Prospects, the 2010 Revision. In 2010, the share of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) was 35.0% of the population in Asia and the Pacific, and India was 30.8%, but in 2050, India’s population will be 36.1% of the population of the region while the PRC’s share will fall to 27.6%. On these projections, India will become the most populous country in Asia—and the world—around the year 2020. The population in Asia and the Pacific is forecast to grow at an annual average of 0.5% over the next 40 years. This is slower compared to all the other main regions except Europe where the population is expected to be stable. Figure 1.3 gives the United Nations population projections for 2050. The growth rates are annual averages between 2010 and 2050. World population is expected to rise from 6.9 billion in 2010 to 9.3 billion in 2050. Population growth and the changing shares of the regions mainly reflect the assumptions about fertility patterns between now and 2050. Fertility rates may be affected by national population policies, unforeseen political and social upheavals, civil unrest, and climate change. It is also difficult to predict trends in migration between poorer and richer countries. It must be noted that small variations in fertility can produce major differences in projected population sizes in the long run.
Figure 1.1 World Population, 2010 Rest of the World 1.2%

West Asia 3.1%

Africa 14.8% Europe 11.8%

Asia and the Pacific 55.6%

North America 7.9% South America 5.7%

Sources: Table 1.1 and World Population Prospects, The 2010 Revision (UN Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2011).

Figure 1.2 World Population, 2050 Rest of the World 0.5% Africa 23.6%

West Asia 4.0%

Asia and the Pacific 50.4%

Europe 8.7% North America 7.6% South America 5.2%

Source: Derived from World Population Prospects, The 2010 Revision (UN Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2011).

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

128

PEOPLE

Figure 1.3 Population by Region, 2010 and 2050 5,000 4,500 4,000 1.5 3,500 Number (million) 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Africa Europe North America 2010 South America 2050 Asia and the Pacific Growth West Asia Rest of the World –1.2 –0.5 –1.0 –1.5 0.0 1.9 1.4 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.0 1.0 0.5 2.5 2.0 Annual Average Growth Rate (%)

Sources: Table 1.1 and World Population Prospects, The 2010 Revision (UN Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2011).

The Asia and Pacific region contains some very highfertility and some very low-fertility economies. The net reproduction rate is the average number of daughters that a hypothetical cohort of women is expected to have at the end of the reproductive period. Net reproduction rates range from 0.5 in Taipei,China to 2.5 daughters per woman in Timor-Leste. In Figure 1.4, economies are divided into three fertility groups—low, intermediate, and high fertility—based on criteria used by the United Nations’ Population Division. In Asia and the Pacific, economies in the high fertility group are mostly the Pacific island economies, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, and the Philippines. The low fertility group consists of the PRC; Hong Kong, China; the Republic of Korea; Japan; Singapore; Thailand; and Viet Nam. The medium fertility band is the largest and includes three of Asia’s most populous countries, Bangladesh, India, and Indonesia. Most of Asia’s contribution to the growth of world population will come from countries in this group together with Pakistan in the high fertility band.

Most countries in Asia and the Pacific experienced net emigration: more left than arrived. Figure 1.5 shows net migration rates: numbers immigrating minus numbers emigrating (expressed as numbers per thousand population). To avoid distorting the graph, three Pacific island economies—the Federated States of Micronesia, Samoa, and Tonga—with net emigration rates between 16 and 17 per thousand are omitted, as well as Singapore, which recorded net immigration of 31 per thousand over the period. Countries with net emigration include those with long traditions of exporting labor—Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, and Sri Lanka, some central Asian countries, and Republic of Fiji and Timor-Leste in the Pacific. All five most populous economies recorded net emigration—low rates in India and the PRC and somewhat higher in Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Pakistan. Note, however, that in these countries even low rates translate into large numbers in absolute terms.

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

PEOPLE

129 REGIONAL TABLES

Figure 1.4 Net Reproduction Rate, 2010–2015 (annual average) Timor-Leste Afghanistan Solomon Islands Tonga Samoa Vanuatu Papua New Guinea Micronesia, Fed. States of Philippines Tajikistan Pakistan Malaysia Fiji, Rep. of Kyrgyz Republic Nepal Lao PDR Kazakhstan Mongolia India Sri Lanka Cambodia Turkmenistan Uzbekistan New Zealand Bhutan Bangladesh Indonesia Brunei Darussalam Azerbaijan Australia Myanmar Viet Nam Maldives Armenia Thailand Georgia China, People’s Rep. of Japan Korea, Rep. of Singapore Hong Kong, China Taipei,China 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 –15.0

Figure 1.5 Net International Migration, 2005–2010 (numbers per 1,000 population annual average) Australia Hong Kong, China Bhutan New Zealand Brunei Darussalam Thailand Azerbaijan Malaysia Japan Kazakhstan Maldives Solomon Islands Korea, Rep. of China, People's Rep. of India Nepal Viet Nam Indonesia Mongolia Myanmar Turkmenistan Pakistan Sri Lanka Lao PDR Afghanistan Philippines Cambodia Uzbekistan Bangladesh Armenia Kyrgyz Republic Georgia Fiji, Rep. of Tajikistan Timor-Leste –10.0 –5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0

Source: Table 1.3.

High Fertility (more than 1.30) Intermediate Fertility (0.95–1.30) Low Fertility (0.5–0.95)
Source: UN Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2011).

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

130

PEOPLE

In 2010, populations in most economies of the region are still quite young with less than 15% over 65 years. Figure 1.6 shows the percentage of total population aged 65 years or above for 2010 and projections for 2050 for 41 economies of the region. With a rapidly aging population, by 2050, about 40% of the economies in the region will have more than a fifth of the population above 65 years. The percentage will be much higher in Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Singapore at 40% and above. In most developing economies in the region, oldage pensions are available only to government workers and those able to afford private schemes. The tradition of intra-family support is weakening in the region so that many old people, especially women who have longer life expectancies than men, will suffer real hardships as they age. In order to address old-age poverty, policies of “social pensions” can be useful alternatives to support the elderly who cannot afford formal pension schemes. The current period of rapid economic growth provides the opportunity for countries to build up funds to provide social pensions in the future.

Figure 1.6 Percentage of Total Population Aged 65 or Over, 2010 and 2050 Japan Georgia Australia New Zealand Hong Kong, China Armenia Korea, Rep. of Taipei,China Singapore Thailand Sri Lanka China, People's Rep. of Kazakhstan Cook Islands Azerbaijan Viet Nam Tonga Indonesia Samoa Myanmar Maldives Palau India Bhutan Kyrgyz Republic Malaysia Fiji, Rep. of Bangladesh Uzbekistan Tuvalu Pakistan Turkmenistan Mongolia Nepal Lao PDR Micronesia, Fed. States of Brunei Darussalam Cambodia Tajikistan Philippines Vanuatu Solomon Islands Kiribati Timor-Leste Papua New Guinea Afghanistan Marshall Islands Nauru 0 10 2010 20 30 2050 40 50

Sources: Table 1.6 and The World Population Prospects, The 2010 Revision (UNSD 2011).

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

PEOPLE
Box 1.1 Population Censuses in the Asia and Pacific Region

131 REGIONAL TABLES

Early censuses were carried out to identify potential tax payers or men of military age, but modern censuses serve wider purposes. The demographic, social, and economic information collected on the census forms are the basis for national population policies, provision of social services, policies to alleviate poverty, infrastructure development, town planning, and economic development, more generally. By tradition, population censuses involve visits by enumerators to every household. Some European countries have stopped carrying out censuses because they can obtain the same data from administrative registers. Singapore also uses administrative sources for basic population counts and characteristics, along with a large sample survey for detailed demographic and housing characteristics. Australia; Hong Kong, China; and Singapore have also adopted the use of the internet to collect census data from households. Most countries in the region still conduct censuses in the traditional manner. Population censuses are usually carried out every 10 years although a few countries, Australia for example, have every 5 years censuses. Various sources are used to update the latest census information, including birth and death registers and sample population surveys. In some cases, the latest figures are simply extrapolated by growth rates calculated from the two latest population counts. The United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) encourages countries to obtain census data—through actual censuses or from administrative records—at least every 10 years. The UNSD is currently promoting a census round centered on 2010 but extending from 2005 to 2014. Some 228 countries/areas all over the world including almost all economies in Asia and the Pacific are participating in the 2010 round. Box Figure 1.1 shows the reference years for censuses in 43 countries of the region for the current round. Myanmar and Uzbekistan are not included in Box Figure 1.1. They will participate in the 2010 round but the UNSD has no information on their plans. Population statistics for these two countries and for the 15 countries with 2011 or a later year as reference (red bars) are therefore extrapolations from earlier censuses. The 15 include Afghanistan, India, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Afghanistan has never had a full census. It had a partial count in 2008 and plans to hold its first complete census in 2013. The two most populous countries, the PRC and India, conducted their population census in 2010 and 2011, respectively, with preliminary counts at 1.36 billion persons in the PRC and 1.21 billion persons in India. Extrapolations of a country’s total population and its distribution by age and gender are usually quite reliable, but when the 2010 round is completed, there may be substantial revisions to the detailed characteristics and, especially, to the geographical distribution of the population in some countries.

Box Figure 1.1 Census Reference Years in the Countries of the Asia and Pacific Region 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2O11 2012 2013

Source: Derived from the United Nations Statistics Division, 2010 World Population and Housing Census Programme website (www.unstats.un.org/unsd/census2010.htm).

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

132

PEOPLE

Almost all countries have made progress in HDI relative to Australia though most still have far to go. Box 1.2 describes the methodology for HDI and provides ranking for Asia and the Pacific economies on HDI out of the total 169 economies. In recent years, Australia has had the highest HDI in Asia and the Pacific. Figure 1.7 shows how far the other countries in the region needed to improve to catch up with Australia in 2010 and in 1995 (or the earliest year available). For example, Afghanistan has the furthest to go although it had made modest progress by 2010 compared to 2005 (the earliest HDI for Afghanistan). The countries that have made the most striking gains over the period are Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, the PRC, the Maldives, Mongolia, Timor-Leste, and Viet Nam. Among the five most populous countries, the PRC is closest to Australia, followed by Indonesia, India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh.

Figure 1.7 Human Development Index, 1995 and 2010 (distance from Australia) Azerbaijan China, People's Rep. of Armenia Mongolia Bangladesh Maldives Viet Nam Timor-Leste Lao PDR Cambodia India Korea, Rep. of Pakistan Kazakhstan Indonesia Malaysia Nepal Myanmar Kyrgyz Republic Afghanistan Tajikistan Sri Lanka Thailand Philippines Uzbekistan Turkmenistan Hong Kong, China Solomon Islands New Zealand Singapore Georgia Japan Papua New Guinea Micronesia, Fed. States of Tonga Fiji, Rep. of Brunei Darussalam 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 2010 0.6 0.7

1995 or Earliest Source: Table 1.15.

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

2 The Human Development Index 133 REGIONAL TABLES The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary measure of human development calculated by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Prior to 2010. In Box Table 1.PEOPLE Box 1. The statistics on the numbers of people infected with AIDS are estimates based on methods and on parameters developed by the UNAIDS Reference Group on HIV/AIDS Estimates. called “plausibility bounds”. access to knowledge. Population censuses are conducted every 10 years in most countries.800. where the wider the bound. Modelling and Projections. but five are in the low human development group with HDI under 0. Statistics on the urban population are compiled according to each country’s national definition as there is no agreed international standard for defining an urban area. Household surveys are the best source for labor force data but these are not carried out in all countries. 2010 Very high human development Australia 2 New Zealand 3 Japan 11 Korea. Seven economies in the region are classified as having very high human development with HDI over 0. economies of Asia and the Pacific are listed. changes were also made to the way in which the subindices are normalized to lie between 0 and 1. It is an unweighted geometric average of three subindices: life expectancy at birth is the subindex for a long and healthy life.15. and a decent standard of living. under four human development groups. States of Maldives Indonesia Kyrgyz Republic Tajikistan Viet Nam India Timor-Leste Lao PDR Cambodia Solomon Islands Pakistan Low human development Bangladesh Myanmar Papua New Guinea Nepal Afghanistan 97 100 102 103 107 108 109 112 113 119 120 122 123 124 125 57 66 67 74 76 85 Medium human development Turkmenistan 86 Fiji. HDIs for earlier years have been revised to maintain broad comparability with the new 2010 indices. GNI is equal to GDP plus migrants’ remittances and other net income from abroad and so is considered to be a more appropriate measure of living standards than GDP In 2010. the subindex for access to knowledge is the unweighted average of mean years of schooling and expected years of schooling. For that reason. the greater the uncertainty surrounding an estimate. and the HDI is now obtained as a geometric. Other countries rely on census data supplemented by enterprise surveys and unemployment registration records. of 87 China. the average of literacy rate and school enrollment rate were used to represent access to knowledge. Rep. rather than arithmetic average of the three subindices. and the subindex for standard of living is per capita gross national income (GNI). Pakistan is at the lower limit of “medium development” and Bangladesh is in the “low human development” category. Unemployment registration records are often incomplete and breakdown by economic activities may not be available.1 Asia and the Pacific Economies Ranked by the Human Development Index. vital registration records are incomplete and cannot be used for statistical purposes. and per capita gross domestic product (GDP) was used to measure the standard of living. In many of the developing countries of the region. teachers. It represents the average achievements in a country in three basic dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life. Most countries in the region fall in the “medium human development” group. Fed. The estimates are presented together with ranges. Box Table 1. the growth rates are probably more reliable than the levels. including the five most populous countries except for Bangladesh and Pakistan.1.490. 129 132 137 138 155 Data Issues and Comparability Demographic data are either based on vital registration records or on censuses and surveys. and education resources are compiled by the UNESCO Institute of Statistics from country sources. People’s Republic of 89 Sri Lanka 91 Thailand 92 Source: Table 1. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Data on numbers of physicians and health resources are compiled by the World Health Organization and data on pupils. China 21 Singapore 27 Brunei Darussalam 37 High human development Malaysia Kazakhstan Azerbaijan Georgia Armenia Tonga Philippines Mongolia Uzbekistan Micronesia. . Republic of 12 Hong Kong. (See Box 1. with their ranks. HDIs were calculated for 169 economies in 2010.1).

2 19.9 27.4 16.5 84.7 437.3 7.8 66.6 9.4 14.4 13. China Korea.2 80.9 8.2 8.3 22.0 19.5 1321.0 214.9 2005 251.9 48.1 154.2 945.9 7.2 8.4 4.0 1035.5 2.2 3562.8 23.8 22.7 4.5 6.2 20.0 1016.5 9.0 102.6 2.3 20.5 0.2 8.7 2001 235.5 50.3 1421.0 5306.1 78.3 65.9 3.0 2002 239.1 101.3 16.9 85.8 1321.7 3641.4 20.1 19.4 1995 212.6 1314.2 126.9 4.4 15.4 4.7 178. of Hong Kong.1 22.0 106.0 11.0 6661.2 0.6 48.0 160.7 6.1 17..3 17.5 5436.4 15.4 184.4 99.3 109.3 22.6 596.4 143.6 4.0 1101.3 0.5 25.3 2003 243.9 4.6 0.9 151.7 1355.5 85.0 127.0 148.1 27.8 15.2 8.3 2009 267.3 3756.2 1166.4 3832.4 18.6 19.6 21.1 0.4 85.5 0.7 20.3 13.0 1185.7 225.9 565.3 1299.8 211.4 127.2 991.6 96.4 15.4 2.9 19.9 5.5 1378.5 104.5 19.0 152.5 2970.6 52.4 135.0 779.5 9.7 4.2 9.1 525.7 19.1 18.5 48.1 176..7 0.5 103.6 0.6 0.8 4.0 10.3 147.2 146.8 6200.0 1085.9 50.0 118.1 10.9 1307.2 6122.0 794.5 106.6 22.9 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.3 0.0 811.4 4.5 59.9 5.9 151.5 3.6 4.2 8.0 104.0 7.5 3370.0 19.3 5.0 20.9 26.2 9.2 1267.5 58.8 24.1 217.0 23.4 24.3 6.4 0.6 3.5 94.1 27.9 139.4 47.7 21.6 6817.9 1066.0 22.7 2.0 4.6 0.9 9.8 3.9 3410.4 5.4 14.1 979.2 20.8 23.7 2.5 448.0 886.7 4.1 3.5 3690.1 127.4 10.1 3.8 6.6 105.4 14.1 21.3 1211.3 100.3 21.7 4.3 3489.2 155.5 18.9 3482.3 86.9 528.6 801.8 7.4 470.2 2006 254.5 222.2 6.0 0.1 5.5 3063.3 0.7 4.5 4.3 18.5 2.8 25.0 44.2 3.3 0.9 17.3 0.4 13.9 239.3 154.7 52.3 8.9 228.1 129.6 26.4 11.4 821.8 1395.0 3641.3 4.6 3602.4 6.6 25.3 4.1 4.6 9.5 21.4 1359.8 459.2 22.9 102.0 787.4 1276.4 5726.1 23.0 478.3 4.2 81.5 4.4 2826.5 24.3 48.4 19.0 66.6 142.7 49.1 123.7 5.0 1117.8 1245. but it is not classified as a developing member.8 581.4 4.3 9.3 6348.7 10. c For reporting economies only.7 180.1 152.8 51.2 6.0 80.1 127.9 212.1 Midyear Population (million) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.0 62.2 3677.3 3.6 3450.8 3438.4 14.6 22.1 10.7 3718.0 6276.5 438.1 0.6 1143.9 202.0 747.9 1283.8 56.5 504.9 18.1 22.2 4.9 2.0 5.6 133.0 5.2 153.0 27.0 5190.4 1264.5 6.7 127.7 1134.0 51.3 127.1 23.4 13.4 6.9 6213.9 5.3 167.7 6895.4 109.5 22.0 294.2 4.0 923.8 4.1 125.3 161.7 7.2 6486.7 6353.4 13.6 179.2 64.0 515.2 7.4 144.7 84. Rep.2 20.6 182.1 40.1 5.5 2007 258.2 26.1 5689.2 28.9 0.0 20.2 18.1 21.2 810.4 17.7 5.1 42.8 1207.3 1286.8 2010 272.2 5.6 54.3 3288.2 3526.3 15.3 0.8 20.5 0.2 5.5 0.7 0.9 4.1 18.1 6. of Mongolia Taipei.7 0.0 4080.9 54.9 5.4 20.0 20.9 100.1 481.5 1039.9 3679.5 26.8 5948.0 1334. World Population Prospects.2 1182.4 4.2 177.8 6506.3 1225.6 1340.1 829.6 5.7 9.2 4.5 5.5 229.0 55.6 66.1 5817.3 0.1 1363. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .7 6.2 0.9 20.1 9.4 13.1 151.4 235.0 19.7 68.7 1339.4 166.6 5.2 6.0 549.1 8.0 904.0 6.7 9.3 20.2 6429.3 12.3 5.6 22.6 48.6 102. The 2010 Revision (UN Population Division.3 83.4 71. Sources: Country sources.3 50.5 5.1 11.1 92.2 418.7 4.1 4.9 90.0 557.9 6.2 1409.4 127.6 19.1 62.1 3.5 816.8 94.3 234.7 22.5 8. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESc REGIONAL MEMBERSc WORLD 1990 190.7 0.7 48.6 0.0 26.9 847.6 47.6 124.6 27.5 1292.9 2008 263.0 1150.3 23.7 177.7 23.0 83.2 2.9 23.6 0.6 208.8 223.8 140.5 87.6 20.6 25.3 153.1 147.1 67.4 15.1 81.7 149.3 77.9 3.9 1387.1 533.3 53.2 3.8 3331.0 53. People’s Rep.7 588.0 9.0 7.6 0.3 50.0 5312.3 10.5 55.2 77.8 4.6 19.6 3.9 4.4 9.4 88.9 807.4 7.5 105.6 24.2 96.2 22.9 4.3 15. 7.8 78.0 4.6 4.0 47.0 15.6 9.9 1379.6 23.3 5.2 0.1 22.4 191.3 19.9 20.3 0.0 923.8 6.5 5.4 25.2 8.1 11.1 48.6 825.4 9.3 219.3 163.7 26.5 3.6 22.4 102.2 0.8 128.6 82.8 72.9 103.9 59.5 23.8 24.3 3522.5 20.0 832. Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2011).0 48.2 153.0 1068.7 6.9 3795.6 2.6 0.9 25.8 4.3 10.5 99.8 4.3 12.8 4.9 353.0 27.4 238.4 968.7 3564.3 21.6 0.3 53.5 2.3 0.6 0.0 138.1 6.2 8.7 101.8 60.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacificb Cook Islands Fiji.1 231.6 428.0 97. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.4 3.0 1402.7 44.8 3.0 103. b Population figures for the Pacific developing member economies are in thousands while the regional total for the Pacific are in millions.1 5.7 0.1 6079.9 9.3 19.3 12.6 1015.7 5.2 492.2 158.3 14.4 90.4 3.6 20.6 5562.2 737.6 28.9 150.8 17.0 52.4 2.9 3603.6 0.8 26.3 3.0 145.1 51.3 103.7 99.5 25.9 87.5 88.0 7.8 5.9 131.8 10.2 24.3 175.5 4.0 10.9 4.7 25.8 6.4 102.7 3.0 105.5 127.1 541.7 196.4 14.5 1302.4 517.3 1328.3 8.0 1051.0 1345.6 6739.9 127.2 8.4 65.0 17.1 47.3 0.6 .5 19.6 9.2 137.2 9. Fed.3 22.4 16.8 1371.6 5.5 194.3 1416.5 7.4 79.9 573.5 81.6 9.2 178.6 3210.5 1214.1 152.2 8.2 8.134 PEOPLE Population Table 1.7 181. Rep.8 4.7 2000 232.5 205.2 57.5 833.3 24.8 19.1 76.2 1080.8 22.0 9.7 5.3 168.4 3.6 2.2 63.2 4.8 66.0 26.5 183.5 3.8 107.3 59.4 102.4 92.3 18.9 142.0 752.6 19.6 4.0 97.6 6584.1 5.6 2004 247.3 217.3 1284.2 97.7 6.7 8.1 64.7 835.2 2.9 45.7 4.7 127.2 28.7 6.2 206.2 25.

3 2.5 1.7 0..PEOPLE Population Table 1.0 2.3 0.1 1.2 2.4 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.3 1.0 1.4 0.1 1.2 1.4 0.5 1.9 2.8 2.9 1.5 –0.4 0.9 2.3 2.3 –0.6 1.6 2.1 10.1 1.4 –0.5 2.4 1.1 1.5 –0.2 0.4 2.2 0.1 1.2 1.2 2.3 2.0 2.3 1.1 1.8 0.4 1.1 –11.0 2.9 0.7 3.7 1.9 2.7 0.1 –3.8 0.2 0.3 1.1 1.0 1.5 1.1 1.3 1.0 0.4 0.1 1.4 0.2 0.7 1.6 –0. Fed.8 1.3 1.2 1.9 1.5 1.3 1.1 –0.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.2 1.9 .3 1.6 1.4 0.5 2. People’s Rep.3 0.8 1.9 2.9 0.4 0.0 1.9 1.3 1.3 1.0 2.3 0.7 0.2 1.3 2.1 0.4 2.5 1.4 1.2 2.4 1.1 1.4 0.1 1.6 1.3 0.6 0.9 2.9 2.5 –0.1 1.5 1.0 5.6 0.5 2.4 2000 1.7 1.3 1.4 1.0 1.3 2.1 0.5 1.0 0.7 0.9 2.1 1.2 0.2 1.5 2.8 1.5 2.1 1.4 1.4 0.1 1.1 1.3 2002 1.5 1.7 1.9 2.3 1.2 1.4 0.6 2.9 3.0 1.9 2.8 –0.3 1.4 0.5 1.0 2.0 0.9 –0.4 1.5 2.4 1.1 2.3 1.5 0.0 2.6 1.4 1.5 2.3 2.6 2.1 4.3 1.2 0.7 2.9 1.2 1.2 2006 2.4 0.2 2.1 135 REGIONAL TABLES a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.9 0.3 2.9 1. b For reporting economies only.2 0.1 1.2 0.1 1.3 1.7 0.6 0.4 1.3 –0.3 1.7 0.2 1.6 1.1 0.0 1.2 0.0 2.1 2.3 0.1 1.4 1.2 2003 1.3 2.2 1.2 2.1 0.6 2.6 2.5 3.2 1.3 2. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESb REGIONAL MEMBERSb WORLD 1990 1.3 2.4 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4 –1.1 0.1 1.3 3.2 0.7 1.9 1.9 5.2 1.6 1.3 1.1 1.7 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.3 0.2 0.2 1.1 –0.1 0.1 –0.7 0.2 0.1 1.0 –0.6 2.2 0.3 2.3 0.1 –0.3 2.5 1.2 0.3 1.2 1.5 1.9 0.4 6.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 2.4 1.6 0.4 –0. Rep.4 1.1 0.3 0.7 1.5 2.1 1.2 1.5 1.2 0.9 1.0 0.9 1.8 0.0 2.0 0.2 2.3 1.2 1.0 1.2 3.4 0.2 0.1 1.0 3.5 0.0 1.7 –0.2 10.8 2. Rep.1 2.2 0.5 –2.0 0.3 0.9 3.3 1.8 1.3 1.5 –1.3 2.6 2.1 1.3 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.0 –0.2 –2.5 2.7 1.9 0.9 –0.2 2008 2.0 2.6 1.0 0.1 1.3 2.5 1.2 2.5 1.3 1.9 2.4 0.9 2.9 2.5 1.2 1.3 0.9 2.3 –0.5 3.4 0.8 1.4 0.1 0.6 0.8 1.7 1.0 2.5 0.3 12.1 2.5 1.5 2.0 –0.2 0.5 0.1 2.3 0.7 –0.6 1.9 0.4 1.3 1.0 2.7 0.3 2.2 0.8 –0.2 1.1 0.0 2.5 0.0 0. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .1 2.3 2.7 2.3 1.1 0.2 0.0 0.1 2.1 2.9 –0.1 0.3 1.4 2.0 2.4 0.6 1.2 0.5 1.3 1. of Hong Kong.3 1.1 0.5 1.1 2.7 –0.7 0. of Mongolia Taipei.9 1.1 2.3 2.3 1.7 2.7 3.6 2.4 3.2 Growth Rates in Population (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.0 1.3 0.4 1.2 0.7 1.1 2.6 0.7 –0.4 1..5 2.7 1.8 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.9 1.7 … 1.0 2.3 1.5 2.0 0.3 2001 1.8 1. Sources: ADB staff estimates based on country sources and World Population Prospects.4 0..0 3.5 0.4 0.4 1.4 1.1 5.4 1.3 2. Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2011).8 2.3 2.4 0.4 0.8 1.8 2.8 1.7 1.5 0.2 –0.5 1.5 1.8 2.0 2.1 1.3 9.8 1.6 1.2 0.1 2.6 2.9 1.0 2.6 2.2 0.1 1.1 2.1 0.1 –0.5 1.7 1. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.0 0.8 1.3 1.1 2.0 1.3 0.9 1.0 2.1 2.8 1.2 2010 2.3 1.0 1.5 0..1 1.2 5.1 –0.2 2.1 –0.7 0.1 0.3 1.8 1.0 2.9 –0.1 1.5 0.2 2007 2.2 2.8 1.9 4.2 1.1 1.3 1. but it is not classified as a developing member.3 1.5 0.2 1.0 1.6 1.7 1.3 2.8 0.2 0.6 6.3 1.0 0.3 1.2 2.5 0.8 1.3 1.2 0.8 0.5 1.7 2.4 2.2 1.0 2.1 1.1 2.3 2.9 –0.4 0.4 1.3 2.0 1.4 1.9 .0 2.9 0.4 2.7 2.1 1.1 1. 1.3 1.2 1.5 2.9 1.2 2004 2.4 2.3 2.9 1.2 0.3 –0.8 0.6 2.9 0.0 1.3 0.3 2.6 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.2 0.2 1.3 1.3 1.7 1.0 1.3 1.0 1.7 1995 1.4 0.3 2.8 2.3 1.1 1.2 1.4 9.3 2.5 2.7 0.6 1.3 0.3 1.3 1. 1.2 1.6 1.5 –2.7 1.0 1.6 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.8 2.1 1.1 1.7 1.1 1.6 1.0 2.4 1.6 1.6 2.8 2.3 1.7 2.3 1.1 –0.1 2.2 0.7 2.3 2.0 2.6 0. China Korea.3 –0.5 2.5 2.5 1.5 –2.4 0.3 0.9 1.8 0.4 1.6 0. The 2010 Revision (UN Population Division.0 1.3 2.4 3.2 0.2 1.9 0.9 1.2 1.4 1.6 0.8 1.5 2.0 1.2 2009 2.6 0.0 2.8 1.3 2.5 2.4 –0.0 1.0 0.0 2.3 1.1 0.3 2.0 1.7 2.2 2005 1.8 –2.2 0.3 1.4 2.9 3.

5 26.5 1.6 … … –25.5 14. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 2005–2010 –2.8 –1.5 100.9 17.4 –4.3 –0.0 –2.2 a Refers to annual average.0 5.2 68.1 –0.1 –0.8 43.8 38.5 –0.7 12.0 21.1 Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.6 –2.2 –15.8 8.5 34.1 66.7 –18.3 37.8 15.8 71.9 –0.8 30.4 –0.3 71.4 –0.5 0.7 55.2 65.9 … –1.4 22.6 30.9 –0.5 57.4 –0.2 33.7 21.9 52.7 33.6 30.4 … … … –15.5 25.1 0.3 7.7 –1.4 –0.9 71.8 … –10.0 0.4 25.2 72.3 57.5 88.4 … … … –17.5 26.0 34.4 47.5 36. Rep.0 29.8 Urban Population (as % of total population) 1995 2000 2005 19.7 18.2 –29.7 0.2 58.7 25.0 –0.0 8.7 30.7 73.3 0.7 13.6 –1.9 –7.4 20.9 3.9 100.3 27.0 40.4 14.1 25.0 77.1 52.0 –2.2 26.3 100.8 55.1 –5.6 –2. but it is not classified as a developing member.3 28.7 87.2 11.2 –3.8 28.0 2.6 17.6 21.0 32.4 49. World Urbanization Prospects.1 –1.7 45.9 –17. b For urban population.6 –3.9 26.4 50.1 44.8 –3.8 –3.3 –3.7 40.4 –0.3 36.0 56.3 … … … –17.0 70.6 15. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .4 66.1 –4.3 22.0 20.3 –4.9 44.1 21.1 100.3 3.1 –0.3 35.4 30.5 –3.Chinab South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamc Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. of Mongolia Taipei.2 … –2.2 66.4 –1.1 100.7 100.6 –4.7 48.4 25.0 … –8.3 –0.7 6.7 51.0 71.1 24.0 –2.3 64.7 58.5 45.9 … … … –20.1 –20.5 18.8 23.0 22.5 0.0 69.4 3.5 65.9 –0.0 –9.6 100.4 48.8 –16.9 36.4 55.0 50.0 46. refers to localities of 100.9 1.6 19.1 40.4 15.2 64.7 25.3 5.4 … … 6.8 57.1 –2.1 –2.1 21.9 1.9 –2.5 –10.1 51.1 23.1 13.1 35.1 14.1 –23.1 26.3 33.0 –2.2 47.6 56.1 27.1 –0.000 population) 1990–1995 1995–2000 2000–2005 51.8 22. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.4 27.6 25.8 –1.3 –13.6 28.1 … –4.6 –12.5 –14.7 27.7 31.0 31.9 –10.3 100.6 –0.2 35.4 –38.0 4.8 –0. country sources.2 33.6 10.2 22.1 66.9 55.0 –2.2 –4.8 … … –16.8 –0.7 –6. Sources: World Population Prospects.0 100.9 14.8 100.8 22. Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2011).1 23.0 59.7 20.136 PEOPLE Population Table 1.3 49.3 Migration and Urbanization Net International Migration Ratea (per 1.8 30.4 12.5 73.2 … –0.5 1.1 4.7 22.0 –1.2 –6.1 17.0 83.3 51.4 67.8 –0.5 1.9 43.4 3.2 86.3 –11.0 … –6.5 35.2 51.9 42.5 3.2 13.4 –16.4 –1.8 0.000 or more inhabitants.1 –0.9 100.6 25.0 13.8 100.3 31.2 53.8 12.8 37.0 22.0 81.1 3.6 –1.5 20.9 … –1.8 –3.5 … … –4.2 56.3 59.6 70.3 –13. The 2009 Revision (UN Population Division.3 23.2 18.6 56.6 85.0 68.2 –2.6 15.2 47.0 62.4 53.8 24.9 48.0 15.0 86.4 75.5 22.6 64.1 67.4 –2.0 2.1 –0.0 –0.6 –18.6 14.9 –37.0 30.7 42.3 75.4 35.6 14.8 0.9 –6.5 0.4 63.2 3. Fed. People’s Rep. c Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.0 28.7 2.1 84.0 62.1 1990 18.5 52.7 45.7 41.5 –1.7 20.0 100.1 18.3 –3. China Korea.4 –2.2 17.1 5.7 25.0 26.8 11.6 48.0 … … 10.1 23.9 … –9.1 64.5 –0.4 99.8 48.1 … –15. The 2010 Revision.8 86.0 30.6 89.8 16.5 57.6 35.2 48.8 53.6 31.1 34.5 36.1 –1.9 –4.2 52.0 49.4 –8.3 –3. Rep.7 24.6 65.7 2010 22.9 18.0 27.2 –2.7 20.9 43.3 3.2 0.0 79.1 … … –17.3 100.7 85.7 1.9 44.7 –2.2 85.1 –2.0 78.0 –0.1 16.2 –2. of Hong Kong.1 34.0 21.9 43.0 65.8 –1.1 6.3 20.0 83.

9 20.6 24.5 31.5 42.1 24.8 23.7 29.4 37.7 29.1 40.2 29.2 36.4 19.8 23.3 40.4 40.1 26. The 2010 Revision (UN Population Division.0 43.1 35.6 20.8 30.9 2001 48.6 31.4 12.1 29.5 40.7 30.1 37.6 42.4 46.0 21.2 30.9 13.3 43.2 43.1 43.5 40.5 36.5 38.7 20.4 18.4 18.2 40.0 27.4 39.4 28.0 36.2 29.4 35.8 30.5 32.9 21.8 18.0 40.1 39.7 17.4 39.6 18.2 38.1 32.3 35.9 36.5 38.0 32.6 38.5 12.8 36.6 25.2 31.9 36.4 32.7 19.7 30.2 2005 47.4 27.7 40.8 22.1 22.0 17.8 41.1 38.9 40.2 47.0 23.9 23.8 36.4 30.3 39.3 37.8 35.6 30.2 26.9 40.0 18.9 28.8 33.2 29.8 31.6 40.8 29.9 26. Statistics and Demography website (www.6 29.9 40.7 27.5 23.0 31.3 37.0 34. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIES b REGIONAL MEMBERSb WORLD 1990 46.9 29.8 46.3 35.4 38.2 37.8 37.6 21.7 29.7 18.6 46.0 26.5 28.5 26.9 39.2 40.0 31.2 30.2 39.9 22.4 39.8 34.3 34.4 25.2 33.4 33. Fed. … 40.2 16.6 24.2 23.7 39.2 32.7 19.6 32.0 12.0 26.9 39.9 37.0 26.5 37.5 32..6 29.7 40.7 34.0 24. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.9 20.9 32.6 49.4 25.6 24.3 42.4 29.6 23.6 33.5 28.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.8 40.7 34.8 21.8 41.9 40.2 31.0 21.6 26.4 29.8 38.0 29.4 49.1 24.6 37.8 15.1 41.9 37.4 27.9 27.3 41.1 16.3 21.2 20.3 28. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Sources: World Population Prospects.0 29.8 28.3 24.0 41.6 27.1 20.3 40.2 16.3 29.5 16.6 20.9 28.2 … 42.3 32.0 20. of Hong Kong.7 24.6 32.8 26.5 32.1 24.6 24.1 38.0 25.8 26.3 40.1 19.0 2003 47.0 39.8 27.2 25.3 30.7 18.8 … 38.3 19.3 30.3 37.3 39.7 26.6 38.0 36.2 30.9 39..3 41.9 28.3 18.8 29.3 21.6 20.6 27.1 30.5 16.1 31.2 39.7 38.1 41.3 24.3 27.4 32.6 19.2 41.0 27.3 29.5 26.2 41.2 18.0 23.1 14.3 30.7 19.7 37.3 39.6 38.2 23.1 31.0 24.1 40.6 37.9 39.6 27.7 34.6 36.6 35.7 39. of Mongolia Taipei.0 31.2 27.6 38.9 37.9 39.8 30.7 32.0 37.4 18.3 28.8 35.5 40.3 … … 43.1 19.9 20.1 37.9 21.7 34.5 39.7 35.1 22.6 17.2 17.0 24.9 38.9 32.7 38.8 29.5 19.5 31.1 38.0 32.5 41.5 39.1 18.php).2 40.1 40.1 33.3 40.9 36.0 41.3 14.4 26.1 24.6 16.2 30.7 33.5 … … 43.2 25.2 39.7 36.9 39.4 39.5 17.6 32.9 35.8 22.8 26.1 41.2 31.1 34.3 19.4 26.8 28.8 34.spc.6 33.1 33.4 29.3 42.9 37.2 35.2 43.3 37.3 25.9 21.7 32.3 40.4 29.2 36.9 31.5 33.4 29.0 36.2 30.6 2010 46.8 27.7 34.2 40.0 24.4 20.7 40.9 32.3 35.6 20.4 37.1 40. but it is not classified as a developing member.4 36.3 35.1 40.6 38.5 29.9 19.7 34.5 31. b For reporting economies only.8 34.3 25.3 17. for Taipei.7 26.5 24.9 29.7 28.8 37.PEOPLE Population Table 1.7 35.1 20.7 22.5 37.8 33.1 27.6 37.9 2009 46.2 28.3 28.2 36.3 27.4 15.2 37.8 36.5 39.3 40.7 39.8 20.0 31.2 21.4 20.0 20.3 39.4 39.7 31.8 34.6 38.3 30.5 13.6 20.5 27.9 33.1 19.1 37.8 36.1 27.7 13.8 28.3 36.4 37.4 Population Aged 0–14 Years (percent of total population) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.1 23.3 36.2 39.0 32.7 29.1 30.5 30.0 24.9 23.4 30.5 21.4 27.9 37.1 37.6 22.4 35.2 20.2 42.4 33.5 2002 48.1 29.1 38.8 36.4 1995 47.9 35.5 23.2 38.5 26.7 23.4 137 REGIONAL TABLES a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.9 26.6 22.0 41.7 31.3 20.9 41.1 22.8 20.1 13.3 36.2 34.7 20.1 33.6 27.5 37.China: Monthly Bulletin of Statistics Online (Directorate-General of Budget.0 34.2 25.2 … 36.9 38.1 43.9 31.3 30.0 19.2 41.2 27.8 42.0 21.2 37.9 30.1 21.8 40.8 35.6 42.2 39.2 .0 40.9 32. Rep.4 18.4 20.5 28.8 46.8 41.3 12.1 … 43.3 31.0 46.9 13.6 19.0 13. Rep.4 29.5 41.4 24.2 27.6 31.3 38.3 13.9 16.1 42.9 39.2 33.9 39.7 37.5 23.4 36.7 45.2 40.4 37.8 47.5 32.2 2008 47.3 28.0 19.7 38.6 11.5 41.9 33.3 36.4 16.4 21.6 13.9 … … 42.0 31.2 23.5 38.2 20.1 28.0 27.6 32.3 28.1 24.4 23.5 34.3 19.9 37.8 37.4 21.6 21.2 43.5 29.0 17.7 22.5 32.7 17.5 22.6 2004 47.5 43.1 15.2 40.6 27.0 41.9 28.3 30.4 36.7 12.4 34.4 32.6 46.9 35.2 33.4 39.5 36.8 2006 47.0 37.7 41.0 31. China Korea.8 20.4 2000 48.4 37.1 33.5 37.0 29.7 32.5 27.0 21.5 12.0 25.7 29. Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2011).int/sdp/index.0 19. Accounting and Statistics 2011).7 35.5 41.3 37.1 39.9 30.2 31.1 29.8 40.0 32.3 28.8 20.4 27.2 48.0 42.5 36.4 35.0 47.8 38.9 23.3 37.9 29.1 21.6 25.0 27.2 20.7 24.8 36.4 32.3 37.7 29.0 40.2 46.1 25.7 31.0 19.1 32.2 38.8 35.4 39.6 23.5 27.7 21.9 21.7 35.0 18.2 11.1 40. People’s Rep.3 22.1 42.5 2007 47.7 34.3 34.0 33.4 46.8 28.2 28.7 16.9 15.9 35.1 37.1 18.2 25.

6 67.4 55.3 68.3 64.6 55.4 60.3 62.1 65.5 2010 51.3 64.5 59.7 60.2 56.2 57.4 1995 50.0 71.1 2004 49.2 62.8 70.2 58.3 58.3 59.138 PEOPLE Population Table 1.7 72.3 60.2 60.8 65. Rep.9 55.3 57.3 65.1 58.3 58.6 58.7 63.6 58.1 58.9 59.1 66.6 66.7 … 52.3 68.0 66.0 57.5 66.7 65.9 63.2 65.6 66.4 63.9 66.8 62. People’s Rep.0 57.5 70.0 70.China: Monthly Bulletin of Statistics Online (Directorate-General of Budget.3 71.3 70.0 65.php).5 71.2 65.2 54.1 68.1 57.9 65.1 59.7 64.0 70.6 65.9 67.4 62.9 64.3 55.5 59.8 49.4 58.2 64.3 61.6 55.5 58.3 66.6 66.4 65.7 62.6 55.8 70.7 69.2 70.3 63.6 63.2 55.5 68.6 57.8 68.2 61.9 52.2 64.9 68.9 60.9 65.3 55.0 56.4 57.2 62.2 65.6 59.9 58.7 67.5 56.3 65.4 69.3 70.6 54.9 2007 50.1 64.7 57.2 52.6 59.0 67.7 67.3 65.6 58.8 64.9 62.8 63.5 61.0 62.3 64.9 56.2 59.8 56.7 55.2 73.3 68.0 71.2 62.9 72.8 66.1 60.0 64.4 69.1 63.7 67.2 60.0 61.2 50.1 70.7 64.6 57.5 57.5 … … 52.7 66.4 66.6 65.1 66.3 56.3 57.4 56.0 56.8 70.3 55.7 63.0 64.8 61.7 66.1 63.9 56.8 55.1 54.9 56.4 56. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.8 62.8 62.3 58.4 61.5 55.3 60.1 61.5 65.4 58.1 62.2 48.2 64.7 2006 50.4 49.1 71.7 55.5 61.6 60.4 67.4 65.0 61.7 55.0 65.7 60. of Mongolia Taipei.7 53.8 61.6 56.0 63. China Korea.7 56.1 61.4 57.7 70.0 60.9 60.3 55.5 64.7 60.5 57.5 68.3 64.4 62.2 50.5 65.0 63.9 67.9 67.7 70.1 65.1 66.6 59.1 63.2 64.7 64.9 55.2 59.2 55.3 60.9 63.6 67.1 61.6 62.5 65.4 62.9 63.0 56.2 65.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.8 55.0 71.9 60.6 … 58.6 57. b For reporting economies only.9 68.9 56.1 70.3 69.7 71.1 64.9 67.2 66.9 67.5 Population Aged 15–64 Years (percent of total population) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.3 55.2 70.6 64.3 53.5 52.0 65.1 66.8 55.4 58. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .6 59.6 63.5 59.6 55.1 61.0 56.8 68.5 62.4 56.2 56.6 61.0 67.1 64.0 54.8 66.8 58.6 65.0 66.6 55.4 64.5 65.4 54.2 56.7 67.8 67.3 66.9 54.8 57.7 61.1 … … 55.1 67.5 70.9 52.3 59.2 64.3 55.5 63.9 65.0 60.7 … 53.4 60.9 61.3 50.0 2000 49.5 62.5 55.6 64.7 62.6 60.6 57. but it is not classified as a developing member.3 67.0 66.9 71.3 56.3 68.7 66.1 73.5 57.6 60.3 2009 50.8 56.8 70.7 56.int/sdp/index.1 63.9 69.4 62.1 64.1 58.9 64.0 50.7 63.9 61.9 58.8 71.8 60.7 64. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIES b REGIONAL MEMBERSb WORLD 1990 50.2 56.3 64.spc.0 70.9 61.0 62.5 61.3 57.6 66.5 53.5 65.2 2001 49.1 59.9 50.4 61.5 70.8 63.3 63.5 55.9 56.6 61.7 55.0 54.7 63.6 70.7 68.9 55.1 64.5 55.2 62.3 65.9 58.3 60.0 64.5 56.0 51.8 58.6 63.7 72.4 68.0 63.7 71.5 62.3 63.9 71.0 69.3 61.5 66.2 66.7 70.2 … … 52.6 52.2 62.7 65.0 59.0 68.3 55. Accounting and Statistics 2011).6 64.4 62.9 63.0 66.2 72.4 70.6 55.6 62.8 64.7 56.9 64.7 61.9 … … 56.0 59.8 59.2 57.8 66.6 65.4 55.2 54.4 72.5 60.2 61.8 64.1 65.5 60.4 67.6 64.7 58.0 62.6 71.0 64.8 64.3 64.0 56.2 55.4 66.1 55.6 52.3 59.7 63.5 57.7 61. of Hong Kong.8 64.8 63.2 55.0 54.5 62.1 2008 50.3 61.3 56.0 59.4 70.4 65.9 64.7 57.9 65.2 66.4 64.6 67.5 68.0 56.8 71.4 72.1 62.2 60. Rep. for Taipei.2 59.1 54.7 54.3 70.6 48.8 64.7 54.2 64.8 61.6 62.5 50.4 71.4 55.3 66.7 59.4 71.4 57.2 60.9 70.1 71.2 65.2 66.9 60.8 63.9 70.3 58.8 69.7 56.5 62.4 63.1 68.0 67.6 60.8 64.0 67.4 53.2 58.8 50.0 65.7 56.5 64.9 64.7 62.6 50.9 59.6 70.5 52.4 66.6 59.0 50.1 64.4 73.7 58.9 64.4 60.5 63.4 69.9 55.3 70.6 63.5 71.0 55.8 70.0 59. The 2010 Revision (UN Population Division.4 58.0 59.0 61.9 63.8 73.2 54.6 55. Sources: World Population Prospects.2 64.5 53.8 61.0 56.4 63.8 62.3 55.9 73.9 59.5 63.0 66.0 66.8 54.7 55.5 72.1 65.5 64.5 66.4 64. Fed. Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2011).1 68.9 62.4 59.8 65.9 60.2 65.3 62.1 61.9 65.8 56.9 65.6 65.2 71.3 55.6 55.4 64.8 58.1 69.9 62.2 71.3 64.6 56.7 56.5 64.2 62.4 48.6 72.6 58.8 67.8 63.7 66.2 63.8 73.9 65.5 56.4 56.7 64.5 65.2 70.5 57.6 63.6 63.5 55.6 55.9 70.0 59.3 66.5 70.7 66.2 69.6 68.5 57.6 65.3 65.7 62.7 60.0 57.7 68.7 69.5 68.5 57.0 63.9 56.5 72.0 54.5 63.2 66.8 57.4 63.2 68.3 69.9 66.8 66.9 64.2 61.3 60.3 61.2 56.5 65.1 63.8 2003 49. Statistics and Demography website (www.4 2005 50.4 66.8 64.0 57.2 53.7 65.4 66.4 70.7 55.5 2002 49.6 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.9 61.9 68.3 55.7 66.9 … 60.6 65.1 55.1 56.5 55.6 58.8 59.3 57.9 61.2 70.

6 7.8 8.5 6.9 5.7 5.6 6.4 6.3 8.0 5.7 6.2 5.4 13.7 15.4 6.8 4.6 2007 2.3 6.1 14.3 11.7 4.0 3.9 7.6 6.1 5.4 3.4 9.8 4.5 3.3 5.3 10.0 5.3 4.6 4.0 5.8 9.8 5. People’s Rep.2 3.9 10.3 6.8 4.9 8.4 3.9 7.6 4.5 7.0 5.0 5.1 5.8 6.2 5.5 3.2 4.8 4.9 24.8 3.3 9.1 8.4 3. Rep.8 8.5 3.7 7.9 16.5 5.2 15.8 4.8 7.2 4.2 4.7 4.8 3.1 4.1 3.9 5.2 4.6 4.1 4.1 3.0 7.0 6.9 3.8 11.8 5.3 4.1 … 4.0 … … 2.9 7.7 6.6 3.9 5. for Taipei.6 6.9 7.1 3.8 16.7 3.6 5.4 3.1 4.2 2.7 5.3 1.4 12.3 6.6 3.4 3.6 5.0 12.0 7.4 1.2 2.5 2.4 3.6 9.5 4.8 4.1 5.2 7. b For reporting economies only.1 5.2 2.8 5.3 4.7 9.6 6.2 16.1 2002 2.0 5.4 13.4 4.2 5.0 5.0 7.2 4.1 7.4 5.1 5.8 3.0 5.1 5.6 4.8 4.0 3.0 4.2 5.0 4.4 13.4 6.3 8.0 4. Fed.0 5.spc.0 5.4 3.2 3.7 5.4 1.2 11.1 14.1 5.2 4.1 4.2 5.4 3.6 9.5 3.1 4.4 3.2 4.9 3.2 6.8 15.8 9.3 4.9 3.9 7.9 7.3 16.8 8.2 1995 2.8 5.3 13.7 2.4 8.1 4.0 8.5 8.2 2.4 5.5 2.0 4.1 6.9 5.4 7.6 4.4 11.3 5.0 3.4 4.8 14.8 9.4 8.5 7.4 8.3 3.6 4.5 5.6 3.4 3.4 2.3 1.1 5.9 14.1 4.4 7.6 5.2 4.6 2.9 6.6 14.7 3.1 3.3 … … 4.5 2.5 6.0 11.5 5.3 5.2 4.1 5.9 6.6 5.7 4.2 3.3 5.9 8.5 4.3 4.7 4.8 4.3 1.6 3.3 5.0 4.6 1.4 5.1 5.1 8.9 8.5 22.1 4.5 7.3 8.5 2.3 5.1 4.7 4.4 5.4 16.4 12.0 6.4 5.9 5. The 2010 Revision (UN Population Division.3 4.4 5.5 3.2 4.0 4.1 7.6 3.1 5.2 4.7 9.0 15.2 3.0 4.7 4. Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2011).9 6.5 4.2 8.7 12.6 5.4 13.0 5.9 8.5 2.6 7.4 13.1 8. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESb REGIONAL MEMBERSb WORLD 1990 2.2 5.2 4.6 8.2 3.3 10.5 9.5 2.6 4.2 3.9 4.4 7.9 9.3 5.1 25.5 2.6 27.5 6.7 3.8 6.6 5.3 3. of Hong Kong.2 4.8 5.9 5.1 4.9 5.2 4.5 2006 2.1 5.1 8.7 4.4 3.0 3.9 … 3.5 4.2 5.6 4.2 8.6 1.1 7.2 4.3 9.2 3.2 7.9 9. Rep.5 4.0 7.0 5.5 3.1 4.4 13.0 4.8 2009 2.0 5.3 3. Statistics and Demography website (www.3 14.4 4.0 5.2 3.9 15.7 5.2 6.3 5.4 3.1 2.7 15.0 7.6 3.2 4.6 4.0 13.8 4.5 6.3 4.2 8.China: Monthly Bulletin of Statistics Online (Directorate-General of Budget.4 4.6 5.3 5.9 6.5 7.1 5.6 5.9 7.8 3.6 8.2 13.8 5.1 5.8 8.8 6. of Mongolia Taipei.0 2001 2.6 6.3 9.1 9.1 … 4.1 7.5 14.6 3.6 4.0 4.2 3.7 5.5 5.4 5.2 25.1 15.3 6.4 4.4 3.6 2.3 15.6 10.8 4.6 4.7 4.9 10.7 7.4 8.7 3.6 4.5 7.1 6.0 9.4 13.3 3.7 8.2 5.5 6.2 3.9 15.6 1.5 6.5 9.3 6.4 26.9 7.1 5.7 3.8 7.4 5.1 4.5 2.5 10.8 16.6 2.7 10.7 4.3 5.1 4.8 3.9 5.3 8.7 7.4 6.4 9. China Korea.0 7.9 3.8 5.2 6.4 12.0 10.2 2003 2.8 15.5 3.1 8.0 20.6 2000 2.1 13.0 4.9 15.9 6.5 6.2 20.2 6.8 4.9 4.1 6.9 … … 2.5 16.3 12.0 8.6 17.4 3.2 4.6 2.1 5.6 4.5 14.0 4.7 2008 2.6 … 3.7 15.1 4.6 7.7 3.3 5.0 10.5 9.2 4.1 3.8 14.5 4.1 14.2 14.5 3.3 3.6 16.4 5.7 4.5 5.7 6.9 15.6 3.5 3.3 5.8 6.4 9.5 9.6 8.2 3.3 4.3 21.php).6 14.6 4.6 8.7 9.0 8.5 15.8 23.6 2.4 3.8 5.6 1.0 7.6 5.3 5.6 22.1 4.2 4.5 5.5 2.7 5.7 10.9 5.9 6.9 13.2 6.8 4.PEOPLE Population Table 1.2 14.9 5.9 5.9 3.9 5.7 5.6 6.3 2004 2.6 7.1 4.3 3.2 3.5 4.5 1.6 Population Aged 65 Years and Over (percent of total population) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.5 2.4 7.4 13.4 8.2 6.6 10.5 16. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .2 3.4 15.2 4.4 4.9 4.5 2.8 4.9 2010 2.8 4.3 5.8 16.6 4.8 6.0 6.6 3.2 2.5 4.4 4.3 3.9 4.6 3.7 5.0 139 REGIONAL TABLES a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.3 5.0 5. but it is not classified as a developing member.7 4.7 6.8 6.4 8.6 4.9 4.3 5.2 9.4 4.9 3.4 4.8 15.4 11. Accounting and Statistics 2011).4 2005 2.1 7.7 4.9 4. Sources: World Population Prospects.int/sdp/index.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asin Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.5 3.9 5.0 6.5 8.3 2.7 10.7 6.2 5.2 7.2 4.7 8.5 4.3 5.7 9.8 3. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.2 5.1 3.2 2.2 4.7 3.9 4.9 7.4 14.6 14.8 5.3 4.9 8.5 4.1 6.4 8.6 10.5 4.4 8.7 6.0 7.7 7.2 2.7 9.5 2.6 6.3 5.4 5.8 4.3 5.6 16.9 8.9 5.5 1.3 5.2 4.9 6.3 … … 3.1 6.6 10.3 4.

7 40.2 57.3 58.1 68.7 75.7 49.3 46.2 42.0 66.8 81.3 52.6 79.5 49.8 59.9 41.7 41.8 75.0 57.1 72.6 50. of Mongolia Taipei. Source: Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .4 49.2 60.7 71.9 47.5 50.8 74.2 54.9 42.0 … … 92.2 62.9 77.2 64.6 70.6 77.0 97.5 66.1 64.2 55.6 52.8 54.0 45.6 56.2 72.7 53.3 74.9 47.9 69.8 53.9 58.5 50.4 … 91.2 42.6 90.8 59.7 49.5 53.5 70.0 59.3 64.1 45.2 82. ADB staff estimates.2 43.3 61.7 62.2 72.9 58.5 36.8 68.5 79.1 47.9 51.1 46.6 73.0 54.4 49.5 36.1 62.2 49.4 82.5 61.5 51.5 42.9 52.0 55.2 59.5 59.2 55.1 52.9 52.3 74.6 68.5 58.5 64.3 48.8 68.3 44.6 81.0 37.5 40.9 56.3 52.3 53.9 42.3 49.2 91.8 91.2 41.8 70.5 75.0 2002 101.0 63.7 52.5 59.2 68.2 58.5 51.3 65.9 63.1 47.2 66.0 61.5 77.0 37.1 55.1 36.7 79.2 51.3 80.9 55.9 54.0 63.4 60.8 93.9 52.0 Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.6 99.1 77.5 70.8 40.8 45.5 50.3 46.4 55.0 84.8 52.9 53.7 68.8 59.1 48.5 80.8 81.4 62.8 83.7 63.1 55.3 72.0 90.6 55.2 2009 96.2 44.8 55.2 54.4 54.4 75.6 78.6 54.4 73.7 41.5 35.4 41.3 72.1 61.9 78.1 43.8 53.7 67.1 49.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.0 65.4 62.4 58.2 68.7 56.6 50.6 48.6 50.1 64. For reporting economies only.8 41.9 40.7 97.6 51.1 79.1 80.1 97.4 42.8 56.7 81.6 41.9 41.6 51.1 41.6 57.4 54.5 54.2 45.9 78. China Korea.4 55.1 56.4 50.7 77.1 69.8 80.9 82.0 61.0 53.4 50.7 87.0 49.3 58.4 76.3 64.4 47.5 97.7 90.4 41.2 53.2 45.1 78.2 50.7 97.3 63.6 84.9 71.4 45.7 38.5 107.7 69.4 71.6 64.7 … 71.3 54.7 51.8 53.4 63.8 68.0 52.1 78.6 2010 95.7 75.6 52.9 80.2 107.7 81.8 42.1 66.7 2006 99.6 80.7 45.8 42.8 76.1 51.0 53.4 60.3 50.4 47.0 52.9 71.6 59.6 51.2 54.1 36.4 65.6 57.6 50.0 63.4 75.0 56.0 80.0 80.6 62.8 71.3 54.1 55.4 81.2 40.4 49.9 46.2 52.7 55.8 40.6 77.7 68.0 59.1 56.9 50.5 77.7 69.8 85.4 56.0 43.2 … … 76.6 51.9 38.8 48.3 63.6 56.5 61.5 51.6 54.2 51.7 74.1 80.2 42.6 77.1 56.4 68.3 61.9 59.1 53.3 59.6 80.7 66.7 64.9 63.0 57.7 68.3 44.2 41.6 … 66.0 82.5 56.8 2004 100.1 70.8 79.8 74.0 … … 80.6 51.6 49.3 42.3 58.5 53.8 68.0 64.9 2003 101.8 65.4 54.1 45.8 53.3 75.2 52.0 79.0 41.2 65. of Hong Kong.9 52.7 78.4 69.8 55.0 53.4 61.1 40.7 37.5 77.3 56.8 58.9 75.1 102.5 48.7 78.4 72.6 39.8 75.6 41.4 73.9 45.7 78.8 47.4 80.0 53.3 56.9 79.8 66.2 51.7 41.4 49.2 79.4 70.6 50.6 56.3 77.5 55.9 49.4 47.8 63.9 2008 97.4 54.2 52.7 63.2 73. but it is not classified as a developing member.1 47.8 57.2 57.4 77.9 40.9 97.0 50.1 61.8 49.0 76.4 65.6 79.6 74.5 45.7 81.7 48.4 75.6 46.8 60.8 55.1 65.0 86.5 55.0 64.7 53.3 55.6 60.6 51.2 79.1 85.0 75.8 58.7 49.3 74. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.6 61.9 65.4 71.7 54.9 78.1 51.9 68.6 50.3 51.3 53.6 78.4 72.1 47.9 63.3 35.0 58.4 45.1 68.3 69.5 51.1 54.1 69.5 44. Rep.8 62.3 55.2 54.9 79.6 64.6 81.6 57.8 67.4 59.8 74.3 62.4 39.9 68.8 55.4 76.7 59.6 41.9 56.9 39.7 65.2 97.6 49.8 56.5 50.1 60.9 70.8 62.6 78.3 76.6 46.1 40.4 38.4 72.6 48.0 73.7 55.8 55.0 83.0 56.2 74.7 81.0 76.7 60.5 40.2 80.1 81.5 74.9 64.3 49.1 82.0 61.7 54.8 49.6 47.3 76.0 90.8 72. Rep.8 69.6 58.5 79.1 76.4 53.3 39.0 1995 99.8 80.3 41.1 58.0 51.9 64.0 39.7 73.4 54.8 105.7 42.3 80.8 42.4 41.7 40.0 61.6 83.140 PEOPLE Population Table 1.9 58.4 76.1 62.3 38.7 102.2 51.0 59. People’s Rep.1 75.8 53.1 57.4 78.7 46.0 82.3 75.9 66.8 2007 98.3 57.0 70.3 50.5 60.5 90.3 71.3 69.1 53.9 79.2 70.4 68.6 54.1 43.7 60.1 51.4 63.7 53.1 55.3 44.3 47. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIES b REGIONAL MEMBERSb WORLD a b 1990 96.2 39.8 85.9 80.9 82.4 52.6 80.5 39.5 69.0 2000 101.0 50.4 83.8 57.6 66.7 Age Dependency Ratio Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.8 60.6 38.0 45.8 76.5 39.8 61.7 53.0 55.0 53.2 56.3 75.8 55.0 83.7 56.9 61.9 50.8 79.2 57.9 74.1 67. Fed.0 2001 101.7 70.6 80.2 78.7 59.3 67.0 … … 89.9 84.6 77.9 56.5 47.7 74.4 80.7 2005 100.9 … 87.3 41.5 58.4 57.9 67.8 57.9 44.8 53.1 54.5 66.5 43.5 49.5 85.0 60.8 45.2 65.4 77.3 53.4 100.3 62.6 81.8 73.2 80.8 76.4 59.9 41.7 70.5 40.6 41.2 38.7 44.9 66.7 58.7 71.

6 … 83..4 67..6 58.8 64.3 .0 ..7 … … … 65.8 61..8 ..5 58. 39..8 64.2 65.8 36. 65.2 61.8 67. 54.7 68. 64..1 141 REGIONAL TABLES a Derived from total population.9 49.5 68.6 51.0 .7 63..9 … … … … .1 37.2 70.8 56..8 60.1 64.9 64.4 66.9 74.0 61.6 … 84.5 … 56..3 66..1 76.4 71. 64. 64.9 58.. 66.7 .PEOPLE Labor Force and Employment Table 1. of Mongolia Taipei.5 2008 59.8 60.3 43..2 73.7 74..0 62.6 67.6 63.. 65.5 72. … … … ..2 … ..4 63.5 76... .2 .2 63.4 63..3 66....6 60.4 57.4 71.8 63.7 70.6 .8 60.8 ..0 61..0 62... 59.1 … 83.. 59.9 ..6 66.8 71.6 . 62.2 ..5 60.3 37..China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan Indiaa Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singaporec Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.. 67.5 ..4 61.2 … 83. 58...2 .9 62.4 .2 ..5 65.3 64. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 59.9 58.2 66.6 70..6 69..6 68..4 62..2 … 45.2 72.. … … … 41. China Korea.7 63.2 81. 68.4 63. but it is not classified as a developing member.4 61.0 72.8 2002 59.6 63. … … 51.6 68. … … … 59.2 72.5 … 64.0 62.3 65.0 72.8 … 64..9 34.6 65.9 .2 66.9 65.5 73.3 … 83.5 56.3 62.1 67.. … … … .5 61. 67.0 59.9 68.9 58..4 64.6 54.1 71.8 67. 72..0 69.3 70. Key Indicators of the Labour Market Online (ILO 2011).6 45.8 67.4 60.2 58. 67..0 .2 .5 60.6 ...5 60.3 61.5 57.1 … 84.. 60. 67.7 54.2 66. … … … .7 57.4 55..5 61.7 .4 64. 64.2 62.8 62.9 69..9 … 59.4 65.2 63.3 72.7 63.3 52.3 57.7 63.9 61.0 62.9 .8 .2 .0 … 71.3 62.7 59.4 76.1 .2 71. Rep.9 62.9 63..0 63.5 2009 59. Sources: Country sources.9 ..9 71..5 59.6 71.3 ..3 63.6 … … … 48.0 2005 59.0 63.2 70.6 67..4 … 61.6 67.0 61. … 57.. 72..7 51.8 43.9 61.9 63.5 59.5 75....6 45.2 68..6 … 58.4 37..8 63.6 67.5 63.8 60.0 64.9 70.5 46.6 37.3 65. 72.6 65.1 74. 58.7 56.4 43.1 1995 58.3 2001 58..9 66.1 .4 47..8 … 83..7 62...2 70..7 60.1 64.1 63.5 63.4 ..3 62.2 72.6 54. 66.4 61. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . c Refers to Singapore residents only.. 73.8 63. Fed..2 49.6 73. 64.8 2006 59. 72.0 . 62.6 72. … … … .8 59..4 60.8 … 63. … … … 69.7 … 66.4 61.8 78...0 66.4 68.5 58.7 66.5 63.0 65..2 85..6 43. … … 52.8 48.0 37..3 56.0 65.7 74. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.. 67.2 60.2 58.6 58.0 59.. 64.5 50.9 68.9 64..1 35. 59. 72...8 85.9 .9 74.9 74..3 62.3 … 65.9 42.8 71. Rep.. 62..5 64.4 64.3 54. 63.9 58.7 . 62...2 64.1 66..1 64.7 61.7 .5 … 59.7 54.2 67. . 64..5 72.3 79.7 64.8 ...2 63. 63.7 ..2 … 83.7 41..7 60.9 .1 64. … 65..8 65. 64.4 65.0 70.0 61.3 .0 .8 .5 61.4 57.9 69.0 .3 … ..6 … 67.6 2003 59.7 … … … … .7 . 68..4 72. 66..5 57.7 73.0 72. 59.2 70.3 .5 .2 63.1 71.2 57.9 67.3 ...1 72.. 73.0 65.8 65.2 69...3 2010 … .0 64..2 67.4 67...6 76.4 72.4 .9 .3 … 59.4 62...5 65.0 … … … … .2 64.4 78. 65. .1 … 83...4 50.0 63.5 74.7 .6 48. People’s Rep. 77.4 2004 59...9 60..8 60.3 2007 59.0 .2 68. 59..6 71.2 73.6 72.. 63.2 … 84.9 … … 54.7 65.2 ..3 … 83.9 57.2 71.3 69.0 64.. 93.8 64.4 57..4 64.7 80.2 68.2 61..6 45. … … 59.0 68..1 65.0 .4 61.9 57.7 55. 63.9 61.8 ..2 63.3 60..5 65.8 .0 61.3 57..5 76.8 66.9 … 58.6 84.7 64..9 77.5 37..4 68.0 59. 66.8 61..2 .0 . 67. 64...0 63.7 66.0 36..4 . of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia..4 71.6 43.. 56.7 48.3 68.3 64.8 58.0 61.6 37.4 72.0 80.1 70..0 69..8 52.8 84.0 … … … … . … … … … … ..1 … 83.9 67.8 56.1 58.6 65.. 58.9 60..9 73.5 64.4 64.5 49..9 .8 Labor Force Participation Rate (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.3 .0 64. 64..2 52.7 2000 58.3 70.9 62.9 63. of Hong Kong..3 69.4 61. 72.9 36..2 . 37..6 70.2 51.5 … 67.2 66..6 … … … 69.8 66.3 72.1 77.9 74.9 .6 65.4 65. 67.5 59...0 53.5 … 56.4 67.0 59.8 66.6 50.8 57. .1 63...3 75.6 77.2 60.1 51...

6 . … … .1 4.1 . … . Fed.. 7.7 2.3 … .2 ...5 1. … … .. … … 2.6 … 22.2 1.3 4...6 5.3 2. … … 8.4 4..4 1.3 3.5 .4 4.....4 1.5 7.2 7.4 .1 . 8.8 3.9 16.2 4.3 8.1 4.3 … … … … .9 … 0.8 2.5 6.0 4.3 2. … 5.4 .0 … .5 0.. .4 3. 5.2 … 0. 4. 8...4 4.0 4.2 6.4 2...8 1. … . 7..7 . … 7..4 … 2.7 … … … 4..0 4..0 … ....6 . … … 4.5 1. 6. … … … .7 0..... 3.7 ..5 2000 .7 2. … … . … ...0 11.1 7.8 3.5 4.3 2. 7.4 4..3 4..8 13.. 1..9 … 15.1 3.7 3.8 7. 3..7 3..2 5. … … 4.0 11.0 5.2 3...9 … ..7 2.1 10... … … … .8 10.9 1...0 7.0 6. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .2 8.6 4.4 0..0 3....6 8.1 .4 7.6 13.2 2.5 3..3 4.5 6.. 7.asp). 7. … … .9 2.7 .8 4.7 1.6 8.6 .6 .4 3.1 4.7 6. … 4.4 1. 3.3 11.8 4. 13.6 4.4 3. Sources: Country sources.. 8.5 8..6 0....7 6.. 3.4 5..0 7.4 .4 .2 2009 . … … … … ..3 .3 2.2 2.4 3.4 2.2 … 0..3 6.8 3..3 4. 3. … … 6. 2..2 2...7 2.7 3... 9.4 4..8 2004 3.3 2.7 .. 6. 3.4 . 7.1 2010 . 9. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.142 PEOPLE Labor Force and Employment Table 1..2 4.9 8..6 6.3 ... 9. 7..6 … … … … .. … .0 5.2 3. 9.8 9. 11.6 3.. . … 8.1 3.6 … … … … ..8 1995 .1 9. … … 5...7 3.0 3.2 . 10. 5.2 9.8 . … 1.1 1..2 2. … … 5. China Korea.1 … … 6.3 12. 11.1 ..2 10.5 2.... but it is not classified as a developing member. … .4 5.1 2.0 5.2 … … .3 7... Refers to urban areas only.7 .5 5. … 0..1 6.3 2.1 4. … .6 5.8 4.3 4.6 3.2 ..0 3..3 2. 6...5 .0 2. 3.8 4. … … ..5 3.1 ..3 2.0 … … … … . 11..3 4. … … … … .5 4.. 2.9 … .5 13.9 . refer to 1996 and 1999..9 6. … 6.5 8..0 11..1 7.7 … .9 ...1 4.5 Based on officially registered unemployed only. 3..5 2002 3.8 4..1 … 2.1 8.1 … … … 4.6 3.6 3.3 4.1 4..8 ..5 … 7.9 7. 16. Key Indicators of the Labour Market Online (ILO 2011).4 2.6 2. . 6.1 ...4 2..9 2. of Mongolia Taipei.2 1....3 5.. … 3..7 5...7 1..9 3....1 .5 … 5...9 8.4 2..9 5.3 .5 1.5 .2 3.3 2003 3.5 4.2 .. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.2 … 3.8 … .8 5.8 .0 1.0 7.5 … 6.3 1.9 Unemployment Rate (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armeniaa Azerbaijanb Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistana Turkmenistan Uzbekistana East Asia China.0 4.7 1. … ..8 . 11...0 7.3 6.7 3.3 .. … 5..2 4.9 .5 4.2 .8 7..5 … . .3 7.5 12.9 4.. 7.6 0. … 5.0 5. … … … .2 2.4 12.1 5.3 3.. Rep.4 4. United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific website (www. 7. … … … 7.8 7.7 ..2 2001 3.2 … … 5..4 5. 3....6 .5 2. . … 8.8 3.8 8.5 6.... … 8.3 4..6 9. People’s Rep.4 3...5 4. – ..6 5..org/index.0 .6 5.4 8.6 0....6 7.2 3.1 3.8 7.4 9.0 ...9 3. … ...7 2...9 .2 4. .9 2007 .. … … 5.5 2.5 7.8 2....2 5..0 … … 4. … 1.9 3.8 7. 3. Rep.7 11.0 7.1 2005 ....1 2.1 4..4 … 6.. 3..4 2. 6..9 4. … … 0...0 4.0 2. Based on International Labour Organization’s methodology starting 2002..7 2008 .5 2.0 3..5 4.. 5.. … … … .5 13. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand a b c d e 1990 3..6 8. For 1995 and 2000. … 1..9 8.9 … … 2..2 … ...5 3. 0.3 4.8 2006 .2 2.4 10.5 7.1 2. … … 4.3 8.....4 5.6 3.6 8..6 3... 8.4 4.4 5... .6 4..3 … 5.2 .1 5.6 5..unescap...9 3.3 3. of c Hong Kong......8 1.8 8.4 4.2 6.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepald Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalame Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.6 4.1 5...0 16....8 2.4 2. … .4 10..2 4...5 4.4 3.4 10...0 11.8 8..4 . 7..6 12.1 6.7 4.3 … 0.9 .5 .1 … 14.2 5....2 3. 8..1 9...1 … … 4. 9. 8.0 4. … 4.3 .5 .4 1..3 .. respectively..0 ..7 2.4 3.9 . … … .1 ..0 … 2..3 2.1 5.8 .4 3.

of Hong Kong.1 16.3 (1996) 6.4 4.3 (1994) 1.6 10.7 (1999) 19.3 (2002) 7.4 8.0 (2001) … 2.8 20.1 12.3 … 7.4 6.1 12.9 (2003) … … 12.0 2.3 (2008) … 16.1 (1996) 3.3 (1998) 7. Sources: Key Indicators of the Labour Market Online (ILO 2011).2 9.2 (2006) … 21.9 (2008) … 17.9 (1991) 13.8 (2005) 30.2 … 10.5 (1990) 67.PEOPLE Labor Force and Employment Table 1.2 (2006) 10.1 (2003) … … 10.0 (1999) 44.9 (1996) 18.9 5.5 20.6 (2005) 7.8 (1999) 24.6 (1990) 24.0 (1996) … 8.8 (1999) 19.0 (2005) 5.7 (2008) 32. People’s Rep. Rep.6 9.2 Female 2009 … 69.5 (2000) 17.5 2.4 (2008) 35.0 (1999) 26.0 (1996) 3.3 2009 … 57.4 (1999) 24.4 (1994) 1.6 (2004) 24. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.2 (2000) … 5. Data are averages of quarterly estimates.8 (1996) 2.7 (2008) 8.0 (2000) … 35.3 (2005) 6.0 (1998) 17.0 (2003) 14.0 (1999) 24.8 (2008) … 19.1 4.2 (1999) 35.9 (2003) … … 11.1 … … … … 5.0 (2000) 9.0 (2000) … 5.3 (2000) … 35.5 (1996) 3.4 (2005) 15. Excludes Chathams.3 (1996) … … 15. Rep.0 (2008) … … … … 15. of Mongolia Taipei.9 (1992) 17.1 11.2 (1998) 15.8 3.5 (2006) … 17.6 9.9 (1999) 24.9 (2004) 26.8 (2008) 40.3 … … 22.10 Unemployment Rate of 15–24-Year-Olds (percent) Total Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.9 4.4 (1999) … 12.6 1995 … 56.5 (2001) 15.4 (2007) 9.3 16.6 … 10.7 (1994) 22.5 (2003) … 8.7 (2003) … 13.6 (1990) … … … 27.5 (2001) 46.2 (2001) 45.0 (1999) 22.4 (2004) 22. but it is not classified as a developing member.6 (2006) 7.1 16.1 (1990) … … … 30.8 (1998) … 19.7 (1998) … 16.8 (1999) … 9.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.0 (1994) 2.6 (1990) 62.6 (1998) … 14.2 (2002) 18.4 12.7 14. Antarctic Territory.9 6.6 (2001) 12.4 (2008) 6.6 (2001) 45.9 8.3 … … 5.7 7.0 17.3 (1996) 2. Excludes Jervis Bay Territory beginning 1993.4 (2000) … 35.1 5.5 9.6 (1996) 3.9 (1999) … 11.9 … … 23.6 … … … … 7.0 143 REGIONAL TABLES Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.0 (1996) … 8.5 (1991) 11.2 (2008) 16.1 12.3 (1992) 17.1 (1999) … 15.8 (1999) … 12.2 (1990) … … … 32.2 (2001) 18.7 (1990) 59.0 (1996) … … 14.4 (2001) … 2.1 5.3 (1996) 4.9 (2001) 17.1 (2001) … 2.1 … … 21.6 5.5 (2006) … 27.2 (1990) 16.4 (2001) 19. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australiab Japanc New Zealandd a b c d 1995 … 48.5 (2005) 10.5 (2005) 22.0 … 11.6 (2007) 14.2 1995 … 41.3 (1998) 14.9 … … … … 6.1 (2002) 8.5 (2000) … 6.9 6.1 (1996) 14.3 (1994) 38.4 (1996) 5.3 8.6 (1999) 32.3 (1992) 17.1 (1999) … 12.7 (1994) 29.3 (2002) 21.3 Male 2009 … 47.6 (1999) 17.0 (1996) … … 15.8 (2008) 13.9 2.5 (1991) 16.7 4.3 4.4 (2001) 10.9 19.6 (2006) 7.0 8.4 (1990) 21. Fed.9 3.4 4.2 (2007) 18. and other minor offshore islands.4 (1999) 15.5 (2008) … … … … 10. The Pacific islands Regional Millennium Development Goals Report (The Secretariat of the Pacific Community 2004).4 (1996) 12. China Korea.7 (2000) 13.3 (2005) 10.8 6.7 (1996) … 8.8 … … 8.3 (2002) 20.4 8.5 2.2 (2005) 10.5 (2008) 6. Data are averages of monthly estimates. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .7 (2008) … … … … 12.

6 … 36.2 5.3 60.6 27.4 6.1 2.2 … 29.3 7.2 38.8 2001 69.8 41.9 46.7 59.2 39.5 … … … … 65.9 5.3 10.0 … 64.6 7.6 4.1 0. respectively.2 39.5 34.1 … … 5.8 2003 69.7 11.1 … 37.3 39.4 39. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.9 49.1 48.3 … … … … … … 9.2 67.5 … 72.3 72.1 62.0 … 73.3 38.6 … 35.1 8.3 52.1 40.9 … 37.7 32.0 51.0 66.1 0.7 2009 … 45.5 … 70.0 … … … … 4.5 … … … … … … … … … … … … 4.6 … 30.8 … … 3.3 37.3 52.3 58.9 0.8 82.2 … 72.4 70.3 39.4 31.0 56.1 10.0 44.3 … … … … … … 4.4 37.0 67.5 58.3 42.3 … 36.3 … 65.2 … 29.3 6.3 14.2 36.4 4.7 9.5 … … … 22.3 7.7 … … 17.8 … … … … … … … 3.9 1.3 51.3 8.3 32.5 43.9 2007 … 46. but it is not classified as a developing member.6 57.1 … … … … … 32.5 … 32.2 1995 … 37.2 43.1 22.1 0.4 0.6 28.0 0.5 55.3 2005 … 46.4 … … … 32.7 5.8 46.3 82.9 … … 56.3 … … … … … … … … … … … … 3.6 38.6 31.2 64. People’s Rep.0 48.1 … … … … … 6.4 14.8 4.5 52.8 … 11.8 … … 55.3 … 13.6 … 36.0 50.0 65.2 38.6 7.8 … 60.5 … 60.144 PEOPLE Labor Force and Employment Table 1.4 0.3 7.5 7.2 46.3 … 72.9 27.3 7.9 13.9 39.9 4.3 … 16. of Mongolia Taipei.0 0.1 43.1 54.6 0. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 69.2 … 14.2 6.1 … … 32.1 2002 69.2 39.3 43.0 12.2 6.8 32. Key Indicators of the Labour Market Online (ILO 2011).0 43.8 … 35.9 … 1.3 4.7 38.3 10.0 33.2 6.9 … 1.5 53.9 50.3 9.1 39.3 … 33.6 41.3 53.7 2.2 38.0 … … 42.3 8.9 7.2 … … … 0. Fed.4 64.4 … … 27.5 48.8 35.6 66.4 4.2 46.1 … 1.4 66.1 38.2 … 36.3 … … 26.3 41.3 31.8 0.5 … … … … 8.4 … … … … … … … … … 28.3 43.6 39.6 28.3 44.1 0.0 2008 … 44.8 5.6 … 20.7 … 1.3 4.5 … … … … … 34.6 33.6 48.3 39.0 44.4 82.3 4.7 … 72.6 1.4 … 1.6 7.9 54.8 0. Rep.9 2006 … 46.0 … 35.8 … … … 3.3 … … … 32.9 54.1 72.0 0.3 … 14.9 38.6 44.7 17.4 44.5 67.3 52.0 0.9 0. of Hong Kong.2 0.7 76.9 9.6 46.7 8.3 40.6 45.6 29.3 4.2 1. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.3 … 1.3 7.9 50.4 … … … … 7.7 52.7 51.3 … … … … … … … … … … … … 3.5 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 3.2 38.8 35.0 0.7 … … … … … … … … … … 50.3 … 34.9 5.7 43.5 5.8 7.6 0. Sources: Country sources.9 … 26.2 32.2 42.5 … … 40.9 35.2 10.1 38.9 43.8 … 59.5 … 45.3 42.0 76.8 a Data for 1990 and 2000 refer to 1991 and 1999.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepala Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.0 39.7 2000 … 44.2 38.9 … 18.9 33.2 48.5 … … 7.1 6.1 67.3 44. Rep.0 … 20.6 … … … 31.3 42.4 44.0 66.6 46.3 … … … … … … … … … … … … 3.0 34.8 39.3 … 14.5 43.3 … 66.9 48.5 … … … … … … … … … … … … 4.4 45.7 4.8 50.4 … 31.4 63.8 46.1 44.7 … … 39.9 … … 3.2 … 59.8 … … … 25.2 0.0 64.7 5.2 7.7 … 13.0 … 14.7 … 27.0 … … … … 38.2 38.0 41.3 0. China Korea.2 0.4 52.2 81.6 66.7 … 1.3 41.0 46.6 … … … … … 33.6 2010 … … 39.8 37.7 45.0 6.7 15.1 36. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .2 14.5 81.8 … … 47.7 71.9 5.8 … 45.5 … 34.1 43.5 63.0 0.1 36.11 Employment in Agriculture (percent of total employment) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.5 … 72.3 … … … … … … 35.2 39.3 4.9 2004 69.4 30.0 38.3 7.6 45.7 … 37.5 53.2 34.8 0.7 54.6 7.6 0.

0 5.6 6.2 11.9 11.2 12.1 10.4 27.6 … 10.4 11.2 14. People’s Rep.1 4.9 9.3 8.4 2009 … 10.2 15.5 9.8 6.7 9.5 … 23.0 3.4 9.6 16.4 19.7 13.0 13. Tajikistan.7 … 13.5 2010 … … 5.6 … 7.2 12.2 4.8 … … 25.9 13.6 13.3 10.2 13.3 13.8 … 15.7 6.9 15.0 12.9 … 11.9 13.0 27.3 11.8 … … … … 13.PEOPLE Labor Force and Employment Table 1.9 6.8 5.1 5.8 17.2 12.7 … 20.5 2002 6.0 22.8 … 9.1 21. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … 10.0 … 11.2 9. Key Indicators of the Labour Market Online (ILO 2011).7 27.9 … 17.0 … 16.6 16.2 23.8 5.0 4.8 12.2 28.6 8.8 20.0 22.7 16.3 14.9 11. Rep.9 10.7 … … … … … … 21. of Mongolia Taipei.0 18.8 2000 … 14.3 10.3 … 30.4 10.2 12.6 18.7 19.3 … 17. China Korea.3 … … 26.4 … 8.3 … 26.7 15.0 19.7 10.1 22.5 … 24.5 17.4 … 9.6 18.7 22.3 12.1 … … … … 1.6 6.4 6.3 … 18.2 2004 6.9 13. Sources: Country sources.8 … … 0.2 13.3 17.1 4.8 27. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.1 … 31.9 6.9 20.8 … … 11.4 2006 … 12.5 19.5 15.1 … 11.4 … 9.1 … … … … … … … … … … … … 12.2 21.9 9.9 … 20.6 … … … … … … 12.9 15.7 17.1 12.0 15.9 12.3 13.2 … 8.5 11.2 … 9.2 13.3 18.1 17.2 6.7 … 9.7 21.2 1995 … 20.0 … … 22.7 16.9 20.8 … 10.9 19.4 11.3 19.1 11.3 18.0 9.0 18.4 20.4 … 23.2 13.2 4.7 5.7 … … … 4. Total industry only refers to the People’s Republic of China.1 10.8 12.2 9.4 … 19.0 18.8 12.2 27.9 6.9 23.5 … 9.8 11.1 5.5 7.9 … … 12.5 6. of Hong Kong.0 13.12 Employment in Industry a (percent of total employment) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. the Maldives.0 18.2 27.7 17.0 11. Nepal.5 2003 6.6 14.1 18.1 … 30. Also includes construction sector for the Kyrgyz Republic.8 8.2 … … … 23.8 12.0 16.5 12.5 2008 … 11.6 … … … 24.0 13.6 … … … … … … 1.8 … 20.2 13.9 12.6 … … … 26.7 12.5 … … … … … 24.6 12.6 25.7 14.2 8.3 19.0 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 10.7 18.2 19.6 18.4 11.0 5.9 … 22.5 … 21.7 3.6 12.6 … 9.7 … … … 10.8 … … 27.8 15.8 27. but it is not classified as a developing member.7 14.8 13.2 13.6 13.7 24.8 14.7 13.7 … … 16.3 … … … … … … … … … … … … 11.4 145 REGIONAL TABLES a Refers to manufacturing and mining.6 2001 6.9 10.2 12.8 21.4 23.5 7.6 21.6 14.4 … 23.8 27.3 … … … … … … … … … … … … 12.6 16.2 13.9 … 13.8 23.4 19.9 21. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.3 6.3 … 6.2 6.2 13. and Timor-Leste.9 27.3 … … … … … 22.7 23.3 16.2 13.9 12.2 … 6.0 27.8 5.2 … 30.4 … … … 25.6 … 10.6 9.9 8.8 2007 … 12.3 … … … … 2.0 27.1 … 9.5 27.2 4.2 18.0 5.4 … … … … 3.7 6.7 22.7 … 7.3 … … 15.4 6.2 23. Meanwhile.8 32.8 6.2 7.2 15.5 11.7 13.1 8.9 11.8 15.0 31.1 12.9 30.8 16.9 14.5 15.2 12.5 … 30.4 … 20.9 6.6 … 9.7 … 13.4 20.6 … 9.4 … … … … 14.0 18. Turkmenistan.0 10.1 11.2 8.9 16.4 2.1 … … … … … … … … … 24.1 … 9.2 2005 … 12. Fed.0 5.5 15.3 … 9.2 33.5 10.1 20.1 … … … … … … … … … … … … 12.8 … … 27.3 20.1 11.9 … 13.4 … … 10.0 … 9.4 12.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.1 27.1 … 30.1 10.8 … … … … … 26.1 19.0 … … 12.4 27.6 … … … … … … … 11.3 15. and Uzbekistan.9 … … 23.6 11.9 12.4 14.3 11.1 13.6 13.0 15.0 … 9. New Zealand includes only the manufacturing sector and Afghanistan includes transportation and communication.7 … … … … … … … … … … 8.0 12.9 … 9.9 … 30. the Republic of Fiji.5 10.3 13.0 12.5 10.7 … … … … … … … … … … … … 11.5 … … 18.5 … … 25. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .7 … … 8. Rep.9 18.9 19.3 21.7 … 14.

2 42.8 49.2 76.9 84.3 36.2 27.5 83.7 2006 … 40.5 … 28.1 … … 41.5 79. of Mongolia Taipei.4 … 67.3 … 19.8 … … … 42.146 PEOPLE Labor Force and Employment Table 1.4 76.5 … 41.4 55.6 … … … … … … … 84.8 42.7 … … 61.3 29.3 42.2 26.9 … … … 52.3 2002 24.9 43.3 42.9 55.6 45.5 … … … … 96.7 58.5 … 52.0 85.4 77.3 41.1 59.4 … … … … … … … … … … … … 82.4 94.5 86.5 … … … … … … … … … 46.4 16.4 … … 91.7 … 54.4 … 60.2 … … … … … 43.5 … … 25.8 28.3 57.9 45.2 24.3 … 56.7 50.6 45.5 2008 … 44.0 43.6 18.6 74.2 75.0 … 18.5 … … 32.0 26.5 42.7 49.7 55.6 90.2 40.1 … 53.5 71.8 41.1 80.1 27.1 59.5 … … 33.5 … … 36.4 … 68.5 89.5 39.5 … 67.6 … 60.9 40.2 41.1 25.4 37.6 28.5 43.7 … 58.2 39.6 29.4 27.4 52.3 77.7 67.4 66.0 … 69. includes only electricity.2 93.7 27.1 … 68.4 31.7 … … … … 20.3 … … 85.7 2003 24. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .2 42.8 … 64.9 81.2 55.6 18.4 64.5 2000 … 41.9 55.4 41.6 45.5 70.8 25. Sources: Country sources.2 78.4 … 58.4 39.2 94.3 41.7 75.7 29.8 29. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.0 45.2 40.1 … … … … … 41.6 54.6 2001 24.4 24.0 71.6 44.4 … … 59.1 30.6 … 64.5 43.4 28.0 … 18.9 78.8 43.2 81.8 … 68.6 … 56.6 … … … … 81.7 36.4 36.8 … 53.7 … 54. of Hong Kong.4 20.9 78.2 … … … 42.7 42.1 79.3 … 55.6 92.9 84.0 54.4 69.9 46.4 28.1 … 18. China Korea.1 … 18.5 45.9 67.1 52.1 … 21.7 82.4 … … … … … … … … … … … … 85.8 75.7 40.0 67.2 31.5 54. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 30.5 80.6 43.7 … 71.9 … 41.6 26.0 40.8 48.7 … … 92.4 56.6 47. and water.7 81.9 2009 … 43.8 46.5 77.9 2004 24.0 44. People’s Rep.4 … … … … 90.9 55.3 52.5 46.1 46.4 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 85.7 41.0 26.6 28.6 42.2 … … … … … … … … … … … … 83.7 44. gas.3 47.7 44.8 … 30. also includes mining sector.13 Employment in Services a (percent of total employment) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.1 74.2 20.8 … … 33.2 74.9 2010 … … 54.6 … … … … … … … … … … … … 84.8 57.4 54.2 30.7 64.8 … 41.4 73.7 73.6 1995 … 42.1 83.2 … 54.7 … 69. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.9 44.5 … 64.9 43.1 37.8 68.3 55.4 8.8 … 58.6 77.5 2005 … 41.4 80.5 26. Rep.8 66.9 54.2 … … 32.6 63.1 39.7 89.0 40.5 47.6 90.7 19. Rep.0 75. For New Zealand.5 … … … 86.9 75. Fed.2 40.5 87.8 81.3 91.0 … … … … … 42.1 45.1 41.8 8.5 38.1 64. and water.4 … … 84.1 33.3 … 43.3 14.6 31.6 … … 78.9 … 18.3 2007 … 41.8 … … 44.7 65.2 … … … 95.3 28.6 61.3 76.1 73.9 77.2 … 23. For the Kyrgyz Republic.3 77.6 54.0 … … … … … … … … … … … … 85.8 67.8 80.5 27.6 47.4 45.0 55.2 … 46.7 41.8 … 53.4 93.0 78.1 … … … … … … 89.0 … 68. Tajikistan.3 … 53.0 28.1 88.4 … … … … 89.8 a Includes construction and electricity.6 47.2 … 52. gas.5 80. Key Indicators of the Labour Market Online (ILO 2011).8 56.2 41.8 67.3 26.1 67.4 44.5 67.4 … 66.1 … 55.4 65.3 67.6 … … … … … … … … … … 40.4 … 30.5 80.9 28. but it is not classified as a developing member.2 68.7 71.9 51.0 … 25.4 50.5 43.2 38.7 … 68.3 40.5 … 34.0 … … … 42.1 64.0 46.7 24.0 78.4 … 57.3 … 65.0 47.5 40.0 … … … … … … 42.2 … … … 53.1 … … … … … … 82.1 25.9 48.2 … 41.2 54.2 72.9 8.9 40.1 40. Turkmenistan.2 … 18.8 44.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam b Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.1 40.1 … 67.6 63.8 56.0 42. and Uzbekistan.5 50.2 … 59.7 54.5 80.4 78.1 41.6 54.8 62.3 82.

316 0. 9..3 6.9 50. 12.350 0....3 8. . ....... .4 78.. . .371 0.6 88. ...429 … 0.5 (2001) .3 … 8. China Korea.9 … 7.5 (1996) ..434 0. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .425 0.6 4..440 0. … 6.4 7.367 0.6 76..4 (1993) 6.. of b Hong Kong.5 38.1 14.1 6.354 0.. 57. ..5 … 79..2 … 8. . .4 7.7 4.. c Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. … 0..6 (2007) .5 85...2 8. .413 0. … 0.PEOPLE Poverty Indicators Table 1..4 9. . .339 0. ...5 (1996) … 5.336 0..374 0..3 4.7 5.485 … 0.0 (2001) . ...8 (2007) ..2 78.462 … 0.8 (1990) … … … .376 (2008) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2007) (2007) (2006) (2004) (1998) (2003) (2005) (1996) (1998) (2005) (2003) (2005) (2003) (2005) (2004) (2004) (2007) 147 REGIONAL TABLES Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.4 (1996) ....2 (2008) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2007) (2007) (2006) (2004) (1998) (2003) (2005) (1996) (1998) (2005) (2003) (2005) (2003) (2005) (2004) (2004) (2007) Gini Coefficient 1995 Latest year … 0.349 0.....6 66. ....1 7. . ADB staff estimates.. .287 0.8 6. .1 (2005) … 81.468 0.2 77.... . but it is not classified as a developing member.315 0.6 74.249 (1993) 0.6 6.337 0...425 0.7 32.8 77.0 2....9 5.3 6. … 0.4 50.8 4.4 60..313 (1993) 0. 72..0 9..309 0.3 … 45. Fed.334 0. ..0 18... ....2 (1996) (1993) (1998) (1996) (1996) … 12. . . . States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand (1996) (1996) (1996) (1993) (1997) (1999) (1993) (1998) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2007) (2007) (2006) (2004) (1998) (2003) (1996) (1996) (1996) (1993) (1997) (1999) (1993) (1998) (1996) (1996) (1996) (1993) (1997) (1999) (1993) (1998) 36. . 4..5 … … … 0. ... Sources: PovcalNet Database Online (World Bank 2011).294 0. .5 75.0 79. People’s Rep.9 ...1 6..367 0. . Rep..453 0. .444 0..509 (1996) ..4 (2005) (2003) (2005) (2004) (2004) (2007) … … … 5..5 5....2 12. .8 49.9 6..3 9..4 12..537 0.383 . .1 … … 43.0 (1994) 3...6 12.6 5.. .354 … 0.1 46. 0.332 0... .... ....362 (1997) a Derived from income or expenditure share of the highest 20% and lowest 20% groups. ..403 … 0.3 49.7 30. .. .3 (2005) … … 49.8 (1997) … … … … … … … … ..9 11... .490 (1990) … … … … … 0.. .473 0.352 (1994) 0..5 29.. 5.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan Indiab Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamc Cambodia Indonesiab Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji..276 … 0.9 4... ..9 5.9 5.4 5.6 … 17.. Rep.. .9 6..329 0. World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011).14 Poverty and Inequality Proportion of Population below $2 (PPP) a Day (%) 1995 Latest year … 38.355 (1996) (1993) (1998) (1996) (1996) (1994) (1996) (1997) (1994) (1996) (1998) (2007) (2009) (2008) (2009) (2006) (2004) (2008) (1994) (1997) (1994) (1996) (1998) (2007) (2009) (2008) (2009) (2006) (1998) (2004) (2008) (1994) (1997) (1994) (1996) (1998) (2007) (2009) (2008) (2009) (2006) (1998) (2004) (2008) ...327 0... of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.4 … 81. ..444 0.1 … 56....395 (2001) .7 6..7 53.368 0.4 (1993) 4. .408 0. b Values are weighted average of urban and rural.377 0. .0 … 11. . 7.3 (1996) .... .1 83.415 0...9 11....3 … 9.434 0. ..7 40..332 0...1 4..7 8.9 39.0 … 52.. 7. of Mongolia Taipei... .. .633 0.7 3.. ..6 29. 77. ..368 0. .0 (1996) 5. .7 … 77. .7 Income Ratio of Highest 20% to Lowest 20%a 1995 Latest year … 9.2 1. 0.353 0...3 22..319 (2007) . ..309 0.8 8.7 4....365 0...9 4.

423 0.616 … 0.484 0.598 0.880 0.873 0.841 0. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .651 … … 0.642 0.865 0.931 0.663 0.662 0.925 0.313 … 0.839 0.490 0.602 0.693 0.708 0. of Hong Kong.482 0.801 0.557 0.639 0.646 0.539 … 0.855 0.620 0.815 0.349 … … … 0.588 … 0.677 … … 0.327 0.558 0.460 0.836 0.653 0.937 0.619 0.515 0.903 2009 0.819 0.774 0.935 0.460 0.659 … 0.426 … 0.440 0.594 0.633 0.667 … … 0.494 0.884 0. Source: Human Development Report 2010 (UNDP 2010).577 0.616 0.703 0.468 0.595 0.417 0.425 0.881 0. Rep.576 0.388 0.598 … 0.431 … 0.898 2007 0.651 … … … … … … … 0.475 0.421 … 0.386 … … … 0.855 0.739 0.489 0.574 0.390 … 0.612 0.605 … 0.612 … … 0.408 … 0.560 … 0.654 0.648 0.552 … 0.846 0.907 Rank in 2010a 155 76 67 74 66 109 125 112 87 102 89 21 12 100 … 129 … 119 107 138 91 37 124 108 122 57 132 97 27 92 113 … 86 … … 103 … … 137 … 123 120 85 … … 2 11 3 Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.887 0.400 0.792 0.344 0.471 0.580 0.571 0.568 0. Rep.563 … 0.652 0.560 0.323 0.469 … 0.500 0.416 0.612 … … … … … 0.735 0.457 … 0.713 0.631 0.669 0.903 2008 0.593 0.658 0.804 0.546 0.804 0.933 0.493 0.787 0.691 0.800 0.896 2006 0.492 0.646 0.725 0.804 0.616 … 0.797 0.483 0.375 … 0.605 0.776 0.492 0.588 0.637 0.406 0. People’s Rep.311 0.428 0.696 0. China Korea.702 0.635 0.641 … … 0.664 … … 0.569 … 0.412 0.350 … 0.389 … 0.484 0.508 0.406 0.684 0.487 0. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand a Rank among the 169 countries classifed in UNDP’s Human Development Report 2010.506 0.627 0.597 … 0.449 … 0.617 0.731 0.471 0.655 0.616 … 0.710 0. but it is not classified as a developing member.590 0.572 … 0.494 0.588 0.620 0.614 0.695 0.600 0.554 … 0.744 0.858 0.640 0.550 0.458 0.628 0.655 0.385 0.837 0.872 0.914 0.865 2005 0. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.15 Human Development Index 1990 … … … … 0.591 0.513 0.349 0.695 0.904 2010 0.584 0.614 … … 0.667 … … 0.857 0.502 0.675 … … 0.673 … … 0.519 0.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam b Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.445 0.805 0.491 0.691 … 0.467 0.677 0.307 0.714 0. of Mongolia Taipei.698 0.642 0.697 0.316 0.572 0.501 … … 0.707 0.490 0.432 … 0.512 0.428 0.483 0.566 … 0.463 … 0.663 … … 0.505 … 0.650 0.636 … … … … … 0.667 … … 0.638 0.648 0.593 0.342 0.669 … … 0.670 … … 0.407 … 0.502 … 0.667 … … 0.419 0.497 0.881 0.441 … 0.870 0.561 0.597 … 0.547 … 0.813 1995 … 0.842 0.658 0.550 0.600 0.520 … 0.411 0.389 0.614 … … 0.354 0.500 0.494 0.862 0.619 … … 0.613 … … 0.475 0.497 0.567 0.577 0.540 … 0.592 … … 0.457 … 0.438 0.583 0.877 0. Fed.702 0.669 0.415 … 0.451 0.814 0.877 0.679 0. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.804 0.563 0.432 0.711 0.849 0.826 0.615 … … 0.649 0.489 0.518 0.415 … 0.580 0.148 PEOPLE Poverty Indicators Table 1.851 0.671 … … 0.738 0.928 0.856 0.444 0.614 … … 0.622 … 0.481 0.697 0.832 0.623 0.584 0.698 0.650 0.408 … 0.600 0.686 0.773 … 0.572 0.466 0.581 0.635 0.459 … 0.726 0.493 … … 0.359 0.846 2000 … 0.493 0.

5 72.2 58.0 56.1 80.5 67.6 58.8 78.7 80.6 68.2 63.9 61.5 62.7 69.8 63.3 60.5 74.7 66.8 52.9 77.5 59.9 83.3 66.4 71.8 75.4 59.1 72.5 61.1 66.3 64.3 60.0 Both Sexes 2000 41. of Hong Kong.0 72.2 64.0 65.7 70.4 82.9 79.8 78.9 69.9 63.1 72.6 63.4 62.2 75.7 62.8 62.8 66.7 70.2 59.7 62.6 76.8 73.4 66.4 74.3 70.3 65.8 64.3 59.0 64.3 55.3 80.9 68.3 61.7 60.4 61.6 83.1 62.9 Male 2000 41.6 67. Sources: World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011).4 71.0 63.1 73.4 70.3 77.0 67.7 71.0 63.9 79.3 60.1 61.4 74.6 66.5 74.8 63.2 67.5 61.7 72.3 53.4 61.6 63.2 2009 44.8 54.9 76. Accounting and Statistics 2011).0 68.5 80.0 69.6 75.9 63.4 70.2 73.5 62.9 72. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .6 68.1 72.7 68.5 58.8 60.3 77.0 63.0 75.2 75.2 64.9 67.7 56.0 71.9 60.7 53.4 65.2 65.4 67.16 Life Expectancy at Birth (years) 1990 41.4 45.0 73.8 63.0 75.1 72.0 62.2 70.2 69.2 71.2 68.6 75.1 72.6 72.6 55.2 59.6 69.5 62.0 74.1 68.7 68.2 82.6 70.7 66.1 67.8 71.9 66. Rep.5 69.1 46.3 72.1 54.7 72. of Mongolia Taipei.9 78.2 72.3 1990 41.3 69.4 65.2 76.6 73.3 72.9 61.6 80.9 66.8 75.3 68.1 63.0 72.0 84.7 76.7 67.2 59.3 71.8 54.3 69.7 74.1 61.3 59.9 61.1 81.5 69.1 72.3 66.1 56.6 61.9 65.8 60.6 59.8 62.6 62.1 63.4 67.8 60.0 73.1 77.9 65.0 72.0 71.0 69.8 59.2 60.3 61.6 67.5 67.8 64.7 45.5 59.1 63.2 64.3 82.3 67.5 55.6 80.0 63.3 56.0 69.7 60.9 75.5 69.8 57.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.6 60.8 69.2 69.4 51.0 78.8 74.1 68.2 77.5 78.6 79.4 72.5 71.1 69.5 63.5 64.4 73.5 77.8 62.8 65.7 60.1 52.9 65.4 82.6 68.9 83.8 69.2 1990 41.3 70.8 71.7 69.3 54.2 65.1 74.1 60.3 61.8 74.4 65.9 86.3 67.4 67.6 62.5 64.2 59.5 68.5 64.8 67.4 67. China Korea.1 67.0 68.0 66.9 58.6 79.3 2009 44.1 149 REGIONAL TABLES Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.7 68.2 73.0 66.4 76.3 73.0 69.PEOPLE Social Indicators Table 1.9 78.2 58. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.9 65.4 71.8 75.1 Female 2000 41.5 54.0 66.9 69.3 66.9 65.1 64.2 65.8 53.4 64.9 67.6 65.9 73.2 60.2 81.3 67.0 71.5 57.9 62.8 67.0 64.3 66.9 58.China: Social Indicators (Directorate-General of Budget.2 64.8 67.4 74.6 81.2 68.1 85.3 68.4 64.7 80.4 61.1 63.3 79.2 76. for Taipei.7 54.1 78.2 65.9 64.8 71.8 54.1 58.6 64.4 73.7 69.9 76.2 63.4 67.8 69.4 57.2 70.8 75.3 66.7 54.5 66.6 81.4 59.3 75.6 72.9 61.9 67.8 74.4 70.6 62.8 59.4 83.0 67.9 71.5 61.0 60.0 71.9 65.2 56.6 70.9 72.9 69. Global Health Observatory Data Repository Online (WHO 2011).2 81.7 60.9 67.5 70.3 67. People’s Rep.5 59.9 72.0 53. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand WORLD a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.8 62.6 77.1 65.6 71.0 67.3 66.7 61.8 63. Fed.8 64.4 71.2 57.0 66.9 71.9 67.0 72.7 71.8 70.8 54.9 63.5 76.7 79.1 2009 44.6 67. but it is not classified as a developing member.8 65. Rep.1 79.1 66.1 66.7 62.6 67.2 58.4 59.2 66.4 74.1 61.3 69.4 66.4 63.3 59.2 67.5 82.9 80.2 71.1 72.1 64.9 58.0 67.5 59.0 76.9 79.5 59.6 66.9 70.4 70.6 75.3 68.3 62.8 65.3 68.9 56.9 54.3 63.6 70.6 63.5 68.9 63.7 77.0 67.8 56.1 74.3 69.6 78.0 63.4 73.

4 30.8 13.7 19.5 … 6.0 3.5 3.7 5.6 38.9 4.8 8.5 24. People’s Rep.3 12.China: Social Indicators (Directorate-General of Budget.3 21.1 11. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand WORLD 1990 22.8 28.5 9.0 43.7 3.9 1.3 31.5 8.0 3.0 7. Sources: World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011).2 3.1 6.2 5.7 8.2 8.0 6.150 PEOPLE Social Indicators Table 1.5 5.7 9.0 43.1 6.6 4.3 5.2 1.6 3.3 32.0 (1992) 28.5 8.1 13.3 21.8 2.5 6.7 7.5 5.1 10.0 6.0 3.5 4.7 21.0 (1992) 7.7 9.4 (2005) 4.4 19.2 2.6 6. International Data Base (US Census Bureau 2011).7 8.7 19.0 38.3 2.3 8.8 19.1 2.0 2.9 29.000 people) 2000 2009 22.0 6.7 3.0 17.7 30.1 5.0 (1991) 23.8 1.8 8.5 2.5 20.9 2.3 6.1 9.8 4.7 6.4 6.0 8.6 2.6 4. Fed.0 11.3 6.6 25.4 3.0 2.0 12.5 3.7 6.6 10.2 2.2 2.7 27.9 21.0 1.8 5.7 2.5 5.3 2.5 1.5 21.1 5.2 12.0 5.6 26.8 27.2 40.6 23.5 1.2 3.4 19.9 18.4 2.7 8.3 3.1 3.4 12.3 24.4 10.7 2.8 4.8 46.4 29.8 1.4 32.1 5.2 31.9 2.6 1.1 22.0 15. and Fertility Rates Crude Birth Rate (per 1.8 … 5.4 6.2 6.8 6.0 1.4 9.5 3.3 1.9 6.1 4.4 16.0 6.0 1.9 8.5 11.2 4.4 14.0 36.2 4.5 6.1 2.9 6.8 6.8 2.8 13.0 (2007) 24.7 3.5 3.4 14.8 7.0 7.8 11.9 8.2 8.0 4.2 6.9 8.0 2.6 19.9 3.0 11.1 9. but it is not classified as a developing member. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .4 2.9 22.6 30.0 34.2 27.6 5.9 16.6 4.2 1.2 6.0 2.4 5.0 6.5 6. Rep.3 7.7 2.8 24.7 43.3 7.0 6.1 6.0 6.17 Births.7 18.4 25.4 7.6 6.3 1.4 39.2 7.9 4.0 28.1 27.9 18.1 22.9 8.6 (2005) 35.7 8.5 4.9 4.9 13.5 1.9 12.4 23.7 32.3 7.0 5.2 1.5 18.0 12.0 (1991) 3.6 18. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.7 29.6 2.0 (2006) 30.1 13.1 5.1 39.5 7.1 3.0 2.4 1. China Korea.9 8.0 8.0 7.7 31.8 3.5 2.9 5.0 18.1 4.1 15.0 9.3 8.3 7.9 9.3 1.4 3.8 32.2 25.5 36.7 30.8 5.5 13.0 7.5 25.0 6.1 2.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.9 32.0 2.8 Crude Death Rate (per 1.8 1.5 18.0 21.8 1.4 2.3 1.1 8.3 1.1 14.3 5.4 26.6 1.8 23.8 15.2 28.6 17.1 5.7 33.7 2.5 2.8 5.8 21.1 30.9 4.2 6.7 4.1 9.9 15. of Hong Kong.0 1.9 2.0 10.5 2.8 4. Deaths.5 25.1 28.9 16.5 9.3 2.2 3.9 33.7 7.4 50.8 2.8 32.8 4.2 5.9 3. of Mongolia Taipei.1 2.5 6.7 35.8 3.8 9.7 33.2 3.4 4.3 14.3 4.8 35.9 5.7 7.9 10.0 3.4 17.9 14.4 21.7 7.7 1.4 4.8 8.0 6.0 21.3 10.9 1.8 28.1 27.7 3.5 21.0 8.5 24.0 20.7 (2005) … 6.7 4.0 6.0 21.5 (2007) 3.6 2.3 9.4 2.7 41.3 12.1 6.5 5.4 5.9 6.5 14.3 4. for Taipei.2 29.1 22.3 2.8 3.4 2.4 4.5 6.8 4.3 3.1 34.5 2.5 4.8 4.7 34.9 8.2 3.7 6.5 7.0 6.8 3.4 2.8 29.6 5.7 21.1 7.2 34.2 Total Fertility Rate (births per woman) 1990 2000 2009 8.6 (2006) 7.3 10.3 6.1 20.5 9.5 4.2 8.0 11.5 3.9 3.5 5.0 25.2 … 4.7 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.8 2.9 (1999) 6.4 9.9 19.4 … 40.7 1.3 7.8 40.3 7.8 27.2 7.7 11.8 2.5 Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.6 13.8 (1992) 3. Accounting and Statistics 2011).1 12.3 40.000 people) 1990 2000 2009 51.5 2.0 2.6 14.3 32.6 4.0 20.7 22.0 2.8 6. Rep.9 1.8 12.0 1.0 (1991) 6.6 5.

6 83.9 94.3 107.4 99.9 (2003) 57.9 92.5 98.0 109.8 107.8 (2005) 95.5 … 92.6 94.4 94.7 (2008) … 91.8 … … 105.8 107.0 98.1 90.0 (2002) 97.5 … 93.4 98.1 … 99.7 (2007) … 90.6 … 92.4 148.1 … 91.6 53. Rep.4 69.6 79. World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011).1 (2003) 65.2 93.7 … 61.5 … 90.9 89.3 107.6 95.9 93. Fed.7 96.4 118.0 97.3 … … 94.0 … 87.1 (2005) 96.7 (1995) … … 96.3 45.3 97.7 71.8 … 102. Sources: Millennium Indicators Database Online (UNSD 2011).8 53.7 101.6 60.3 117.7 (2003) 102.3 104.9 86.3 79.18 Primary Education Completion Rate (percent) 2000 Both Sexes 2009 2000 Female 2009 2000 Male 2009 151 REGIONAL TABLES Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. but it is not classified as a developing member.2 85.1 94.2 (1997) 101.4 … 57.8 93.0 96.5 (1995) a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.1 94.5 109.8 104.9 (2001) 96.5 94.8 (2008) 119.8 75.3 (2008) 111.3 99.5 88.5 101.9 94.5 55.4 47.8 (2005) 97.2 109.8 99.9 (2007) 91.7 … … 102.9 … 84.3 98.4 48.9 … 105.4 100.4 (2008) … 63.2 92.8 (2007) … 92.1 93.4 … … … 55.2 69.4 99.0 (2001) 93.1 … 100. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.9 … … 104.0 96.6 (2005) 100.9 92.9 84.6 … 93.0 79.4 104.2 101.1 … 59.2 150.8 … 100.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.2 … … 105.7 … … 96.1 104.4 (2005) 99.0 106. of Hong Kong.8 95.9 104.4 (2002) 97.5 51. Rep.5 94.1 98.1 107.9 (2007) 91.5 98.8 (2003) 103. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand … 93.0 (2002) 93.6 82.2 (2008) … 57.0 56.0 (1997) 107.9 99.3 79.5 … 79.8 94.1 110.6 … … 100.5 … 87.4 94.4 (2003) 74. China Korea.8 106.7 97.3 103.3 (2001) 121.7 76.8 … 87.0 … 79.3 82.2 … … 93.1 97.2 92.5 103.7 63.9 100.1 88.2 70.9 84.6 … 92.7 51.0 108.7 94.7 (2002) 89.0 112.4 (2005) 89.3 98.4 70.5 93.9 … 102.5 (2001) 103.2 … 100.6 91.9 … 102.4 94.2 82.2 82.0 90.9 99.9 63.3 106.1 109.4 … 95.PEOPLE Social Indicators Table 1.7 57.3 (2008) … 60.8 101.9 78.2 92.4 104.3 61.3 … 86.7 (1997) 104.1 79.9 (2001) 122.7 … 97. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .8 94.1 90.4 87.3 74.1 21.4 … (2001) (2001) (1999) (2001) (1999) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2001) (2007) (2008) (2005) (2007) (2004) (2001) (2001) (1999) (2001) (1999) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2001) (2001) (2001) (1999) (2001) (1999) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2001) (1999) (1999) (2001) (1999) (1999) (2001) (2008) (2005) (2007) (1999) (1999) (2001) (2008) (2005) (2007) (1994) (2001) (2008) (2006) (2006) (2001) (2008) (2006) (2006) (2001) (2008) (2006) (2006) … … 96.4 104. of Mongolia Taipei.4 94.4 77.5 (2001) 95.9 64.6 97.5 98.9 93. People’s Rep.7 (2001) 121.1 103.8 87.0 … … 90.8 94.9 101.1 50.7 … 80.8 118.3 93.9 108.9 96.6 72.3 94.2 (2002) 97.2 (2007) 92.9 145.2 38.5 89.5 (2002) 85.3 (2008) 126.9 95.1 67.

7 88. of Hong Kong.0 30.4 92.4 99.2 (2001) (1999) (2002) (1999) (1999) (1998) (1995) (2001) (1999) (2002) (1999) (1999) (1998) (1995) (2001) (1999) (2002) (1999) (1999) (1998) (1995) (2005) (2006) (2006) (2008) (2005) (2006) (2006) (2008) (2005) (2006) (2006) (2008) 92..0 99.6 90.6 94. 99.8 99..6 99.5 98.6 88..4 96.1 … 60.5 … 42.0 (1998) 86.4 82.2 (2007) 99.9 52.6 37.7 99.1 90.5 95.7 99.8 (2007) 99.5 85.5 96.7 99.9 (2008) 99.0 (2006) … 82.1 86.0 99.1 … … 98.7 99.8 96.7 95.7 99.5 (2008) 99.9 92.0 96.5 99.1 (2001) (2001) (2001) (2001) Female 2009 . Fed.4 46.4 86. 99.3 98.5 2000 … 99.8 99.5 98.5 90.5 99.1 90.7 92.5 (2007) 99.9 92.4 59.8 (2004) 58.5 (1998) 94.5 … 55.9 89.2 … … … (2008) (2008) (2005) (2008) (2005) 90. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.6 96.China: Statistical Yearbook Online (Directorate-General of Budget.8 2000 … 99.2 96.9 … … 97.1 95.8 98.6 92.0 93.7 42.9 98.7 99.2 99.5 92.6 99.1 93.0 (2004) 81.4 98.5 98.0 75.8 98.2 55.9 89.9 89. Sources: Institute for Statistics Data Centre (UNESCO 2011).3 48. 83.7 45.0 40.2 69.8 62.8 … 50. Accounting and Statistics 2011).6 … … … … … … … 50.3 … … … (2004) (1999) (2001) (1996) (2004) … … … … … … … 63.1 29..6 (2007) 99.2 90.5 68.3 (1998) 90.6 76.4 72.2 98.7 99.2 … … … (2008) (2008) (2005) (2008) (2005) 95.2 (2001) 79.7 (2001) (2001) (2001) (2001) 2009 . China Korea.2 (2001) 57.7 65.3 99.7 … … … a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB..8 92.7 50.9 … … 97.3 98.5 (2007) 99. 99.0 … 76. percent) Both Sexes Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.9 93.8 … 80.3 89.9 … 73.2 98.6 99.4 99. Rep.8 85.5 94.6 90.0 38.5 … 40.1 63.6 90.9 … 51.6 99. of Mongolia Taipei.8 99.4 94.5 92.5 92.1 (2008) 99..7 93.4 98. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .4 92.5 (2007) 99.19 Adult Literacy Rate (15 years and over.0 … 53.4 (2004) 69.152 PEOPLE Social Indicators Table 1.8 99.7 70.8 99.5 … … 97.7 99.6 95.5 95.0 … … … (2004) (1999) (2001) (1996) (2004) … … … … … … … 56. for Taipei.4 47. but it is not classified as a developing member.0 78.7 (2001) 67.2 … … … (2008) (2008) (2005) (2008) (2005) (2004) (1999) (2001) (1996) (2002) (2004) … … … … … … … 60.9 … … 97.9 99.3 (2001) (2001) (2001) (2001) Male 2009 . 99.. People’s Rep.3 98..6 95.0 95.3 99.0 … … 97.7 89.2 72.7 99.1 98.3 94.0 91.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.2 95.6 92.2 98.0 (2006) .9 83.7 99.3 98.5 … 61.6 94..2 … … … … … … … 57.8 … 47.7 92.1 (2006) … 80.0 92.6 99.5 86.0 97.6 90.6 98.0 … 58.3 55.9 … … … … … … … 63. Rep.8 99.8 98.3 77.8 92..4 34.2 62. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 2000 .

8 (1991) 20.7 … 15.3 16.1 (2008) 20.9 19.8 11.3 30.0 21.4 30.6 32.1 2009 1990 24.9 11.9 16.7 14.8 29.4 19. Accounting and Statistics 2011).0 16.7 14.8 15. China Korea.9 17.8 (1991) 33.9 (1999) … 21.3 13. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.7 (1991) 21.0 19.3 (2008) 15.7 40.0 19.0 … 27.9 13.0 39.4 12.0 (1995) 6.5 (2008) 11.8 7.2 21.0 15.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.7 22. for Taipei.3 (1991) 35.1 11.2 21.3 18. Sources: World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011).6 … 12.6 … 10.6 21.3 (2008) … 12.0 13.5 35. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 41.7 17.2 (1999) 50.9 43.7 35.5 28. Fed.7 … 31.China: Monthly Bulletin of Statistics Online (Directorate-General of Budget.0 19.5 (2008) a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.5 17.4 16.7 42.4 24. Rep.8 (1995) (1995) (1991) (1995) (2007) (2004) (2008) 14.8 21.8 28.7 (1991) 27.2 20.1 22.3 13.5 10.9 (1999) 20.6 (1980) … 12.2 (2001) 25.6 28.8 21.4 44.1 17.2 20.3 (2007) (2008) 153 REGIONAL TABLES Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.3 19.6 7.7 40.0 … 39.7 18.4 32.6 20.4 21.0 21. but it is not classified as a developing member.2 18.1 19.0 19.7 24.7 18.3 (2001) 13.8 33.2 36.1 (2008) 14.0 22.1 28.8 35.7 13.9 (1991) 16.5 17.5 10.9 16.5 10.2 29.1 19.6 (2002) 10.7 (2008) 27.6 9.0 26.9 18.3 (2001) 18.9 … … 21.3 19.2 … … … … 21.7 13.3 27.9 24.7 50.8 31.9 (2008) (2004) (2003) (2008) (2004) 15.7 12.0 14.7 16. People’s Rep.2 17.6 15.9 32.1 22.9 20.3 (1995) 20.4 (2001) 21.3 6.2 17.0 15.3 32.3 … 24.6 32.5 31.6 (2008) 15.1 (2008) 30.4 15.3 33.1 16.5 (1991) … 17.6 22.7 … 29.9 … 20.9 49.7 16.1 33.8 (2001) 22.5 35.2 19.1 32.7 24.8 9.0 22.4 27.6 19.1 22.6 (1995) 14.4 (2001) … 24.5 63.6 … … … … 31.0 (2008) 19.1 31.3 34.1 28.2 (1991) 17. Institute for Statistics Data Centre (UNESCO 2011).4 … 13.1 20.1 … 23.0 25.9 (1995) (1995) (1991) (1991) 43.5 16.6 41.8 20. Rep.0 (2001) 28.1 43.0 19.6 (1995) 21.5 15.9 12. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .6 27.7 25.6 15.7 22.0 7.5 17.2 17.8 19.0 (2008) (2007) (2008) (2007) (2008) (2008) (2007) (2008) (2008) (2007) (2008) (2007) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2010) (2008) (2008) (2003) (2007) (2010) (2008) (2008) (2003) (2007) (2008) (2005) (2006) (2006) (2004) (2007) (2004) (2002) (2002) … 18.9 36.3 17.0 34.8 18.20 Education Resources Primary Pupil–Teacher Ratio 2000 32.3 29.4 … 11.3 (2007) 11.9 (2002) 7.1 20.6 26.4 38.0 23.7 18.0 47.4 8.6 … 24.7 (2008) … 17.6 17.2 16.8 … 21.1 … 21.5 29.4 Secondary Pupil–Teacher Ratio 2000 2009 28.7 33. of Mongolia Taipei.3 12.6 (1999) … 17.5 15.1 15.8 28.5 17.4 … 24.1 19.0 (2005) 41. of Hong Kong.8 19.PEOPLE Social Indicators Table 1.3 28.5 15.2 10.4 24.4 31.5 11.4 16.8 (1996) 16.3 23.1 40.1 12.0 (2008) … 18.5 33.2 18.2 18.0 … 46.2 (2004) 12.7 19.3 (2006) 16.4 … 28.4 (2001) 14.1 (1998) 20.2 23.1 8.4 14.

21 3.39 0.23 0.42 0.23 0.19 0.80 2.11 0...36 0. 2.60 5.55 3. . China Korea. 12.. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand (2007) (2007) (2007) (2007) (2006) (2007) (2007) (2007) (2007) (2007) (2007) (2008) (2007) (2007) 1. of Hong Kong..37 0. .68 4.90 1.76 (2008) 1.53 (2001) 0..40 1.57 2.82 13.. but it is not classified as a developing member.30 1.00 3.98 0. 6.06 (2006) 2.71 0.39 1..05 0.22 .50 Hospital Beds 2000 0..69 (2005) (2006) (2005) (2005) (2006) (2004) (2008) (2004) (2002) (2005) (2006) (2006) (2008) (2002) (2008) 1.16 0.06 4.40 0.69 1.56 0.21 Health Care Resources (per 1.50 0.08 0..75 (2008) 6..74 … 2..75 (1991) 0.43 (2001) (1999) (1998) (2001) 2009 0.33 2.30 2.30 0..10 (2001) (2001) (2002) (2001) 2009 0.37 0.87 .70 1. 0..33 0.89 1.97 (2008) 2.76 0.30 1.10 9...13 . 4.50 (2002) 5.83 Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.40 (2001) 5.55 0.19 0.11 (1997) 5.59 (1996) 0. Sources: World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011).90 2.58 .. 0.45 0. 2.68 0.30 0.70 3.00 2.10 2.60 (1993) 8... of Mongolia Taipei..10 0.19 7. 0. .80 14.51 0.09 10.80 13.18 0.60 5.48 2.50 0..89 6.19 (2001) 3.30 2.51 .37 0.05 0..56 3..18 4.54 (1999) 1.44 .38 (2007) 7... 3.64 1..09 0..13 0.154 PEOPLE Social Indicators Table 1. 0.85 0..30 0.70 3.71 1.01 2.20 (1998) 3.50 3.60 0.90 2..90 2.05 0.40 4.24 2.70 6.80 .30 0.60 1.82 0. 0.27 0..90 Physicians 2000 0.20 1.41 4.42 0..25 9.30 0.46 2.70 0.97 1.07 0.62 1990 0.70 0.99 2.10 2.06 0.80 2.32 (1995) 1.27 .21 0.45 0.14 0. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .28 (2008) 5.. 4.67 11.11 2.06 .60 0.44 2.12 1.54 7.80 0.90 .93 3.20 (2001) (1999) (1998) (1999) (2004) (1999) (1999) (2002) (1997) (2001) (1998) (2002) (2001) (2001) (2001) (2001) (1992) (1996) (1993) (1995) (1998) (1992) (1992) (1991) (1991) (1999) (1998) (1999) (1998) (2008) (2005) (2005) (2008) (2008) (2001) (2001) (2001) 2.45 1.70 0.60 1.11 3.83 0.60 0.64 1. Fed. 9..49 (1991) 4.11 (1992) 0.47 8.40 .70 (2003) 6.70 0.23 0.40 .52 ..18 (2002) 2. for Taipei.20 2.98 3. .07 7.83 .60 5. 1. .30 0.45 1.....60 0.90 2.27 0.77 1.20 2.16 0.12 (2007) (2007) (2005) (2007) (2004) (2006) (2008) (2008) (2007) (2005) (2008) (2008) (2004) (2004) (2008) (2004) (2003) (2006) (2008) (2005) (2008) (2006) (2008) (2005) (2005) (2004) (2002) (2008) (2008) 4.58 0.10 7. Rep..22 1.27 0.60 0.32 7.05 0.59 1.10 0.54 1.05 0. Rep.66 11.78 0.68 0.18 0.47 0..54 3. 0.63 3.29 0.80 2.. Global Health Observatory Online (WHO 2011).53 3.30 2.20 (1993) 0..45 2.20 1. 3.15 1.50 1.. 3..20 2.07 0..23 0.79 4.60 1.10 2.40 … 2.49 1.14 2.79 (1991) 0.72 (2007) 1. 4.94 0.02 0.67 2.83 ..29 0.56 0.93 3.15 (1993) 0.87 0.16 . .. .60 0.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.30 3.64 10.27 2..77 7.China: Statistical Yearbook Online (Directorate-General of Budget.64 0.40 (2001) 0..78 0.61 3..02 . People’s Rep. Accounting and Statistics 2011).08 1..18 (2002) a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.42 1.92 3.07 0.61 1. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.66 2. 4.40 .48 (1992) 0.81 2.70 1.20 5.92 4.30 .01 0.60 0.78 0.20 (1991) 15.54 4..000 population) 1990 0.46 1.55 1.10 11.48 12.10 0.39 3..

9 3. thousands) Adults Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.5 6.1 … <0.0 <0.8 <1.0 2.0 6.5 7.4 2001 … <0.0 1.0 81.2 … … … … … 13. of a Hong Kong.0 … <1. People’s Rep.0 <1.1 … 1.2 1.1 57.5 <1.0 250.22 Estimated Number of Adults Living with HIV (aged 15 years and over.0 … … … … … … 13.3 … 83.0 2.0 … … … … … … 20.1 880.0 4. refers to maximum estimates ranging from 240–470 thousand adult individuals.7 610.9 <0.6 2.5 … 6.6 … … … … … … 3.5 11.5 1.0 11.0 … 9.6 <0.0 <0.0 8.0 270.0 140.1 … <0.5 11.6 1.0 … <0.0 39.1 … … … … … 7.6 3.4 1.1 19.0 3.0 <0.0 … <0.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.1 2500.0 … <1.0 2. Rep.0 300.2 <1.0 <0.0 88.0 2.0 67.6 2009 … 1.0 … 5.0 <1.7 95. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 2001 … 1.0 230.0 8.0 730.0 220.2 <0.3 100.2 1.8 28.0 470.0 155 REGIONAL TABLES a For 2001.0 39.0 210. but it is not classified as a developing member.4 13.8 … 56.2 … … … … … 18.1 <0.5 130.5 <0.1 2.1 67.1 60.9 <0.2 <1.5 … 51.5 3.1 <0.0 … <0.0 … 1.0 1.0 … … … … … … 6. Source: Report on the Global AIDS Epidemic (UNAIDS/WHO 2010).9 … 28.4 1. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 9. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.3 520.5 <0.0 3.0 1.0 … 2.PEOPLE Social Indicators Table 1.7 … 8. Fed.0 <0.1 1.0 81. Rep.7 2.0 … … … … … 31.0 Women 2009 … <1.5 <1. China Korea.0 8.9 2. of Mongolia Taipei.2 … 1.0 230.2 2.5 880.0 <0.0 2300.0 8.0 <0.1 20.0 … 35. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.7 <1.2 <0.

the region is not self-supporting. however.1 Percentage Distribution of GDP at PPP: Asia and the Pacific in the World Economy. and the other regions in total generated only 15% of global GDP. The growth of the giants stimulates trade within the region and promotes growth of the smaller economies. Japan. 2009 Africa 3. the PRC and India can be seen as the locomotives of the Asia and Pacific region. and India—dominate the region. North America includes Mexico and the Caribbean islands. Each country’s GDP has been converted into a common currency using PPPs. The big three—the People’s Republic of China.0 Japan 16.5 Taipei. North America about 24%. With their high and steady growth rates.6 Others 7. The same figure shows that within Asia. accounting for more than 70% of total GDP.1 shows that in 2009. Rep.6 Korea. have narrowed down since 2000.6 Rest of the World 2. The big three—the PRC. Europe accounted for about 28%.1 divides the real GDP of the world economy for 2009 into seven regions. However.9% in 2010 from 1.2 Australia 3.2 Philippines 1. North America and Europe are still the most important customers for the final output of “factory Asia.China 3.156 Economy and Output Asia generated a third of global GDP (gross domestic product) in 2009 in purchasing power parity terms. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . with the richest (Singapore) being 45 times better off than the poorest (Nepal) in 2010. Given the disparity between their growth rates with India growing much faster than Japan in recent years.4 Sources: Table 2. Asia and the Pacific accounted for exactly one third of global GDP.8 India 15. Figure 2.4 Indonesia 3. accounting for more than 70% of total GDP While in 2009 the GDP of 15 economies contracted in real terms.2 Pakistan Malaysia 1.0 Thailand 2. and India—continued to dominate the region in 2010.1 and World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011). Figure 2.3 Europe 28. Figure 2. India is likely to soon overtake Japan as the second largest economy in Asia—and third in the world.2 shows the distribution in 2010 of GDP among 11 economies that each accounted for at least 1% of Asia-Pacific GDP in PPP terms. Key Trends The Asia and Pacific region generates one third of global GDP.4% in 2009. growth in 2010.6 North America 23. The disparities.9 South America 5. only two reported negative .8 1. Japan. of 5. of 37. People's Rep. the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and Japan together account for more than half of the region’s GDP while India is currently ranked just behind Japan. There are striking disparities in per capita GDP within Asia and the Pacific. Figure 2.6 China.9 Asia and the Pacific 33.6 West Asia 3. “factory Asia” will inevitably suffer.” so if the present recovery in North America and Europe falters or turns into another recession. bringing the unweighted average growth for 37 economies in the region to 5. while Asia and the Pacific covers both developed and developing regional members of ADB.

1. Brunei Darussalam and Singapore were at the top of the chart ahead of Australia. Figures 2. China.2 Japan 16. although there has been some convergence since 2000.4 In terms of their rankings. and Taipei. 2010 China. and those whose bars pass the red line have average income above that year’s regional average. and Taipei. 0 10 1. respectively. and Taipei.8 Thailand 2. In 2000. Rep. Averag Mic Average f Source: Table 2. Nepal. Thus.China grew faster than the regional average so that they all moved up in the ranking.2 Percentage Distribution of GDP in PPP Terms in Asia and the Pacific.China had overtaken Japan.4 Malaysia 1. for example. and Japan grew more slowly than the regional average and they slipped down. Kiribati. Hong Kong. China had overtaken Australia.China Korea. Rep. the PRC. By 2010. Kazakhstan. followed by Hong Kong. the per capita GDP of the PRC stopped short of the red line in 2000 but in 2010 its per capita GDP had moved slightly past the red line—from being poorer than the regional average in 2000—the PRC’s population was now a little richer.6 Philippines 1. the big gainers between 2000 and 2010 were— Armenia.5 Others 6. China Japan Taipei. The rankings change because economies are growing faster or slower than each other. 2000 (regional average = 100) Brunei Darussalam Singapore Australia Hong Kong. Brunei Darussalam. In summary.1 Australia 3.2 Indonesia 3. China. Japan. It should be noted that in absolute terms of course. 0 20 1. Singapore.China. the Maldives. with the richest economy (Singapore) being 45 times better off than the poorest (Nepal). and Mongolia—their indices all increased substantially because their per capita GDP increased much faster than the average.3a and 2. despite progress in all economies. People's Rep. People's Rep.China 3. the PRC’s population was much richer in 2010 than in 2000 because the regional averages themselves had grown substantially over the period. Azerbaijan. but some did so much faster than others.3 India 15. The indices are based on each year’s average for all the 33 reporting economies in the region equal to 100. Taipei.3b show the indices of per capita GDP in PPP terms for 33 economies in the region for 2000 and 2010. Fed. Figure 2. The big losers were Brunei Darussalam. States of Average for Developing Members Philippines Indonesia China. and Tonga.6 Pakistan 1. of Georgia Azerbaijan Kiribati Armenia Papua New Guinea Pakistan India Mongolia Viet Nam Kyrgyz Republic Solomon Islands Lao PDR Nepal Cambodia Bangladesh 0 10 0 20 0 30 0 40 0 50 0 60 0 70 0 80 0 90 1. 0 00 1. 0 30 0 There are striking disparities in per capita GDP within Asia and the Pacific.3a Indices of Per Capita GDP. of Malaysia Thailand Kazakhstan Average for Regional Members Tonga Maldives Sri Lanka Samoa Micronesia. The red lines in both figures are the 100 mark so economies whose bars are to the left of the red lines have per capita GDP below that year’s regional average. the Federated States of Micronesia. of 38.2. Japan. Indeed all economies became richer over the period. Sourc Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .9 Korea. these rankings had changed—Singapore had overtaken Brunei Darussalam as the richest economy in the region.ECONOMY AND OUTPUT 157 REGIONAL TABLES Figure 2. the differences in the per capita GDP between the rich and the poor economies remain huge in 2010. while per capita GDP in Australia.9 Source: Table 2. Per capita GDP in Hong Kong. of 5.

and Timor-Leste. –8 –4 0 2010 4 8 12 16 Source: Table 2.China (10. 0 30 0 Figure 2. Singapore (14.158 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT The unweighted average growth for the 37 economies in Figure 2. of Malaysia Thailand Kazakhstan Average for Regional Members Tonga Maldives Sri Lanka Samoa Micronesia. and Taipei. China Viet Nam Georgia Korea. 0 00 1. the Kyrgyz Republic. 0 20 1. and the PRC 10. In 2009. 0 30 0 Source: Table 2. 2010 saw a strong recovery throughout the region as developing economies proved their resilience after the 2008–2009 crisis. People's Rep.5%. India reported real growth of 8.4% in 2009 to 5. States of Tonga Kiribati Kyrgyz Republic –16 –12 2009 1. 0 10 1. Myanmar. of Maldives India Uzbekistan Sri Lanka Lao PDR Thailand Philippines Malaysia Solomon Islands Papua New Guinea Kazakhstan Hong Kong. of Georgia Azerbaijan Kiribati Armenia Papua New Guinea Pakistan India Mongolia Viet Nam Kyrgyz Republic Solomon Islands Lao PDR Nepal Cambodia Bangladesh 0 10 0 20 0 30 0 40 0 50 0 60 0 70 0 80 0 90 1. Meanwhile. 2009 and 2010 (%) Singapore Taipei.China Korea. of Mongolia Indonesia Timor-Leste Cambodia Bangladesh Azerbaijan Nepal Japan Pakistan Vanuatu Brunei Darussalam Australia Armenia Samoa Micronesia.2. Fed. Fed. demonstrating the vulnerability of export-driven economies to events in the rest of the world that are outside their control.8%). Figure 2. Although Kiribati had negative growth in 2010. the GDP of 15 economies contracted in real terms but only two reported negative growth in 2010—Kiribati and the Kyrgyz Republic. The larger economies.China Myanmar China. Both Singapore’s and Taipei.13. Others with strong growth included Myanmar (10.4 compares growth in real (constant price) GDP for 2009 and 2010.4%). especially India and the PRC. China Japan Taipei.4 Real GDP Growth. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Rep.3%.4 went up from 1. 2010 (regional average = 100) Brunei Darussalam Singapore Australia Hong Kong. States of Average for Developing Members Philippines Indonesia China. it should be noted that GDP had fallen even faster in 2009. People's Rep.9% in 2010.3b Indices of Per Capita GDP. Figure 2. in only four cases was growth in 2010 slower than 2009—Azerbaijan. Rep. had weathered the 2008–2009 crisis better than most economies in the region and they continued to grow strongly in 2010. 0 20 1.5%).China’s growth represent a striking turnaround from 2009 when their real (constant price) GDP actually declined.

0 2. 12.6 5. 2000 (% of global GDP) United States Japan China. Japan.2 159 REGIONAL TABLES Recall that the GDP shares here are calculated using PPPs. Indonesia. of gross domestic capital formation exceeded 40% China. of Italy Mongolia 2.7 3. People's Rep.0 Figure 2. Likewise.7 2.People's Rep.1 and World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011). it will become the world’s largest economy by the end of the present decade.5b Top 10 Economies in the World in Terms of GDP at PPP. Figure 2.4 of GDP in the PRC and Mongolia. Figure 2. Many of the countries now reporting high shares of gross domestic capital formation are creating a basic infrastructureStates future growth. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 3.0 3.1 and World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011). Such comparisons are difficult to interpret because they mix together differences in volumes and differences in prices. 2009 (% of global GDP) 23. This means that differences in price levels have been removed so that the comparisons are in “real” or “volume” terms.6 Gross Domestic Capital Formation as a Percentage of GDP.2 formation provides and these high rates will generate continued high growth Germany 4. and Viet Nam.2 United States China.7 United Kingdom 3.0 Russian Federation 3. Assuming that the PRC continues to grow at least 5 percentage points faster than the US. People's Rep. The US is still the dominant economy accounting for nearly a fifth of global GDP but the next three are all in Asia—the PRC.5 shows the world’s 10 largest economies in PPP terms for the years 2000 and 2009. given the recent high growths of India vis-à-vis Japan.2 4. It only became possible to make such comparisons on a global basis after the 2005 round of the International Comparison Program (ICP).7 Sources: Table 2. Intercountry comparisons of GDP are still sometimes made after converting to a common currency using exchange rates.7 3. China Myanmar Taipei.6 7. that is.4 2. Indonesia Tonga Korea. of Japan India Germany Russian Federation United Kingdom France Brazil Italy 19. of Kyrgyz Republic Sri Lanka Thailand Kazakhstan Bangladesh Uzbekistan Singapore Hong Kong. India will soon overtake Japan as number three.7 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 0 22 24 26 0 1995 Source: Table 2.0 Brazil China.7 2.6 19. 1995 and 2010 France 3.5a Top 10 Economies in the World in Terms of GDP at PPP. People's Rep. and was over 30% Japan 5.2 shows that United for in 2010. Viet Nam 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 India Sources: Table 2. Rep. and India.0 3.6 in Armenia.ECONOMY AND OUTPUT Strong growth in Asia and sluggish growth in North America and Western Europe are shifting the economic balance to Asia.9.1 and World Development Indicators Online Armenia (World Bank 2011). 20 2010 40 60 Sources: Table 2. Capital India the basis for growth of an economy 5.3 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 7.6 3. of Germany India United Kingdom France Italy Brazil Russian Federation 5. Figure 2.6 3. India.4 5.China Malaysia Philippines Cambodia Azerbaijan Pakistan Australia Japan Figure 2. they compare the volumes of goods and services being generated in each of the world’s economies.9 2.2 12.0 23.

China. and Singapore. The national accounts data can therefore be considered as reasonably comparable. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . ill health. mainly on the assumption that PPPs are a function of per capita gross national income calculated using the World Bank Atlas Method. 20 40 60 80 100 rates of GDP in years to come. Private consumption generally absorbs a much smaller share of GDP in Asia and the Pacific than in North America and Europe. dams.China. These shares are low when compared with North America and Western Europe. Hong Kong. Shares range from a high of 84% in the Kyrgyz Republic to just 23% in Brunei Darussalam. Extensive consultations were held with participating economies to ensure the comparability and reliability of the PPP calculations. and Thailand may be in this situation—they all had high rates of capital formation in 1995 but their shares of capital formation in GDP are now more in line with those reported by the two developed economies at the bottom of Figure 2. 2010 Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Nepal Armenia Myanmar Cambodia Georgia Bangladesh Philippines Viet Nam Sri Lanka Hong Kong.6. Some of the economies at the lower end of Figure 2. The PPPs for Asia were calculated as part of the global 2005 International Comparison Program (ICP) exercise coordinated by the World Bank. Malaysia. roads.7 Private Consumption Expenditure as a Percentage of GDP. China Japan Taipei. but the lack of saving in itself keeps them from getting richer by building up the country’s stock of capital. Others have changed to the 1993 SNA or are in the process of doing so.6 will need to invest more if they are to achieve consistently high rates of growth. In some of these economies—the PRC. or children’s education. while many of those with lower shares are more mature economies where much of the necessary infrastructure is already in place. of Malaysia Kazakhstan Azerbaijan Singapore China. The economies with high shares of capital formation in GDP are now building up a modern infrastructure. and are seen as having important roles in aiding the global rebalancing process by encouraging domestic consumption. Taipei. The differences between the two systems are not significant for most countries when comparisons are made for GDP and its main components. where private consumption typically accounts for at least 60% of GDP and shares of 70% are not uncommon. PPPs were calculated by the ICP Global Office located at the Development Data Group of the World Bank. Singapore. PPPs for 2005 were directly calculated for 31 ADB regional members. Many countries still use the 1968 version of the SNA.7. Private consumption shares in GDP are shown in Figure 2. unemployment. and airports.g.160 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT than half of GDP. Some of these countries are at the center of the global rebalancing debate. bridges.. the PRC.China India Indonesia Mongolia Australia Thailand Korea. Households need to accumulate large precautionary savings for retirement.7. Much of the capital formation in Asia is in the form of infrastructure. People's Rep. and Singapore—private consumption is less Data Issues and Comparability The national accounts statistics are all compiled according to the United Nations System of National Accounts (SNA). For an additional 14 ADB regional members. The red bars signify economies that have run surpluses on their balance of payments current account for at least the last 5 years. Brunei Darussalam. for example—private consumption might be low as social safety nets are underdeveloped. In five of these—Azerbaijan. Malaysia. Malaysia. which in turn implies low capital formation—in poor countries households cannot afford to save. The counterpart to a high consumption share is low household saving. Figure 2. e. of Brunei Darussalam 0 Source: Table 2. rather than in machinery and equipment. communications networks. Rep. Many of the countries with high shares are the poorer countries in the region. railways.

c For reporting economies only. country sources. of Hong Kong. Fed. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .ECONOMY AND OUTPUT 161 REGIONAL TABLES National Accounts Table 2. million) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. of Mongolia Taipei. and US Bureau of Economic Analysis. but it is not classified as a developing member. estimates include the value added of United Nations activities. . States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Lesteb Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESc REGIONAL MEMBERSc 2000 … 6255 17764 9799 71316 6543 236380 5485 … 35665 2985366 175962 808400 3748 450152 111394 1404 1593154 837 21042 52086 14053 11430 496144 6004 211876 … 190145 133614 307709 109904 … 2796 175 … 290 … … 9300 477 538 631 336 … 642 506074 3250282 81378 2001 … 7010 19965 10503 82778 7047 246531 6181 … 38006 3306472 180846 859578 3949 451584 119932 1593 1714270 1117 22540 52213 14766 12592 525880 6501 217801 … 198518 134247 321505 120146 … 2917 174 … 303 … … 9499 523 524 750 356 … 635 533295 3330099 85895 2002 14385 8064 22440 11258 92367 7161 258617 6853 … 40167 3665958 187167 936042 4231 484665 127260 1775 1807742 1219 21363 54132 15587 13685 558469 7108 233271 … 208415 142412 344103 130764 … 3059 188 … 308 … … 9817 556 505 588 375 … 618 567926 3417249 90418 2003 16799 9391 25491 12773 103133 7827 276989 7720 … 42730 4119472 196949 965846 5284 512101 136836 1897 2001291 1459 22684 58584 16385 15170 597779 7553 252093 … 222249 151042 376618 143365 … 3156 200 … 317 … … 10598 595 594 602 393 … 655 596852 3509948 94807 2004 18906 10671 28887 13904 116238 8615 305839 8774 … 47079 4664101 219679 1039100 6011 559203 149533 2040 2228386 1633 24419 63525 16934 17213 645649 8315 276824 … 242531 169888 411863 158913 … 3417 208 … 314 … … 11303 642 658 645 408 … 703 633869 3708493 100441 2005 22372 12559 37731 15747 131765 8887 340262 9682 … 50015 5364252 243081 1096741 6662 607027 163725 2255 2517282 1541 26022 69740 17567 20143 705159 9687 301308 … 260987 193557 445195 178075 … 3556 208 … 332 … … 11299 724 728 707 417 … 764 667298 3872842 104608 2006 27161 14680 52399 17785 150609 9460 373032 10761 … 58009 6242144 268605 1172954 8096 656999 180261 2546 2840146 2013 27868 77530 18936 23039 768147 10938 329305 … 283015 217512 483006 198996 … 3742 215 … 342 … … 11882 749 850 688 432 … 845 710517 4071410 113373 2007 27632 17263 67769 20665 169633 10620 407741 11940 … 65696 7372801 295561 1269102 9174 720317 198419 3071 3225841 2284 29772 85638 19649 26262 844878 11575 362660 … 312412 244506 524255 223220 … 3835 228 … 350 … … 13361 833 900 691 443 … 933 765070 4290184 121153 2008 24996 18437 81033 21605 179062 11764 423305 13212 … 67117 8257241 308849 1306387 10126 743354 215310 3323 3458951 2458 31958 92716 19750 28632 914712 12416 388855 … 332864 248322 549509 242495 … 3927 236 … 349 … … 14546 811 1111 791 464 … 1014 801678 4316608 124478 2009 34603 16152 87137 20988 182870 12447 442166 13714 … 79826 2010 … 16446 94524 22505 197376 12151 464794 … … … 9091142 10120628 300917 327178 1323490 1416494 10239 10800 735576 822950 229756 3531 3808443 2003 34857 97085 19559 28207 963925 13310 385021 … 340508 254062 541231 257743 … 3844 224 … 345 … … 15657 799 1157 909 465 … 987 864311 4105914 125130 245229 … 4179052 2563 35506 105527 20258 30881 1032960 14673 417275 … 368808 287189 588847 277566 … … 233 … 359 … … 16717 823 1195 … 469 … … 846526 4277041 … 8074764 8684987 9407109 10308235 11466038 12860197 14526764 16582278 18012258 19335335 21111717 11926550 12649041 13498288 14526228 15925775 17522512 19441000 21778333 23274773 24450249 26255543 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. People’s Rep. Rep. Rep.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. CEIC data. China Korea.1 Gross Domestic Product at PPP (current international dollars. b GDP estimates refer to non-oil GDP Before 2002. Sources: ADB staff estimates using World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011).

c For reporting economies only. CEIC data. of Hong Kong. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. . estimates include the value added of United Nations activities.2 GDP Per Capita at PPP (current international dollars) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. People’s Rep. b GDP estimates refer to non-oil GDP Before 2002. Sources: ADB staff estimates using World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011). but it is not classified as a developing member. Rep. country sources. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Lesteb Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESc REGIONAL MEMBERSc 2000 … 1942 2200 2209 4792 1338 1691 886 … 1447 2355 26401 17197 1555 20291 870 2358 1568 3100 943 2820 43266 917 2410 1180 9020 … 2473 33172 4944 1416 … 3519 2076 … 2714 … … 1792 2726 1285 811 3379 … 3352 26422 25624 21094 2513 3546 2001 … 2181 2449 2386 5571 1430 1732 979 … 1522 2591 26934 18151 1618 20213 923 2642 1656 4048 989 2787 44368 997 2520 1252 9029 … 2529 32443 5117 1528 … 3637 2023 … 2841 … … 1788 2962 1223 953 3563 … 3226 27471 26191 22135 2669 3715 2002 644 2511 2727 2575 6216 1442 1780 1064 … 1589 2854 27753 19656 1706 21576 967 2905 1720 4345 917 2848 45284 1069 2641 1342 9434 … 2600 34103 5426 1644 … 3790 2147 … 2905 … … 1806 3140 1151 664 3737 … 3058 28900 26814 22899 2838 3895 2003 737 2924 3068 2941 6918 1562 1869 1175 … 1671 3188 29261 20181 2114 22697 1026 3065 1874 5117 952 3043 46868 1169 2790 1398 9956 … 2714 36707 5886 1782 … 3897 2254 … 3003 … … 1905 3351 1323 666 3899 … 3165 29999 27482 23542 3074 4144 2004 813 3320 3440 3222 7749 1701 2024 1308 … 1820 3588 32384 21630 2376 24692 1106 3254 2054 5641 1002 3264 47079 1309 2974 1509 10686 … 2902 40773 6382 1951 … 4211 2300 … 2993 … … 1987 3601 1433 698 4033 … 3312 31493 29027 24573 3381 4494 2005 944 3903 4439 3644 8704 1742 2210 1413 … 1911 4102 35678 22783 2602 26706 1195 3552 2286 5248 1045 3550 47465 1512 3207 1723 11380 … 3061 45374 6839 2161 … 4356 2252 … 3174 … … 1942 4054 1548 748 4111 … 3507 32719 30310 25305 3750 4892 2006 1123 4557 6086 4041 9839 1833 2401 1539 … 2190 4749 39172 24286 3126 28786 1299 3936 2541 6735 1094 3899 49441 1706 3449 1903 12274 … 3254 49419 7366 2389 … 4554 2286 … 3285 … … 1998 4146 1767 711 4237 … 3782 34328 31869 27093 4192 5372 2007 1121 5350 7769 4702 10955 2055 2578 1672 … 2445 5580 42675 26191 3475 31431 1411 4661 2845 7492 1143 4280 50382 1919 3744 1972 13338 … 3522 53285 7938 2650 … 4648 2378 … 3382 … … 2198 4586 1827 697 4325 … 4068 36307 33577 28653 4734 5957 2008 995 5701 9168 4930 11424 2215 2630 1811 … 2458 6218 44262 26877 3779 32323 1512 4951 3007 7941 1200 4586 49623 2065 4003 2069 14120 … 3680 51313 8266 2849 … 4734 2413 … 3396 … … 2341 4444 2203 779 4506 … 4308 37290 33802 29159 5088 6301 2009 1352 4979 9739 4786 11506 2338 2700 1840 … 2875 6811 42964 27150 3750 31873 1593 5167 3266 6370 1261 4747 48151 2003 4166 2172 13800 … 3692 50939 8090 2996 … 4609 2252 … 3369 … … 2466 4355 2242 874 4505 … 4133 39373 32189 28993 5405 6552 2010 … 5051 10440 5073 12236 2246 2791 … … … 7554 46291 28982 3885 35562 1677 … 3535 8016 1255 5098 48886 2159 4411 2355 14771 … 3923 56570 8748 3193 … … 2265 … 3497 … … 2577 4472 2264 … 4518 … … 37912 33566 … 5951 7100 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. China Korea. and US Bureau of Economic Analysis.162 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT National Accounts Table 2. of Mongolia Taipei. Rep. Fed.

b Based on GDP per capita and exchange rates from the country source. Fed. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Sources: World Development Indicators Online. of Mongolia Taipei.3 GNI Per Capita. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. ADB staff estimates derived from country sources. Atlas Method (current US$) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.ECONOMY AND OUTPUT 163 REGIONAL TABLES National Accounts Table 2. People’s Rep. States of Naurub Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalub Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … … … … … 420 … … … 330 12660 6000 1170 8339 270 590 390 … 210 470 12540 … 630 200 2390 … 720 12050 1490 130 3759 1810 730 … … … … 830 1070 … … 1230 976 1180 17420 27160 12970 1995 … 450 400 530 1280 350 490 200 610 580 530 23490 10770 400 13121 310 560 380 … 200 700 15800 280 1020 360 4030 … 1020 23570 2690 250 4814 2480 1160 … 2280 4235 5780 1040 1010 890 … 1990 1195 1240 19470 40650 14940 2000 … 660 610 730 1260 280 490 170 650 630 930 26570 9910 410 14908 350 730 450 2150 220 880 14670 280 580 280 3450 … 970 23350 1960 390 5119 2260 1380 2420 2270 2679 6260 620 1420 1000 … 2020 1461 1440 21260 34620 13620 2001 … 710 660 710 1350 280 500 170 740 560 1000 25930 10890 440 13405 350 790 460 2150 230 830 16030 300 690 300 3540 … 960 21500 1900 410 5317 2160 1350 2540 2200 2513 6400 550 1450 920 … 1880 1427 1380 20250 35120 13410 2002 … 800 720 760 1520 290 510 170 870 450 1100 24850 11830 490 13718 350 820 470 2210 220 860 17060 300 740 320 3780 … 940 21320 1900 430 6043 2180 1270 2800 2240 2781 6150 510 1450 830 330 1860 1562 1240 20100 33240 13850 2003 … 950 820 910 1800 340 560 210 1130 420 1270 25850 12680 560 14198 370 900 530 2380 240 950 17690 340 930 340 4160 … 980 22650 2060 470 8303 2420 1360 2860 2340 3655 6420 500 1520 830 340 1940 1924 1370 21260 33420 16520 2004 220 1150 950 1100 2300 400 640 270 1450 460 1500 27510 14830 680 15507 410 1060 640 2600 270 1070 19810 390 1120 400 4740 … 1080 25180 2360 540 8792 3020 1610 3080 2370 2857 7190 570 1870 850 500 2230 2201 1600 25670 36690 20860 2005 260 1470 1270 1360 2930 450 720 330 1620 530 1760 28150 16900 810 16455 440 1210 750 2610 290 1200 22770 440 1170 450 5200 … 1160 28340 2580 620 8491 3570 1780 3150 2490 2780 7760 680 2110 890 740 2470 2157 1780 30400 38940 24640 2006 300 1920 1890 1680 3860 500 790 390 1860 600 2050 29520 18950 1010 16910 450 1320 850 3010 320 1350 27050 500 1300 510 5720 … 1250 31380 2860 690 7926 3600 1820 3250 2460 2751 7960 720 2410 960 960 2740 2249 1960 34300 38590 25410 2007 320 2580 2710 2090 4970 620 860 460 2210 720 2490 31220 21210 1280 17595 480 1650 1000 3270 350 1540 … 560 1520 610 6420 … 1460 34640 3240 780 10854 3800 1830 3240 2470 2467 8250 940 2570 1020 1520 2910 2530 2130 37140 37770 27380 2008 310 3350 3830 2450 6140 790 940 600 2760 900 3050 32900 21570 1670 17844 520 1770 1080 3700 400 1780 … 630 1880 750 7270 … 1700 37650 3670 910 10563 4060 1960 3120 2460 4341 6690 1090 2930 1050 2460 3240 2685 2490 41890 38000 27260 2009 … 3100 4840 2530 6920 870 1000 700 3420 1100 3650 31570 19830 1630 16876 580 2020 1220 3970 440 1990 … 650 2050 880 7350 … 1790 37220 3760 1000 9139 3840 1830 3060 2500 5551 6220 1180 2840 910 … 3260 … 2620 43770 38080 28810 2010a 330 3090 5180 2700 7440 880 1050 780 3700 1280 4260 32900 19890 1890 19177 640 1920 1340 4270 490 2290 31180 760 2580 1010 7900 … 2050 40920 4210 1100 … 3610 2010 2990 2700 … 6460 1300 2930 1030 1280 3380 … 2760 43740 42150 29050 a Preliminary estimates of the World Bank for reclassification of economies. China Korea. but it is not classified as a developing member. Rep. c Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. Data have yet to be reconciled with historical time series in the World Development Indicators database.Chinab South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamc Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands b Fiji. Rep. of Hong Kong. Open Data Initiative (World Bank 2011).

2 34.1 4.2 32.7 1.6 17.0 5.4 13.2 1.0 34.1 23.1 10.2 15.0 … … 20.5 12.5 10.9 21.4 23.2 38.6 5.8 11.7 2.1 20. ..7 0.4 5.9 13.7 0.0 12.7 8.2 22.5 26.5 9.5 19.3 32.1 6.9 15.4 5.3 5.6 22.0 … … 7.2 27.1 27.5 27.8 7.6 3.7 31.9 13.7 0.7 19.2 9.4 1.6 14.9 18.2 17.2 1.3 30.1 21.4 26.5 1.3 38.8 20.8 22.4 … 37.9 17.0 19..2 3.7 1.4 31.9 34.9 .6 19.8 3.2 20. of Mongolia Taipei..9 0.7 20.9 43. 2..0 1...7 32.4 1.1 3.8 21.7 31.9 14.8 13.6 34.5 8.0 0.6 16.7 15.6 6.1 3.5 9..1 32.4 2007 37.6 24.7 57.7 4.4 0.7 22.1 2005 39..2 6. Sources: Country sources..2 7.8 5.2 41.9 24.5 21.2 21.3 3.4 61.0 11.3 3.9 15.2 10.3 12.7 26.4 11.0 16.7 19.6 9.5 19.8 17.1 1.0 24.9 35.1 3.4 24.0 23.1 12. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .7 8.1 0.2 20.7 12.1 9.5 6.9 14.1 24.0 25.7 20.6 2003 46.1 18.4 … 29.3 39.4 23.7 23. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.5 21.164 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT National Accounts Table 2..5 38.6 12.9 27.3 6.8 … … … … 29.1 24. Rep.4 14.0 20..0 19.3 0.1 10.3 26.0 9.1 24.6 22.0 6.8 … … 5.7 54.0 10.2 22.5 13.4 31.4 0.5 31.9 22.2 4.1 0..5 1.9 16.9 19.3 57.7 15.8 16.3 21.4 2009 32.3 21.3 33.3 22.2 20.3 23.6 1.0 6.8 6.9 13.4 8.1 3.4 20.8 36.4 1.2 20.4 12. China Korea.3 34.4 24.7 23.3 4.0 17. 19.5 22.9 1.8 20.5 23.6 2.1 48.2 7. but it is not classified as a developing member.0 15.7 13.4 23.1 26. People’s Rep.2 20.6 6.0 24.7 … … … 34. 21.3 5.4 … … 4.5 21.2 .9 14.3 38.4 5.0 0.5 24.1 35.4 24.1 20.1 50.4 24.3 18.1 … … 7.9 .1 2.4 1.1 32.9 20. 2.9 9.8 29.8 7.2 32.3 22.5 1.6 26.5 13.3 .9 … 12.5 … 38.2 0. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … 29.6 18.0 20.2 … 33..6 31.6 1.3 45.0 22.7 … … 19.. 31.2 12.1 4.7 0.4 36..3 3.5 10.7 25.8 26.9 1.3 32.7 21.2 9.9 35.4 15.3 21.0 12.2 1.9 23.1 2.9 14.5 42.3 33..5 … … 18.2 6.6 20.0 4..7 0.6 17.5 3.5 32.2 18.2 34.6 17.8 43.1 2000 … 25..7 14.5 2010 .3 5.1 18.8 25.7 34.1 13.7 18.5 8.7 13.0 37.3 21.3 36.9 32. 19.9 35.1 12.0 7.4 19.7 20.5 27.6 … … 19.4 24.3 25.6 2008 28.8 23.9 36. Fed. 24.6 6.7 60.2 24.2 1.9 9.3 22.9 21.0 14.4 3.6 43.8 0. of Hong Kong.1 5.5 23.2 46.7 15.9 3.8 14.1 0.6 22.7 14.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.0 20.8 10.6 5.3 21.3 21.6 29.1 3.0 9.1 12.1 0.0 12.4 23.7 33.2 33.3 … 32..1 2.4 32. .6 15.9 12.0 12.3 37.8 30.4 6.2 .5 14..6 36.5 20.3 … … 33.4 20.5 2.5 32.6 25.9 25.0 3.2 0.2 9.1 13.5 37.5 18.3 13.1 25.9 1.4 16.0 24.0 1.5 22.3 22. Rep..7 17.8 22.1 15.5 5.0 0.4 3.7 15.5 0.2 35.6 8.2 1.2 8.7 19.8 3.7 2.5 … … 7..2 14.0 … 35.0 10.6 0.6 10.3 … 48.1 9.9 2.5 7.5 13.1 4.7 … 3.0 12.4 0.1 36.4 8.1 0.5 20.3 … . of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.4 5.0 … … 7.1 2.4 … 32.8 … 24.7 35.8 .6 13.6 15.1 9.1 55.9 32.9 1.3 5.0 56.2 9.7 5.6 1995 … 40.0 57.4 37.1 13.9 16.7 8.0 10.5 2004 41.9 35.5 19.3 0.7 17.1 0.8 21.8 2002 45.4 1.7 … 25.8 0.9 10.0 11.0 40.8 1.0 … … 5.9 36.2 49.1 23. 30.3 … … … .4 1.3 35.4 5.6 14.6 6.6 11.5 18.7 3.4 8.0 6.0 23.7 37.4 27.5 18. 10.5 11.2 17.6 20.1 17.1 10.5 20.7 26.5 14.2 1.6 16.4 13.6 48. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.8 7.4 Agriculture Value Added (percent of total value added) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.2 33.4 22.9 … … 7.8 33.3 … 33.2 16.2 2006 38.1 23.7 20.3 25.2 13.3 21.3 3.7 8.5 2001 … 27.4 26.6 … … 7.9 19.1 31.3 16.9 6.1 … … 9.5 0.2 14.0 21.3 0.1 36.4 3.4 12.0 30.0 21.1 … … 6.3 24.9 29.1 26.6 … .1 3.9 4..8 28..8 3.5 19.2 0.4 12.4 0.3 12.0 35.0 32.4 20.8 18.8 0.8 18.1 26.2 13.7 22.2 25.8 17.7 8.2 19.0 5.0 5.

8 … … 11.5 27.6 37.2 9.7 7.0 … … 2.7 … .4 25.2 70.4 33.9 26.7 26.1 … .1 31.2 39.9 40.0 34..3 12.1 23.8 23.5 17.1 14.6 … … 18.6 54. Rep.3 … … 21.7 24.5 39.8 9.7 29.8 37..1 24.0 23.5 12.2 7.6 9.4 16.5 36.6 26.3 39.5 2009 22.0 47.6 … 21...8 38.3 27.5 25.5 8.3 7.7 23.8 47.6 14.4 33.9 … 12.1 24.1 14.7 25.9 … … … .3 44.7 65.3 28.5 21.6 30.5 1995 … 31.9 37.3 46.7 41.1 10.0 12.8 19. China Korea.3 31.3 36.8 71.4 40.7 13.2 36.4 23.7 8.3 15.2 46.4 8.4 67.9 29.2 … … 18.0 32.1 29.5 42.8 69.1 7.7 40.9 27..1 29.3 .8 29.6 33.9 37.2 9.2 19.3 23.2 17.0 18.2 8.0 18.3 28..7 33.7 32.0 11.5 13.6 47.8 16.1 46.7 6.6 … 13.2 37.1 8.5 30.2 37.6 25.5 42.9 36.8 41.3 18.2 71.7 38.9 26.0 41.3 38.9 19.2 2006 26.6 2002 19.0 45.6 26.6 31.2 22..1 30.0 9.2 … … … 13.8 … 18.7 32.2 22.6 … … 11.9 7.6 31..3 22.7 27.8 27.2 44.2 10.8 31.8 8.7 … … 35.1 31..5 19.1 24.5 8.5 64.3 30.2 21.2 26.5 29.6 19.6 20.5 2004 23.7 32.3 43.9 25.6 14.0 40.4 44.8 9.3 45.8 47.4 21.0 29. 35.9 23.7 32.4 23.2 … … 12. of Hong Kong.5 43.3 2010 .2 … 17.9 28.2 26..8 23.6 22.5 34.7 11.0 24.7 26.1 43.9 26.9 26..8 11.7 27.8 17.8 48.7 32.6 44.6 20.8 46.0 17.1 45.2 27.3 30.0 34.7 29.8 2007 24.1 38.9 29.8 47.1 23.3 28.4 38.2 … 19.3 54.9 63.2 39.. but it is not classified as a developing member.3 30.6 31. 7.7 38.5 23.3 45..4 38.4 74.5 22.3 41.6 26.5 .5 24.1 36.7 18.5 20.3 26.1 8.6 30.2 37.1 25.0 29.0 23.7 46.0 10.9 17.7 28.1 26.6 11.9 30.5 41.1 20. 46.6 20.8 40.0 27.2 10.9 37.7 … … –1.8 28.1 22.5 34.6 17.0 38.1 … … 51..9 44.9 17. Rep.5 2008 26.9 32.5 … 16.7 17.8 41.9 24.6 31.1 16.6 44.3 27.5 18.5 31. .9 23..3 44.8 48.5 48.0 46.9 13.4 33.7 25.2 44.0 23.6 … … … … 31.9 61.4 32.4 37.9 29.8 7.8 31.1 47.8 8.3 24.5 19.6 … … –6.0 36.1 30.3 8.1 40. .1 29. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.8 46.1 35.7 22.3 23.1 28..1 68.6 46.9 28.6 46.4 26.2 29.7 27.5 19.4 39.0 60.5 22.4 .3 7..5 34.2 36.7 28.2 38.5 33.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.5 31.7 37. 26.4 29.3 14.0 27.7 21.9 42.1 37.1 33.4 16.3 36.1 39.7 28.8 42.8 26.4 47. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. of Mongolia Taipei. 27.1 38.5 8.3 40.2 27.9 25.2 13.6 34.5 16.1 26.ECONOMY AND OUTPUT 165 REGIONAL TABLES National Accounts Table 2.9 12.3 34. Fed.5 29.5 25.8 23.5 24.0 29.9 15.7 10.6 28.5 62.1 17.2 … … 38.7 … … 17. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.8 37.5 8.6 24.7 27.5 47.5 .5 28.9 … 31.6 31.5 8.8 17.0 22. Sources: Country sources.8 22.9 22.4 … … 17.5 46.1 28.0 47.3 33.9 31.3 8.2 22.3 21.3 42.7 42.5 32.4 41.0 13.7 17.4 64.5 31.9 23.1 39.4 … 8.5 24.9 26.7 44.0 39.4 28.6 44.3 44.1 24.9 27.8 29.8 32. 9.6 39.2 … 16.4 7.0 47.8 27.6 37.2 36..1 15.7 41.3 26.3 26.3 25.8 .8 27. 39.5 38.1 … 16..2 22.6 11.4 27.9 37.9 11.0 22.8 21.1 46.9 41.4 40.3 29.9 43.7 34.8 52.8 30.6 34.3 29.2 32.6 22.2 38.2 15.8 28.3 13.8 2000 … 38.7 41.6 26.7 63.0 38.3 … 15.1 27.4 66.4 14.4 … 25.0 26.9 38.6 26.6 40.5 25.4 7.8 … 17.7 10.0 30.6 8.5 Industry Value Added (percent of total value added) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.0 19.9 26.4 15..7 26.0 27.6 60.5 9.9 2005 25.2 10.9 33.8 19.3 43. People’s Rep.9 30.0 32.2 44.3 39.1 20.7 25. 44.2 60.6 28.7 28.4 43.8 36.5 20.7 26.0 24.2 42.0 2003 18.8 30.5 30.0 13.9 8.2 7.2 22.3 28.5 49.9 28.9 37.6 41.7 19.9 47.6 19.7 24.2 11.3 28.9 24.0 21.7 8.1 23.0 24.1 21.9 13.9 29.3 26.3 40.7 32.3 32.1 32. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … 33.6 … … 26.7 42.6 45.8 43.5 35.7 18.7 25.5 10..5 52.0 27.4 9.6 73.4 46..2 28.7 … … 18.3 44.1 9.8 13.3 40.5 10.6 39.0 25.4 7.5 43.7 28.2 2001 … 35.0 25.

0 56.7 77.1 38.1 48.1 34.8 50.5 39.7 81. … 43.7 66.6 65.8 67.0 35.8 85.1 53.1 68.6 55.0 65.7 54.0 38..5 35.5 52.6 46.6 .6 43.3 62.9 71. 67.1 57.5 40.3 37.8 47.7 54.5 88.0 64.8 23.7 34.4 … … 67.6 48.7 24.9 67.2 41.9 … … 80.0 46.1 27.3 65.4 69.2 38.7 34.2 39.2 59.1 69.9 37.3 68.0 57.6 … … … … 39.1 34.4 2003 35.2 56.0 80.4 45.5 52.5 35.2 ...5 32.0 43.7 20..1 … … 81.0 … … 31.4 49.6 .3 39.8 30.3 37.2 54.7 40.2 33.3 54.8 66.8 44.2 32.1 57.8 2008 45.6 41.6 63.9 66..3 69.6 65.1 83.5 24.2 67.0 38.4 70.6 40.9 70.5 48.1 65.5 … … 73.0 2004 35.9 66.5 69.5 35. 58.6 83.0 67.9 67.0 .6 67.5 … 44.4 51..8 49. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .1 52.5 41.5 91.3 66.7 70.2 34.6 62.4 63.5 52.6 34..8 70.7 45.5 44.6 35.5 66.5 … 51.2 57.1 41.6 46.4 54.6 51..5 71.1 76.9 52. China Korea.1 71.6 33.5 41.9 70.1 54.5 75.4 30.0 44.9 73.2 25.9 20.8 46.3 51. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … 37.8 66.8 45. Sources: Country sources.6 50.1 37.6 24.0 44.7 41.4 41..2 40.7 57. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.7 41.4 68.3 … ..5 66.7 42.3 68.7 45.2 57.1 48.5 79.7 … … 62.5 52.8 65.9 49.7 64.6 71.3 44.7 31.9 92.7 70.7 63.3 45.2 52.0 70.8 20.5 36.6 27.0 41. People’s Rep.9 68. 48.1 75.2 40..3 43.1 46.5 52.2 66.5 49.0 52.7 57.5 … … 98.5 71.6 23.5 38.2 41.2 2010 .6 .8 … 39.6 38.6 78.8 53.2 68.0 57.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.5 … 50.7 38. 23.1 25..9 84.8 … … … . 54.6 17.7 43.5 37.3 36.8 24.2 47.7 81.3 44.4 90.9 … … 81.5 36.5 53.0 43.4 31.4 37.0 … .4 18.4 69.4 41.6 38.0 38.1 54.2 46.2 33.6 67.8 36.7 44.5 43. Rep.3 55.1 50.0 77.1 57. of Mongolia Taipei.8 66.9 33..6 2002 35.4 41.3 39.9 84.6 35.4 52.5 41.1 68.5 32.3 38.9 55.1 52.8 60.0 37.7 59.1 70.. Fed.8 38.8 50.8 36.5 54..8 49.7 … 43.9 2005 35.6 62.7 66.9 38.1 53.3 2001 … 36.8 43.8 45.5 38.0 43. Rep.4 26.3 49.1 51.0 38.0 43.6 45.8 50.7 79.6 66.4 53.8 56.9 … 87.2 53.8 57.6 43.0 … 59.1 55.6 69.6 67.8 53. of Hong Kong.6 79.1 37.0 69.7 53.0 66.2 59..8 54.6 Services Value Added (percent of total value added) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.9 54.1 69.7 59.1 52.9 … … 90..2 52.1 53.2 89.6 … … 62.0 69.5 51.6 2006 34.4 46.4 … … 61.6 … … 72..1 85.5 40.0 65.6 40.3 64.5 59.7 44.8 46.4 … 48.4 43..6 36.1 46.6 45.6 53.4 69.3 … … 62.2 37.1 52.0 68.1 35.7 51.0 83.0 53.9 38.4 50.3 69.3 35.9 34.3 35.166 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT National Accounts Table 2.6 50.4 47.3 40.8 69.1 51.2 … 50.. .8 37.8 52.8 2007 37.9 58.4 92.5 52.3 27.4 62.1 2009 45.9 60.4 50.4 55.5 39.8 63.6 36.0 67.8 43.3 51.6 58.9 69.2 43.4 68.0 83.4 44.8 40.7 52.1 28.9 34.0 37.7 37.5 57.1 52.4 61.2 42.7 69.7 41.3 69.0 41.4 52.9 51.1 56.5 43.3 51.1 2000 … 36.4 43.6 43.8 70.5 79.7 54.9 52.1 35.0 … … … 51.7 42.6 32.5 50.4 40.0 37. 70.7 68.2 41.3 42.9 86.0 80. 45.5 68.6 67.8 57.4 70.6 53.0 56.2 85.3 39.8 79.0 35.1 53.7 72.7 82.4 … 50.0 54.5 … … 44.6 70.5 57.0 40.0 71.4 38.0 69.5 60.0 69.1 37.4 34.1 52.0 87.4 58.8 32.4 41.4 64.9 39.5 38.7 66.5 88.7 36.1 69.8 59.5 49.8 80.7 59.2 71.8 32.5 32.6 66.0 23.7 43.5 83.4 43.4 52.8 76.4 .8 55.9 34.6 60.5 80.6 21.7 62.6 38.7 67.4 35.5 58.4 51.5 61.0 55.2 … 56.0 35.7 70.3 38.8 70.9 56.3 41.0 58.2 51.1 40.2 43.2 77.1 67.6 70.2 … 45.9 1995 … 28.7 67.1 40.7 38.0 … … 56.1 52.9 24.2 67.3 62. 67.7 72.7 68..8 31.8 39. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.1 48.7 70.7 42.4 36.5 35.5 39.0 47.1 52.4 32.1 70.8 92.1 34.6 … 55.2 54.9 82.3 43.3 32. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.1 26.9 46.4 52.1 52.8 54.8 67.9 91.9 80.7 … … 94.7 52.0 59.0 41.4 68.0 53.8 35.3 70.1 55.0 31.1 68.1 38..0 40.3 46. but it is not classified as a developing member.0 48.

6 85.1 … 44..7 35.0 53.6 60.3 71.5 42.7 61.1 60..9 55.6 33.1 2003 123.1 57..6 36.5 73.8 74.0 61.2 38.7 55.6 37.9 … 70.9 … … … … 49.7 59.8 76..5 … … … … 49.4 50.0 … … 58.0 60.5 … 45.8 86. .5 57.5 44.2 40.6 37.5 47...4 … … … … 125.6 55.7 79.2 … 46.0 … … 53.5 51.6 46.7 … … 70. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.3 64.0 44.3 52. of Hong Kong.1 73.6 60.7 55.3 58.0 67.4 … … … … 58.1 82.2 53. Rep.4 72.9 49..0 22.1 59.1 … 66.2 41.4 55.7 … 82. 80.5 .4 … … 111.8 58.6 92...5 38.3 96.8 60.9 74.0 … … … 93.0 … 81.2 61.0 35. 93.8 58.4 26.9 64.0 59.6 … 60.9 67.3 74.2 70.1 1995 .3 57.9 86..4 39. . Sources: Country sources.5 75.6 57.7 Private Consumption Expenditure (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.3 50.5 55.3 54.7 74. Rep.9 … … … … 88.4 42.7 36. 71.3 103.3 2002 111.7 77.3 58.0 65.8 55.0 74..8 23.8 2005 105.2 66.4 … … … … 53.9 84.0 54..2 … … 56.2 53.3 83.4 57.2 78.0 74.3 83.4 48. … … … 103.0 40.8 43.2 54. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .4 93.5 59.6 91. … … … … .5 42.4 … 80.0 87.6 89.9 50.6 57.1 74.1 84.6 65.6 … … … … … … … 59.2 61.7 19.5 77.9 75.8 64.0 59.5 59.6 74. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.0 2010 .ECONOMY AND OUTPUT 167 REGIONAL TABLES National Accounts Table 2.2 63.4 76.8 … 77.0 82.0 52.1 71.9 56.1 63. but it is not classified as a developing member.4 24.5 84.7 40.9 76.5 63.4 78.8 73.1 38.6 … 45.7 64.7 66.5 90.1 57.6 … 45.1 59.9 2000 .4 60.5 … 72.9 74.5 76.4 … … 109.5 69.2 38.8 71.5 2009 98.8 27.0 72.3 70.5 … … … … 50.9 64.1 75.1 57.9 24.0 57.1 67.1 88.2 59.2 96.. . China Korea. . Fed.1 57.9 53.5 74.0 78.1 58.5 44.9 76..9 44.5 79. of Mongolia Taipei.5 48.2 … 56.5 88.6 … 47.2 66.1 82.8 59..1 71.0 89.6 74.2 74.6 38.5 … … 59. 33.2 45.8 56..8 71.0 45. 52.4 68.2 74.7 … 79.1 … … 70.7 58.0 42.6 89.6 56.7 … 82.6 ..8 … … 55.6 .3 81.2 20.5 57..1 … 73.4 56.8 74.. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 .4 … 44.9 46.4 59.6 62.1 57.8 … 44. 71.4 63.6 47..7 … 45.7 62.8 77.6 61.5 76.4 90.6 62.7 2007 98.9 46.6 45.1 58.8 88.7 … 49.0 80.8 47.3 54..1 … … 58.3 55.0 75.4 57..9 73.5 56.4 56.2 … … 58..4 41.4 70. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.0 54...9 57.1 58. 106.0 … … 99.7 40.2 53.9 43.5 61.3 67. 57.7 45...3 57.2 65.3 84.5 2006 98.4 74.9 81.4 59.4 94.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.3 91.0 61.3 55.3 39.1 75.8 63. People’s Rep.3 55.4 64.7 95.8 54.0 .2 57..1 52.3 … 77.9 60.1 78..2 74.5 47.5 92.6 … … 58.3 71.3 37.4 .3 64.2 59.4 … 80.7 60.5 62.4 54..9 77.2 … … … … 52.6 58.8 45.6 47.4 58.9 43.0 … … 54.0 56.5 54.8 … 71.3 54.5 61.1 … … … … 67.6 33. … … … 98..9 … 51..2 83.4 … 81.5 87.5 76.7 71.9 … 58.3 83.5 57.3 … 68.2 73.7 77.5 … .8 81.6 85.7 … … … 95.1 63.7 62.7 53.4 52.1 75.2 77.7 53.1 … … 92.7 72.7 36.6 .1 74.1 66.7 … … 99.2 82.0 2008 104.6 83.5 53.2 … … 74.8 58.0 58.7 … 48.5 52.9 84.6 68.8 76.1 41..5 84. … … … 98. … … … 102..1 58.3 61.6 .7 … 43.6 50.1 66..0 62.2 80.1 50.1 66.8 58.0 17.6 44.2 63.5 36.9 78.9 39.8 87.3 .3 … … … … 42.8 86.7 … … 58.6 67.7 2001 .3 59.7 58.0 84.2 43. .9 59.2 2004 120.9 57.7 … 63.7 45.1 55.8 80.9 67..2 … 82.6 50.5 … 70.7 75.6 … … 111.6 70.2 … 82.0 50.8 55.8 … … … … 49..9 65..2 52.8 73.1 87.8 55.7 63.8 60.5 60.0 72.5 … 73.6 58.1 55.4 … … 109.3 61.4 45.0 58.4 76.8 81.7 41.9 82. 96.3 63.2 86.4 66.2 65.4 53..1 58..9 82.3 25.9 26.5 54.8 26.3 … 79.8 73.7 57.1 … 79.

.5 9. 25.0 … 11.3 14. .. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.1 29.1 12.2 8.0 11.4 12.2 … … … … 34.2 13.7 12.3 13.6 4.1 17.0 8.8 17.5 8.6 13.4 9.9 … … 14.5 21..6 … … 51.2 8.4 18.8 13.0 5.3 10.3 8.1 6.0 20. 11.1 18.0 13.7 26.9 … … … … 33.2 7.3 19.3 12.6 … … 13.1 … … … 16. 17.5 … 10.8 11.8 Government Consumption Expenditure (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.5 … .1 6..7 2..9 10.9 9.8 … 27.8 10.8 16.4 … 12.1 9.9 8.2 6. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.2 20.4 … .2 10.7 25..5 8.6 16.3 8.4 13.8 10.6 22..0 17.0 11.8 23.3 10.3 8.4 8.9 18.5 14.8 13.7 19.2 8.3 11..5 19.1 24. 17.2 … 11.3 … 9...9 13.8 2008 12.0 18.1 14.5 21. 13.6 19.4 16.3 8.4 4.5 12.3 18.4 9.5 11.6 23.7 6. China Korea.8 11.1 12. of Hong Kong.8 8. … … … 18.4 18.8 12.3 … 8.0 … 9.0 … 10. 17.4 4.1 5.6 2007 10.1 11.1 … 9.7 13.8 9.8 8..9 … 9.1 13.3 10.5 13.4 7.9 10.1 … … … … 34.0 10.3 … 9.8 … 10.1 17.6 … 11..7 … … 47. 13.5 2005 9. 17.7 15. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . .9 8.0 17..7 27.9 … … … … 34.4 5.2 5. 17.1 13..1 16.5 12.8 29.5 9.1 10..7 18..4 10.1 17.6 7.4 … 11.7 12. Rep.8 12.8 5..7 … … … … 38.9 13..5 … .4 5.1 … 12.5 12.1 9..7 … 9.4 … 17.2 16.3 6.5 7.7 15.1 12.1 … .9 14.1 18.2 … 16.6 16.5 … .9 16.2 6.5 15..8 … … 53. .5 17.6 21.9 … .4 16.0 … 10.1 8. Sources: Country sources.6 … 9.7 … … 13.4 8.8 17.7 5.5 15.0 7.0 5.2 5.1 … 14..5 20... 17.2 18..3 21.1 7.5 10..8 19.0 .1 20.3 6.3 12.3 2002 7.3 11.3 8.4 9.3 .4 11.5 9.4 14.9 12.3 … 12.6 4.4 12.8 10.2 16.7 12.5 11.1 … 13.2 12.3 6.168 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT National Accounts Table 2.6 9.6 5.7 21..3 15.0 17.6 13.7 12.9 … . of Mongolia Taipei.6 .2 … .5 11.8 … 12.0 14.2 17.6 8.0 .5 12. . 11.6 9.2 18.5 17.8 12.1 13.3 2000 .3 … 17.2 18.1 17.0 7.1 7.4 5..0 14.6 10.6 … 14.1 20.5 15.0 15.4 11.5 11.4 15.2 18..8 14.2 … 16.1 14.9 . 17.4 … 16. 17..1 8.1 … … 47.2 … … 39.6 12.3 2001 .6 18..1 … 12..0 15...0 25.1 12.9 7..5 15.4 10.4 … … … … 36.9 12.3 11.3 14.1 9.8 8..9 … … 51..1 17.9 12.7 13...0 18.3 2004 9.2 17..9 13.1 10.5 13..2 9.4 … 8.8 14..6 12.4 17.3 8..5 … 14. but it is not classified as a developing member.2 17.6 18.3 18.0 9.6 18.7 17..6 20.0 … 10.3 11..9 1995 .8 14.0 2006 9.9 18..9 13.6 5. UN Statistics Division (UN 2011)..5 21.9 19.5 25.9 6.5 22.1 17.1 17.3 22..2 8.8 4. 17. Rep.1 … … … … 41.6 12.1 18.5 17.2 11.3 … 12.. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 .4 17...9 17.6 15.2 11..0 10.0 4.4 14.8 6.3 … 17.4 18.2 24.3 14.9 14.9 … 8.9 … .0 9.8 10.5 … … … … … … … 24. … … … … .9 11.7 10..9 10.8 5.9 10.1 6.4 10.4 8.8 … … … … 35.1 … 16.0 … .6 19.4 12.1 17.7 15.2 … 9.7 8. … … … 18.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.1 2003 9.2 8.9 … 8.8 20.3 18.6 21.1 3.7 … 30.1 11.4 … 8. .3 15.0 10.6 16.7 15.2 10.8 13. 11.7 13.2 17.1 14.9 16.2 15.3 … 13.1 13.2 11.9 … 8.2 … … … … 41.8 11.5 … 10.2 12. 18.4 22.3 … 16.3 … 8..2 15.7 12.9 16.9 11. Fed.9 17.8 … … … 18.0 10. 17..7 … 12. … … … 19..8 … 13.9 11.3 17.9 13.5 5.5 7. People’s Rep.1 9.6 22.3 10.3 9.8 11.3 2010 .1 6.3 16.5 11..4 … .5 8. … … … 19.1 11.4 .6 .7 10..9 16.1 2009 13..9 6.4 6. 12.3 12. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.9 11.2 22.9 … … … … 35.3 20.0 … 18..3 6.9 10.6 8.8 .5 … … … … 36.4 12.4 8..2 … 16. 13.6 … … 35.

9 34.2 25.3 … … … … 29.3 … .7 15.5 43.5 16.4 24.6 … 24.6 … 21.0 25.4 … … … … 24. 23. 26.5 20.7 18..8 27..6 21.6 .1 40.8 24.1 11.4 34.7 20.5 26. … … … 26.2 9.3 … 23..8 … 35.9 25.5 36.2 … 20.7 24. 27.3 23.8 4.4 17.6 24. of Hong Kong..3 17.0 31.1 35. 28.3 30.1 27.9 29.5 24.7 29..0 35.2 … 20.2 29...4 31..5 26.7 46.0 64.9 22. 26..0 16.9 … … 25.0 12.3 18.1 … 23.ECONOMY AND OUTPUT 169 REGIONAL TABLES National Accounts Table 2.8 11.8 34..0 38.1 32.5 32.8 … … … … 21.8 10.8 22.6 20.3 26.8 41..2 22.. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 .4 27..6 26..4 17.4 15..7 19. … … … 19.4 … 24.1 34.6 22.3 21.2 24.1 32..4 .9 2003 16. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 21.1 26.2 24.4 17.8 … 22.8 1995 . … … … … .3 21.0 … … … … 16.6 21..1 45.2 22.2 24.7 37. … … … 27.8 23..3 30.7 24.2 22.4 11.9 … 43.1 … 28.6 12..7 18.1 2002 11.9 30.9 24.8 23.2 21.7 … … 20.8 … .4 22.4 26.7 20.3 42.1 .0 24..1 26.5 48.8 10. 24..4 38..7 2006 32.3 2005 31.3 40.3 17.2 42.0 27.9 2010 .5 28.8 26.8 … 19.3 23.6 21.9 13.4 19.9 … .8 … … … … 32.2 24.8 29.1 25.1 20.4 24.6 9..1 21.9 26..1 25.1 … 21.4 15.3 13.6 19.0 42.2 35.4 21.2 36.4 26.5 23.6 20.3 30.5 … 21.1 41.1 2007 30.0 21.5 25.9 12.0 3..8 . but it is not classified as a developing member.9 48.2 25.4 … … 20..9 22.6 36.9 16...7 29.4 … .0 38.7 22.6 28.4 … .7 … 8.2 41..3 21.6 18.6 22.5 30.1 27.5 6.1 … 20.9 … … … 26.8 20.9 22.7 18.4 56..0 17.8 29..2 22.0 20.0 13.1 … … … … 25.3 28...0 20.0 21.7 24.5 23.9 Gross Domestic Capital Formation (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.4 18.6 14.9 18.8 29.6 23.0 … … 20.1 20.1 20.8 41.0 9. 26.0 27.4 21.2 23.4 … 20.4 10..8 35.3 24.4 24.1 59.5 32.7 23.6 3.1 35.8 17.4 21.0 … … 30.. China Korea..8 16.3 31.1 16..7 26.6 22.6 32.2 18.0 21. 33.1 31.. . … … … 29.1 24.3 18. 18.7 19.9 … … … … 20. Rep.1 24. .5 27.3 34.5 28.0 19.9 28.3 22.6 21.5 .. Rep.2 … … 25.9 … 21..5 50..4 23.7 18.0 23.4 21.6 27. .4 31..5 19.7 33.5 33.9 2008 18. of Mongolia Taipei. UN Statistics Division (UN 2011).0 48.8 33.7 23.6 15.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.6 25.7 … .5 17.7 30..2 37. Fed.7 … .7 11.5 … 23.4 18.4 14.1 21.9 33...5 … 24.5 … .2 36.8 21..0 21.6 37.3 18.8 23.6 29.2 … 19.4 13..9 23.7 26..1 25.0 23.7 … .3 … … 25.9 23.7 21.5 24.3 25.8 … ..3 53.6 22.2 39.1 36.2 14.9 … … … … 21.0 21.3 21.4 23. 23..8 23.7 … 26.0 … … 38.3 14.5 25.2 . .7 13.9 … .3 18.7 34. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.9 58.4 18.8 … 24.4 18.0 … 14.1 32.9 12.. 24.2 24.6 16.6 28.2 24.5 … 30. 28. 24.7 … 23.3 36.2 38.5 33.5 13.7 18.6 14.5 22.6 … 22.4 … … … … … … … 24.3 23.7 26. 25.8 … 24. 34.4 33.0 17.9 17.4 … … … 18.7 27.4 20. 18.3 25.7 … 26..9 29.6 35.5 34.8 35.1 18.1 11.7 31.4 27.0 .9 27.8 23.1 27.2 22.1 39.7 23.0 28.6 19.6 … … … … 19.1 26.2 39.2 21.7 … 32.7 24.1 … … … … 21. 19.9 31.1 59.5 31.3 29.9 18.1 13.6 35. 28.1 … 34.8 .2 31..0 2000 .4 2009 17. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.0 16.5 .3 … … … … 24.7 23. 14.4 … … 29.5 16.4 35.4 13.6 21...3 24.9 22..9 43.6 4.6 … 21.5 21.7 19.5 23.8 34.2 43.3 20.2 4..5 … 31. 27.9 23.0 31.0 22.9 35.3 27.5 25.7 26.1 44.3 15..9 38.4 41.3 … 32. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.9 34.1 19. People’s Rep.6 29.1 … 21.1 … 22.4 … 21.0 29..7 24.2 25.4 43.1 36.3 25.4 21.7 22.2 2004 17.9 29.1 16.3 2001 .4 22. Sources: Country sources.1 36.2 23.3 26.5 41.2 … 26.2 22.7 22.5 … … 20..2 21.0 30.7 24.

7 69.9 51.7 68.7 39.2 58..0 31.9 32.5 19.9 73..5 42.7 59.3 11.6 2007 17.7 14.0 212.8 62.5 36..9 12..6 34.1 205.7 … … … … 78...8 7.2 14.3 15.2 47.4 … 110.6 25.3 19.4 57.7 39..7 … … … … 68.4 92.6 31.9 27.2 28.4 … .6 14.7 35.8 21.0 14.9 65.4 32.2 56.6 69..5 30.1 41.3 … … … … 72.8 223.0 13.9 29..3 65.4 30. Rep.4 42.4 67.5 33.7 31.1 0.2 67.5 65. .5 29..0 14.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.7 18.4 0..5 … 47.4 25.5 14.7 6.0 … 56. .0 39.0 20.7 65.0 54.6 32.9 32..5 1995 .2 25.9 29.6 27.3 29.9 67.8 40.3 30.0 142.2 49..9 59.9 10.5 … ..9 41.8 11.2 42.5 … .5 41.1 36.6 29.8 – 111.4 … 53.9 20.0 31.1 71..6 39.8 … … 11.8 48.6 73.1 149. Sources: Country sources. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.0 … 116. … … … 14.7 37.2 207.6 … ..1 28.1 … … 30.4 49.4 69.5 26. 19.0 … .3 64.0 0.9 23. … … … 13.8 211..9 69.4 68.0 188.8 … … … … 71.0 2003 41.7 13.2 40.7 2000 . China Korea.5 52.8 61.3 62.3 24.5 … 9.1 230.0 20.4 73.3 36.9 68.7 53.4 28. 39.7 80.7 130.4 15.4 … … … … … … … 40.3 … … … 17.0 13.1 198..7 34.7 42.1 55.5 … .7 … 108.0 73.4 208. 18.2 14. of Hong Kong.7 24.1 49.2 29.8 … 22..5 0.7 26.0 41. Rep. 29.7 35..1 14. 19.4 95.2 143.5 51.4 53.4 192. 20. 43.8 28.6 … .6 171.6 2002 30.9 … … 11.6 15.5 38. 17.6 57.9 37.9 32.5 11.1 26.6 20.3 0.8 22.5 61.8 19.5 40.8 2.8 78.0 35.2 43.2 … … 0.5 .0 35..3 … 94.5 39.6 34..2 46.9 59.1 … 117.5 82.9 14.9 ..0 15.6 74. 23.0 52.6 138.7 34...6 . 22.9 68.8 55.7 50.8 36.9 59.7 40.6 … 16.1 26.8 63.0 … … 35.4 … ...5 24.2 35.4 30.1 65.7 112.1 40.2 68.8 55.5 12.0 … 110.1 12.9 … … 12.5 19..2 … 49.3 … 48.4 38..2 28..5 31..3 15..4 76. Fed..4 76.1 19.7 19..2 53. 50.3 27. but it is not classified as a developing member.4 32.8 17.1 34.4 15.7 19.6 21.2 23.9 14.6 23.4 0.6 38.8 15.5 46.5 .7 9...7 63...8 59. 52...2 … … 38.1 39.3 … 14.0 62. … … … … . 19.1 28.1 34.8 13.9 2010 .6 70.2 0.3 57.8 … … 12.0 190..8 … 59.3 2008 17..5 23.. 29..6 … 56.4 64..9 33.0 19.7 12.8 24.6 234. 19..6 … 97.5 0.3 143..170 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT National Accounts Table 2.6 32.8 73.9 … 53.4 52. 25.6 52.2 62.9 233.4 183.0 100.9 24.8 … … … … 9.5 16.6 219.8 0.2 … 15.2 13.5 .5 … 106.3 . 47.6 28.3 56.7 39.8 … 12.6 27.7 81.7 59.4 21.5 16.6 72..3 … 56. ..4 34.7 55.1 41.2 64.4 … 12.7 12.9 … .4 15.5 14.1 19.3 29.9 .4 … .7 .2 62.0 10.0 28.3 … … 1.5 32.5 72.2 48.0 2001 .2 … 115.1 17.4 40.0 … … … … 65.5 1.6 … … … 33..9 0.7 189. 22. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … .7 2004 30.3 0..8 32.6 … 49.3 67.8 … 103.1 65.7 66.3 46.3 72. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.7 … 51..4 66.0 56.4 35.9 62.1 32. … … … 12.8 31.5 32.7 65.0 54.5 … 45.3 68.7 15.3 38.. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.5 177.7 48.5 51.3 218..8 15.10 Exports of Goods and Services (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.1 67.8 … … … … 61.0 29.0 … … … … 77. 23. ..5 38.1 .5 46..2 51....6 66.6 15.6 2005 25.9 54. … … … 13.1 81.1 … … … … 69.5 … … 11.4 26.0 29.6 .8 55.0 64.2 … 96.8 … 56.4 68.3 … … … … 14.5 … 17.4 .4 0.. 21.2 26.7 58.9 … 48. 18.6 59. 19.2 41.1 31.0 65.7 17.4 77...6 … 45.7 16. 52.8 29..0 … .6 41.7 54.3 46.0 … 119.5 16.0 73.2 199. People’s Rep.3 28.. of Mongolia Taipei.8 44.4 66.2 ..1 … … … … 65.4 18.4 56.5 30.1 71. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .8 2009 14.4 2006 22.2 46.3 77.9 24.1 … 13.3 … 74.7 17.1 61.3 70.1 34..0 10.6 29.8 … 12.2 47.7 195.

8 32.7 27.3 36.1 15.3 53.0 … 79.6 41.6 46.5 … 65.9 48.1 21.6 67.3 … … 95.0 44.7 7.5 52.0 24.6 23....9 79.7 … .5 40. 50..9 50.1 52.9 26.5 134.0 23.1 … … … 55.5 41.2 55.5 62..6 39.0 122.3 187.5 41.8 141.5 42.3 24.5 44.0 0. 22..2 43.5 … … 102.1 73.1 … … … … 91..1 40.0 42.5 33.4 … 74.6 .8 … 80.0 .4 56.6 161.....6 197.3 55..1 50.3 49.9 58.4 0.4 66.9 20.5 33..1 … 87.0 22.3 … … 71.2 – 123..8 33. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.5 2010 .5 70.7 73.2 … … 72.5 38.4 ..3 1995 .0 … 59.2 … 31.5 27.6 0.3 41.4 31.4 2001 .2 … … 48. … … … … .5 … … 38.3 … ..7 47.4 41.5 46.8 22.9 … 28.7 … … … … 89..1 … 74..2 61.7 27. 20..3 72.5 20.9 32.0 … 34.4 3..1 … … 79.7 … … … … 106.2 28.2 54.9 87..0 25.4 28.9 .8 28.7 23.7 16.1 .7 30. of Hong Kong.5 … 95.3 36..6 57. 45.8 9.5 58.0 23.7 … 63.7 100.3 202.1 2009 44.4 32.7 56.0 28.2 … … 45.9 29.4 89.2 145.1 28. 21.9 48.2 … .9 31.8 35.8 40.1 29.6 64. … … … 57.8 12.9 138.1 38.4 181.8 … … … … 63.9 25.4 176.6 186.2 31.. 21.7 48.1 57. 43.2 80. Rep.9 29.8 19.1 193.8 35.5 11.0 25.8 … 93.0 65.0 43.4 23.3 22.11 Imports of Goods and Services (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.1 60.3 43.0 66.1 51. 25.9 … . 20.9 65.2 56.9 … 94.8 … 76..3 38.2 … 69.4 121.2 67.4 13.9 15.5 79.4 35.2 21. … … … 60.3 2005 71.5 21..4 27.8 70.7 27.5 … 65.3 76.4 13.8 19.9 … 64.8 57.0 92...0 19.3 51.9 51.7 32.6 67.8 32.7 18.8 78.6 0.8 27..6 … 33.9 … … … 63..5 58.1 47.6 45.5 10.2 .9 8.3 … 65.8 19.5 41..4 39.3 27. 62.6 72..2 54.6 12. 49.7 49.6 66. 39.8 47.3 2002 61.1 21.8 … .6 … .0 42.5 46.4 26..4 30...5 24.9 26.5 61.1 74.1 43.0 31.5 ..0 … 29.3 8.2 53.7 39.4 179. 21..6 147.9 51.2 53. . 20.4 … 31.9 … 54.5 53.9 217.1 46.5 37.7 57. … … … 53..3 38.0 53.2 31.3 48.7 … 72.9 … 58.7 20.. .7 29.3 29.6 2006 64.5 20.7 77.0 … .9 30. but it is not classified as a developing member.0 39.1 57.0 43.5 58.3 … .6 … 98.6 … .6 46.7 56.8 63. … … … 63.. People’s Rep.0 63..5 52.5 27.3 … … … … 78.2 14.1 54.4 … .2 68.2 67.4 61.5 … . 20. Sources: Country sources.1 30.6 … 93.6 14.5 … 100.4 47.4 … … … … 61.5 31.9 … 33.1 37.5 55.9 .3 86.5 … 28.1 92.1 23.5 0..0 21.0 0. Rep.4 … 91...8 0.1 36.3 16.3 2004 77.3 167.0 31.3 31...2 2003 90.7 35.9 33.6 44.3 14.9 172.5 .0 1.8 84.3 76..2 2008 52.7 36.8 61.5 73.4 58.... ..8 … 37.5 30.7 171.2 19.8 33.7 … 63.9 9.1 48..1 0.3 57..6 29.ECONOMY AND OUTPUT 171 REGIONAL TABLES National Accounts Table 2.8 17.7 79.1 14.8 22.1 12.7 28.0 … … … … 88.5 59.3 … 29.6 50.. 24.8 58.6 12.0 28.6 23.3 0.7 … … … … 78.0 63.4 194.1 49.8 50. 45.8 31.7 ..3 64.8 57.5 39.5 54.9 2000 ..4 19.5 14.3 9.1 43.8 73.9 67.6 53.2 78.4 . ..4 212..0 16.3 15..6 65....0 51. China Korea. 45.0 57.9 25. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.5 55.9 … … 106. 20. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .7 .5 … … … … 82.6 74.6 33.2 44. 50.6 30.4 29.2 166.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.4 41.7 179.1 25.8 58.5 62.6 72.6 58.1 48.7 200.7 20.6 59.0 2007 56.8 19. 19.3 … 56. of Mongolia Taipei.1 37.9 0.3 … … … … 81..3 … 41.4 30.9 93...1 … … … … 79.9 10.4 186.5 17..2 33.8 46.0 23.7 … 61.5 15.0 15.3 72.5 39.4 … 89.0 0.3 26.1 39.3 56.1 33. 44. 46.9 69. Fed.4 43.6 183..2 52.2 76.4 37.2 83.6 69.3 38.4 … … 78.3 26.3 42.8 78.4 204.1 26.0 40.7 20.7 … … … … … … … 48. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … .9 27.7 44.0 45.9 72.

9 –2.4 44.6 … 19.2 14. –17.4 0.9 28..0 47.4 0.7 –8.7 … .0 31..3 18.8 51.7 3.3 27.7 12..0 32.1 … .6 35.2 45.0 46.9 34.4 22.3 46.7 51.8 51.8 … … 12.4 28.9 44.1 30.7 6.3 12.8 16.7 … … … … … 36.7 … 2.2 … 39. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.4 30.0 .9 … … –46.6 57. 6.8 –4.8 11.6 33.1 31.4 43.2 56.0 28..6 27.2 … 9.7 … 9.4 … 11..0 2001 ..4 26..0 32.3 … 26.. 15.7 46.1 15.7 38..3 10.8 13.3 … 4.2 12.2 21.0 … 26.6 20.8 … … … … … .1 39.0 … 41. … … … –22..8 20.3 –10.9 33.1 … 17.7 27.2 18.. 27.0 3.9 33. of Hong Kong..8 2003 –32.6 30.4 23. 23.9 … 43.7 17.4 33.4 17.1 28..5 24.8 2000 .172 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT National Accounts Table 2.0 36.9 65.9 … … … … … … … 16.1 6..4 31.8 13.3 5.3 16.2 .7 37. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .5 6.8 … … –46..3 11.4 33.0 33.8 29..1 26.2 32.5 30..7 34.8 24.7 13.0 … … –39.0 15.2 31.1 … … –46.1 15.8 –9.4 27.6 … … … … … 35.2 30.2 32.9 17. … … 53..2 … 8.6 9.4 24.8 … … 3.8 … –0.2 16.5 15.9 30.0 48.4 8.5 31.4 5.8 … . Fed.8 13.6 29.4 11.7 19.9 49.7 16.7 54.4 29.4 26.0 2.5 … 7.5 … 11.3 18.3 20.1 –6.3 5.3 42.0 … 42.7 32.0 .9 7.0 39.1 … 29. –4.6 36.9 31.3 42.7 54.0 10.6 22.8 … 8.2 … 5.. 31..9 26.6 17.9 23.9 34.12 Gross Domestic Saving (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.9 20..7 … 42.0 23.6 32.4 … –1.4 … 21.4 … … … … … 36.7 25.0 27. 24.1 –8.1 … .1 –13.8 … 46.9 18.8 30.5 29.1 24.2 8.7 18.2 35. … … … … … ..0 47..7 … … –61.1 … 42.1 47. –8.4 … .6 … … … … … 40.6 47.0 … .7 18.6 29.4 34..6 … 4.1 27.2 … 8. 24.4 … … … … … .8 17.3 20.3 32.9 59.4 2009 –12.9 10.7 46.3 31.7 6.3 17.7 28.2 36.7 28.0 29.5 0... … … … –17.4 51.5 25.3 … 32.5 … 42.2 18.1 23.8 –18. China Korea.5 41.4 26.2 15.7 … 27.5 … .6 14.2 … … 27.5 50.4 36.4 8..8 20.1 41..0 3.7 … .4 49.5 .9 … .1 23.3 5.8 31.3 … 9.0 0..7 16.3 … … … … … .0 … .4 19..5 23.7 30.1 32.7 12.0 51.0 36.2 58.4 6.5 2.1 … … … –12.9 34.0 62.2 21.2 .0 … … –62.0 43.. 24.8 23.6 29.6 26..3 9.4 14.5 27.2 50. Rep.9 … 30.0 29.4 28.7 … 43.0 23.3 32..9 27. Rep.3 11...6 28. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … 31.5 44.8 17.9 43.6 2.7 15.9 … 9.8 … .0 28...1 32.5 2.6 13.1 12.2 35.3 … 13.2 … 31.6 … 39.0 33.4 15.1 11.8 40.3 … 34.0 … .2 33.1 –17.5 … 5.4 … … … … … 38..8 28. 26.4 18.1 9.2 2008 –8.4 … 26.4 … .5 16..8 17.3 25.3 16.9 .1 31..8 28.3 16.0 31.1 41. 7.1 34..0 32.9 18.5 30.5 3.3 34. Sources: Country sources.8 … 20.6 23. … … 51.1 … 42.6 16.9 . but it is not classified as a developing member.7 45.1 –2.7 16.8 –11.. 14.3 23.5 24..9 20..0 27.1 15.4 24.5 15.6 28.1 14..1 –6.9 52.6 2010 ...9 30.9 1.1 23.8 14..5 … 11.4 2002 –19.6 8.1 13.5 11. … … … –21. 23.6 … … … … … 27.0 1995 . of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.9 33.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.7 2005 –14.4 14..2 4..9 33. of Mongolia Taipei. 28.2 50.7 23.5 … 3.2 … … … … … 31.4 31.7 22.9 7.5 15..6 17. 24. People’s Rep.5 27.3 32. … … … –17.4 30.1 … –0.8 23.0 31.2 53..3 24.0 14.5 … –6. 15..9 5.9 … … … … … 35.4 27.5 50.4 38.6 15. 16.6 2004 –29.4 27.5 2006 –8. 15.9 24..6 … 9.6 36.1 19..4 31.4 12..9 … … –57.2 … … … –12.2 27.4 46.8 32.0 17..7 34.7 20.4 .9 31.5 27.7 13. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.0 36.3 24.9 33..7 … 36.1 14.3 16.5 34.7 2007 –8.6 24. 18.3 17.

7 4.1 4.0 9.7 4.9 3.4 3.3 5.1 3.3 8.2 3..2 2.1 –1.3 4.5 9.6 –9.2 6.7 3. 0.0 4.8 25.4 5.7 3.3 2.0 3.9 6.3 –14.8 … .1 7.9 4.4 5.8 8.7 7..1 7.13 Growth Rates of Real GDP (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.8 9.7 –3.5 2.7 9.2 1. 2.3 –20.9 5.4 .9 7.1 6.3 7..4 0.5 –7.2 4.3 0.6 2009 17.1 7.5 –1.7 6.6 11.6 2.1 2..5 8.8 0..1 3.9 5.0 5.3 4. Rep.1 8.8 6.4 10.3 7.1 –5.3 2000 .8 10.1 –0.3 7.8 13.9 1..5 13.1 7.9 6.8 6.2 13..8 6.0 9.6 –1.3 5.2 7.6 5.7 –0.4 5. 15.5 2001 .5 6.2 6.4 8.5 5.6 4.0 –6.8 5.0 8.6 8.6 8.6 4.2 5.3 8.4 4.5 2.9 –1.5 –1.8 4.8 7.0 –4.5 4.5 4.1 3.8 4.4 –1.8 6.7 9.8 13.2 1.. 8.3 4.7 2.5 4.2 6..0 11.6 8.0 8.4 0.0 16.2 5.9 5.6 –2.1 6.2 –1.2 12.1 9..2 0.7 8.4 6.5 4.5 10.7 5.1 4.7 5.9 8.1 –0..7 5.1 6.4 10.0 –1.2 –2.8 1.4 10.9 1. 5.5 10.8 5.0 10.3 4.0 1.3 4.4 0.6 1.6 –0.3 ..2 9.2 13.0 2.2 18.3 –2.2 3..9 9.5 9.5 10.0 –1.7 7.9 2.8 13.5 3.0 8.6 … … … 3.4 3.9 6.1 5.7 6.9 –1.0 6. 8. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.1 10.6 4.3 8.0 2.2 11.1 5.0 4.0 .5 5.3 4.0 1.0 3.7 6.8 5.7 7.0 9.6 8.6 6.1 4.7 2010 .3 8.8 2007 16.5 6.8 13.0 6.8 1.1 2.9 2003 14..6 7.3 5.9 4.3 2.3 4.5 7.9 26.9 9.0 4.1 3.2 5.8 .4 –6.8 5.6 10.3 16.9 8.0 6.9 7.1 5..3 5.1 –8.5 12.9 –3.6 7.4 6.ECONOMY AND OUTPUT 173 REGIONAL TABLES National Accounts Table 2.2 13.1 9.0 0.2 2.2 3.2 5.1 11.0 9.0 7.6 8.9 –3.4 4.5 10..1 9.5 1.0 2.3 6.2 8.6 –3.9 3.0 4.4 5.9 2.0 5.5 3.3 13.9 .1 3.5 3.0 1. –1.3 11.5 2.7 1.8 6.0 2.6 5.5 –0.6 4..7 6.4 3.2 6.1 10.1 10.3 7. Rep. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .7 6.8 –2.3 –2.1 7.3 –0.0 –1.2 10.3 7.0 7.0 .6 9.2 6.0 0.5 … .4 6.8 6.2 2. b GDP estimates refer to non-oil GDP Before 2002.2 0.3 3.4 6.0 –1.2 8.2 9.3 5.8 0.4 12.0 –14.8 10.3 4. China Korea.1 5.2 3.8 6.0 .9 1.6 9.6 –0.0 6.2 6.2 34. 3.9 2.5 –0.4 4.5 13.6 7.8 5.6 –1.2 5.0 –7.1 5.5 4.3 –3.4 4.5 6.5 6.3 1. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Lesteb Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … … … … … 4.0 6.5 8.6 10.3 12.9 8.8 5.4 –1.1 9.7 3.5 8.8 0.2 9.8 2005 14.. People’s Rep.1 3.. .1 1.4 7.2 2.9 4.5 16.4 5.2 6.5 9.9 4.6 2.3 –2.0 –0.3 9..9 6.7 3.4 10.5 0..2 –1.5 4.2 1.3 –3.4 2004 9.0 3.5 9.9 3.8 6.0 1995 .6 7.4 7.0 … 5.4 4.8 5.3 95.1 12.4 … 4.4 12.4 9.6 10.4 3.0 2008 –15.4 –7.6 6.0 7.2 2006 11.3 –0.9 0.7 11.9 4.0 1.7 6.1 11.0 3.9 –3.8 12.8 3.6 9.0 6.7 0.7 5.8 5.5 2.0 3.2 –3.5 0.7 3. 0. 7.7 10.6 9.3 4.4 13.5 10.6 4.1 1.9 4.0 3.9 … 2.8 2.1 4.1 3.4 10. .9 –1.0 6.8 3.0 7.0 15.8 4.7 –0.0 6.2 1.4 1..3 0..6 0.. but it is not classified as a developing member.5 1. 9.8 0.3 8.2 10.3 14.2 2.6 –2.5 11.5 4.3 6.6 5.4 3.1 7.3 –1.0 7.8 5.6 6. 6..7 9.8 6.8 2.7 7..4 17.0 –0.0 7. –8.1 –2.8 13.1 1.3 –2.6 2..9 0.2 –1.1 0.5 6.6 11.1 3.3 4.2 –1..2 –0.0 6.0 7.0 2.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.5 –4.1 1..1 0.8 1.4 –18.6 5.9 5.8 2.9 0.7 3.1 8.9 13.8 –0.6 –3. of Hong Kong.5 7.3 5..0 –5. of Mongolia Taipei..2 6.2 6...9 3.9 4.7 13.0 8.7 –1.0 … … –0.7 6.8 4.0 2.3 3.6 21.6 10.9 6.0 2.5 –1.6 –3.4 9.9 5.2 5. –12.2 3.9 2.8 7.7 10.4 3.3 –3.0 9.3 7.2 3.4 7.5 –0.9 10.2 –2.0 7.6 14..4 4.6 4..3 4. CEIC data.6 1.0 6. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.9 4.4 7.8 7.8 2.7 4.6 14.4 2.1 0.5 7.5 4.9 –10.8 3.2 4.5 6.2 5.2 0.9 11.1 1.9 9. –0.8 .7 7.4 4. .0 6.6 2002 .8 –1. Sources: Country sources.4 7.0 6.4 3. Fed.3 3.4 3.8 5.3 2. estimates include the value added of United Nations activities.5 –4.3 0.9 7.3 8.5 6.2 5.3 2.1 10..0 4.4 .3 –1.2 9.8 0.4 –1.2 –5.3 7.0 –2.9 5.0 2.4 10.3 4.

4 0.3 4.7 1.5 8.0 4.2 6.1 2.3 10.4 9.1 –1.6 2.1 –4.0 2002 … 15.3 –2.4 4.8 –3.7 24.9 8.1 –0.4 5.8 2.3 9.7 1.1 4.7 4.9 1.2 5.9 9.9 2.6 2. .3 4.7 4.9 2.4 2.7 4.3 4.8 10.0 1.8 1.8 7.7 3.6 1.3 0.3 –2.0 2.8 0.5 –7.7 3.4 3.8 2.4 2.3 –2.3 2.3 7.9 4.8 8.3 1.1 –10. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .8 2000 … 6.2 6.2 –4.8 5.8 –5.3 3.2 11.2 6.3 4.6 23.9 –1.1 4.4 1.1 –3.3 –2.7 5.4 –3.0 5.5 3.1 –0.3 –6.3 –2.3 4.2 0.3 2.9 –4. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Lesteb Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … … … … … 1.0 –9.1 11.6 –1.0 1.3 8.6 2.3 3.2 0.6 10.2 –8.9 2.6 –8.9 5.1 11.4 5.4 11.3 3.4 2.6 2.3 7.9 9.2 7.2 3.5 4.8 –1.4 5.0 1.2 2.6 12. b GDP estimates refer to non-oil GDP Before 2002.7 2.7 –5.4 –2.7 0.0 3.9 2008 –17.1 5.0 6.3 4.3 6.9 –9.4 1.3 –1.0 5.1 3. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.0 5.0 5.5 5.4 3.5 2.2 5.8 2.3 4.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.1 0.3 5.9 6.4 9.7 –1.7 7.1 2006 9.6 5.5 11.2 –2.7 2.3 5.2 5.9 … –2.3 2.0 –0.5 –4.9 2.6 8.3 5.0 –19.4 2007 13.1 4.5 –7.2 –18.6 –6.2 2.3 –3.7 5.3 6.0 13.1 6.5 6.8 6.4 7.3 4.8 7.6 0.3 1.2 3.2 3.8 4. Rep.5 4.5 8.2 –0.1 –2.4 –6.8 1.0 3.0 1. Rep.0 13.7 5.8 2.7 1.3 2004 7.3 2.2 2.1 4.4 … … 5.8 6.0 6.6 5.2 4.1 –2.1 –2.0 6.8 –0.0 7.6 4.2 2005 12.1 6.9 9.9 13.2 6.8 –3.7 –0.4 … –1.6 3.2 5.1 2.8 5.4 13.5 9.2 –3.1 9.9 3.3 8.8 –3.7 0.0 7.8 1.8 5.6 0.3 7.8 1.0 5.1 –7.3 0.9 2.7 4.6 3.6 4.0 5.7 8.9 4.4 –0.9 3.6 2.9 3. Fed.9 1.8 5.6 2.7 5.9 0.9 4.8 … 0.9 10.3 6.8 9.8 4.3 7.6 2009 15.5 1.9 2.7 5.7 –6.4 9.5 … 7. People’s Rep. estimates include the value added of United Nations activities.4 9.6 3.2 4.7 –2.1 1.0 7.4 5.1 10.0 5.2 9.1 7. of Mongolia Taipei.8 5.4 –0.9 –4.8 1.4 1.7 3.7 1.5 … 5. Sources: ADB staff estimates using country sources and CEIC data.3 5.6 6.9 4.5 7.8 5.8 2.0 3.5 –1.3 3. but it is not classified as a developing member.1 3.2 9.8 8.8 4.1 4.7 4.7 2.9 4.8 6.5 5.9 –0.3 11.3 4.0 … … –2.8 –1.5 1.0 2.4 1.2 4.5 8.6 7.5 4.6 7.0 –1.0 –16.1 4.7 –1.9 –0.2 2.4 –12.2 –6.0 3.3 4.0 1.8 14.3 3.0 –4.9 6.9 3.3 –4.7 12.6 8.8 6.7 –3.2 3.6 –1.3 –0.0 –14.8 91.0 –5.2 9.4 4.0 … –6.3 4.1 2003 12.6 3.4 5.1 9.1 32.6 1.4 –1.2 4.0 1995 … … –13.6 7.6 –2.6 5.6 1.2 3.9 8.2 2.5 3.4 3.2 –5. of Hong Kong.6 2.6 6.1 –1.4 7.3 –2.2 2.0 3.3 –0.7 4.8 2.0 7.8 5.0 2.9 –8.7 7.7 7.8 9.2 –2.0 –3.174 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT National Accounts Table 2.6 3.6 7.9 6.7 4.1 2.7 –0.2 –0.5 10.3 3.1 2.7 … … –3.4 0.7 2.2 –3.6 5.4 –2.8 0.1 4.2 5.0 9.9 –5.1 15. China Korea.6 –1.9 9.6 9.7 … 1.7 3.1 2.0 8.8 1.7 4.7 –2.1 8.8 7.6 –4.9 5.1 6.4 11.8 6.3 –1.4 6.9 4.2 –2.2 –0.9 6.2 8.2 –2.9 9.1 6.4 0.9 3.2 … … 4.6 3.6 8.9 –4.0 –18.1 2.9 17.6 3.1 3.1 7.3 10.9 –1.0 10.1 0.7 8.7 –3.4 0.5 12.9 0.5 0.0 2.5 –4.1 15.3 4.3 0.4 5.7 9.6 5.9 0.2 14.6 3.3 7.0 … 4.3 1.7 4.8 –2.9 3.3 –2.3 1.9 … … … 2.1 5.2 4.6 2.8 2010 … 1.8 1.5 1.2 –1.9 2.2 3.1 5.3 –1.3 5.5 7.7 –0.1 8.3 1.2 –1.5 –2.7 4.5 –7.0 4.6 6.5 2.0 3.6 –3.3 8.5 7.4 6.6 2.9 –2.9 2001 … 9.4 10.9 0.3 10.6 5.5 1.5 2.4 8.5 1.8 4.6 2.4 6.1 14.2 9.1 … 2.0 19.5 1.3 4.3 2.1 12.9 –3.9 4.6 1.1 … a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.2 –0.7 4.2 5.8 … 5.1 9.7 3.8 8.9 5.3 2.3 4.8 1.3 4.2 5.5 3.5 0.3 9.5 4.9 4.3 2.1 1.4 8.9 4.4 4.4 6.4 3.9 0.9 –1.3 4.8 6.1 2.1 12.5 4.5 0.5 –0.0 –0.6 2.2 2.6 4.6 13.3 12.4 2.2 5.5 4.3 4.4 4.7 2.5 2.5 2.4 4.2 3.14 Growth Rates of Real GDP Per Capita (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.2 6.8 5.1 –0.0 0.8 –0.3 6.5 10.5 6.2 5.8 –1.1 8.

1 –0.7 1.4 –6.7 5.3 1.9 –1..3 7..0 6.4 2.8 4. 9.1 0..0 3.9 4.9 3.9 1. 6.1 2. –7. Rep.0 5.8 –4. of Mongolia Taipei.7 1.7 2005 6. 2.4 4.1 11.1 6. –1..0 … 3.5 3..1 6.4 –2.0 –3.2 –11.1 4..3 12.3 1.3 6.0 11.1 4.1 –2.1 –1.7 11.0 … … … 7.2 6.0 11.8 2008 –23.9 3.8 –0.0 … 1.2 8.2 –5.5 –8. –2.2 7.3 6.4 7.3 –3.5 –11.1 … … … –2.7 2.3 2.2 .9 12.7 2001 .2 –1.1 10.1 4.1 14.5 –0.9 5.7 .0 5.7 6.9 14.7 4.2 4.3 –17.4 –18.6 0.3 0.7 7...8 –29.7 5.6 –20. 2.9 –11.3 8. 3.8 –0.6 1.1 2.7 – 2.0 8. .6 –11.2 8.4 4.7 … 0.3 7.5 .8 2.7 1.3 4.7 … … … … 2.3 17..8 0.1 5.9 –3.7 1995 .6 –3.8 … .1 2.0 4.3 6.0 –1.0 –0.6 12.2 10.2 –3.8 4.8 11.6 –8.2 3.5 6.1 15.4 3..9 5.1 … … … –21.2 10. but it is not classified as a developing member.2 –3.7 1.8 .7 3..9 2.0 –4..1 2.9 –0.3 0.3 –8.5 3.0 3.3 –5..2 5.4 5.6 3.4 4.4 4.8 2..0 0.8 6.4 9.7 0.0 9. –15..4 –2.7 –3.3 –3.1 .8 2.8 4.0 –7.0 4.5 1.8 9.1 –17.9 7..1 15.0 3.9 2.1 … … … 4.1 2.9 5.4 … … … 1.1 1.4 13.7 –7.6 0.8 4.1 .5 8.0 2.2 –5.3 3.2 –4.3 –6..7 2. 1.9 –1.8 2002 .9 1.7 –7.5 –0.0 6.6 10.6 5. Rep.6 3.0 0.0 7..0 –5.9 4.2 –2.0 4.1 –12.2 4.9 –1.8 5.0 3.2 2010 .7 3.2 6.7 –3.8 7.6 –10.6 0.8 –5.8 2007 24.0 … 4.3 10.9 4.2 –0.0 25.. –5.2 3.7 2.4 19..3 6.6 –1.9 –2.6 –4.2 5.7 3.3 6.8 5.0 7.7 .1 –4.3 5.1 … … … ..3 –4.1 –2.6 4..6 6.2 0.5 5.4 –0.0 –0.1 8.3 10.4 3.0 –0.2 5.7 4.5 3.8 14.7 6.8 5.8 5.0 2004 –4.9 3.0 4.5 –6.4 –10.9 4.2 5.0 0.6 6.1 6.7 6.9 1.7 4..2 1.8 6.1 4.4 4..2 1..1 2.5 4.3 –2.0 4.7 11.0 –2.7 –6.8 10.5 22.5 5.7 0.8 –2.3 –6.7 0.0 3..8 3.4 0.2 … … … 3.5 3.3 7. –7.8 0.4 –0.0 .3 2. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.1 –2.0 –4.0 3.0 2.1 –4.4 9.9 2.2 3.3 4.5 8.5 11.3 3.7 5.2 1.2 –9.1 6.7 5.3 1.4 –19.3 5.4 … … … –0.6 10.1 7.0 5..6 4.4 3.7 6.4 3..3 15. 6.7 1.7 –7.1 3.0 2.4 .3 –2.5 6.1 0.2 6.7 2.2 3.8 0.0 3.4 –1.8 –5.1 2..9 2.3 –0.9 13. People’s Rep.2 … .5 0...7 –0.9 –14.7 5.9 –0. 3.5 0.8 8. 11.3 –9.6 0.0 13.6 1.5 2..7 ...4 4.2 4.4 5.7 –0.0 14.9 5.2 2. .0 4.1 4. .6 3.7 3.4 –5..3 2.5 4.3 16.7 –1.5 38.15 Growth Rates of Agriculture Real Value Added (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.2 3.0 2..6 –0.8 5.6 4.6 .1 3.3 –16.3 7.0 … 9.8 –2.9 2.3 1.8 4..0 –18.8 3..8 0.0 7. –1.9 1.2 3.8 6.9 –9.2 –12. Fed.1 0.2 3.1 –2.8 5.5 5.1 10. of Hong Kong.7 –0.2 1.3 … –3.0 4.4 4.8 12.. UN Statistics Division (UN 2011).3 –0.8 –11.7 12.4 –4.6 6.6 7.0 2003 17. Sources: Country sources.4 1.9 –0.0 12.1 … … … 1.9 2.2 2.5 –3.7 0.9 4..1 … … … –5.4 2009 23.7 3.1 8.0 –5. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.2 –0. –24.0 0..3 –5.4 15.5 5.5 6.7 5.5 2.4 3.1 1.4 1.2 –1.4 –6.0 10. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .. 1. 3.9 6.0 3.9 1.0 –3.8 4.6 3.0 1.1 –2.0 3.6 5.6 5.7 –6.2 6.1 –14.9 –3.4 2.1 –2.6 0.6 –0.0 –3.0 2.1 –1.2 4.6 6.1 –4.ECONOMY AND OUTPUT 175 REGIONAL TABLES National Accounts Table 2.5 –6.2 –1..5 5..4 4.2 2.8 1.4 1.8 –2.2 3.1 –2.6 20.8 –4.8 0.0 3.3 5.2 4..7 4.3 6.7 –9.6 –6.7 –12. –53..7 1.7 11.3 3.8 4.3 1.7 –2..6 .7 –6.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.1 1....0 5.5 5.2 –4.7 –21.0 2.8 –4.5 3.1 –15.0 2.0 4..5 4...5 12.2 2.7 … … … 0.2 17.. … .3 .0 5.5 … … … –16.6 –18.2 3.2 0.0 2. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 .5 –7.7 4.0 –15.7 0.3 2000 .9 9..3 –4.9 –4.3 –0. China Korea.9 7.2 13. .6 –1.8 13.1 2.2 –0.0 2.7 3.2 4. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.2 0.8 … … … 5. .3 … –1.2 2.6 4.2 9..7 –0.6 2.3 2006 0.5 0. 6.

5 10.4 … … … 27.4 40.4 … –2..2 3.3 7.6 8..8 8. Sources: Country sources.7 –2.5 … 4.7 4.0 1.1 3. China Korea.9 16..5 4.0 –9.7 –36.4 –3.4 10.3 .1 0. 4..2 .8 12.4 4.3 3.4 8. .4 5. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 .3 7.2 11.5 –5.4 18.8 9.6 –5.6 3.2 –5.0 3.5 13.6 … … … 14.1 9.1 –0.9 10.6 5.3 2010 .0 .5 16.6 6.2 4.9 7.4 7.0 10.9 28. 11..4 9.1 –1.9 7.5 8.0 2.4 4.8 14.3 11.6 5.4 3. 6.8 4.8 4..9 –8.8 1.4 4.3 13.8 9.9 .4 2.3 0.5 14..5 16.4 –4..4 –0.4 6.3 –0.. People’s Rep.3 –1.6 2.0 31.0 0..3 –2.9 –4. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.1 3..2 12.4 2.5 2. –15.9 14..0 –2.6 –4.7 –1.5 12.0 … –0.2 15.4 3.0 1.4 7.4 2.6 9.1 –1.8 .0 11.2 6.0 –9..8 5. of Mongolia Taipei.3 … … … 7.4 1995 .0 0. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ..0 … 9. 14.6 –6.8 43.1 12.0 5.4 1.1 14..9 –0.6 8.6 7.1 2.1 2.5 10.3 11. 8.4 –15.7 10.0 15.4 2.0 … … … 6.6 –5.4 13.6 8.5 2.3 12..5 … … … 3.3 6.7 –1.9 12.4 9.6 19.8 0.8 1. .4 0.8 –4.8 10.2 –11.6 12.9 –4.8 1..3 13.2 –4.9 12.7 –13.0 6.7 32..3 8.4 12.2 2.5 –7..9 18.7 3.0 11.4 6.2 5.5 –2.4 –3.7 10.5 .2 2008 –4.1 –0.1 4..3 –9.1 30.1 7.3 0. 7.9 7.5 .3 10.6 –0.7 7. 9..8 11.4 3.8 7. Rep.3 21.7 4.7 –1.4 15..9 7.0 1.3 15.7 6.1 7.1 –13.3 4.5 3.7 –5.5 17. –4.3 8.4 5. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB..6 8.9 –5.8 5.7 –4.7 –9.4 2006 20.7 2001 ..4 5. 9.1 4.2 0.3 –21.6 –7.0 4.9 … 9.7 17.6 21.9 8...3 6.5 –2.7 4.2 4.2 4...8 4. 22.7 7.9 2.3 … … … 9.4 –6.4 4. Rep.6 49.3 … … … –11.1 7.7 4. Fed.7 10. … . 12.6 9..5 20..7 4.5 7.3 6.1 –2.16 Growth Rates of Industry Real Value Added (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.3 –0.2 5.7 8.1 4..0 1.0 16..4 4.8 9.5 3.3 3.9 12.0 –10.3 –32.9 1.6 4.9 10.5 16.4 3.0 11.1 4.0 –25.3 6.8 –9.5 –6.0 9.8 11..2 2.8 1.0 –0.2 12.3 5.5 2009 5.7 13.9 –13.4 3.3 4.8 14.4 0.4 –29.7 5.7 … .0 –10.6 –15.0 –0.1 2.7 6. 0.8 12.176 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT National Accounts Table 2.9 2004 32.9 3.5 2.0 3.0 1.4 6.9 8.0 5.6 4.8 15.4 3.3 –0.6 4.8 31.1 –16.4 .1 16.1 –0.5 13.0 2.4 4.7 … … … 6.3 10.4 –5. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.4 9.1 11.3 … … … … –2.0 7.7 3.3 14.8 8..7 8.4 –2.1 –5.8 1.9 … … … 11.0 17.7 7.8 … … … 6.8 15.6 10.3 31.0 0.7 7.9 ..1 .1 14.3 3.6 16.1 1.0 8.0 8.8 –10.7 8.8 13.2 –5.7 0.9 14.0 5.1 18.8 –8.3 54.8 9.4 … … … . .6 8.8 6.7 … 1.0 4.5 2.2 6.5 20..0 4..5 8.7 9..5 –10.0 9.7 9.7 6.5 12.4 4.8 3..7 –3.3 4..2 5.3 –17.0 10.3 –3.2 … … … –5.8 2.0 8.9 4.8 3.9 4.9 –1.1 11.3 –1.8 –1.0 4.9 10.6 10.8 –3.9 –1.2 6.8 –1.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.2 13.3 –18.2 10.9 4.5 2.2 10. 6.4 4.3 9.0 3. 12.0 3.1 –2.0 6.4 1.7 –6.3 37.5 4.3 7.9 13.4 0.2 –1.8 7.6 10.7 0.1 16.3 4.7 10.6 2.3 –6. –13.5 7.7 .3 1.1 7.4 2005 23.5 3.2 7.9 3.2 3.9 2.4 3.9 –0.6 –0.1 –1.5 6.6 18.3 8.7 9..2 13.8 19.1 –18...3 12.6 10.1 1.5 2.5 7..0 19.9 15.9 8..5 13.3 16.5 –1.5 14.7 13..1 –1.8 7..9 2002 ..2 5.0 –0.7 7.2 12.1 5..2 8.7 24.8 5.6 25.3 .8 10.1 4..3 15.5 –29.5 3.3 –3.7 3.7 10.7 … 0.2 35.9 … . .9 … 7.3 5.0 2003 6.0 3.9 18.. UN Statistics Division (UN 2011).6 4.2 8.2 –5.8 18.6 0.3 –0.6 1.1 –5.2 –4. but it is not classified as a developing member.1 –10.4 1.6 3.3 10..1 15.0 –2.6 11.3 6.8 6.5 2.0 –0..0 … … … 30.7 7.2 7. 1.5 2.9 9.9 –12.0 0.6 10.7 22. 8... 22.7 22.3 5.2 13. –1. 9.5 9.6 21.2 6.3 10. of Hong Kong.3 8.1 3.7 –0.1 5.7 3.0 2.0 2000 .6 8.9 –5.5 16.7 1.5 4. .8 9.7 7.3 .5 7.3 20.9 2007 7.1 15.5 17.5 12.7 9.3 10..3 8.9 11.7 –0.9 8.3 11.

9 5. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .4 10.7 … … … –5.8 –3.7 11. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 .9 1.4 .1 4.1 1.2 5. .3 2007 14..8 3..2 –2.5 –0.8 12.6 7.1 4.2 4.17 Growth Rates of Services Real Value Added (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.1 2.2 9.7 4.3 11.6 1.7 4.9 3.0 10.7 6..7 10.4 16..7 4.3 3.8 3.6 2004 16.0 15.3 … … … .1 7.5 27.8 16. 8.9 2003 13.9 2.0 12.2 –1. of Mongolia Taipei.2 14.7 6.9 … … … 1.3 8.1 2.7 6. of Hong Kong.3 4.1 0.4 5. 4.6 –1.2 8.5 10.7 5.8 –4.0 6.5 2010 .4 … … … –2.7 6.3 6.6 2.4 1.8 11.6 5.7 0. .5 7.0 13.4 10.2 1.7 –0.5 8.2 4.9 3...0 … … … 3.4 –2. 4.. 4.8 –0.6 3.3 5.9 6.4 3.2 2..7 –0.4 6. .7 4.5 8.9 –12.7 10.4 7.8 5.8 10.8 4.0 4.1 6.7 2005 14.0 3.4 1.7 6.4 0.7 12.0 2.5 … … … 0.0 1995 .7 8..2 4.2 1.2 1.7 7.1 4.. –7..0 7. … .0 4.8 6..1 7.8 36.8 –0.7 9.4 6..8 12.5 8.3 5..1 2002 .6 5.7 .5 –4.5 3. China Korea.4 6.5 6.0 5.9 6.3 5.4 3.0 9.4 11.1 11.1 9...7 3.3 .8 4.4 5.1 10..2 9.1 –3.2 12.6 10.6 4.4 5.3 9...7 3.5 4.5 9.6 3..9 6. 8.0 –12.6 –1. .3 10.5 –0.5 2.8 6.3 3.9 –1.4 1..6 3.1 1.9 5.8 … 4..5 5. Sources: Country sources.8 –1.6 14.7 … –1.2 6.9 1.4 8.4 4.4 –2.5 –5.9 8.8 4.9 4.4 4.9 –3.1 8.4 5.1 12.4 3.9 11.0 11.1 2009 17.6 7.0 2.8 6.2 10.4 8.0 3..1 13.3 5..2 6.1 5.5 2.8 3.0 7.3 1.7 5.0 13.9 5.6 9. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.2 7.3 8.3 3.4 –0. 17.6 –1.6 … … … 4.2 4.6 4.6 24.5 5. People’s Rep. 0.8 5.4 9.3 2.0 … –1.6 7.3 9.9 9.7 9.5 5.9 3.8 4.3 8.5 … … … –0.2 2..1 4.1 9.5 2.2 –0.1 12.6 14.9 –0.7 –5.0 1.1 4.6 9.8 3.3 8.1 4.2 7.8 2006 16. UN Statistics Division (UN 2011).3 13.9 8.9 2.1 1.0 5.7 22.6 13.9 14.2 8.7 9...3 25.3 0.5 13.9 1.7 1. 8.6 5.4 30.3 4.2 6.1 7.5 8.1 13.7 4.4 –9.8 5.0 6.1 3.3 5. 1.7 2000 .9 9.9 5.0 6.9 4..2 7.ECONOMY AND OUTPUT 177 REGIONAL TABLES National Accounts Table 2.5 5.4 ..0 3. .2 7. –15.7 –2.3 6.1 10.7 3. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data. but it is not classified as a developing member.7 … 9..2 4.3 6.6 10.1 3.2 6.3 7.8 11. 25.6 8.4 5..9 10.8 –4.9 .1 2.3 1.8 5.5 –1.1 7.8 1.2 10.0 6..0 0..0 7.2 18.4 4.9 5.0 4..4 14.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.2 10.0 4.9 10.8 … … … 12.3 7. 4.6 6.3 4.6 6.4 3.2 4.8 3.2 10.8 5.1 2.1 2.0 6..5 4.1 3.9 9.7 9.2 13.0 –12.5 6.3 13.4 1.7 9. 0.1 7.1 25..5 5.6 7.3 2.5 … … … 2.7 3.0 3.5 4.8 .3 2001 .5 17..9 9.9 9.4 8.1 7.7 7..9 4..8 4..9 –1.0 5.4 –3.3 7.6 10.2 … 0.8 0.5 4.4 7.4 2. 11.8 19.9 .7 –1.6 12.6 14.2 13. 6.6 … … … 1.7 9.5 … 10.3 6.6 0.1 9.7 6.5 … . 7..6 4. 21.3 5.4 6.1 10. Rep.7 5.2 3.6 1.8 2.4 3.0 8.7 6.7 4.9 3.3 … .7 5.1 7.9 3.5 0.1 … 1.0 5.0 5.5 9.2 … … … … –6.2 11.6 7.8 4.0 … 2..5 7.9 6.2 6...1 4.7 30.6 4..0 4.7 10.2 –5.4 10.8 2.4 2.7 2.8 6.8 ..1 –0...3 –17.4 11.1 5.6 7.3 3.3 15.0 3.8 2008 –13.3 5.6 4.5 1.4 2.0 7.3 9.8 … … … –7.9 7.6 9.3 8.1 6.2 2.3 3.7 18. 3.3 6.8 11.9 .9 0.9 7.3 ..3 4.0 6. Fed.5 8.1 … … … 10.3 11..4 8.1 7.5 –0.1 .0 2.5 14. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.0 17.5 0..1 14.9 15.5 2.3 –4.1 –4.5 5.0 8.7 2..9 –5.4 14.8 6.9 0.6 2.7 7.8 14.8 10.0 3.3 8.4 10.8 –0.4 6.1 8.9 1.3 4.8 –4.4 10..4 4.7 –3.3 4.5 6.4 –0.3 19.7 3.8 .6 9.5 3.0 8.5 4.9 6.1 14.8 7..9 5.9 –1.9 4.1 2.6 9.2 3..2 12. –13. 9.2 –1.2 23.3 0.2 9.8 7.9 .4 3.8 6.6 3.5 17.0 –5.3 4.0 7.8 5.4 5.6 7.1 14.5 10.2 9.4 8.8 –0.4 9..2 3.7 6. Rep.4 7.1 12.

2 –1.2 5.8 . … … 6.3 … … … … … … 2.9 1.7 1.2 3.6 19.0 6.5 9. 8.9 5.3 … 5.5 5.1 4.0 … 9.8 4.0 4.0 … 10.5 –13.5 3.1 1.8 2.4 1.1 … … … … … … 20.0 … … … … … … 3.2 9.9 4.7 … … 1. … … … … … … 4.8 2003 … 7.2 3.3 5.6 1.3 4.9 1.1 4. of Hong Kong.2 7..3 5.4 1.7 8.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar b Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.3 10.9 3.7 1.9 … 0.1 3.1 28. People’s Rep.6 –2.4 16.1 1.178 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT National Accounts Table 2.1 13.5 5.4 3.3 … 5.9 5.2 –1.5 4.9 6..9 … … … … … … … … –13.5 –12.7 7.3 … … 2.4 … … … … … … … 5.6 3.8 … … 5.3 4.7 … 11.7 8.3 14.3 … … … … … … 16.0 0.5 2005 … 8.6 9.6 12.4 12.7 1.2 7.6 4.0 –7.3 … 3.6 … 2.4 … 2.5 … … 1.1 0.2 4.5 8.2 0..7 3.9 –36.9 .6 … 6.4 –28. Sources: Country sources.7 4.0 6.9 … 3.3 4.5 4.2 … 4.0 3.5 … … … … 6.8 24.7 2..6 12.1 4.5 1.0 –4.1 16. b Includes government consumption expenditure.2 … 10.18 Growth Rates of Real Private Consumption Expenditure (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. … … … … … … 4.3 8.7 … 1..9 7.0 5..7 6.6 … 4.8 13.1 5.7 … … 7.6 6.7 –5.3 2008 … 5.8 2.8 … … 8.2 2..0 2000 … 8.5 … … … … … … –45.8 3.4 6.6 4.7 8.3 2.0 0.1 … … 4.2 8.0 4.8 … … … … … … 3.4 6.7 10.4 2001 … 7.1 … … … … … … 1.4 8.3 … 5.5 3.9 5..8 5.0 … … 1.9 2.1 .4 3.9 14.7 5.2 .9 … 8.3 … … 0.6 … 19.6 6.7 7.3 1.4 13.4 17.3 9.0 3.8 8.6 4.5 10.0 4.0 4..0 0.4 0.8 49.0 … … … … … … … .4 … … –0.8 1.1 … 2.0 6.0 … 1.6 … … … … … … –17. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia..0 11.4 2010 … 3.9 4.0 … 1.7 6.4 … 11.0 12.0 –8.7 0.6 12.1 … … … … … … 2.1 … 3.6 4.4 7.4 12.2 11.7 10.2 2.4 … … 4.5 .3 … … –1.8 7. Rep.4 4.5 2.7 12.5 4.8 10.7 8.5 0.8 11.6 1.2 0..2 1995 … … –2.9 9.7 … 1.9 … –20.9 12.1 –14. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … … … … … 4. Fed.3 12.7 –1.9 7.5 … 3.4 3.5 1..8 … … … … … … 4.4 1.2 17.3 7.5 … 2.8 . . … … … … … … 0.9 9.3 1.9 20.9 3..7 4.2 … 6..8 10.1 6..7 … 8.5 17.7 7.7 4.5 6.3 15.8 11.4 … … 3. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.9 8.5 … … 6.3 8.1 48.2 3.7 6.9 … 3.0 7.0 … 2.7 6.5 5..4 … 8.3 0.2 … 1.1 14.1 2.9 2.1 3.9 … 3.9 3.8 6.4 … 5.6 2.6 … 11.2 13.3 12. of Mongolia Taipei. UN Statistics Division (UN 2011).7 5.7 3.3 12.3 … … … … … … 12.6 –16.2 59.1 9. … … … … … … 2.9 3..3 … –0.8 … … … … … … –20.5 10.7 … … … … … … 5.3 –0.1 12.2 3.9 5.5 … 12.7 6.5 12.7 16.6 4.5 7.2 … … … … … … 8.0 … 10..9 0.2 … 11.7 –0.4 … … … … … … 3.8 12.4 7.7 –0.2 2.9 5.0 .5 5. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.0 4.2 1. Rep. –49.8 1.6 8.1 1.2 … 13.7 … 1.1 … … … … … … 4. 10.5 2007 … 13.5 … 4.8 8.8 … 3..2 2004 … 9.0 … … … … … … –14.6 7..3 … 5.9 0.4 .4 3.3 –5.6 … 13.1 5.5 4.7 7.7 2002 … 8. but it is not classified as a developing member.1 2009 … –4.1 5.0 –1.5 1.5 1.8 2.4 7.0 … 9.3 … 8. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .4 4.4 2006 … 8.2 4.5 … … … … … … 4.2 8.3 … … … … … … 5.2 … … 5.0 4.4 4.7 –0.4 0.1 –3.7 9.5 2. China Korea.7 1.0 4.

8 … … … … … … … 3.8 … 1.0 17.7 7.8 10.8 … … … … … … –0.2 13.9 … 0.2 –1.5 –31.6 … … … … … … 1.0 4.2 7.0 8.1 3.6 … –0. Sources: Country sources.9 … … 2.0 0.9 2.7 1.2 5. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.0 9.8 … 8.6 12.7 9. … … … … … … 3.8 2.8 … 4.5 … 13.4 … –5.1 5.9 4.0 3.5 … … … … … … 4.0 5.6 0.5 8.5 2.9 … … … … … … –1.8 –2.6 13.2 0.1 –2. ..3 … … –1.0 1.0 … 10.8 … … 2.5 7.9 4.0 5..6 3.6 1.6 … 5.7 7.1 … 5.9 … … 5.4 … 9. Fed.2 .5 .8 –33.5 … … … … … … 6..8 4. … … … … … … 3.8 5.6 … … … … … … –12.8 7.1 16.4 15.0 4.6 … –1.3 –5.9 … … 2.8 … … 8.3 27.3 4.3 9.9 10...5 2.4 … 3.1 22..0 5.0 .2 … … … … … … –0.3 … 0.9 15..9 … 6.6 5.1 2.2 0.1 3.7 … … 3.0 4.3 4.3 … … 0.7 … … … … … … 2.3 … 6.5 … … … … … … 2.8 –1.2 1.5 5.6 4.5 … 2.3 0.8 4.6 2005 … 19.2 1.9 … 2.0 … 7.5 6.5 6.7 … –1. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.1 –5.4 … … … … … … 16.8 3.5 .8 9.3 … 0.0 3.3 2.4 2.8 –2.4 3.6 10.5 0.5 4.3 –4.0 … 11.6 … 1. 11.9 3.5 … … 4.4 … … … … … … 3.3 –5.1 1.2 15.7 1.6 11.2 7.8 11.2 8.7 … 7.7 1.6 3.6 … 6.3 … 19.5 19.7 –0.2 3.0 2008 … –1.7 3.3 8.0 2..8 … 0.9 7.1 5. 4.3 .4 12.7 3.0 … 1.2 2.3 1. … … … … … … 2.6 … 3.4 … 7.3 … … 3.4 … –1.9 2006 … 14.4 … … … … … … –8. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 10.5 –0.4 1. of Mongolia Taipei.9 2004 … 8.8 82.3 1..9 11.9 … –4.0 0.3 … 15.7 … 3. Rep.1 2.7 12.1 9.0 12.9 3.8 –16.9 3.9 … 1.1 2.1 6.7 … 3.2 4.9 7.0 4.2 ..4 –0.2 7.4 4.2 … … 6.0 1995 … … –2.2 … … … … … … 11.9 … 2.3 –23.0 11.9 5. but it is not classified as a developing member.0 5.7 … … … … … … 3.7 16.5 7.0 … … –3.1 14.6 4.6 7.4 5.2 2002 … 5.2 2009 … –1.0 6.3 6.6 … 3.0 … 8.19 Growth Rates of Real Government Consumption Expenditure (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.1 … … … … … … 1.4 … 2..9 6...4 –13.5 7.3 5.7 1.ECONOMY AND OUTPUT 179 REGIONAL TABLES National Accounts Table 2.6 … 6.3 8.0 11.4 2.3 10.2 2010 … 5.0 45.9 … 1.9 0.9 … 14.9 … 1. Rep.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.5 48.1 2001 … 3.5 1.0 3.5 6.3 … … 1.0 0.2 10.7 0.0 2.6 … 10.1 … … … … … … 3.3 5.6 10.4 … 10.0 –1.5 … –7.4 … 10.. … … 2.8 8...2 2.2 1.5 12.2 3.5 2.5 0.5 4.8 … 5.8 3.8 5.3 –2.9 … … … … … … … … –2.7 .3 4.8 9.6 0. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … … … … … –3..8 –2..0 1.5 7.6 10.3 2.9 4.2 11.0 … 1. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.5 … 7.7 5.9 1.3 … 0.4 38.7 6.5 –15.9 2.1 0.2 … … 1.2 … … … … … … 3.6 4.1 … 8.8 –0.4 18.2 8. UN Statistics Division (UN 2011).6 2.5 10.1 2007 … 5.5 19. China Korea.6 … 8.3 7.6 1.7 13.7 3. of Hong Kong.6 … 15. People’s Rep.9 1.9 2000 … 2.1 0.8 –9.2 7.3 7.9 … 6. 25.4 4.2 7.4 4.4 4.0 5.2 … … … … 5.0 .0 … … … … … … 6. … … … … … … 1..7 … 0.2 9.6 2.2 4.0 53.4 –14.9 … 10.3 … … … … … … … ..0 … … … … … … 3.8 3..4 … 9.9 14.6 … 2.6 … … 0.5 … 4.7 9.4 2003 … 11.7 7.1 8.2 12.8 4.

6 4.0 10.3 5.4 … 15.6 3.5 3.5 … 7.8 … … … … … … 60.9 … 29.7 … 6. Rep.8 10.1 8. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … .0 … 2.0 13.4 2.7 6..7 10.4 4.8 –0. 9.5 9.2 –3.4 –5.0 … 2..2 13.8 9.2 2000 … 5.6 … 40. .7 –6.7 2.5 17.1 6.1 –5.7 … –12.5 10.6 –17. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. … … 11.3 28.3 17.3 29.3 … 11.4 0..9 25.2 11..3 … –4. Rep.3 … 16.4 … 0.6 10.6 12.20 Growth Rates of Real Gross Domestic Capital Formation (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.2 16.3 21.0 –20.8 –12.8 .5 –5. People’s Rep.3 –4.6 … … … … … … 8.9 … … –0.4 … –2.9 .6 2009 … –30.4 –30.0 5.9 –1.7 –8.8 13.8 –7.9 23.4 … 0. … .8 … … … … … … 4.3 –4.1 –3.2 51. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.5 10.5 … 6.1 … 29.8 2..4 12.5 –5. but it is not classified as a developing member.3 … … … … … … 4..9 –5.4 35.0 12.6 –5.8 10.5 5.4 … … … … … … … .5 6.5 –10.4 13. .6 … 6. UN Statistics Division (UN 2011).1 6.8 –6.1 4.5 – … –7.0 –4.2 –0.5 2010 … 2..9 … 8.8 6.6 11.0 … … 8.5 2001 … 16..8 … 9.1 –0.9 4.3 45.2 2.2 –80.2 16.3 1.9 6.5 29.9 2.7 2.8 3.4 28.1 15.4 23.6 2006 … 32.4 … 39.9 … … –13.8 11.5 13.7 21.7 –13.7 3.8 .6 1.0 8.2 –3.5 … 2..8 … … 1.1 4.5 … –23.7 … … 16.2 14.6 20.6 … 8.4 1.2 –4.8 24.2 2.5 11.3 4.2 … 5.3 3.5 … 3. … … … … … … 6.0 12.8 … 35.7 2004 … 17..0 … 23. … … … … … … 10.9 1.1 10.5 21.9 2.1 .9 12.3 17.4 –17.8 .7 5.9 –14.9 –13.0 10.8 34.2 … … 0.5 13.5 –9.5 … … … … … … 27.8 … … 13.0 36.6 12.2 13.3 0.6 … … 1.9 –0..5 … 5.3 … 4.8 16. of Hong Kong.5 8.6 0.9 … … … … … … –40.4 9.3 … –23..1 –4..6 6.8 9.2 6.6 4.8 30.9 17.1 2.5 2.4 … … … … … … 15.6 … 10.6 5.4 13.5 … … … … … … 6.3 30.9 31...3 18. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data..7 15.7 1.9 9.9 16.8 21.. Sources: Country sources.5 … … 8.6 … –9.7 53.2 –27.4 –13.3 20.6 11.7 –19.2 18.1 7.7 12.0 26.8 … .7 22.4 –15.4 –6.2 … … … … 9.8 . 8.7 2007 … 19.0 7.2 … –42..0 –6.7 2008 … 12.1 … … … … … … 162.5 29.5 24.0 15.3 –8.3 33.8 … 17.8 –0.180 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT National Accounts Table 2.8 … … … … … … –13.5 84.4 … –13.8 … … … … … … 6.1 … … … … … … 62..3 .7 8.1 … 20.9 17.9 6.2 … … … … … … … … 0.0 … … … … … … –7.1 1.4 12.2 15.. … … … … … … 3..2 … … –0.9 … … … … … … 7.7 2002 … 22.0 –0.1 2.3 … … 8...7 6. China Korea.8 … … … … … … –15.8 17.3 7..4 96.9 –2.. 5.7 61.1 16.7 10.4 … 38.3 39.8 … –1. .1 10.7 15.1 7.1 –5.1 –1.8 .4 14.0 –11.1 3.4 0.1 –20.4 –0.0 … 11.1 1.7 7.1 –4.7 … 17.9 … … –1..5 … –21.6 1995 … … 55.3 16. –21.3 14..3 … 9.7 15.4 13.6 –3.7 2005 … 26.7 … … –2.. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .6 … … –0.9 … 21.2 2003 … 30.2 … … … … … … –28.9 10.6 … … … … … … … 7.3 8.7 .5 … –0.1 8.0 26.8 … … … … … … 13.3 3. –7.4 38.7 … … … … … … 28.9 … 6.3 –23. … … … … … … –0.3 2.1 23.7 –24.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.2 8.4 29.4 … –2.2 31.. 39..6 7.3 –25.3 10.2 4.5 14. Fed.8 10.2 109..4 ..8 21.1 8.9 11. of Mongolia Taipei.9 5.5 … 31.8 … –14.3 15.4 –1.3 … … … … … … 0.1 25.1 –2.4 –26.2 13.7 4.2 12.8 –4.4 14.5 –3. 5...

8 30.2 10. Rep.4 … 27.8 16.9 16.3 … –11.3 16. … … … … … … 4.8 –8..1 … 11.9 –12.5 7.5 –1.0 –17. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.3 7.6 27.6 5.4 … 0.6 25.0 34.7 9.0 9.4 –2.9 … … 10.9 … … … … … … 4..4 2.8 … 1.7 3.7 4.5 20.2 1.4 14.0 –0..1 7.1 … … … 1.. … … … … … … –19.2 2.1 –12. of Hong Kong.4 … … 7.5 .9 13.1 3. UN Statistics Division (UN 2011).2 –5.1 –25.8 2.0 14.8 9.2 21.1 21.9 –43.4 48. .5 … 1.7 .1 –1.3 … … … … … … 0..8 –6.0 9..5 5.0 –7.1 –3.4 3..1 13. but it is not classified as a developing member.5 .2 … 5. … … … … … … 4.3 3.9 31.5 … 16.2 … 12.3 28..4 25.6 10.6 –3.8 14.5 17.3 … … 8.7 … 19..7 14.3 31.8 –1..8 … … … … … … 3..3 … 15.3 12.0 4.6 2.9 12.6 … … … … … … … 7. –8...7 … 15.1 … 9.5 –6.9 … … 15.1 ..1 2. … … … … … … –2.3 –9.5 … 25..0 12.5 … 4.7 6.7 12..2 12.3 2001 … 27.1 –1.0 4.8 15.0 … … 9.0 –1.7 16.4 12.0 24.3 –1.1 12.5 12.7 19..0 15.8 19..9 9.7 28. … … … … … … 544.6 … … … … … … 4.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.6 –15.5 0.5 … 3.2 2006 … –7.0 –9.4 … … 16.0 22.0 –6.9 39.6 … –6.0 25..6 10.6 14.2 … … 17. … … … … … … … .5 0.0 2.. … … … … … … 7.2 15.0 14. … … … … … … 8.8 –11.4 –3.9 2007 … –3.8 .3 12.6 –1.4 . China Korea.1 … –1.6 3.1 … 18.1 13.7 5.9 8.3 25.1 –11.8 … … 10.9 … … … … … … 1.6 –7.8 35..6 4.4 11.8 .6 … 0.6 … 7. … … … … … … –9.6 6.8 … 11.1 2004 … –1.2 27.. Sources: Country sources.0 6.4 –2.5 7.6 5.1 7.4 … –8.4 4.5 1.8 17.6 13..1 10..4 … 11.7 … … 2..0 2002 … 35.1 8.7 2.9 … 0.6 … … 9.7 … –10.0 –11.4 26.5 36.0 … –1.9 .7 9.7 39.1 –3.4 7.0 1.2 2008 … –13..9 7.3 –9.1 … –23.5 2009 … –10.1 11.2 14.3 –2.3 –5.9 –4.1 .4 .6 0.4 … 17.1 5.7 –15.7 –3.2 .5 23. … … … … … … 2..0 1. .2 .4 –14. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ..8 –7.9 7.3 27.4 –6.5 … 10.3 16.6 .3 … … … … … … 4.7 34. … … … … … … 3..6 … 8.0 19.9 3.5 14.2 14.4 4.5 –4.1 0.1 –6. 17.0 … … –1.ECONOMY AND OUTPUT 181 REGIONAL TABLES National Accounts Table 2.0 5.9 4.4 19.9 10.1 .8 3.7 … 12.0 12..3 11..1 15.3 … … … … … … –0.6 2010 … 21.5 .0 7.6 7.5 … 16.6 .3 9..9 4. of Mongolia Taipei.8 69.3 2000 … 19.8 2003 … 29..6 33. People’s Rep.8 17.9 … 9..2 –20.2 7.7 0.5 –2.3 18.9 52.4 … 0.4 29.6 … 9.4 … 6.7 .6 … 11.0 12.3 12.5 8.8 … 7.0 –22. Fed.1 19.3 3. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data. 79.8 14.5 4.9 14...1 –16.0 … 1.5 22..9 220.1 6.9 … –13..4 … … … … … … … … –4.9 … –0.7 0.7 –0.1 –3.0 –14. … … … … … … 2.5 –2.3 … … –8.2 7.3 7.6 … –4.4 5.4 … … … … … … 2. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.4 23.2 6.5 8. … … … … … … 5.6 –23.3 1995 … … –4..2 9.3 … 6.8 2005 … 15.1 … … … … 8.9 … 5.6 6.5 7.2 … 5.2 3.7 … … –10.3 13.9 9.1 8..7 7.8 –3..6 12.8 … –3.1 9.5 26. … … 16.3 –23.8 13.5 18.7 ..1 –5.21 Growth Rates of Real Exports of Goods and Services (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.2 9.1 … … … … … … 9.4 16.4 … … … … … … 8.2 15.1 79.8 14.3 –6.2 12.8 … … 12.2 … –8.0 48.3 14. Rep. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … … … … … 1. … … … … … … 18.

2 … 6.4 48.5 2005 … 14.5 13.4 3.9 12..5 57. … … 17.0 –0..5 … … … … … … … … 8..1 5. 17.8 2.4 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 9..1 19.3 –4.2 11.1 12.0 32.1 … … … … … … … … –4.3 … … … … … … … … 3.0 .5 14.5 –15. 6..9 –25.1 … … 0.0 11.5 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 5.8 ... Sources: Country sources.6 2007 … 13.8 20. 14.1 10.8 –4..6 … 3.9 2. 25..9 13.1 … … 9.7 7. 12.3 16.1 12.5 –13. .5 .5 –57.2 2006 … 3. but it is not classified as a developing member.9 4.1 –30.9 21.3 22.5 16.4 … –3. –15..2 0.6 –16.2 –0.3 244.1 17.4 4.6 4..7 10.5 10..4 22.1 3.8 .7 … … … … … … … 8.2 … … 8...3 10.1 2008 … 7.7 7.3 1.0 8. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.5 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … –3.8 –6.4 0.9 –5.9 1.9 3.9 –18.7 17.6 16.. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … .5 … 10.0 –21.5 .6 –9.6 8.0 0.3 –9.1 16... .8 .4 –15.5 … … … … 11.6 25.9 20..1 48.7 2.3 .9 16.2 12. –19. 2.7 –13.2 –5.6 –17.3 11.3 48.9 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 14.5 13.4 … 6. .3 … 4.8 15..4 … … –9.1 –11.8 .0 1.6 3.1 42.1 0.0 –18.7 2001 … 6.7 … … … … … … 12.8 … 8.6 10..4 … … 13.4 13.2 10.1 2..8 4. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. 26.2 22.6 … … … … … … … 17.5 … … … … … … … –6.4 –8.3 … 15.2 17.4 … … … … … … … … 13.8 2.7 13. 12.0 … … … … … … 13.7 3.0 14.1 … 7..4 .8 11. of Hong Kong.7 2004 … –2.6 4.6 0.1 1.3 16.8 … … –10.. 12..6 13.0 11.0 11.9 … 24.8 –19.6 25..2 –18. 6.1 –4.7 … 3.5 16.1 31.0 22. People’s Rep.9 1.1 12.1 9.3 –15..6 10. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.2 –8.6 9.0 2002 … 18..8 20.2 –14.0 … –12.7 .9 … 23.2 –17. –7..5 10..0 22.3 .2 4.2 … –8.1 3.2 .6 21..0 –0.4 … 26.9 … 28.5 … … … … … … 1.6 … 15.5 23. 0.3 5...China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.0 … … … … … … … … 14.3 16.7 … … … … … … 12.9 16..8 7.1 11.6 18.2 30.9 … … –1.7 … … … … … … 12.5 6.5 6. of Mongolia Taipei.0 … –12.6 … 4..2 17.4 8.1 11.5 .0 20..8 –2.0 … 2.0 22. 0.0 16.2 –11.6 .3 … 5.8 13.6 8.1 21.7 … 17.4 2009 … –19.2 –2.8 4.7 19.6 … 8.5 22.4 2010 … 13.2 45.5 9..22 Growth Rates of Real Imports of Goods and Services (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.3 9.2 –0.3 4.7 1995 … . Rep.0 10.6 28. .2 9.4 13.9 .4 7.7 13.2 12.6 … … … … … … 7.4 1..3 19..9 –15.6 –0.9 33.7 39.7 … 19.5 –0.9 33..8 … 0..4 … … 2.4 … .2 … 8.7 9. 28..9 –8.2 0..2 –1.8 11.5 1.2 6.0 18..2 23.8 11.9 13.8 26.9 10. –1..3 9.3 15..0 7..5 11..1 57.182 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT National Accounts Table 2.3 … … … … … … –1. Rep.0 –3.4 … … … 17.7 … … … … … … … … –16.0 –8..1 9.0 … … 9.3 17.9 … –14. –3.5 6.9 –1.5 9..5 40. China Korea.4 .2 .9 7.4 8.5 –4.5 … … 11.6 37.3 –8.9 2.2 19.7 –2.4 4.2 … … 16. 9.6 … … … … … … 16.2 7.1 .4 –4.0 –3.4 –18.4 11.0 … … … … … … … … 4..7 ..2 3..3 … 3.0 11.6 32..6 9.4 … … 12.0 … –6. 8.3 … –15..3 3.8 16.2 2003 … 26.6 4.5 27.1 20.0 27.5 22..1 11.4 14.5 … … 14.3 4.8 . Fed. –11..1 .1 10.8 2000 … 7. … 2.4 … … 7.1 … 5.9 7.

5 –2.7 –1.0 – … 3.0 5.7 4.7 9.9 7.9 –2.4 –1.0 5.7 –1.5 7.6 1.1 5.1 2.2 4.2 – 3.ECONOMY AND OUTPUT 183 REGIONAL TABLES Production Table 2.6 8.3 0.1 – – –0.8 – 4.6 6.9 8.9 4.9 10.7 1.6 9.0 6.9 10.7 –5.3 –0.2 3.8 6.0 3.4 –10.8 –5.3 –17.0 –0.7 – – … 1.7 1.8 – 2.3 – 3.0 2.6 3.5 6.7 2.2 –1.2 6.1 8.3 … … 1.8 3.1 8.9 9. country sources.7 2008 –12.8 – – – … 2.5 – 3.8 1.9 –31.8 9.5 –10.3 – – – – … – 0.9 3.7 1995 4.0 4.0 3.1 0.7 2006 –10.2 5.7 8.9 4.4 6.4 – 1.0 2.6 3.1 1.8 14.0 –3.3 – 2.0 2.7 3.3 2.9 –5.4 – –4.8 –2.3 0.0 9.7 0.9 2.5 1.2 –1.3 2.0 –4.6 14.7 4.0 2.4 – 8.0 4.9 6.7 6.9 –17.1 –10.1 3.6 4.3 –15.9 1.0 2.0 –1.4 29.4 3.4 –13.3 17.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.7 3.1 –2.4 6.8 5.0 –0.7 2004 –3. Fed.5 –9.9 – 0. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.5 29.9 0.1 –63.2 5.7 2.3 3.4 31.0 11.0 6.8 –24.0 21.0 1.0 5.4 7.6 21.9 1.6 1.3 0.4 –9.3 8.9 2.3 6.4 5.1 3.0 1.7 –16.1 –16. Sources: FAOSTAT Database Online (FAO 2011).9 –4.0 6.1 1.7 11.6 3.1 1.0 –7.9 2.1 – 132.6 9.0 4.4 1.4 – –20.7 2.5 –3.4 –6.6 –3.9 5.4 2001 – 3.7 2.9 18.9 6.5 1.9 4.3 – – … 1.1 9.1 –2.7 2.8 9.0 13.3 1.3 3.0 15.9 5.0 4.5 24.7 3.8 0.7 1.0 7.0 –2.9 5.3 –16. but it is not classified as a developing member.5 –1.1 9.0 –1.0 – –39.1 3.6 33.7 4.4 –1.8 1.6 12.7 –20.1 –3.8 –3.2 10.5 2.9 12.8 –0.0 – 19.0 –4.6 – 15.0 7.9 – –6.1 – 0.8 –7.8 8.9 –0.5 2005 14.8 10.7 – – … –2.1 4.0 3.9 –1.0 4.8 8.4 2.1 – 0.3 6.8 3.3 0.2 –2.6 14.1 –2.0 2.0 3.8 2.9 27.6 2.8 0.1 –5.0 – 3.5 … … … … … 4.4 – – –5.4 –4.8 1.0 2002 14.9 –1.6 10.1 … 3.9 2.4 –4.1 2.9 7.1 8.4 3.6 10.2 9.4 –1.8 4.0 2.7 –4. Rep.6 –0.0 – 4.0 – 2.1 5.4 –6.8 – – – –0. of Mongolia Taipei.0 –13.0 3.7 4.9 –12.1 –16.0 – 3.8 2.0 –7.2 12.0 4.4 –1.3 –2.0 5.1 –7.9 0.1 –6.0 9.5 4.9 10.6 –4.8 – 19.6 2. Rep.5 0.1 1.6 –2.3 2.0 – 8.2 6.9 … 1.4 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.0 5.5 2.0 6.0 14.1 0.3 3.1 2.8 –40.7 3.6 6.0 – 2.1 … – –10.7 –2.7 3.0 4.0 8.2 –5.7 – –1.9 5.3 10.0 –1.1 7.9 –4.1 0.2 1.4 23.6 –21.8 5.6 – –7.0 3.6 –2.2 –2.1 19.9 2003 3.8 10.3 3.8 3. of Hong Kong.3 3.0 –10.0 – … 4.1 2.2 6.1 –7.6 8.7 –24.0 … 4.6 8.1 1.7 2.9 –14.2 6.5 –8.8 –74.4 13.8 –2.8 –8.4 4.7 8.7 2.4 16.7 –1.8 –1.7 – 2. People’s Rep.4 9.2 –0.0 1.6 6.6 –3.8 3.9 23.5 –1.6 8.7 4.0 –0.7 1.7 1.3 – – – … – –0.0 – –1.2 1.9 9.9 1.7 20.9 3.5 –7.5 3.0 –38.5 … … … 8.9 – –3.1 –14.6 30.0 – 7.2 –2.5 1.4 5.5 1.0 3.9 30.0 –10.6 1.8 3.9 15.9 –7.9 2.0 1.1 1.0 – – 2009 21.9 –1.1 2.0 7.1 –8.1 – 1.1 5.0 1.9 12.9 8.7 16.0 15.1 –4.4 –0.0 1.0 – –5.2 … – … – 8.2 9.5 4.2 14.7 3.1 6.0 –5.1 1.23 Growth Rates of Agriculture Production Index (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.2 58.9 0.8 2.3 –8.9 –1.9 23.0 –6. China Korea.0 4.7 –5.0 1. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 8.8 –0.5 5.7 – 22.3 –3.9 –7.8 3. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 10.6 –37.0 – 5.6 7.9 2.0 254.4 –2.0 0.0 3.3 3.0 5.9 2.7 –2.0 4.0 4.8 –10.2 2.6 9.1 2.9 –16.0 2.2 16.5 –3.1 4.0 1.8 –17.3 1.3 –1.5 1.3 8.9 3.5 –3.9 2007 10.9 – – –0.0 –1.1 2000 –17.0 1.8 3.4 –5.7 1.7 –6.1 1.

9 9.1 … 8.1 5.9 8.6 6.1 … … –0.2 … … … … … … 2.0 –3.0 14.5 … 2.3 … 5.1 … … … 2.3 … 1.1 2009 … … … … … … –8.2 … 6.7 8.3 13.7 13.3 6.5 10.0 … 2.3 … 7.9 … … –1.7 15.1 … 9.3 –4.2 –0.5 … 2.2 –22.0 10.3 … … … … … –4.9 … … –0.7 … 2.5 … … … 5.24 Growth Rates of Manufacturing Production Index (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoab Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … … … –0.9 4.3 5.9 –1.0 … … 29.3 … –9.6 14.8 … … … … … … –1.1 –4.3 … … … –1.oecd.8 … 12. Rep.1 3.5 10.5 4.2 … … … … … … 16.5 –16. of Mongolia Taipei.1 … … … … 0.9 12. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.0 … … … –1.7 … … … … 3.2 10.3 5.0 –10.4 9.5 … … 48.2 9.2 … –8.4 … 4.2 2004 … … … … 9.4 2010 … … … … … … 4.5 5.3 … … … … … 0.7 … 4.0 7.2 … … 7.9 15.5 … 10.8 8.3 11.8 3.0 … … … 3.7 … 0.6 0.9 –4.2 5.6 1995 … … … … –16.5 … … … 2.8 –0.3 1.0 … 14.0 … –1.0 –6.7 … … … –6.3 3.2 … 7.9 … –2. Sources: Country sources.1 … 0.5 … 9.6 … 24.8 4.6 … 8.4 2001 … … … … 15.0 … 13.4 0.8 … … … … … 0.9 … –0.8 … 14.7 8. b Refers to volume indexes of industrial production.6 … … … 3.0 16.3 … 12.0 … … … … … 1.8 … 10.3 … – 12.1 … … 2.9 … 16.8 … … … … … 2.8 … … … … … 2.6 … … … … … … 2.3 6.9 10.9 0.0 15.3 … 5.9 … –0. of Hong Kong.7 … 10.9 11.1 … 9.1 … … … … … 1.7 … –53.1 … –9.1 … 8.7 9.9 2006 … … … … 8.4 … –4.2 … 18. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 … … … 13.1 3.9 … 6.7 3.3 … … … … … … 6.2 2007 … … … … 6.1 … … … … … … … –3.6 … a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.8 … … … … … … 19.5 … … 2.1 –1.9 … 5.2 … 2.2 –6.4 … … … … … … –15.4 … … … … … … 4.1 … –9.9 6.8 … 6.7 22.2 2000 … … … … 17.2 … –10.6 … 9.0 … –7.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.1 … 2.3 10. Fed.0 … … … … … –0.6 … 2.0 … –6.5 … 1.2 … 2.7 … 8.4 … … … 5.2 6.4 0.3 … … … … … … –9. Rep.7 … … 12.5 17.184 ECONOMY AND OUTPUT Production Table 2.7 … 15.6 … 18.2 … … … … … 3.9 4.7 3.8 4.2 … … … –8.7 4.7 … 12.3 … … … 11.org).9 … … … 3.4 –2.7 12.1 … … … 4.9 8.0 … 7.6 16.5 … … … … … 3.8 2008 … … … … … … 4.0 … 5.0 13. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development website (www.5 … 7.2 1.4 … –1.9 2.7 … … 13. People’s Rep.6 7.2 7.8 … 9.4 … … … … … … … … … 24.9 … 6.4 – … –0.2 5.2 … … … … … … … … … –11.1 … 9.8 … –0.2 3.0 … … –2.4 … 3.1 … … … … … … –4.9 … 3.4 … 2.1 … 1.2 … 8.0 … … –16.4 … … … … … … – … … … … … –1.3 … 6.0 6.3 –11.4 … … 1.0 7.0 14.1 … … … … … … –3.5 2002 … … … … 8.3 –3.4 7.5 6.3 –0.2 8.4 … 11.8 … 11.0 2005 … … … … 7.1 –7.5 … –6.7 2003 … … … … 8.0 –4.9 … … … 1.1 … 9. China Korea.1 … 13.8 0. but it is not classified as a developing member.6 2.2 … … 2.5 –5.3 … … … … … 2.9 5.9 … … –5.2 10.

food prices continued to rise faster than those of other consumer items but the differences were not usually great. Overall. The growth in the money supply was slightly lower in 2010 compared to 2009. These included seven Pacific island economies—the Cook Islands. The economic recovery during 2010 has led to higher prices in most countries of the region. In 13 countries. food prices actually rose more slowly than the all items index. the Federated States of Micronesia.7% in 2010 down from 14.1 Consumer Price Indexes.1%. Solomon Islands. Papua New Guinea. REGIONAL TABLES Key Trends Consumer prices edged up in 2010. food prices continued to rise faster than those of other consumer items. rising by 4 percentage points or more in 10 economies. Kazakhstan. However. inflation was down in 2010.1% and this rose to 4. Timor-Leste.9% for the all items index.7% compared with 4. however. These economies benefited from appreciation of their currencies against the United States (US) dollar. in several countries. Fed.3% in 2009. States of Thailand China. Inflation rates were up in 30 economies.1). 9. in nearly half the economies. Larger increases were recorded in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (up by 6 percentage points) and Myanmar and Georgia (both up by 8 percentage points). and Prices Consumer prices edged up in 2010.8% in 2010. In 2009 the simple average of inflation rates for 43 countries was 4. of Indonesia Maldives Turkmenistan Cambodia Philippines Tonga Micronesia. and by Pakistan. but by international standards.7% in 2010 down from 20.China Solomon Islands Viet Nam Samoa Brunei Darussalam Timor-Leste Cook Islands Japan –5 0 2009 Source: Table 3. Rep. In general.0% deflation in 2009. including the People’s Republic of China (PRC) where prices rose by 3. and Vanuatu. 9. and in several countries food prices actually rose more slowly than the all items index.2 compares the price increases for all items and food components in 2010 for 36 economies in the region. But the differences were not usually great. food prices have generally been rising faster than the overall consumer price index. of Korea.0% in 2010 down from 12. Particularly sharp falls in inflation were recorded by Nepal.185 Money. People's Rep. the simple average of inflation rates for 43 countries was 4. Most Asian currencies appreciated sharply against the United States dollar in 2010 following an equally sharp depreciation in 2009. Finance. Figure 3. and Pakistan. In recent years. Rep.1. The higher average growth Figure 3. of Australia Singapore Vanuatu Hong Kong. China New Zealand Malaysia Palau Taipei. inflation rates are still among the highest in the region (Figure 3. In these countries.3% in 2010 compared with almost 1. 2009 and 2010 (annual percentage change) Pakistan Georgia Mongolia Myanmar Tajikistan Nepal Uzbekistan India Armenia Kyrgyz Republic Bangladesh Bhutan Kazakhstan Papua New Guinea Lao PDR Sri Lanka Azerbaijan Fiji.8% in 2009.4% in 2009. which rose to 4. Samoa. but the overall increase has been quite modest. 5 10 2010 15 20 25 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . In 2009. they were exceptionally high in Georgia. In 2010.8% in 2010. India. 11. Nonperforming loans were at manageable levels for most economies in the region. which brought down the prices of some imported goods. food prices rose more slowly than other items. the unweighted average food price inflation for 36 countries was 5.

an increase in food prices will significantly lower consumer purchasing power.2%. the money supply grew at less than 4%. especially among the poor. In principle.0% in Bangladesh. Mongolia. Governments influence the supply through their control of government borrowing and by setting interest rates. current accounts. In the Republic of Fiji.2.e.. an increase in the percentage of poor by 1. of Australia Singapore Vanuatu Hong Kong. and Indonesia. and New Zealand. notably Georgia where food prices rose by 22. Even though food price inflation in 2010 was not greatly out of line with other price movements. which is a broader measure than M2 because it includes some less liquid financial assets. A recent study1 by ADB based on 25 developing countries in the region suggests that households with daily per capita consumption of less than $1. most of the differences were only around 1 percentage point.9 points. As food absorbs most of the incomes of the poor. Rep. 2010 (annual percentage change) Pakistan Georgia Myanmar Tajikistan Nepal India Armenia Kyrgyz Republic Bangladesh Bhutan Kazakhstan Papua New Guinea Lao PDR Sri Lanka Azerbaijan Fiji. Manila. and Solomon Islands where the differences from the all items index were between 2 and 4 1 ADB. it should be noted that food price inflation is still high in some of the larger countries—12.4%). Nepal (14. including transferable.2 Price Increases for All Items and Food Components. The study further estimates that a 10% rise in domestic food prices in developing Asia may lead to an additional 64 million poor. this could lead to accelerating price inflation. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . In 2010. the unweighted average growth rate for 39 economies was 15. and term deposits—but a few countries have reported versions of M3. these high rates of food inflation risk halting or reversing progress toward eliminating poverty in the region. 2011. of Indonesia Maldives Cambodia Afghanistan Philippines Tonga Thailand Korea.7% compared with 16. food prices rose more slowly than the all items index by 1 percentage point or less.China Solomon Islands Samoa Brunei Darussalam Cook Islands Japan –5 0 Food Sources: Tables 3. and Viet Nam. i. Higher growth may cause inflation to accelerate while lower growth may restrict increases in real GDP. and if growth continues at this level. and Pakistan (12.5% in Pakistan and about 9. 5 10 All Items 15 20 25 percentage points. India. China New Zealand Malaysia Taipei. Money supply grew at 30% or more in Georgia.1 and 3. The 15 countries where food prices rose at a slower rate than the all items index include Afghanistan. Most governments try to keep the growth of money supply in line with the growth of nominal gross domestic product (GDP). the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Tajikistan (13.3 shows the growth of money supply in 2009 over 2008. Figure 3. In the other 11 economies. In the countries where food prices rose more rapidly than the all items index. and in 2010 over 2009.6% in 2009. Uzbekistan. AND PRICES Figure 3. New Zealand.186 MONEY.25 at 2005 purchasing power parity spend 60%–70% of their total budget on food. Growth of the money supply was slightly lower in 2010 compared to the year before. rate for food prices was due to exceptional increases in just a few countries. Rep. Global Food and Price inflation and Developing Asia. Therefore. Samoa. Japan. The size of the money supply is largely determined by the level of government and private borrowing from banks. GDP not adjusted for inflation.5%). money supply here is M2—the total currency in circulation and the value of deposits held by banks.9%). FINANCE.

MONEY.China Singapore Hong Kong. virtually unchanged from the average of 6. People's Rep. People's Rep. Rep. and Tonga.3 Percentage Growth in Money Supply. 2009 and 2010 (% per annum. of Solomon Islands Maldives India Sri Lanka Indonesia Pakistan Kazakhstan Nepal Tajikistan Armenia Thailand Philippines Timor-Leste Papua New Guinea Brunei Darussalam Singapore Hong Kong.1 percentage point but falls of 2 percentage points occurred in Bangladesh. AND PRICES 187 REGIONAL TABLES Figure 3. 5 10 15 2010 20 25 Bank interest rates were little changed in 2010. Figure 3.4 Interest Rates on Time Deposits of 12 Months. Mongolia. China Japan 0 2009 Source: Table 3. China Samoa Malaysia Korea. Indonesia.China Tonga Australia Fiji.1% in 2009. of New Zealand Japan Vanuatu –20 –10 0 2009 Source: Table 3. of Philippines Thailand Timor-Leste Taipei. Samoa. the interest rates in Figure 3. In principle. there is some variation as regards both the period and the methods of averaging rates. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Rep. Tajikistan.0% in 2010.8. while rate increases of 3 percentage points were observed in Nepal and Papua New Guinea. Rate changes from 2009 were mostly in the range of +/. 2009 and 2010 (change over previous year) Mongolia Lao PDR Georgia Uzbekistan Viet Nam Bhutan Azerbaijan Afghanistan Bangladesh Kyrgyz Republic Cambodia China. 10 20 30 2010 40 50 60 70 The simple average of interest rates for the economies in Figure 3. In practice.5.4 are the period averages of the interest rates paid by banks for money left in a time deposit for 12 months. of Malaysia Samoa China. with some countries taking simple averages of monthly rates and others calculating weighted averages.4 was 6. of Taipei. period averages) Tajikistan Viet Nam Kyrgyz Republic Azerbaijan Mongolia Kazakhstan Nepal Armenia Bangladesh Sri Lanka Pakistan Indonesia Bhutan Cambodia Australia India Papua New Guinea New Zealand Maldives Tonga Korea. Rep. FINANCE.

12 usually cover real estate foreclosures and loans that are 90 days or more past due and still accruing Domestic credit provided by the banking sector is a significant source of finance in only about a dozen economies in Asia and the Pacific.0 2008 Source: Table 3. of Vanuatu Kazakhstan Pakistan Samoa Tonga Sri Lanka Papua New Guinea Indonesia Georgia Mongolia Solomon Islands Azerbaijan Armenia Cambodia Bhutan Afghanistan Timor-Leste Micronesia. the Maldives. 2008 and 2009 (% of GDP) Japan Hong Kong. 2008–2010 (% of total gross loans) Kazakhstan Pakistan Georgia Philippines Thailand Malaysia Armenia Indonesia India Korea. The nonperforming loans in Table 3. The top part of Figure 3. bank finance is much less important and both small businesses and households must rely on their own savings.0 2008 Source: Table 3. Nonperforming loans are at manageable levels for most economies in the region but by international standards they are are exceptionally high in Georgia. and on money lenders. of Singapore Japan Australia China. Kazakhstan. People's Rep.188 MONEY.11.0 2010 25. specifically the Figure 3. Malaysia.6 Bank Nonperforming Loans. AND PRICES developed and high-income countries from Singapore to Japan.5 shows the economies with bank credit as a significant source of finance. of Australia Malaysia Thailand Viet Nam Maldives Korea. of Hong Kong. People's Rep. China New Zealand China.12.0 5.0 2009 15. and Viet Nam. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .5 Domestic Credit Provided by the Banking Sector. Figure 3. States of –50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 2009 Figure 3. FINANCE.China Greece Ireland Italy United States France 0. Fed. on informal lending societies.5 shows the domestic credit provided by the banking sector as a percentage of GDP for 2008 and 2009 for 33 economies. Rep. China Taipei. of Singapore Nepal India Bangladesh Fiji. and Pakistan. In other economies. Rep. Rep. Thailand. 10. Also included are the PRC.0 20.

imports of petroleum and other commodities priced in dollars become cheaper but.China Lao PDR Fiji.3%). When a country’s currency appreciates against the dollar. These include Armenia. while the yen gained 6. bars to the right indicate depreciation against the dollar.2% following a gain of 9. Most Asian currencies appreciated sharply against the US dollar after an equally sharp depreciation in 2009. on the downside.9% in 2010 compared with 1.5% in 2009.MONEY. 189 REGIONAL TABLES Figure 3.7. The 30 appreciating economies included several Pacific island economies whose currencies are pegged to the Australian and New Zealand dollars. Singapore. and Uzbekistan whose currencies depreciated by between 3% and 8%. China Bangladesh Myanmar Cambodia Armenia Pakistan Tajikistan Georgia Kyrgyz Republic Uzbekistan Viet Nam –20 –10 2009 Source: Table 3. FINANCE. In 13 of the 43 economies listed in Figure 3.7. of Vanuatu Samoa Malaysia Thailand Afghanistan Tonga Singapore Brunei Darussalam Japan Nepal Mongolia India Bhutan Philippines Taipei. People's Rep. In Figure 3. Malaysia. The yuan continued to appreciate against the dollar—by 0. of Sri Lanka Papua New Guinea China. often by 5% or more. 2009 and 2010 Tuvalu Nauru Kiribati Australia New Zealand Cook Islands Indonesia Korea. the Kyrgyz Republic. Hong Kong. Rep. Rep. Kazakhstan. Among the 13 economies whose currencies depreciated in 2010 were Viet Nam (9. Georgia. the global economic crisis appears to have increased the percentage of loans classified as nonperforming in 2009 but the percentages had been reduced by 2010. and Thailand. bars to the left indicate that a country’s currency appreciated against the US dollar. Currencies of the other six economies depreciated by only 1% or less.6 are below those of all five OECD countries at the bottom of the chart. its exports to the US become less competitive. Tajikistan.7% the year before. and Armenia. and Pakistan.1%). 0 10 20 2010 30 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Pakistan (4. levels of nonperforming loans are shown for five countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that were significantly affected by the 2008/2009 financial crisis. Except in Georgia. For comparison.7 Percentage Change in Dollar Exchange Rates. Indonesia. China. AND PRICES interest. but the exact definition depends on banking regulations in each country. of Azerbaijan Kazakhstan Turkmenistan Solomon Islands Hong Kong. currencies in 2010 continued to fall against the dollar but the other 30 economies all saw their currencies appreciating in 2010. the 2010 level of nonperforming loans in the Asian economies in Figure 3.16. In several economies.

8 Price Level Indexes.190 MONEY. The stock market price indexes are the most widely tracked indexes on the stock exchange. FINANCE. States of Singapore Tonga Maldives Kazakhstan Samoa Korea. 2010 (United States = 100) Australia Japan Micronesia. Data on bank credit and interest rates are taken from the International Monetary Fund’s International Financial Statistics (IMF 2011) and are generally compiled according to IMF guidelines. of Malaysia Armenia Papua New Guinea Mongolia Solomon Islands Azerbaijan Thailand Philippines Taipei. Wholesale price indexes are not always based on wholesale prices but on prices at the factory or farm gate. 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Data Issues and Comparability The coverage and content of consumer price indexes (CPIs) are not standardized. is the US. on average. of Hong Kong.China Georgia Sri Lanka Afghanistan Nepal Lao PDR India Bangladesh Viet Nam Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Cambodia 0 Source: Table 3. In Figure 3. and Singapore. the “market basket” may be based on expenditures of a particular socioeconomic group and not the population as a whole. People's Rep. Fed. Goods and services in these two economies are. Figure 3. China. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Australia and Japan have higher price levels. the CPI covers only prices in urban areas or in the capital city. in this case. as are some import-dependent island economies of the region. In some countries. Money supply for most countries relates to M2.8. the Republic of Korea. Rep. the ratio of the exchange rate to the PPP shows how much cheaper or more expensive goods and services are in any given country relative to the reference country which. which is broader than M2 as it also includes some less liquid financial assets. Exchange rates are also taken from the International Financial Statistics. In general the richer economies are near the top of the chart—Hong Kong. The price level index is the ratio between the market exchange rates and purchasing power parities (PPP). As the PPP is a conversion rate that equalizes price levels between currencies. more expensive than in the US. All other economies in the region have much lower price levels. In addition. AND PRICES Price levels in Asia and the Pacific are much lower than those in the US and other developed economies. but few countries report M3.18. in other words. China Indonesia Brunei Darussalam Kiribati China. the bars for Australia and Japan extend past the 100 line representing the price level of the US.

1 1.8 1.4 3.1 3.4 2007 9.5 9.9 3.0 3.2 9..0 2006 7.6 3.1 2010 3.7 –0. 13.4 8. 3.8 –1.0 2..2 43.3 1.3 3.1 0. ..2 1.0 24.1 1.9 4.7 2..9 2.6 5.3 .7 –0..7 3.9 –1.2 6..0 11.. China Korea.7 11.2 5.8 0.6 2002 .2 8.4 7.5 12.9 5.8 .2 … –1...6 .9 15.0 7.1 0.3 2.0 0.2 6..6 10.8 1.9 8.2 1.4 0.7 3.3 1.6 13.3 6.1 6.2 8.9 10.8 … 1.7 4.0 10..9 6..7 7.8 0. Fed.2 5.1 4.6 4.2 1..1 13.0 3.6 –1.3 7.0 9. 1.7 13.6 9.4 0. 6.4 2008 33.5 1.5 4. 176..8 15.3 –2.2 7.0 –0.8 0..7 9.7 10.1 1.2 4.5 8.1 7.3 10.4 3.6 4.5 –0..6 9. 5. Rep.0 6. ..1 3.2 –0.7 1. 10.4 1.7 6. of Kiribatic Marshall Islandsc Micronesia..6 –2. Data refer to capital city. 2..7 2. Sources: Country sources.3 11.8 7. but it is not classified as a developing member..0 12.9 3..9 2.6 1..2 8.2 1. 6.0 2.6 0.0 –0.7 4.5 2.5 8.3 2.4 17.0 . 6..7 2.6 11. 12.2 8.9 9.2 1.6 .0 3.5 4..8 4..8 10.2 .4 16.6 27.5 –1.3 7.5 4.2 6.8 2000 .1 Growth Rates of Consumer Price Index a (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.9 4.0 2..8 57.7 4.4 –0.3 4.6 3.7 –1.3 8..9 2.8 1.5 –0.5 0.8 3.6 5.7 8.1 9.6 4.6 0.1 16.1 6. For 1990 and 1995.4 12.2 5..9 4.5 .4 2.5 14.9 5..3 5.3 1.4 1.9 9.8 10.8 .1 .. AND PRICES 191 REGIONAL TABLES Prices Table 3. and for 2008 onward.3 4.4 6.6 –0. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islandsc Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvaluf Vanuatuc Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand a b c d e f 1990 .7 9.5 10.5 2.0 1..8 5.0 2.9 5.6 8.5 11.8 7.8 2.0 3.8 12.3 1. 176.7 21. .1 10.4 0....7 7.8 4.3 7.7 … 5.6 3.8 2004 .5 6.3 6.9 7.3 6.4 3.1 15.7 1.1 10.6 8..5 5.6 –0.8 9...8 3.0 0.8 4..2 1.0 10.3 4.5 7.1 6.5 7.2 18.9 2..6 60.6 9. 3. –0.6 1.9 6..0 1.4 2.. 3.9 6..9 12. –0.7 0.4 2.0 2.9 4.7 –1..3 8. .1 9.8 1. .6 .9 5. for 2003–2007. 15.9 7.3 3.9 9.0 .. 4.3 3.5 17.4 6.5 2...8 3..5 8. 0.2 1.8 2..4 4.4 12..9 9.5 3.3 2.9 0.7 … 3.2 4.3 1.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepalb Sri Lankac Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamd Cambodiac Indonesiae Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.9 2. 9. FINANCE.4 3.1 6.8 … 12.0 1. data refer to the whole country.1 9.8 5.4 2.0 .6 4.4 1.1 4.3 3.5 4.9 –0.0 2.4 0.3 7. .7 3.1 3.2 2.5 8.8 2.9 2..2 3. .5 6...5 1.0 1.7 1.8 9.6 1.0 4.9 5.8 11.9 8.2 4.3 … .7 .0 11.4 6.0 20..3 9.4 4.7 28.1 7.0 5.2 –2.8 20.5 9.2 2.7 9.9 2.7 … .5 … 1.3 23.0 6.2 36.7 9.2 1.8 8.1 2.3 4.7 5.6 5..9 1.2 5.1 .0 .1 6.7 1.3 24.9 –0.9 6..0 2.3 7.5 11. 4.4 14.5 10..7 5.4 5.0 1.1 1995 .0 –0.3 2005 .1 10..3 0.7 7.1 3.5 2.9 .9 . 17.6 5. Data refer to urban areas only.2 7.3 Unless otherwise indicated.0 2.8 4.8 –0. 43 cities.9 4.1 –0..4 4.1 5. of Mongolia Taipei.MONEY.5 4.5 2.3 9.2 22.0 4.1 2.5 19.4 6. Rep.0 6.8 8.2 1.2 2.2 4.0 9.1 0.6 2001 .7 7..9 6.6 20.. Data prior to 1999 cover Funafuti only.2 3.1 … 1.8 11..6 8.5 13. 6.8 1.4 0.5 7.4 0.0 2.8 2.9 2.3 3.6 17.6 3.9 –0...9 11..2 12.4 1.2 1.4 23.8 . .7 6.7 2003 .4 4.7 8...8 –3. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 . CEIC data.6 7.2 2..2 7..6 1.6 5.5 6.5 5. 3. 66 cities.7 2.9 3...7 5.0 0.9 10.1 3.9 5..1 4. 17.1 141.2 0.6 4.3 3... 3.2 0.2 0.8 2.2 … 12. . of Hong Kong.3 3.3 6.0 2.0 7.0 10.8 1.1 0. 11.5 5.7 0.2 6.5 3.8 19.0 5.0 2009 –9.8 4.0 14.6 10..7 2. –0..8 4.8 0.4 –3.8 2..9 8.5 6.3 2. 35.8 0.6 .8 7.0 5.0 0.7 –2.8 11. 0.2 … 3.4 0.6 1.6 2.0 14.8 8.3 –0.5 3.5 7.6 … 1. 10.7 7..0 . People’s Rep.7 3. 7..4 5.8 3.3 … 4.9 14.0 20.4 4.7 7.1 2.8 0.7 3. 2..9 7.8 1.1 10.0 0.1 3.4 4.5 7..8 0.5 2.2 2...8 3.5 3.9 3.1 2.6 3..3 1...1 10..0 3.5 7.6 3.0 … .2 –0.8 27.0 1.7 5.6 3.4 21. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB..9 0.9 1.1 6.6 8.0 4.5 6.0 1.9 3.9 .7 4.6 0.8 8.7 4.4 . . data refer to CPI for 27 cities.2 7.6 6.6 3.2 4.9 –0.2 8.1 .0 1.. 0.2 –0.5 0.0 6.6 0.8 5. 6..2 4.4 4.4 6.1 3.8 4.7 8..1 19.0 7. for 2000–2002.8 1.7 2. 45 cities.3 2.3 4.4 7.4 –0.0 11.2 2.6 2.4 56.6 –0.3 0.

4 0.. 5.6 … 7.3 ..7 11..7 .0 . Sources: Country sources.2 2.7 0.0 2.9 –0. –1.6 –0. For 1990 and 1995.3 6.5 0.8 5.3 4. ..9 0..2 9.0 4.6 –0..0 0.9 2008 48.3 2.9 7. 3.4 6.3 Coverage of food varies by country.4 7.2 6.0 .6 –10.6 –0.8 10.3 2.4 –0.3 2000 .9 7. 3.4 ....7 5.1 ..3 3.1 23.7 3. 3.6 14.5 3. 18.. 3.9 .9 2. 16.1 1. 190.4 5.5 12.5 0.4 –3.5 4.6 –0.9 2.0 6.3 2001 .China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepalb Sri Lankac Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamd Cambodiac Indonesiae Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.8 3.2 6.8 8..4 .7 13.3 8.6 1..3 2.5 13.1 3. for 2003–2007.8 3.2 ..4 7. 12.. 2. 4.2 22...5 .6 .0 16.3 3.0 6.7 10.4 1.6 13..1 16.3 3.0 9.4 4.2 3..4 7.3 –0....5 … –1..7 –0.2 20.. 9.0 .6 3. 10.6 6.4 4. 7.6 27.6 .7 3.0 1. 22.8 1.9 10. 1.1 8. 8. 6..4 2..9 –2. –1.8 3.8 7.3 5.. 3.7 10. 0.4 2.2 5.2 1.7 0.6 11.5 0..3 7. 0.4 9..2 2.3 .6 2..1 0.0 2...8 13.3 4.0 –0.4 0.3 –1. 2..8 11..9 –1..5 .0 4... of Mongolia Taipei. FINANCE.2 10.0 … –1.0 2..3 5.1 … –2. 0..2 12.2 9.8 .5 – –3.7 2. 7. the People’s Republic of China.8 12.1 29.9 6.4 – 3..5 4.1 2.9 7.5 8.6 .3 17.8 2.5 2.7 7.1 . People’s Rep..6 5..4 9.7 10.2 0.4 10.0 8..0 4.4 .5 16...0 –0.7 3. 1.2 … … .9 16.5 12.1 1.3 36.0 7.2 8...0 28.5 17. 6.6 –0..9 –0.... 13.4 … … .0 … ..1 . Fed.5 2.1 2.8 15.6 .6 9.2 .1 6. and the Maldives: economy sources........4 20. 18.8 1..2 0.3 0. China Korea.6 .4 10.9 –2.. .3 2..7 11.8 –4.7 0.8 0.1 . 1. 5.3 8.0 15. 1.5 3.0 18...4 1....9 2007 13.8 3.8 2.9 3.7 8...9 .2 . Data prior to 1999 cover Funafuti only..1 6..6 .1 3.0 12. 2.8 4....7 68.6 .5 4.4 2006 6.5 –0.2 12.4 12.5 8. 0.4 5. –0. AND PRICES Prices Table 3.2 3.4 4....9 8..1 4..9 1.5 8.4 0.5 ..3 6.9 3.9 13.2 14..4 7.4 10.7 5.1 5..6 7.2 0. 10. Unless otherwise indicated.6 11..8 .5 .3 2.3 1.7 2...3 ..0 12. … … ..4 5.2 1.7 2010 1.1 … .1 2.0 5..0 –1. . 9..8 3..6 7.9 4. Data refer to capital city...6 –1. Data refer to urban areas only...3 1.3 –0.. 9. –0.5 –2.6 6. 4.8 0.8 18.9 12.4 0.9 … 7. –0.6 10. .2 Growth Rates of Food Consumer Price Index a (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China...6 3.5 –2. and for 2008 onward.0 9. Rep.6 8..192 MONEY. for Bhutan.2 –1...6 20. CEIC data...2 ..6 .7 1.5 3.0 2. .4 … 10.6 5.4 3..6 5..2 5..0 2.2 1.7 30.8 2..4 2.9 1. 27.9 1.5 7. 43 cities.3 7.1 0.7 –6.5 0.1 6.7 3...5 5.. 5....9 3.5 1.2 2.. 4..0 9.9 11.8 0.4 6. .4 2...2 2.2 0..0 13.4 5..6 7.6 10. 13.0 4.9 1.0 21.6 12.8 8.. .1 .8 –0.6 7. for 2000–2002.... 10.0 0.2 0.5 17.3 15.2 0.2 6.0 .0 1...6 7.9 3.4 9.3 11.8 .0 7.1 6.7 2. 3. of Kiribatic Marshall Islandsc Micronesia. 4. 20.5 14. 28.8 8... 4...8 3.3 5..4 6.5 3. 0.1 5.9 .2 2. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB..2 8..0 .4 5.8 9.9 4.5 7. 4.9 .4 . 163.2 9. 18.4 6.6 4.8 2..2 66.6 2.2 .1 23.3 9.. … 2.0 –6. .0 4.0 3.1 9.9 23.9 1. .7 .1 7.9 1. –2.9 10.5 16.7 –0.0 .9 12.. 6.2 11.4 8.3 25.2 7....2 4.9 4.2 2.7 .3 0. of Hong Kong.. 3..4 1.3 6.0 2002 .7 3..6 0...5 1.6 .8 –5.5 19. 10.. 0.8 10. .8 2.9 3. 66 cities.. 4.9 11.8 2009 –15..1 ..1 2004 . 45 cities..9 8.6 0.8 2005 .4 1.4 29.7 ..4 ..3 .4 … –1.1 3.9 –0.4 .. 1.9 0.7 2.1 24. –0.6 –0..3 3.9 –1...3 1.6 6.1 17.0 2.. 2.6 0...5 .2 6.0 9.1 4.. 0. .7 . 9.7 19.5 2.6 1.4 –1.. .2 .5 .6 6..9 9.5 6.7 –0.3 0.2 7..3 8.9 2.0 9. data refer to CPI for 27 cities.8 6.3 2..0 11..4 1995 .9 0.7 4. 8.5 7.9 5.8 10..9 16.4 .6 ..0 … . 2.. –0.2 8.2 6.3 .5 2.2 –2.7 5..1 11.5 . States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islandsc Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvaluf Vanuatuc Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand a b c d e f 1990 .4 –1.1 1..5 5. –0. .5 .2 .7 0...8 40.. . 5.. 10..0 2.3 2.2 –11.5 0..4 3.6 0. 3.. but it is not classified as a developing member.0 –0. .4 … 5...4 ...3 9.4 2.6 –2.0 .1 … 0.9 5.1 2003 .....7 1..3 4. 8.7 3.1 17. . .0 9. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .6 –2. 4.2 10.9 0..8 9.8 1.8 9. data refer to the whole country.4 4.3 9.9 10.0 2..5 .6 0. Rep.1 9.3 0.....

..8 0.7 6..... .7 ..4 25...7 .6 . ....8 7...... . 1..0 1. . ... .4 2006 .. .. 2.. ... . . .8 .4 . . .2 . ...2 –2.4 1..6 5... ..7 18..7 7. … … .. ..4 . but it is not classified as a developing member. ...7 10. 7....2 23.China South Asia Bangladesh a Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. –7. .4 16. 6. 4. .... 11. .. 13.. .... ...1 9. .5 –0. .. .4 9.. .. 3. . 3.6 2... . . .8 .. ..1 10...8 3... .. .... .. 7.2 ..7 0. .......5 ..8 16.. CEIC data. . ..3 2000 ..1 ...8 ... .. . ..6 8... ..0 4.7 12.. ...8 26...2 42.9 2.4 .1 –2.. ... 8.2 2004 ... ..1 … . 10..1 ..... . .3 .2 –1.6 2007 ....6 9.. ... 8. –4... ...8 3.. . .3 2.3 2. –5...1 0.4 ....4 ..... 5.7 . 5...8 –1.8 . ...5 ..5 . .7 ..1 .2 4...0 .8 –0... 3. .6 4.9 –7....7 ..7 .... . . . . 5...0 7.... . ...1 ..3 6..2 6.3 a For agricultural and industrial products.. . .4 .0 3...1 12.... Rep. .3 ..3 5. . . .2 0.8 0. FINANCE....... .0 1.... 10..9 10. 8.6 3......5 5. .3 Growth Rates of Wholesale/Producer Price Index (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. .7 2. .0 2.2 .6 . b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. 6.4 .....1 –19.. 13.9 2. 25.5 11.....4 . .. China Korea.5 ...9 7. ... . ..... ..3 –1.. –8. 5..... .1 1. 2. . .4 .. –0.4 11. . ..6 27. 3.6 8..9 11.4 –5. . 5. . ....3 –1..5 ...5 . 2.....8 4...... 12. . . 2.7 .. 1.6 8. 6. ..3 6.. 8.....9 . Fed..... . . .... 10.. .. ..... .. 0. .6 .. 24.. 275.. 8.4 –1.. ... 6. –1.0 1... 4.. ..1 .0 3...1 24.8 . Rep....0 0. ...5 .. ..0 18..6 3.6 ... .3 –0.2 6. ... 5.6 .2 .0 . . .4 21.1 .3 1.3 9.6 17. . . . 13.. . 15...1 2.4 5. AND PRICES 193 REGIONAL TABLES Prices Table 3...0 24. ...6 –0.. 0.. .. 1.2 2....7 ...9 4..8 21. .2 . ..8 18....8 –4....9 2005 .. . .. Sources: Country sources..2 . .. . 29.. 8. ... .....4 . 12. 0..0 –2...0 3. 14..6 12...2 4.... ... .2 –13.... 3. 5. ..2 ......4 20. 6.. ...5 9.7 . 12. 3.7 –0.1 . 48.. 60...8 ...4 23...2 25.. .4 5.... 5. 10.7 –0. –0.8 36... ....5 –2...4 –5.. ..8 7.... 7....1 . 7. ..2 22.. ..2 ....6 2010 ..9 2002 .8 ...6 8... ... . . ..2 ... –0. 5..5 6. . ...0 2.. 1.9 ... . Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ..1 .... 5.. 11... ... 7..1 . 0...7 9.. . .9 –3..3 4. 0.9 2.. 0.1 5... .. ...6 6....5 ..9 2. of Mongolia Taipei.. .2 .5 –5. . 22.......3 . . –0. .1 3...7 … ...... ....9 12... .4 . 0....... 7.9 6.... 22......5 –22.8 6.... 4...... .. … ..... . 3..0 12.. ... . of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia..... 8.. . … … .5 .5 ... 11..4 4. 25...5 .9 . 5......... .. 7.. ..4 ...3 11... 0.9 21... ....9 3..0 1....2 –3.6 1995 .3 5.....6 .0 2.9 4.. .7 .. 8.6 . . .. 5.. . 4... People’s Rep...8 ... .....5 .9 5. . .6 .. ...4 11.... .9 .4 .2 .0 4.3 10. 9.2 –2....6 28. .......2 . … ... ...4 15...... 7. .9 2. 6. . ... .. ..1 0... .. ...4 ..2 .3 4.. 5.. 4.9 7.. ...2 .0 32...9 16.MONEY.... 21. 7. 0..7 .... . 29. . ... . 8..0 ....8 10..2 2001 ... ..1 3.5 . . . 4..7 2.....8 1...1 0.9 ..6 2009 ....0 –3..3 . 7.7 38. ...0 3.5 12...3 0.9 16.0 .4 9.... 139.7 11.7 4. . . .. . ...... States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 . ....9 10... ..0 1.2 2. 4........9 .8 39.. ..9 –0... 3..6 –0.... .. ..4 ..3 2003 ..3 1. .... 29.. 0....3 3. 7. ... 3.3 .2 ..... 1...3 .. 42.... .6 2008 .7 ...2 .. . . ..1 1.3 . ....3 16.7 8.. ....4 . 4. ... ... 9. 7.7 ..1 6.... . .5 .6 15..... 4.. 4.. . of Hong Kong.... 3..6 .. .1 2.0 ...

5 13.9 4. 545.9 4..0 1..6 14.4 7.8 4.3 1.6 7.3 6..1 3.1 0.0 –1.2 –1.1 3.4 0.8 5.5 4.0 9.9 3.7 7.0 9...0 3.7 5.9 20.4 4.6 2.3 10.2 11.4 6.8 7.1 7.1 4.7 15.0 11.8 .5 5.3 4. 161. .5 3.5 11.2 –1.8 8.7 3.4 18.3 4.8 16.8 5.7 20.4 3.0 5.6 16.7 4.1 26.3 20.2 8. 3.3 6.0 .7 7.7 6.8 3.1 4.5 7.0 2.1 7. 0.4 8.7 2.7 7.9 2.5 5.2 5.0 0.5 5.9 5.6 3..5 13.8 8.9 4.4 6. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 7.8 –0.0 5.1 8..4 2.1 1.2 16.5 6.1 3.9 17..2 2.0 5. 2.6 5.3 18.3 9. of Hong Kong. 8.2 1.5 .7 –8.1 6.8 –0.9 2.0 3.8 42.1 6.0 20.6 2.5 46. 2.5 4.7 3.1 10.1 7.9 8.6 19.7 9.7 33.5 2.8 4.7 3.7 4.0 4.. 7.5 2009 1.7 16.1 3.1 5..9 –0.7 6.6 –6.7 –2..9 .2 2005 8. 5.4 1.5 2.9 6.3 3.1 3.0 1.5 6.2 4.8 6.0 … .3 3.0 42.5 –2.1 5.5 3. 0.2 –2.2 5..5 45.4 12.. but it is not classified as a developing member.8 3.1 –1.9 0.2 47.0 –3.4 –1.9 3..0 4..3 3.4 3.9 –8..0 12.3 7.4 1.9 21.3 5.7 14.7 4.4 0.1 7.5 2004 6..7 1.4 5..6 2.0 10.6 21.0 … 3. Rep.0 .4 2.6 5..0 –5..0 –6..7 2.7 –1..1 1.5 4.1 0.5 10..4 10..9 2.0 9.2 2007 6.6 14.8 5.2 3.0 22.2 44.4 .5 4.3 362.9 2.5 .1 3.8 6.7 .2 21.5 18.9 –0.1 4.3 3.5 3..6 –1.4 0.8 –1.194 Prices Table 3.4 13.6 37. .8 .3 13.9 7.0 1.7 22.1 –0.7 21.8 5.2 4.2 2.2 4.0 0.0 13. 5.1 5.6 2.3 1.9 5.8 4.. People’s Rep.6 4.5 2.3 3.3 12.1 2.7 4.2 0..7 12.1 6.7 1..4 27.6 24.3 8.5 8.7 17.0 7.5 4.6 17.7 6.3 4.5 18.5 3. 3.9 22.0 –0. .7 27.8 5..3 7.4 1.5 … .2 2.4 145.6 7.6 5.5 8. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.9 31.2 2003 3.3 0.2 6. b GDP estimates beginning 2002 exclude value added of activities of the United Nations.4 6.3 11.0 2000 .1 .4 11.5 1995 .2 7.1 –1.7 4.3 8.6 7.1 2.6 6..8 4.2 2.6 10... 10.2 0. 3.1 4.2 2.1 9.7 18.5 2..6 3.2 –0. –1.2 –0.1 8.5 .6 6.7 23.7 2002 .3 5.2 0.7 3.7 –4.0 –3..2 3.2 8.1 1.2 –2.4 3..0 4.6 10.4 2.4 1.4 16. Fed.4 2.1 .8 5.8 7.0 –0...1 6.1 14..4 2.1 –1.2 5.9 7.2 3.8 1.8 1.6 .7 –22..2 0.0 4..2 71.8 1..4 ..5 … .4 5.9 11.6 6.8 2.3 –2.8 0.1 27.2 3.6 21.4 –1. 2.8 –0.1 –3.2 9. 10.1 2001 .6 7..4 11.1 11.2 28.3 –0.1 5.6 2.9 –0.9 4.7 29.8 27. … 5.6 4.0 .8 0.4 8. Rep.3 14.3 2006 8. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Lesteb Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 .9 –3..6 –1. .1 3.8 8. 4.8 9. 4.0 6.9 3.9 8..9 21...4 ..4 8.0 3.7 11.1 11.5 0.5 13.0 3.9 –0.8 –0.9 2.8 17..5 9.6 –0.4 10. .9 11.2 –0.2 1.5 1.6 1..3 8.1 –2.0 31.9 9.5 0.0 4.9 3.5 5.8 28.7 2.1 22.9 7.1 7.5 6.7 –1..4 3.7 4.4 4.9 3.2 6. Sources: Country sources.5 –1.1 –4.3 706.7 3.4 12.9 18.3 8.3 12.8 15.0 17.3 5.5 8.4 3.. 0..4 Growth Rates of GDP Deflator (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.4 5..6 6.2 5.5 10..3 5. .8 3.0 8.1 2.5 17.2 2. 6.8 4.8 4.9 1.7 3. .3 13.7 33..1 8. 0.2 2..7 5.4 10.6 3.0 1..1 6.4 –2.0 16.6 1.4 –0. –0.6 –0.8 5.. 2.4 6.3 7.7 3.5 11.0 27.0 9.2 1.9 … .6 3.4 1.3 –2..4 7..5 3..9 1.3 –0.1 5.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.. China Korea. CEIC data.2 3.0 13.7 9.2 –0.6 1.9 1.3 5...2 5.1 6.2 0.0 2010 –0.9 1.5 23.8 4.4 9..3 7.8 9.4 . .6 –3.8 2.0 3.5 3.0 –1.1 2.8 2.4 15...4 4.7 13.2 2.. 6.6 19.1 1.3 1.0 .2 7.1 14.9 0.5 14.9 4.3 4.1 7.9 4.9 23.7 9.5 1.9 22.0 4.2 4.9 6.0 5.5 17.6 11.6 9. 8.7 7.9 7.6 10.5 1.0 8.8 18.6 –18.6 –2.0 .7 .8 2.5 0.2 16.6 2.9 8.9 2008 19.0 –6.9 9...4 3.7 2.1 41.4 27.1 7.7 11. 3.9 11..8 2.0 4. . of Mongolia Taipei.9 –96.8 4.5 3..7 .1 5.. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.1 –1.7 21.4 0.1 11.7 –2.3 –1..4 2.2 1.5 3.5 8.9 –1..0 6.2 4.5 1.3 3.0 3.8 –2..6 3.1 0. 7.6 3..5 21.

7 11.6 17.3 46.4 … 7.5 3.3 6. of Mongolia Taipei.3 0.3 24.8 40.2 19.9 15.9 … 18.3 22.0 … … … 7.4 7.8 2.1 12.6 16.8 5.3 10.6 6. China Korea.6 12..7 32.4 24..1 33.4 14.7 44.6 32.1 … –1.3 … … … … … 4.1 43.7 43. … … … 9.5 2003 31.1 16.5 21.7 77.4 –3.6 4.3 26.6 8.1 … 11..8 7.4 16.9 14.2 6..4 18.1 19.0 16.4 16.2 4. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.3 1.2 13..8 71.9 … 0.6 18.5 26.1 46..9 10.0 –5.1 … … … 19.0 20.6 … 5.3 28.3 9.9 44.2 44.0 10.9 … .7 78. Fed.9 5.1 … –6. 38.8 14.2 9.6 86.6 3.2 33.1 –5.9 3.3 38.5 34.5 18..6 19.9 25.8 34.5 19.8 13.1 4.2 240.3 –2.2 0.1 19.6 8.4 10.8 7.2 45. 34.9 15..7 56.8 9.2 4.5 29.2 9. but it is not classified as a developing member.8 39.9 … … … 38.6 –0.2 19..0 –6.9 32. Source: Country sources.9 5.1 15..8 10.9 .6 17.6 14.MONEY.1 16.7 19.9 6.8 19.6 … … … … … 14.1 16.8 22.7 25.3 18.8 5.7 39. 64.3 6.1 15.8 10.1 –0.8 12.9 32.0 22.4 25.9 17.6 –16.0 16.5 10.4 46.5 32.9 14.5 7.6 7.8 2.3 24.9 40.0 21.1 21.1 0.9 19.4 27.0 34.8 8.2 14.8 9.1 42.2 22. 10.4 12.4 69.0 12.2 13.6 13.9 … 17.4 39..5 25.3 34.1 19.5 14.3 20..6 … 5. 109.1 8.4 45.5 5.2 5.7 2009 39.8 16.1 20.4 … –0.9 5.2 20. People’s Rep.8 16.8 24.8 –2.9 33.6 23.8 13.8 34.6 27.8 27.6 5..8 25.8 … 9.6 62. Rep.6 .9 17.6 16.4 12.4 1995 .4 13.3 … 13.3 20.3 12.1 6.3 … 11.4 … … … 5.4 15.3 34.1 7.1 13..0 33.2 9...8 12.1 29.9 14.2 9.3 7.3 a Refers to M3.0 3.0 10..6 14.3 11.8 13.9 –9.9 24.3 14.9 … … … 14.1 94.3 19.4 20.1 1.2 16.8 … 41.5 Growth Rates of Money Supply (M2) (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgiaa Kazakhstana Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistana Uzbekistan East Asia China.9 5.9 34.0 30.8 14.6 … 9.4 20. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .9 2004 38.1 7.4 –14.5 15.5 9.7 21.4 –1.0 6.6 22.3 22.1 28.1 16.6 1.0 4.3 19..0 6.3 7.3 32.4 … .7 15.5 13.6 47.5 7..1 12..4 14.5 3. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia..9 26.0 10.2 2008 35.4 … 11..6 –7.1 96.2 14.9 0.5 17.7 9.5 17.9 2006 55..9 9. 4.0 31..4 49.9 4.3 12.2 8.5 14.3 45.2 14.2 17.9 … … … –4.8 27..4 8.3 4.6 9.7 8.8 4. 7.0 9.1 15.4 12.9 12.3 17.5 2000 .3 11.9 9. 34.6 –8.1 13.2 6.2 39..2 9.0 2.5 45.8 … 2.1 16.9 38.5 17.3 –1.4 16.0 .9 10.8 15. 4.1 11.8 … 448.0 26.1 21.7 … .6 –0.2 22. … … … 10.0 .6 .4 27.9 24.8 39.9 –0.7 8.8 36.8 12.5 8.0 62.3 2.1 –0.7 27.8 15.5 7.7 16.9 17.6 27.0 6.8 29.9 13.1 6.4 –7.5 10.2 8.0 … 16.8 8.1 23.1 57.0 1.0 6.4 5.0 34.1 19.0 42..2 .4 19.5 .8 42.5 279.2 21.2 15.7 54.8 18.8 6.0 49.5 25.2 … … … 27.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan Indiaa Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysiaa Myanmar Philippinesc Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.4 26. 22.1 51.4 13.9 9.4 6.8 16.8 40..1 9. … 34.4 2002 .6 6. 15.2 10.1 7.3 8.8 5.2 25.0 47.8 11.8 10.8 16.3 17.9 30.6 8.8 19.0 17.9 35.2 7.1 4.6 –2.1 … 18.7 36.3 0.7 17.8 6.7 13.7 11.7 0.7 18.0 … 11.9 26.6 8.4 14.5 5.2 8.7 7.6 15. AND PRICES 195 REGIONAL TABLES Money and Finance Table 3.1 12.0 36.4 0.1 … 6.9 16.1 18.8 11.0 .8 6.4 … 5.4 17.6 6.1 12.3 –12.3 12.6 54.7 67.3 11.0 78. Rep.7 21.7 8.6 11.7 20.5 17.7 2007 31.7 –5.8 29.4 28.3 1.4 … … … 29..4 29.9 21.5 14.3 … 5.4 31.3 2.5 2001 .3 21.8 16.7 … … … 9.3 12.3 25.6 5.4 25.3 8.9 41.3 8.9 25.9 … 4.2 21.3 32.4 16.0 2010 22.1 2.4 3.1 18. c Data for 2001 is not comparable with those of the other years since it was calculated using the pre-2001 monetary survey concept.6 10.1 8.0 18.8 8.1 16.4 … 8.0 13.4 7.3 8.0 14.8 56.2 4.2 5.0 15.8 –2.7 53.6 37.3 19.3 2005 44.1 9.6 10.1 –9..7 6.0 66.3 47.6 13.8 14.8 –3.0 8.4 … 7.9 4.0 … 1.6 5.6 4. of Hong Kong.9 86.1 21.2 … … … 11.1 31.6 19. FINANCE. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea a Samoa Solomon Islandsa Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australiaa Japan New Zealanda 1990 40.8 15.3 10.2 16.8 … –1.4 19.1 16.5 155.0 151.5 19.4 12.9 14.4 14.1 27.8 3.6 22.5 7.9 33. 10.9 18.6 4.

7 20.5 … 67.1 32..3 14. ..9 23.4 87.5 38.0 48. … … … 50.9 60.8 29.5 178..0 24.5 28.5 19.6 46.9 … … … … … 35.4 111.6 10.3 111. 47. estimates include the value-added activities of United Nations activities.0 38.9 44..4 17.5 60.3 8. 46.8 24.8 … 26.2 115.8 124.5 36.1 … 68.1 41.9 322.6 38.7 275.4 15.7 … … … 46.7 33.4 185.4 109.8 25.1 48.6 25..5 81.3 … 87.5 … 104.0 29.3 39.8 38..1 149.6 … … … 29. 95.2 69.2 31.0 53.1 43.4 15.3 44.3 209.1 98. c GDP estimates refer to non-oil GDP Before 2002.1 47.4 30.2 .9 131.8 … … … … … 40.2 117.8 38.0 47.4 28. Rep.1 13.3 30. Fed.2 17..1 160. People’s Rep.2 9.5 19.9 15.0 10.3 21.9 7.5 115.4 33.1 210..8 15.4 18.9 142.4 7..0 407.3 373.3 14.7 99.9 60.7 11.2 133..7 228.6 153.4 … 92.4 201.5 42.8 105.1 69.3 2004 14.5 36.6 132.4 41.7 43.0 43.3 89.8 82.0 53.4 121.9 52.1 17.7 202.6 48.4 … .2 … 78.1 18.3 25..7 39.0 13.8 43.3 29.2 50.4 … 64.1 42.0 17.6 109.7 38.1 49.7 14.3 41.8 73.7 37.1 40.6 28.2 17.4 87.2 132.3 44.5 46.8 55.8 42.6 82.9 114.2 116.6 20.6 24.1 39.2 22.9 … … … 33.2 15.2 30. 19.1 38.3 38.4 .0 28.7 … 94.7 228.9 117.9 51.7 71.4 93.4 … .6 79.2 74.8 45.8 342.7 6.4 47.2 96.7 48.5 41.2 32.2 20. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.5 18.8 79..0 71.5 32.0 15.2 54.4 14.7 36.6 65.9 42.9 80.2 134.1 51..8 34.7 61.6 14. but it is not classified as a developing member.8 138.196 Money and Finance Table 3.0 130.7 13.4 19.6 139.8 125.1 72.7 22.1 42.5 57.4 … 68.8 129.4 12. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .3 11.1 12.7 … 95.6 10.4 19.5 61.1 43. China Korea.9 50. 45.0 11.0 76.3 162.8 2000 .8 37.0 … .0 25.6 … 91.7 112.4 41..4 39.1 129.2 207.8 17.3 74.8 17.6 8.7 … 95.9 52.2 141. 45.3 208.7 45.5 109.1 42.2 98.6 32.5 48.8 117.6 58.0 2001 .0 25.2 48.2 21.4 273.1 42.6 28.8 38.6 100.6 90..7 15.1 50.4 126.4 60.0 30.7 … 71.4 131.3 151.6 43.2 39.5 70.0 19.8 132.2 108.0 10.0 52.2 159.. 14.5 1995 .2 38.7 .5 21.6 70. 26.2 34.6 .4 48.0 39.9 37.1 95.3 18.9 81.1 45.6 20.0 16.0 41.2 39.5 120.6 37.9 97.7 46.3 12.3 6.8 20.7 12.9 … 90..0 … 61.6 56.5 122.8 40.4 54.4 34.2 21.6 42.7 33.8 40.6 38.4 47.8 … 58.1 … .0 147.0 22.1 63.0 84.1 43.8 11.5 39.9 .8 … 87.5 .6 220.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India a Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysiaa Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.6 Money Supply (M2) (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgiaa Kazakhstana Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistana Uzbekistan East Asia China..7 18.1 113.5 31.8 23.8 19.4 88.1 97.5 228.9 34.3 37.9 308.0 42.0 2002 11.4 200.2 16.6 13.0 29.. of Hong Kong.2 55..0 49. 7.3 44.2 65.7 … … … 53.7 16.8 … … … 47.1 102.6 140.3 41.6 204.9 43.2 9. Rep.9 47.4 … 70.7 85.7 236.4 50.4 64.7 … 28.1 41..0 151.6 27.8 27.8 62.8 111.8 66.1 46..7 49.4 144.8 48.7 18.3 39.3 38.1 52.2 4.7 118.7 277..1 116.1 21.4 16.2 158.5 7.4 128.6 13..7 16.9 13.7 33.3 89.2 19.4 44.9 34.6 93.1 23.7 18. Source: Country sources.3 39.4 182.8 53..2 56.3 … 111.9 30.7 128.7 34.7 39.1 39.7 51.1 43.1 48.3 12.5 … a Refers to M3.4 89.7 41.3 106.6 82.3 25.5 50.4 29.5 70.6 … 70.8 85.9 91.9 2007 23.4 18.1 20.2 … … … 31.0 2008 31.9 202.2 135.9 … 91.1 50.4 202.0 70.4 111.1 53.5 39.4 42.3 67. … 81.5 8.8 116.0 2010 .2 41.2 45.0 117.5 … 25.7 23.4 38.0 208.1 316.7 43.2 70.8 34.2 2005 17.7 39.8 … 95.2 88.0 … … … 25.8 140.3 7.8 10.7 44.9 2003 12.3 40.3 65.6 41. … … … 29.8 45.8 28.1 15.1 41.1 74.1 102.3 31.3 50.7 33.0 34.5 119.3 42.9 208.2 117.0 37.1 17.3 94.1 52.3 18.0 37. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.4 30.9 204.7 77..3 40.5 139.7 115.9 70.6 126.7 53.0 41.4 12. 13.3 73.6 87.7 105.1 12.6 39.0 194.4 18.9 11.8 22.8 378.5 43.4 408.5 176.1 19.6 16.1 31.5 … … … 30.5 38.1 … … … 41.6 51..4 44.7 42.0 85.0 28.6 20.7 49.3 112.2 2006 22. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea a Samoa Solomon Islandsa Timor-Lestec Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australiaa Japan New Zealanda 1990 216. of Mongolia Taipei.7 19.6 39.0 27..6 … … … 32.7 116. 48.7 198.1 58.5 23.3 2009 37.0 60.9 48.3 37.0 27.2 10.5 … 73.

92 … 0.00 3.76 2. 0.20 0.50 5.90 … … 6. 2008 … … … … … … 4.21 3..25 3.50 2.00 … … … … … … … 1.00 12.20 0.25 5.18 3.43 … 10.00 ..86 … 4.50 3.80 6.11 4....40 … … … … … … … 2.68 … … … … … … … 1.13 … … .71 5.36 5.50 5.90 … 1.47 … 1.50 0.10 0..25 … … .53 4.00 5.90 3.75 3.00 … … 4.60 0.01 8.60 5.20 4.28 … … 0.44 … 2.11 2.23 2. 2009 … … … … … … 5. 3.90 1.50 2.00 1.14 … 1.55 4.50 3.22 … … 7.00 9. 7.46 5. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.14 4..22 … … 5..06 .74 3.. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … … … … … 6.20 3. 1.05 0...02 3.40 1. People’s Rep.00 3.31 … 0.75 7.98 . … … … … … … … 4.44 1.80 0.72 5. 2004 … … … … … … 0. Rep.77 1.50 2. 2.50 4.25 5. 2000 … … … … … … 5. 6..50 2.75 2..55 5.40 3.75 3. 0.65 3.25 0.75 3.75 3.20 5.20 3..87 … 2.19 4.50 2.50 4.10 0.00 4.58 … 4.48 … 1. Rep.. 2006 … … … … … … 1.25 8.00 2.48 … 3..20 0. Sources: Country sources.24 6.75 … 0. 2010 … … … … … … 5.00 5.00 .83 11.08 7.70 … 8.. … … 1995 … … … … … … 7.14 5...79 3.33 … 1. 0.40 0.10 4.7 Interest Rate on Savings Deposits (percent per annum.11 5.26 0.10 5.09 .40 .. FINANCE.25 9.67 … … 0.92 2.50 2..15 … … .25 … … 3..36 … … 0.00 0. 1.83 … … 0.30 … … . … … 0.00 4.20 … … 6.05 3. … … 0..36 0.15 6.45 0.50 5.50 3.25 3.75 … 0.25 5.50 3.01 .60 5..22 0.99 4. Fed..88 3.00 .24 5.00 4..18 … … 0.21 .13 4. 0.41 8.00 5..00 14.03 4.50 7.00 … … 3.50 5..91 .04 5.15 0.50 0.00 0.86 … 2.22 0..24 4.12 … 4.01 3..94 3.66 0.75 3..22 … … 0.75 3.20 3.50 4.00 1.55 5.13 2.50 2.58 .50 0.05 .75 … 0.50 5.00 1.50 … 0.13 0.21 .25 3. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ..30 3..97 3.80 0..08 4.74 0.00 5. AND PRICES 197 REGIONAL TABLES Money and Finance Table 3.53 … … 4.99 3.60 0.24 0.10 7.28 … 7..32 … 1. but it is not classified as a developing member.84 … … 3.00 4.30 1.83 4.72 0.01 . 1.38 5.80 0.71 3.75 … 0.31 … 0. 0.67 2.38 2.75 3.72 2.75 0.63 4.60 0.40 6.20 0.55 4.50 5. 2001 … … … … … … 4.58 5.25 2. 2002 … … … … … … 3.06 … … … … … … … 0.20 0.04 .40 … … … … … … … 1.60 0.00 3.00 3.50 2..23 0..87 2..40 … 2.83 … 0.94 … … … 2.00 3. … … 3.13 2.00 … 0.20 3. of Mongolia Taipei..90 . 2003 … … … … … … 1.77 5.72 0. of Hong Kong.40 0...50 5.41 … 3.90 3.00 4. 2007 … … … … … … 2...88 5.00 2.20 0.00 5. CEIC data.38 6..25 3.80 2.20 … … … … … … … 3..10 0.00 . of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.57 7.20 4.75 1.85 … … … … … … … 2.15 3.88 2...75 2.00 ..MONEY..99 2.50 5. 2.00 … … 15.50 3.28 2..50 5.25 … … 5.20 … … … … … … … 3..90 5.24 4.00 .24 4.75 1.00 2.40 … … … … … … … 5. period averages) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.72 … 7.40 … … … … … … … 2.13 … … .13 8.81 6.02 .50 2..06 .88 3..50 7.19 5.62 … … 0.96 … 2..00 8. 2005 … … … … … … 1.00 .02 3.00 … … … … … … … 1.00 4.54 5.88 3.25 9.00 … … 3.36 8.15 4..48 3.00 2.00 … … … … … … … 1.75 … 1..13 4.00 … 3.01 3.00 27.75 5.72 0.63 … … 0.40 .50 3.36 0.15 1..China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji..01 .24 … … .26 … … 0. China Korea.62 … 0...19 … 2.50 3.21 … … 5.

6.48 13.98 8.50 5.80 8. Refers to time deposits from 12 months to less than 2 years.70 … 8.25 5.00 1.05 5.75 8..55 0.65 10.37 … … … … … … … 2.29 9.60 1.33 15.53 … 10.00 … 10.10 10.13 13. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.79 26.50 9.04 6.25 … … 4. Rep.58 2003 … 7.01 10.00 5.01 20.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutane India Maldivesb Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamf Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippinesg Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.83 8.00 .00 8.70 6. For time deposits of over 12 months.10 4.92 … … 7.80 6.88 … 2.95 13. … … 2.00 … 11.30 5.70 4.36 3.29 2. 6.05 8.70 1.62 6.00 .76 8.74 4.80 10..83 10.10 6.00 4.36 2008 … 9..19 … 10.28 6.60 2002 … 11. data refer to interest rates of commercial banks in national currency for 6–12 months..45 … 11.88 6.88 6.50 8.00 .00 5.30 6.53 0. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .20 6. 7.. Figures are derived simple averages of monthly rates for time deposits of 6 months to 1 year..50 10.30 6.91 4. 7.80 1.60 2.49 17.20 3.80 … 2.25 5. From 1996. China Korea. Beginning 1996.82 2006 … 5.80 4.35 0.70 5.69 7.40 … 8. figures refer to weighted averages.68 9.50 … … … … … … … 4.00 10.16 … … 2.50 6.98 4.54 … 9.40 10.49 2001 … 17.89 … 10..60 0.32 6.20 … … … … … … … 9.82 10.28 … 6.81 … … 2.85 7.70 … 3.13 7.08 … … 5.38 … … … 9.86 10.53 2. FINANCE.50 1995 … … .28 7.91 12.24 … 10.40 … … … … … … … 1.50 2.36 … … 2.28 6.40 2.30 … … 5.48 … 4.32 2.00 4.73 3.90 0.90 0.70 … 6.98 0.84 17.59 7.50 3.50 3.75 5. … … 10.59 19.75 0.02 4.86 3.00 .00 8.10 4.55 4.83 20.00 .25 4.95 10.51 12.50 7.50 … … 5.18 14.80 1.75 4.50 … 10.63 15.37 9.38 … … 5...62 12. … … … … … … … 10.50 … 3.43 8.40 … 9.97 9..53 8. … … 45. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tongah Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japani New Zealanda a b c d e f g h i 1990 … … … … … … 9..79 8.00 .90 … … 3.81 … … 3. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.10 0. Fed.63 9.10 1.07 5..00 0.80 … … … … … … … 5.40 7.80 2.20 1.17 … 4.25 2.50 6.50 12.45 1.10 … 10.8 Interest Rate on Time Deposits of 12 Months (percent per annum.10 4.29 7.28 2005 … 6...03 8.00 28.00 12.50 9.10 9.42 3.50 6.90 0.50 13.198 MONEY.07 0.00 … 9.63 11.87 14. Refers to rates charged on interest-bearing deposits with maturities of over 1 year.10 6.00 7.72 1.90 17.31 6.60 5. Sources: Country sources.25 15. … … 2.56 … … … … … … … 9.24 2010 … 8..17 8.38 … 1.63 Figures are derived simple averages of monthly rates for time deposits of 6 months.50 5. AND PRICES Money and Finance Table 3.96 . 16.29 9.44 … 1.41 4. but it is not classified as a developing member.24 6.00 9.79 13.80 … … … … … … … 1.78 5.48 12.25 8.21 … 11.24 … … … … … … … 9. CEIC data.05 … 1.07 … 3.21 … 19. 8.30 … … 4.20 12.25 14.95 … … 5.88 15. of Hong Kong. Rep.45 … … 3.58 8..63 4.33 4.25 1.81 6.84 … … … … … … … 8.91 6. 7.24 … … 1.97 … … 3.25 10.80 4.55 0.58 2.68 10.95 … 3.92 9.75 5..75 .31 9.00 5.18 0.50 8.83 10.98 6.40 … … … … … … … 1.55 11.16 8.00 0.88 4.63 7.00 0.26 4.50 6.43 … 3.22 2004 … 5.00 7.00 … … 18.20 … … … … … 14.50 16.00 … … … … … … … 8.40 0.32 8..86 10.00 7..63 … 3.63 6.50 8.26 5.84 … … 2.50 … 2.32 4.70 1.00 6.25 0.13 4.17 13.35 … … 5.72 12..00 1.26 3.60 .30 8. People’s Rep.87 13.88 6.96 0.50 9.14 6.57 8.50 7.10 1.40 … … 7.50 3.50 6.39 … 3.88 13.46 … … … … … … … 0.93 .33 0.06 2. .40 11.60 7.72 8. 7.33 6.93 … … 4...29 8.07 8.00 16.38 8.55 … 2.50 5. It is computed as the arithmetic average of the monthly figures.81 … 1.16 7.70 6.29 12.60 … 6.83 2.55 6.12 4.80 11.35 0.70 … 1.01 0.00 1.86 6.93 6.97 … … 4.00 0.50 6.17 … … 5.20 10.50 8.73 … 5.78 … … 2.94 9.25 17.00 6.81 2009 … 9.51 18.00 9.38 … 10.38 … 1.23 2007 … 7.00 1.28 … 4.13 8.20 2.70 18.47 8.50 2.10 56.94 13.00 8.50 0..53 … 7.70 1..24 … 3.38 7.50 . period averages) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armeniaa Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstanb Kyrgyz Republicc Pakistan Tajikistand Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.00 7.55 0.40 10.38 … 1.70 … 8..87 13.05 0.87 … 1.96 … 9.00 2000 … 21.20 15.20 3...84 … … 2.50 .00 6.77 8.30 3.17 … … 6.50 8.. For fixed deposits of 1 year to less than 3 years.03 6.80 5. of Mongolia Taipei.00 1.52 9.50 4.

40 … 7.90 … 25.18 … 9.68 6. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.49 16.39 5.42 … 8.96 10.38 … … 13. AND PRICES 199 REGIONAL TABLES Money and Finance Table 3.98 30.00 8.35 … … 15.02 13.77 9.71 15.86 … … … … … 15.35 6.91 1.21 … 14.41 1.50 6.85 … … 15.05 11.00 15.78 … … 16.03 … 6.38 5.55 36.12 7.08 17.17 5.01 13.47 16.00 14.00 7.00 6.78 … 7.65 11.04 2007 18.06 … 8.34 18.00 15.03 11.05 26.47 11.55 26.39 2010 15.26 11.94 30. China Korea.52 … 23.68 13.83 15.20 1.52 14.00 10.58 4.53 15.46 32.71 27.97 … … 14. People’s Rep.67 5.95 15.51 20.14 … 7.25 11.81 14.27 … 20.50 16.12 15.65 7.23 … 29.62 … … 10.62 14.00 … 10.24 … 19.50 16.85 5. Rep. of Hong Kong.31 5.00 7.00 8.78 12.13 10.50 15.00 10.61 8. Sources: International Financial Statistics CD-ROM (IMF 2011).31 5.35 11.67 5.00 8. but it is not classified as a developing member.76 20.00 9.00 10.34 5.28 14.75 13.01 … … 14.66 11.67 19.47 … 5.58 5.63 … 26.03 … … 9.14 … 16.47 3.00 8.21 16.03 21.03 25.75 5.19 13.27 2.53 17.9 Lending Interest Rate (percent per annum.60 … 12.41 1.69 19.09 12.82 2004 … 18.69 5.48 … 7.00 18.76 5.42 13.52 … 18.67 8.25 … 37.55 … 8.12 29.20 … … 5.06 … … 15.05 … … 5.83 5.72 … 7.59 … 7.66 11.43 11.38 … 13.20 … 24.16 1.07 … 7.29 15.00 … … 10.97 … 8.38 8.38 … … 11.38 5.85 9.85 1.00 11.15 … … … 111.88 11.25 11.45 14.00 8.12 7.31 16.83 … 8.23 14.16 8.86 18.49 … … 15.57 19. for Taipei.32 … 22.90 8.00 8.03 … 22.43 16.85 14.00 8.00 5.04 15.94 9.32 … … 5.04 … 18.72 10.24 31.50 18.05 7.00 9.00 … 13.31 5.38 15.21 … 31.41 … 25.00 15.95 7.19 13.12 15.33 14.55 11.83 7.50 … 13.00 15.00 24.50 16.00 … … 13.08 15.73 2008 14.14 17.72 14.54 … 24.00 17.30 5.14 17.75 15.51 11.21 2009 15.34 … … 15.60 … 23.47 5.54 11.91 … … 5.59 30.33 6.13 7.55 … 11.66 14.31 5.17 … … 15. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 1995 2000 … 31.37 10.66 1.43 14.76 21.93 4.38 … … 9.92 16.00 12.17 … 10.00 10.59 … … 5.07 2.75 10.50 17.China: economy sources. Rep.94 13.05 15.82 8.05 … … 15.50 16.31 a Refers to base lending rates but figures before 2003 are prime lending rates.25 6.00 16.88 9.00 15.00 7.44 13.83 4.00 10.36 11.47 5.60 … … 15.97 9.37 … … 6.38 … … 10.70 … … 5.26 14.29 8.90 6.00 6.10 16.70 3. FINANCE.75 6.00 18.85 9.97 16.00 8.90 31.79 11.67 2.34 … 8.57 … … 5.00 6.47 … 10.34 … 5. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.33 … … 17.27 … 19.62 … 11.50 18.06 1.75 … 51.98 17.75 12.65 14.83 … 24.00 8.11 12.79 8.54 … 14.17 20.06 10.16 … 8.50 17. Fed.00 2002 … 21.00 9.00 … … 20.30 15.54 … 13.00 11.86 8.89 11.27 … … 5.56 14.37 31.86 28.18 5.81 8.00 8.77 35.00 7.14 … … 5.67 16.86 … 23.57 5.70 16.31 5.07 9.14 5.18 … 7.22 5.27 15.00 9.13 … … 10.China a South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam b Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.00 5.13 20.46 14.00 12.54 … … 7.08 13.83 10.12 16.25 9.78 5.67 15.40 5.00 6.50 9.41 17.45 10.00 13.50 10.25 … 5.13 … 16.81 … 14.40 15.46 16.16 5.52 7.70 18.00 5.42 … … 11.58 … 11.00 16.02 1.69 19.50 17.28 … … 13.85 5.20 20.57 3.26 2001 … 26.25 … … 11.89 5.47 9.72 13.31 13.28 1. period averages) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.55 21.33 7.17 12.46 … 5.00 … … 13.50 6.33 … … 16.35 7.34 … 9.05 19.08 17. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .36 14.50 … 5.42 2005 … 17.41 8.83 15.50 … 17.91 3.47 6.95 29.30 5.36 12.68 10.20 12.52 19.86 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 9.MONEY.87 … … 7.48 2006 17.46 32.00 14.60 24.91 12.81 5.29 13.50 14.25 9.38 7.66 32.13 15.75 … 23.92 13.37 13.63 15.08 9.91 5.50 … 14.23 18.75 5.50 16.25 10.92 17.84 2003 … 20.92 13.71 37.99 26.02 17.18 13.50 9.40 … … 15.60 10.00 … 134.50 6. of Mongolia Taipei.08 5.73 16.70 24.17 7.58 7.85 25.46 … … 18.33 14.05 12.50 16.38 … 7.50 8.00 12.08 5.33 … 21.31 7.33 17.75 5.57 11.65 21.72 31.

.038 … 3.. . .950 … 5.. 1. .813 1....320 … 3.. .. . 9..667 .070 3.. 5. .. 12. .350 4.000 10.988 0...263 5. … 7... 8.510 29. . . . .. .903 12. . Refers to rate on 182-day treasury bills. 7. 4..879 . Refers to weighted average auction rate for 6-month treasury bills... 24.. . 7..630 … 3.. .944 2.. ..899 0.. for India and Taipei. 4. . . 29. 4.... Refers to 90-day bank-accepted bills. 1..306 … 2.375 . .. .. . 5..793 0.865 10..543 Australiak Japan 5.... .000 . .... . ..960 5.....800 12...442 … ..........990 ..406 2.....713 .. .870 0..504 ..080 4.865 . Rep.752 8.733 … 6. 24.....989 .659 ..China: economy sources. ......998 6.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan Indiae Maldivesf Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamg Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDRh Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nami The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji..... .562 2002 . 6.912 7......792 ..725 2. Refers to average monthly yield on 360-day treasury bills sold at auction..038 . 8. .533 ...820 3..937 2. .280 4. 5. .479 4.083 . 3...921 5..601 5..484 ... … 6......930 14. ..858 3..662 … 5. ... People’s Rep.861 . .... 12. 2... States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea j Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu 1990 . . .450 .......061 ..999 ..050 ..121 2.. . Rep..710 ...663 .003 5. 20. 3... 22. 4.530 . Fed.003 5.016 .380 2. 4.. 3..127 ... 6.486 ...500 3....934 ........ ..285 … … .000 4. .. . 21.163 11..193 . 4.354 5..290 2.290 4.... .481 3. . .... ....... .000 .. ..130 2. ... 4.165 0. 3.. … 6..... 7..337 3.350 12.914 .. 6.... .730 2.. ... .357 7.996 .... ..078 .336 1.. . 3. .. . Sources: International Financial Statistics CD-ROM (IMF 2011)....660 … 9. .. .200 9.409 ...... 23..... 12. 6......154 6. ..280 2.880 … 5. ...913 2.. ..494 0. ..918 ...401 7.... 4.396 . … 2.847 . . 11.010 4..050 5. . .. ...853 . 12....178 0.901 8. . 37. . . .. ..005 5. . 11..805 .519 .639 … 7...849 2005 .456 5.. Refers to rate on 28-day treasury bills.396 . .. .042 New Zealand 13. 4...027 .....403 16. . 5..478 … 7...... .633 . . . .. 3.. 3..230 6... for Australia...550 14.980 7.788 .. ..033 0.. 2....... 9..561 ..686 . 16. 6..303 5.... 4.449 .417 . .808 . . 6..860 7.824 2000 ..637 . ......... . .775 Developed Member Economies 14. . 3.... 4... 3.... ...591 16.307 5.. AND PRICES Money and Finance Table 3.. 5. 3.. . 5.150 . 18. 14.000 13....280 19.169 ...590 16.. 1. ...100 5....663 .....910 3.... ..153 ...720 18...522 2003 ..805 … 3.400 7... ..570 5. ....692 .. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.040 4.077 .. .119 43... 1995 .476 6.000 4. 17...078 10.116 .. .680 … 2. 11..280 4. ....588 12...614 2.159 3.507 .....553 7.500 . 4.688 10... . . 3. 20. 5. ... .. ..512 1......208 1.829 9.280 4.644 0. ... 5.515 0.. . ....568 .434 0.... 18. ....896 0. .963 1.... ... .690 5.478 0.. Refers to 91-day certificates of deposit.998 44.070 2. . Refers to 3-month treasury bonds trading rate.. .. ...489 .354 3. .078 … ..641 0. 4. 9.672 … 2.672 3.. 5.640 … 1. .980 34. .240 8.. 6. ..515 … 3.761 1....010 ... .656 4.....419 5.130 ..... 7.554 7.... . FINANCE. China Korea...... . 7.163 0. Figures are for fiscal year ending March. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.100 6..271 4.... … ... .862 . 18..958 4. 18. ..227 ...... ..910 … 2. 2.. 6... . . . … … … … … … . 4..928 .. .. .. 3.. 6. 20.. .367 .586 0..161 6. ..050 7. . Refers to weighted average yield on 6-month treasury securities. ...750 14. 4.584 . .054 … 4. . ..... of d Mongolia Taipei..984 ....780 a b c d e f g h i j k Refers to 3-month treasury bills unless otherwise indicated..259 8. . 11.902 … … .200 10..810 … … 48. 7.938 . and the Republic of Korea: OECD Statistics Online (OECD 2011)...536 3.000 17.980 10...200 MONEY....403 . 2.484 .360 3....450 ..320 0..396 .. .628 … 1.335 1..089 10..827 .130 2.. .. . 2. 1.....10 Yield on Short-Term Treasury Bills a (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistanb Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. 1.714 . the People’s Republic of China.. 5.. 6.. .. 0. but it is not classified as a developing member... Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ...649 13. 6.788 10.419 7..300 14....928 5..650 3... 6.. 4..318 … .189 12.668 0........ 8.. . .547 .....374 8.114 … … .. .. 2. 10.228 .. ...586 1.....827 2010 … 10.... ..747 0.647 1.....681 0.213 2004 ... . 2... .063 2.. ...390 ...152 1. .. . . 7.726 0.....734 1.380 .. 5.092 ...007 2009 . .524 2006 .... .521 1..690 7.003 6.068 . .. 1.. 7..706 .033 5. .471 .728 ..355 . 3. .296 ..673 6..874 2.566 12.....392 2001 .490 .850 8.. … 2...488 … 4..622 19. 3.053 . . ..540 . ...368 2....866 ..900 16.213 … 5.... 6.618 –0.181 .702 2.973 0.. of c Hong Kong. ... ... .434 ..393 3.. ....420 3..732 ... .300 ..590 32...548 2008 .. 1. ... ......047 2007 .253 .603 ..201 .

8 101.7 10.0 48.7 … … 24.9 49.2 38.6 21.0 34.1 32. of Mongolia Taipei.2 … 46.9 … … –43.0 … 42.6 104.5 … 55.7 31.5 83.4 94.4 29.5 93.9 75.4 46.0 136.3 142.0 36.7 … … 28.5 55.7 127.9 18.2 … 36.6 146.3 20.2 2006 –4.1 … 84.0 72. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … … … … … … 50.8 … 30.8 … 49.8 20.6 60.7 48.8 12.9 123.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.6 … 48.5 25.2 31.4 27.6 … 26.5 2001 … 9.2 63.2 14.4 –29.4 … … 132.7 5.4 124.9 … 5.2 32.4 –11.6 7.4 38.9 41.1 … … 38.5 … … … … … 35. International Financial Statistics CD-ROM (IMF 2011).4 153.4 30.7 … 31.6 –31.4 … … 91.4 69.0 14.2 58.1 … … –30.2 … … 29.7 10.7 … … –17.0 35.8 22.2 16.4 –1.9 23.3 18.3 57.2 109. People’s Rep.0 146.4 43.5 13.4 20.9 110.4 45.0 138. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .9 21.9 141.4 29.8 40.1 … … … … 71.4 11.7 29.0 31.6 94.3 79.8 56.4 17.4 10.1 35.6 10.2 … … 22.6 … 41.7 6.8 … 34.7 31.5 33.5 27.5 154.11 Domestic Credit Provided by Banking Sector (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.5 24.5 46.0 57.3 … 34.2 71. AND PRICES 201 REGIONAL TABLES Money and Finance Table 3.3 82.8 94.3 9.9 40.6 42.9 … 41.2 … 53.8 128.7 … 58.6 37.7 … 35.1 33.2 143.7 295.2 24.1 57.8 … 16.4 … … … 145.0 23.7 61.8 30.6 … … –24.9 34.6 23.7 79.1 29.4 6.7 39.9 32.0 38.1 127.4 101.2 … 54.3 51.0 42.6 198.6 … … 24.8 124.4 32.5 299.8 … 115.6 6.5 15.1 16.0 305.6 41.3 42. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.2 115.0 … … 46.3 141.4 … 50.4 … 49.3 113.8 37.1 17.5 8.5 61.1 … … 143.5 33.2 21.5 9.8 69.1 143.1 69.0 16.1 51.7 38.7 87.9 60.9 … 137.2 2010 … … … … … … … … … … 147.7 122.4 8.1 … 45.8 11. China Korea.1 23.1 13.5 … 38.3 35.7 9.9 81.8 45.3 43.4 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.9 … 120.7 0.0 … 30.6 287.6 5.1 9.6 68.3 152.5 8.2 … 58.4 12.2 136.5 119.6 39.4 8.2 62.4 118.6 130.6 54.6 45.9 14.1 303.6 9.6 –18.6 42.8 44.0 … … 151.6 6. Fed.7 … 51.4 53.8 6.7 100.7 60.0 22.8 … 37.4 … 33.0 … … 22.2 1995 … 9.7 50.4 35.5 9.2 37.6 10.8 113.5 … … 23.7 17.2 … 60.0 2005 … 8.9 2007 –1.5 … 41.4 35. of Hong Kong.5 2004 … 6.0 28.1 92.1 167.1 35.7 … 42.7 54.4 2003 … 5.1 12.6 320.2 … … 22.6 14.0 308.1 30.7 29.6 39. Sources: World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011).6 52.1 … 37.8 57.2 … 55.2 3.5 42.4 60.0 94.7 312.7 58.7 20.4 71.4 7.5 8.3 … 41.5 45.3 136.5 130.0 8.1 45.2 … 49.9 12.1 21.6 37.3 62.8 91.0 … 49.6 … … –25.1 146.7 51.4 44.6 139.7 74.0 11.8 43.2 13.1 13.4 –25.2 41.2 61. FINANCE.5 … … 127.1 32.1 34.5 2008 2.6 … 50.7 39.9 54.2 10.3 20.5 40.4 44.5 26.6 8.5 89.2 138.4 … 54.5 … … –27.8 131.8 … 59.1 … … 24.7 47.1 91.5 12.7 45.3 12.8 112.2 9.3 … … 129.0 … 50.0 79.2 111.7 24.4 –13.5 45.5 11.8 … … –31.2 54.9 40.5 13.3 42.6 … … –31.5 … … –48.0 … … 22.8 10.8 125.7 307.2 36.4 75.6 … 123.7 58.9 19.7 142.2 119.1 135.4 112.1 62.9 126.8 11.0 … 1.7 51.0 143.7 9.3 39.4 42.0 40.8 … 34.5 99.3 8.1 … 57.1 119.3 2002 … 7.6 42.6 17.2 7. Rep.2 128.1 43.3 142.5 96.4 119.2 79.2 21.7 11.9 134.2 … … … 120.2 46.7 69.9 294.0 38.0 … 59.7 32.6 49.5 … … 139.7 5.2 20.6 28.0 … … 39.6 … 47.1 11.6 –13.3 33.1 … … 28. but it is not classified as a developing member.8 299.9 … 43.9 … … –43.3 105. Rep.1 24.9 15.1 46.9 … 39.9 41.7 138.7 26.0 49.5 16.8 9.5 19.6 259.0 53.0 … … –31.MONEY.9 … … … 86.7 108.1 2000 … 11.3 114.6 … 19.3 2009 1.3 76.0 18.4 43.6 112.

.... 2.....5 23......... 7...6 .3 1....8 . 9.......6 . 4... . . .... 2002 .9 ........ ...... 3.4 . 2. .....4 .4 5.. ... of Hong Kong.....7 .. 2.. FINANCE... ........ 24.7 8. ...8 .8 . .8 5. loans secured by cash and cash substitutes past 365 days. 1..2 . .. credit card debt and bankers’ acceptances past over 90 days... not necessarily linked to a 90-day criterion... Loans classified as doubtful of the fifth category plus loan losses... ..2 ...9 . 15... . ..... .... i. . .. .9 . 2006 . 0.. .. data refer to the end of the fiscal year.. . 22..1 0. . .. 9..5 11..... 6. ...8 17.... ..6 . 3. . . 7. . . 5... ..2 1. 2. Loans classified as substandard. as soon as they are past due for loans payable in daily. People’s Rep...5 .2 . ..2 2.3 ... ....8 .. 4..... . .e. 3. 26..5 7.3 .4 .... .... 3...3 22.0 11....... .4 7. 5..... .. .. .. 1....8 0... Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.... ........6 .. 13. 2004 .. .. ....... ... . .5 .1 ...3 5.. ....... 7. 19.. or annual installments... 12..... 7..8 8.4 ..2 1. .. 10. .. 2008 . .3 .1 . doubtful..0 11. .... 13. . 15.3 1.. ... . . 11.. . 15. .. . .. 1.. ........ . 2.....0 3. . .. .... are held off-balance sheet.6 1. 15.. ...4 ... 0. ........ .. International Monetary Fund Global Financial Stability Report 2011 (IMF 2011).9 . .. 6.. ....0 5. weekly..6 .5 .. 27. . .... .. .. 17..8 .. of Mongolia Taipei. but it is not classified as a developing member.. ....... Loans classified as loss..7 . . States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japanl New Zealand a b c d e f g h i j k l 2000 ..8 ..4 3. 2. For nine major banks only... 26..6 .8 .........9 ... ..2 . . ... 8... ..... .2 .. .... .. 2. .. ...2 13..8 ..1 .... .. .. 24.. .9 .. 0. 2. .8 21... .. .4 .3 . . .....2 .... .... 0. .... .4 .. Thirty days for loans payable in lump sum or payable in quarterly....... but included here for reasons of geography and similarities in economic structure.0 ...7 .. . ... .12 Bank Nonperfoming Loans (percent of total gross loans) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armeniaa.... ..0 ..6 8. ... 1.... ... .... . 17...5 .. 2... .4 17.. ...2 . .. .. .8 ..4 1. .. .2 2. 1..5 ..2 .6 ...9 2.. 4.. .3 ...9 .. 8. . . 16.. .. .....0 .. 8.9 ........5 . 4.....3 8..China: economy sources..4 ....4 .. 0. 0.3 34.. 90 days for loans payable in monthly installments... ..3 . AND PRICES Money and Finance Table 3....... 3.. . . .7 .7 13...2 1. ..1 2.. 4. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ..... ...... .... . .. ...0 3. 11....4 ..9 .b Azerbaijan Georgiac Kazakhstand Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.. . 3..9 21. .. 0. 3.... 5.....5 . .8 .. Other characteristics may be considered beyond the 90-day past-due criterion to classify a loan as nonperforming... Rep... 4.8 6.4 28.. .0 11.. ..5 .1 ...j Singaporek Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. 11.7 ..6 1....5 .2 1. for Taipei... ..1 12. .202 MONEY. 7.. . March of the indicated calendar year. March of the next calendar year.8 3.... . .... .... .. 1....... . . or semi-monthly installments. .5 .4 ... . 2. 2.5 3.. . 17. ..5 7. ....7 5.. .. 14.. 17. . .0 2..... 8.. ...1 6..1 . 6...6 ... ... .5 .. i........1 ...5 1.. .5 31...2 . ..6 . ...9 . ........ 24....... Rep. ...... .9 . ..4 .. 1. . 34. 14.. 5. 10.4 ...8 ...... ..3 . .4 1. . Loans with principal and/or interest past over 180 days. 0.. .9 ..9 . . 6. Chinae Korea... and loss.. 6... . .5 .8 1.. . Sources: World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011). 0.... ............1 0. . Not a member of the Commonwealth of Independent States..5 7. .. .. .5 . ... ..1 .. date refer to the end of the fiscal year. 31..4 ..3 . Unless otherwise indicated.. 2001 ... Unless otherwise indicated.... ... 2..2 . . 4. Fed....4 . ... . semi-annual.. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.. 2003 ..7 . ... 29.. . .... ..1 .5 .. .. 10. 0.... 2010 .... . 1... ..... . . .. .4 7..5 .8 .. . .... ..5 2.8 9.. ... .. .. 6.4 5.... . 21...7 15.8 1... . Includes loans that are overdue less than 90 days.. ... which are fully provisioned against. . . 23.6 ..... . 20... ......2 1.....1 .China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan Indiaf Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamg Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysiah Myanmar Philippines i.. . 2005 ...6 1. ..1 1.. Interbank loans are excluded.....3 . .... .. ....1 28.. 4. ... ... 2007 .8 14. .... .. . 4...... . 2. . .. 12. .4 .e.. . . 2...2 1.... . . .... 2.. ...... .9 . . . 12. 2... 7...4 . . . 12. ..5 5..8 .5 .... 2009 .....1 ..7 .. .... ..2 0..8 1. . .

.5 ...7 .. –22.... –24.......... 6... ...9 . .1 . .7 .....9 –18.0 2004 .8 ..4 ..1 ....8 .5 –8. .0 2003 .. . .....1 95...4 .. –8. China Korea.. ...4 ....... 151.. ...... . . .7 16.. ..... . . .. 37. ... –24. .. . . .. FINANCE.5 ........ 20.... 6..1 . 27. . 2. 56. .6 –19. –17.....2 4. . .0 .6 –21.... 161.2 .. .. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 ........ 113. .3 –21.. ..4 . . .. ..13 Growth Rates of Stock Market Price Index (percent) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.. Rep...1 –6...1 11... . Rep. ......9 .... 21... .3 26. 41..1 . . ..... .... ... ..7 –23.. Sources: International Financial Statistics CD-ROM (IMF 2011). –16.. .7 –13........6 51. . ....... . . .. ..7 2. .. .... .4 ...... .. .... .7 26..2 8.6 –21. 13..3 .. Fed.... .. . –6. 47..... . 41..4 .6 .. –32. of Mongolia Taipei....7 –9.. .. 6... .6 ...0 .. 36... –10.. ...4 ..2 . ..8 .. . ...... 16... .... . 10.0 1995 ....3 15... ..3 2009 ... .9 6.. ..... .. –27.... ... –4..0 15... .. . ... ...0 . ...4 45..... ... 21...0 –18.3 .8 . . ..8 –37.... . –11..6 ... 3.7 .9 ... –21. 11.1 –26. . ..4 54.6 . ...0 .. .. .3 –11. ...... . .. . –8.8 31...7 . . . 35..6 . –0. .... . Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ..... .0 20..3 .. ..7 ... ...2 2. 32.8 ..6 . . .9 –5. . 52.4 –10. . 56. –1.9 ..0 .......8 ...2 28. 46.5 .5 . ...........5 17..... 7.1 114. –15. ..... ... .. .3 12. ... ..... .7 . 5. ...5 20. –17. 35.7 .7 5..8 –7.. –4... . ...... .8 27........ 55..... 53. . ....0 9. ... .. . –6...... ... .3 –52.. 31... –7.4 –21..... ... . ...0 –15. ...... ...7 ... .....7 ... .9 4....... .4 2005 ... . . .4 . .3 13.6 –16... 14.8 . . ........0 .. .4 .... .1 28.. ... 21. –12. ... 17.2 ..7 .0 –27.... –28.... . . .China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. .9 .5 26.MONEY.4 . 41.9 67.. ..1 37...7 –4.... 19..8 2....2 11.... ...6 … 23. ... –12. ... .. 39............8 2007 ... .. ...4 2008 . . –0... ..4 2000 . 15.5 ... ..... . –21....5 ...7 .... ..... .6 .1 .. ...3 2001 .5 . .0 33. –31.. .2 . 11. .1 ..4 ........ .. ..2 ......... .. ...2 ...4 17. 16... .. . .0 –12.1 37.. –11.. . .8 . . .. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. ... –10.. –6. ... ..6 –21..3 26..0 . ..9 .. .. 44. 29.0 23. .. 5.8 . –5. ... .... . .. .5 ...2 ..4 13... 21. ..9 .2 ..... –9. .8 –5..2 –13. .6 ..3 5..8 –10.9 ...3 .. . .. –14.0 25.4 285.. . 26....0 –1.8 28. 6.. .8 .. –6..8 . ..... .. .... ............ .. ..0 6.. … … –18........ ..3 .. . . . .. .4 50. .. –24.8 .0 –28. but it is not classified as a developing member..8 . . –8...3 3..4 .8 32. .. .. .. . 76.... ... . 3.. .. 42.. .. 53.. . –0.. ...6 –15.3 . 1... ....... .. 24.... ..0 ..... 47.5 –10... . –0.8 . ...6 35. .3 ....9 . 37... –18..9 –12.5 –5..... 32. . ... .. 11. ...7 5... .....5 .. of Hong Kong.. 32. –3.1 .. .3 23.. .8 . .6 2...... .5 –12.. People’s Rep... ...1 ..3 2010 . ..6 12... .... . ...6 95.8 –10. .... 19.... 27...9 11..4 ......... . . . –35. 15. 20...2 9.8 ...1 ..5 –4.3 22. –17...2 –22. 106. .3 21.0 ...3 ......... . for Taipei.5 59.... .. –12. .... .. ...7 12. 18....8 .... ...China: economy sources.. ... ...6 .. . . .. ......... . ..9 33. –11. . 35..4 .. 35.. .. .3 .9 .. 34.. ..0 .0 10.. ....... ... .. –5. –19. . . 19.. . . ....7 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB..... ..4 19....... AND PRICES 203 REGIONAL TABLES Money and Finance Table 3..5 ........ .. ..2 2006 . .6 .3 2002 . .. ... ...7 22.. –6. . –10.... ..... ....8 . 199. .. 59.... .4 –25.. .. .....8 –20..... 53. –2.9 17.

. FINANCE. Rep. ... .. . 24 1342 4 6581 ..14 Stock Market Capitalization (US$ million) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.. ... 67 . States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 ... .204 MONEY. . .. but it is not classified as a developing member.. .......... ..... ....... . … … … … … … 5930 58930 25957 41523 39021 23565 28948 40153 68382 34300 148004 152827 117338 101900 229328 277004 316658 276329 23900 141507 29489 36349 46173 121233 116695 124864 141093 . ........ . … 121 … … … … … 1520 … … … … … … … 373 … … … … … 1423 … … … … … … … 433 … … … … … 2339 … … … … … … … 539 … … … … … 2942 … … … … … … … 587 … … … … … 3166 … … … … … … … 637 … … … … … 6632 … … … … … … … … … … … … 211693 98761 178191 … … … 325663 187066 255952 … … … 103224 52101 80132 353489 180021 310766 196046 102594 138189 19542 9589 21199 … 522 … … … … … 11959 … … … … … … … 568 … … … … … 10211 … … … … … … … 1607 … … … … … 12213 … … … … … … … … 360388 … 410534 … 157321 370091 277732 20385 … 1404 … … … … … 9742 … … … … … … 109000 245218 372794 375131 378846 585475 776403 804074 1095858 1298429 675619 1258456 1454547 2920000 3667292 3157222 2251814 2126075 3040665 3678262 4736513 4726269 4453475 3220485 3377892 4099591 8840 31950 18866 17779 21745 33052 43731 43409 44940 47454 24166 67061 36295 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.... .... 32 2001 … 2 … 89 1204 4 4944 … … 28 2002 … 10 … 105 1341 7 10200 … … 31 463080 463085 249639 32 263048 2003 … 27 … 203 2425 31 16579 … … 14 681204 551237 329616 42 373910 2004 … 18 … 206 3941 34 29002 … … 4 639765 665248 428649 25 418562 2005 … 43 … 355 10521 42 45937 … … 37 780763 693486 718180 46 486021 2006 … 60 … 668 43688 93 45518 … … 715 2426326 895249 835188 113 595641 2007 … 105 … 1389 41378 121 70262 … … … 6226305 1162566 1123633 612 655481 2008 … 176 … 327 31075 94 23491 … … … 2793613 1328837 494631 407 371435 2009 … 141 … 733 57655 72 33239 … … … 2010 … 28 … 1060 60742 79 38169 … … … .. . . .. AND PRICES Money and Finance Table 3. . ..... of Hong Kong..... .. Sources: S&P Global Stock Markets Factbook 2011 (Standard and Poor’s 2011).. People’s Rep. . . .. .. . .. … … … … … … … … … … 38600 127199 148064 110396 131011 279093 387851 553074 818879 1819101 645478 1179235 1615860 . 2000 .. . . … … 154 248 461 9093 .. .. ...... . ... ..... .. . Rep...China: economy sources.... 2850 . ... ...... . .. . .............. . 244 ..... .. Fed........China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji... . . … … … … … … … … … … .. . ... . … … … … … … 48600 222729 116935 120007 123872 168376 190011 181236 235356 . .. .... .. ............. . .... . . . China Korea. ... ..... … … … … … … 8080 66585 26834 23006 29991 54659 73251 81428 138886 . ...... . .. .... ...... of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia... 244 790 494 417 483 853 1344 1805 4909 4894 5485 4843 917 1998 1074 1332 1681 2711 3657 5720 7769 7553 4326 8133 19924 . 9286 . 27 37 37 99736 192944 262335 303181 5007646 4762837 915825 1079640 836462 1089217 430 1093 635457 752407 321 1338 1186 1145 1193 1622 3317 3035 3610 6793 6671 7068 47000 . .... of Mongolia Taipei. for Taipei.... … … … … … … ... World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011). . Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ... 1995 .. . .. 42055 580991 523952 83400 303705 623398 506073 11100 181955 171587 220046 ....

... . 46...5 .... . .....4 168. ....0 107.3 7.5 368.......4 39.7 ......0 85. 188..8 10. 1..3 ... 34...8 3.5 70.. 5. 38.5 2002 .... .... ..2 2.1 2004 .......7 17. .7 ..1 401. Rep.7 ..8 ..0 112..China: economy sources.... 127. 150.. ....7 103.7 23..3 8.9 . ..1 .2 561.1 37. .3 1....9 . 43....4 0...2 3.. .6 . . . 12... 102...6 3. .. .. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia..5 14.. 32.0 ... .... 129.. Rep. 31...6 21. .4 1.9 . Sources: S&P Global Stock Markets Factbook 2011 (Standard and Poor’s 2011).8 .0 84... .9 .6 51.. 108....... ..2 48.6 53..2 ..4 2003 ..1 101. . . 47.7 95.. . . .. 23...5 32.2 5.. .5 52.2 3. 101.. 6.. 84.8 19. ..7 44.. 113.. .China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji..5 .4 . 250. 19...... People’s Rep.9 66.....3 .......9 120... 20..8 .... 0.8 8.4 ..4 75.....0 0...5 303. ... .4 ..2 92...4 27.... . States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 .8 .3 34. 0. . 151.3 31. but it is not classified as a developing member. . .7 ...8 31...1 ....1 199.8 43...6 .6 ... 122... 11...3 2. .3 .2 .0 1..4 .1 . 128.0 162..8 617.2 51.. 34.9 54.7 51.2 89.1 ..2 . 0.9 . 32..9 9. 28.6 35.4 2..... . ..3 . .........5 .MONEY...3 79.. 7. 13. 15.4 0..8 5. 100.7 ....8 72. 110.4 133. ...8 ... .. 4. .. ..7 35. .. 14.... 56.. 67. . 178.4 80.6 23. .4 .5 19...2 87... ...2 .. Fed. 0...1 .. 54.5 ..... . … ..0 133.. 72..1 2010 ... .. 48..6 14. 14...6 .. 132. . 174.. . 29. 20. .. .. .. 56. ....1 .0 174..1 14. 0... .6 7.6 . .5 . 124.5 ....2 .9 282..4 36.... .. 16.. 38. ... .0 53.0 33. ..3 55....... ADB staff estimates.. 4.4 .0 ..3 2. ... . 61.9 ...5 347.4 2008 .3 6.5 15.......5 .1 . 142.0 .5 ..1 7. ..4 93.. . 53.5 . .........4 ... 81...8 7..5 ...... . 5. 18... 152. China Korea.3 . 164..3 .0 190.. 123.2 71..1 85.0 24.....5 . .9 47.9 40.. .. .6 100.1 57. 131. 78..3 35..7 ..6 .. .5 3..0 . . 3.. ...5 .5 ...7 23.8 0.. ..... ....... . ... .. 8..0 79.0 ... 24. 69...3 3.. .0 252...9 .1 19..3 .....5 . 0....4 2005 .3 .9 67..3 158.5 .2 .6 32.9 43.. 63..4 21.. .4 2006 .... 15..8 210.... 152..1 14. 49... ..2 .4 1.. .1 . .9 ..15 Stock Market Capitalization (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. . … .3 ... .... .8 .9 3.3 . . . 8... 49.4 . 45...... .5 .4 2.. 14......1 1....5 2000 . .. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.8 . . 28. 0.5 22.2 .1 5. 16.4 123...8 166.. .. .3 0... .. .. FINANCE... .4 ...... .4 .4 . 19..2 69..3 ... 15.8 8.. ..... 13. 0. 1.. 102. .......... .... 2...4 .. . .3 2001 .1 2007 . .. 122. 60.. ...9 95..9 .7 . .3 ..7 .9 87.. . 28.5 42. of Hong Kong... .3 38.9 1. ...9 ...... 19.5 166..0 2. . ... . 79.. .4 471. 51.9 1995 .....4 107..... ...6 169...0 .3 41.. . .. ........4 18.. .1 68..... . 145. 9....... .. ..8 50. . of Mongolia Taipei. 39..5 1. 5.5 437.... ... . Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .. ..1 ...0 481... .. . . .. .3 . 7....... .. . 38...2 70... ...1 . . 7.... ..5 18..7 9. World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011).4 . .. 70.2 .1 .1 41.. ... .. 47..2 .... 120.. AND PRICES 205 REGIONAL TABLES Money and Finance Table 3. ....1 . . .0 18. 33... 93. 0. ...2 2... .... .1 28... . 0.. .6 34..3 0.4 6.0 . .... .. .7 ... ..0 .....3 108.. 3.... 5...5 2009 .. 0..3 ..1 . ..4 87.6 390. 91. ..... . 28...7 .... 65..9 ...3 .1 .... .0 . ..0 ..6 10...6 .. 172..3 1....7 245.. 2..9 27. ..0 ..3 9.1 5.. .5 . .6 .. ....7 43..8 16... .3 . 11..1 239.0 38.. 6. 19..5 . .0 33.. 112.4 . . 40.. . ... .....1 .5 67..9 .... . .... 7.1 7. 0..6 .3 .. 62..... 93. . for Taipei. ... … ..5 170... ... 96...7 104.5 23. 59. 0. .. .1 . 1. .. 15... 1. .3 .. 51.0 9....0 59..7 39...1 41.

00 1.52 47.06 26.99 1251.00 1. but it is not classified as a developing member.80 69.36 111.31 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 48.06 1.33 44.28 144.81 1.00 1.76 47.28 93.58 46.74 41.79 929.20 3.08 1.98 142.36 539.00 1.45 4139.12 1.72 1.61 48.78 1.60 1.68 1.50 147.94 44.04 1.54 1.00 2.206 MONEY.65 2.60 1587.55 120.10 1.09 96.00 1.15 1.80 1357.93 1156.25 8938.42 69.00 1.43 1106.12 0.80 7.69 40.47 3. b A floating exchange rate policy was adopted in September 1995 that allowed commercial banks to set their own rates and. People’s Rep.04 1.China and Viet Nam (2010): economy sources.50 8.79 7.92 9090.62 7.80 73.28 2.15 37.13 10569.94 59.40 1165.33 110.61 12.80 0..00 2.49 1. c Unit of currency is the US dollar.28 32.30 1.58 12.27 1130.78 1.31 1.20 117.45 578.00 2.78 7.58 136.70 2.04 754.97 7.60 43.72 137.28 46.17 9698.00 1.04 48.80 3.84 125.93 1.96 1. China Korea.89 0.28 1. 26.52 2.35 41.75 3916.48 1.00 3.03 1.57 24.85 10585.88 95. d Figures beginning 1993 are not comparable to those prior to 1993 due to change in appropriation standard.00 1.37 100.32 45.27 1.97 2.64 1. Turkmenistan.80 34.68 1.78 3.79 426.42 4054..72 1.50 555.43 32.22 15746. and Uzbekistan: UN National Accounts Main Aggregates Database (UN 2011).51 43.78 10260..35 112.40 3.82 31.85 2.75 1.36 1.31 45.90 8516.50 1.94 11.79 25. of Hong Kong.35 1.88 126.13 47.00 4.33 3912.20 102.77 7.64 0.41 1.84 1.80 5.74 1.15 1.65 1.09 122.38 1.10 1215.68 6.38 57. AND PRICES Exchange Rates Table 3.67 1.67 101.30 2.96 1290.10 2.25 1179.01 40.19 1.51 1.36 1.36 4184. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .00 2.51 4056.96 2.52 1. 60.31 16302.66 58.31 2.35 12.00 3.51 60. FINANCE.19 1.75 2002 47.91 1.84 139.00 1.31 1.04 236.28 1.16 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.56 46.54 1.66 0.77 771.19 12.64 7.57 1.38 61.96 6482.43 8258.64 1.79 5.72 59.62 1.28 8.16 Official Exchange Rate (local currency units per US$.36 108.00 1.92 1.72 2.93 1.33 8577.29 5.19 47.61 1.09 1.85 968.73 8.06 1995 36.19 103.29 17065.00 1.00 1.66 4092.15 46.06 1.93 45.17 32.75 58. period averages) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.39 44.71 … 5.52 5.28 117.44 5.00 3.61 1076.09 1.04 1.38 2.77 2.19 1.41 12.43 6. Sources: International Financial Statistics CD-ROM (IMF 2011).20 1.31 1.00 1.80 7.28 8.57 42.80 77.06 448.06 2.61 8421.95 6.97 3.00 2.14 44.93 1.78 51.00 1.59 37.81 2248.76 1.81 1.76 533.22 15858.00 1.00 2.50 1.34 5.93 49.53 1.81 1.06 1.00 1.52 1.76 1.00 1.28 8. of Kiribati Marshall Islandsc Micronesia.92 1.08 305.28 1.30 1.83 3840.20 1.86 0.15 1. Rep.88 15994.15 113.28 106.65 45.09 1.53 32.90 0.80 11038.19 101.29 2.78 7.06 1.95 89.78 7.72 2.83 6.00 3.90 9311.00 1.33 1.78 149.84 1.65 42.80 77.00 1. for Taipei. for Palau.96 50.12 954.22 2.00 1.16 3.23 33.57 17.61 1.67 1097.19 … … … 0.68 1.10 12.28 1.28 1.30 147.10 1.00 1.97 1.70 14725.31 25.51 45.97 363.87 41.77 7.41 48.82 0.37 1.39 3.90 45.24 74.28 8.58 34.98 0.89 48.38 2.79 1014.61 1145.93 121.42 110.72 1.93 2.51 17.00 1.64 8954.25 1.72 1.50 3.00 1.60 1.74 3973.66 40.54 68.04 690.74 70.79 1.73 12.78 7.79 707.36 1.93 145.88 .90 3.13 1.09 87. figures for 1996 onward are simple averages of midpoint rates reported daily.80 71.71 85.22 3.08 0.28 5.73 1.07 1.91 1.20 15279.25 2450.60 69.69 4016. hence.97 7. Rep.19 7.91 1.26 573. States ofc Nauru Palauc Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Lestec Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japand New Zealand 1990 448.43 11.33 1.51 34.08 1842.04 1.70 2.17 1465.75 7.73 1.32 36.80 66.70 1110.23 46.42 32.25 52.33 1.74 10655.83 1314.32 10159.65 41.02 29.85 49.79 1.00 1.30 1.19 1.94 1.51 64.42 1.81 47.30 3.56 2.76 108.89 51.59 4103.50 9704.43 42.80 72.32 1024.00 1.90 1.07 146.59 1.52 16105.20 153.42 1.27 60.26 1102.84 31.79 1.42 1.16 2.80 3.14 96.26 59.00 1.03 1.37 40.60 1260.41 33.55 114.25 50.11 1.77 71.35 0.77 3.99 51.20 1.32 1.31 110..74 7.43 4.69 416.79 1.04 2.19 3. Fed.51 12.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDRb Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.44 3.20 2.80 2. of Mongolia Taipei.17 9141.25 9159.00 1.90 3.00 3.58 45.33 116.48 1.45 34.00 1.70 1170.79 7.00 2.05 3.33 1.69 1.00 9603.51 1.19 707.11 1.76 103.00 1.89 1.96 8744.39 2.06 2.89 34.93 2.69 7887.39 1.28 373.28 1.96 57.41 81.90 1.04 342.19 50.36 68.75 1.00 1.45 457.31 12.53 2.04 132.92 40.28 1.35 94.91 0.35 1.00 1.09 1191.12 3.00 1.22 1.50 9.74 48.76 2.75 56.35 8.04 1.00 3.05 1276.48 15509.61 6.57 405.38 6.00 1.09 77.44 1.75 1.98 0.61 6.97 1.67 1.28 8.00 1.39 1.20 1.55 29.42 1.54 1185.19 1.42 68.97 2.49 49.65 40.72 107.95 1.79 7.53 1.31 1.00 1.48 8.19 1.48 5.00 2.54 122.69 18621.80 7.42 33.60 1.77 51.36 1.11 44.80 73.30 14167.20 1.54 1.72 1.30 1205.71 7.33 10389.31 109.71 44.08 54.31 1146.48 31.54 115.80 1437.80 6.80 6.10 44.00 0.67 5.10 31.73 45.00 3.78 2000 47.61 2001 47.14 4.80 76.70 53.00 1.41 1.00 2.36 43.20 2.75 804.53 0.32 12.76 55.52 33.00 2.94 1.01 55.36 31.58 10056.95 0.22 5.79 7.09 1.95 10.59 24.76 .00 1.59 … 21.

1..13 1..74 .47 768.95 18.19 0.80 1526. 21.81 16.32 22.45 3....73 ...48 116.75 .23 0. . 0..55 3934.64 23.69 . Fed..86 93..11 3289. country sources.80 0.54 2006 15.45 .67 168.39 804.70 … 258.47 37.88 1.30 182.32 25.10 0. 1...77 .36 21.Chinaa South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji..53 … 1.72 643..43 5.. 1. 1.77 5813..22 16.. 1.37 134.61 3.76 8.27 794..35 16.28 0.79 3.....84 1.97 4005. .....31 154..48 212.92 23.26 5123.14 1.71 50.00 .35 19..50 2010a 21..50 2008 21.53 1.. 20.25 .78 358. FINANCE. 0.59 3.28 6.06 16.49 18.58 0.79 .76 .59 2.88 .29 3399.27 1..09 0.41 0.41 … 129.67 .25 1. 0.96 764. Rep.47 2002 13.60 2818.92 … … … 3.98 15.03 20..02 1.45 5.50 0.. .80 5.38 1..65 193.06 .35 139. 1.34 143.08 16.46 1.62 … 230..74 0.57 1.65 .55 21.87 … 357.52 1.78 19.04 3.49 2007 18..64 0.60 0.78 67.34 17.96 26.68 3. 21.59 27.. 0..66 .68 1237. 0.97 3699.77 .52 112.71 0.74 57. Data from 2008 onward are ADB staff estimates.30 6. 1.20 .16 1.61 4347.81 4. period averages) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.66 ..71 4278.65 35.22 3130.78 3. 1.89 173.34 21...74 14.76 17.72 10.48 17. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.52 6124..79 .63 21. 0. 1.92 417.67 1226.75 6217. 164.27 10..39 0.49 2009 18.72 17.43 .13 .19 2487.11 0.82 75.51 30.. 1.61 5.35 4676.22 0.. 1.82 769.67 8.68 17.90 1278.49 774.79 1245.....85 1.17 28.61 11. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.22 0.88 89.53 0.03 1465.13 22.23 3.72 647.74 … … 0..27 0.32 0....75 . Rep..70 0. but it is not classified as a developing member. 61.33 0.45 1..20 0.95 1.62 .33 … 91.42 178.69 2801. 167.36 0.67 3.21 271. 1.35 16..35 49.44 0..44 2001 . .09 16.56 1.72 .60 3. 59.42 0.98 25.32 7.24 314.64 15. 23..88 795.06 13.00 0.49 … 185...21 1. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 2000 .66 40.32 21.15 1..68 .43 120.34 14.06 15.98 24..47 24.89 ..53 17.73 ... China Korea.62 36.46 31.20 11.46 9. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .85 1.38 .11 15.77 1.48 3.30 0.84 3024..20 1.45 0.39 129..62 1.64 .69 1.80 . .30 21.. 24.. 1.03 0.94 0.47 0.24 4895. 0..43 .89 13.27 .. 1. 22.16 1. AND PRICES 207 REGIONAL TABLES Exchange Rates Table 3.61 2284.40 .14 14.75 13.47 5. 0.15 .73 3.91 .13 194..05 1. 63.71 .59 1.79 0.16 3262.02 20.. 60. 61.28 3.49 13.47 1.97 15.80 .78 1..43 0.49 1.50 … 602.31 17..80 .00 4018.23 1.34 … 503.00 16.14 15..75 497.99 21..16 .03 … a ADB staff estimates.85 9.. People’s Rep.75 5. CEIC data.15 1.10 3606.99 .48 21. 1.64 19..67 .11 1.71 .41 1.58 1....33 827... 22.47 2003 13.49 0.64 ..44 0.98 32.66 .97 0.49 746.69 ..96 0. and US Bureau of Economic Analysis. 59.75 1..01 180. 58.27 15.50 0..94 1334.89 21....83 1487.05 16.91 0.14 0.77 292.52 47.28 14. ..80 0. .83 282.74 1232.23 20.70 1.12 15.15 23.37 24.84 4097.83 1.92 109.34 22.76 4501. 0.69 1.43 785.48 1. 60.64 39.41 124.58 8.41 1. 1... 59....37 1.45 114. … 1.57 1.43 0.42 1.48 1.33 149.13 178. .55 1..27 540.MONEY.29 8.93 5.75 1.70 16.20 1.84 . Sources: World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011).28 0....01 0.48 1.99 .44 0. .77 . 1..55 8.71 0.51 2005 15..38 0..42 1.26 2988..37 .90 0.06 17.93 4712.86 22.45 41.16 7136.63 3..61 1..47 1.59 2.74 … 304.12 8.67 44.51 1.44 0. 0.18 757...83 1.23 … 18.14 2151. 1.50 10.12 3.99 16.70 1221.17 Purchasing Power Parity Conversion Factor (local currency units per US$. 19.....27 0.21 1..30 0. 61. 23.43 0..27 0.92 3..13 28.74 . ..73 0.70 .37 16. 20.09 1.88 10.55 1.44 0..78 1..98 53.08 0.66 … 0. of Mongolia Taipei.73 .32 7. .47 14..17 0.08 15.50 2004 14.46 8..08 1.19 1.37 13..47 16..51 0.70 31..20 8..53 32.14 9..65 15.86 3.18 1. 1..91 0.06 1.52 3..59 1.17 15.54 28.93 .. 1..22 19.87 3368.11 15..81 5410.89 0.71 6434.53 21.69 788.60 3548.82 12. 18.46 1. of Hong Kong.50 3555.07 … 429.34 1. 1..96 1295.

67 66.75 63.63 27.66 87.48 20.56 2008 43.46 28.52 43.50 32.53 37.53 47.70 25.47 47.59 … 79.33 76.38 47.39 120.98 25.66 23.23 40.83 17.69 37.21 74.26 33.30 55.54 54.83 80.96 … 58.73 37.20 100.63 53.59 37.66 … 53.93 72.69 … 38. Rep.81 37.08 63.66 50.06 35.58 31.58 40.16 35.91 72.96 47.17 70.27 49.05 37.04 24.86 48.56 … 43.52 41.57 38.30 … 29.15 33.33 48.06 … 37.56 29.51 69. United States = 100) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.83 51.59 … 73.24 … 52.87 37.39 … 73.85 56.26 27.02 35. China Korea.14 36.41 60.59 43. period averages.35 119.75 39.43 37.15 49.23 … 39.66 43.28 … 76.80 39.59 30.69 32.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.04 68.08 … … 47.44 72.23 61.83 2002 28.54 … 41.78 28.94 27.81 … 60.55 63.29 47.16 54.80 56.03 34.91 29.15 … … 56.46 66.37 39.79 2010 46.51 25.96 33.99 … 54.59 30.57 39.13 35.55 53.84 56.28 48.58 93.44 43.34 39.26 31.71 … 74.87 27.83 74. Source: ADB staff estimates.12 28.77 49.78 41.69 34.02 44.15 38.68 46.74 65.33 32.63 48.39 102.52 42.81 49.49 86.69 33.05 47.49 64.11 64.25 38.07 73.05 143.25 32.71 … 37.13 … 75.61 … 82. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.37 63.89 28.68 31.93 31.60 71.22 28.49 … 18.12 25.55 65.21 127. of Hong Kong.35 106.68 49.47 2007 36.90 51.16 48.17 57.47 … 61.02 31.93 … … 55.73 69.14 107.06 … 38.98 54.12 58.31 54.24 40.68 31.78 33.27 26.15 … 34.55 43.66 67.15 96.05 46.23 56.95 61.21 60. People’s Rep.91 26.18 66.85 37.19 … … 51.99 41.11 31.87 26.65 27.54 108.63 … a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.73 51.58 45.13 37.90 24.94 2003 28.58 47.33 54.48 40.27 40.30 61.65 26.76 35.14 96.20 35.85 29.87 36.60 65.85 32.49 53.78 29.02 117.48 60.47 27.42 28.07 … … 36.30 45.40 44.28 44.55 68.03 47.49 29.58 39.33 35.09 53.55 31.68 32.11 … 49.49 42.60 51.65 20.39 53.78 54.55 26.00 67.06 43.25 29.41 33.07 60.48 65.93 49.51 … … 31.04 43. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 2000 … 30.99 2004 30. AND PRICES Exchange Rates Table 3.78 2009 36. of Mongolia Taipei. FINANCE.61 29.46 35.00 54. but it is not classified as a developing member.83 … … 43.11 54.08 2006 30.99 37.66 … 25.33 62.81 35.82 31.58 … 74.57 27.09 56.00 40.08 46.61 70.70 76.47 … … … 58.95 41.67 … 59.16 55.23 … … 139.74 35.02 30.32 42.65 36.54 31.06 54.62 60.79 55.71 … 79.38 46.01 … 53.95 37.71 … 80.28 29.40 51.88 30.39 124.95 37.57 34.55 30.72 … 84.51 61.39 70.07 42.32 … 73.77 51. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .33 2005 30.68 … 80.13 77.53 26.81 36.10 50.11 73.73 71.15 … 23.24 57.62 56.59 87.91 … 80.88 36. Fed.10 40.50 … 47.10 33.36 74.42 75.88 … 27.76 39.88 28.70 … 73.83 32.80 35.05 104.60 37.79 … 39.26 29.05 36.13 … 43.46 32.07 82.71 32.98 61.21 106.59 39.54 28.55 50.81 72.29 59.80 113.34 35.94 30.38 66.67 27.50 46.51 66.17 28.82 35.49 31.52 60.76 21.14 30.76 40.17 15.28 33.88 55.01 39.80 51.58 … … 46.87 30.26 36.78 62.87 36.47 67.81 69.75 122.48 30.79 30.69 … 77.09 42.92 48.60 … 38.10 23.25 … 43.10 72.31 … 41.58 17.33 … … 60.18 Price Level Indexes (PPPs to official exchange rates.07 124.53 86.83 69.61 … 42.15 68.20 … 56.81 27.67 22.45 … … 32.81 37.06 37.05 45.04 63.60 2001 … 30.49 40.25 60.95 59.46 45.61 114.42 65.53 46.12 77.84 72.92 36.34 47.68 35.81 … 88.49 31.23 38.27 … 42.11 65.52 … 53.78 … 49.82 42.54 50. Rep.71 81.06 113.53 100.72 37.99 58.09 30.45 44.208 MONEY.21 25.24 39.35 27.49 52.74 43.27 122.30 63.52 30.05 110.07 92.14 42.34 … … 35.44 … … 37.22 74.16 26.57 … 90.71 43.32 52.36 … 60.53 53.91 62.46 70.54 … 78.25 72.22 36.62 31.82 … 24.08 68.93 66.93 36.26 63.

3 Source: Table 4.5 Rest of the World 4.6 components. and goods that were once exported from Asia to these markets are now produced in Europe and the United States by Asianowned factories. remittances were over $700 in Samoa and Tonga.13. Migrants’ remittances are a vital source of income for many countries. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . The year 2010 saw a dramatic turnaround in Asia’s exports. Asia and the Pacific 54. showing a positive growth of 13% in 2010.8 Europe 20. and the People’s Republic of Europe 16.13.3 Source: Table 4. as long as the economies in the region grow faster than the rest of the world.1a Destination of Merchandise Exports from Asia and the Pacific. exports to Europe and North America have fallen from 48% of the total to just 33%. International tourist arrivals in most popular destinations were up sharply after the 2009 downturn. over $250 in Armenia and Tajikistan. Japan. India with a recorded growth of 40%. intraregional trade is growing with 3. and over $200 in the Philippines. Indonesia. REGIONAL TABLES Key Trends Merchandise exports from Asia and the Pacific now go mainly to countries within the region.6 The year 2010 saw a dramatic turnaround in Asia’s exports.2 shows that the 18% fall in the in North and Central America 27.5 0. Economies Africa listed in declining order are 2.3 Asia and the Source: Table 4.5 region experienced a turnaround. Over the last 2 decades. Higher South America economic growth in Asia Africa that markets for imports means 1.13. Europe 20. 1990 (%) South America 0.4 Figure 4.2 North and Central America 16. Finally. 31%. Among the major gainers were.2 South America Rest of the World of value of exports in 2010. dollar value of all exports of the region in 2009 was replaced byNorth and growth in 2010. major America exporters27.4 Middle East The top bar4.7 Middle East 3.3 China (PRC). bars to the left indicate a decline in exports. Australia. Asia and the Pacific 54.8 Japan and the Republic of Korea have set like up factories in Europe and North America.1 increasing specialization in the manufacture of parts and Asia and the Pacific 41. Pacific will continue to be an important destination for Asian exports.0 Middle East the world. In addition.2.2 South America 2.1b Destination of Merchandise Exports from Asia and the Pacific. since 1990.0 Asia and the Pacific 41.1 4. The sharp fall in merchandise exports in 2009 reversed into strong growth in 2010. 2010 (%) Africa 2. Foreign direct investment is recovering in the region after a fall observed in 2009. and bars to the right indicate increases. Most of these economies had seen their merchandise exports contract by 15% or more a year earlier. Virtually all economies in the 30% Central America 16. 35%. 2.209 Globalization Merchandise exports from Asia and the Pacific now go mainly (54%) to countries within the region.5 Rest of the World 5.4 Source: Table 4.4 Europe 16. In Figure 4. 38%.7 Rest of the World are growing more rapidly within Asia than in the rest of 5. Figure 4.2 Figure 4.1 Africa 1. The 18% fall in the dollar value of all the region’s exports in 2009 was replaced by 30% growth in 2010. On a per capita basis.1 Middle East 4.13. presumably boosted by the proliferation of North and Central preferential trade agreements. 33%.

2008–2010 (average in US dollars) Tajikistan Armenia Philippines Kyrgyz Republic Fiji. of Bhutan Solomon Islands Maldives Vanuatu Timor-Leste Palau Samoa Tonga –60 –40 –20 2009 Source: Table 4.3 Workers’ Remittances per Head. followed by India ($44). the PRC ($37).China India Australia Malaysia Thailand Indonesia Viet Nam Kazakhstan Philippines New Zealand Azerbaijan Pakistan Bangladesh Uzbekistan Brunei Darussalam Myanmar Sri Lanka Papua New Guinea Cambodia Mongolia Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Georgia Tajikistan Armenia Nepal Fiji. Of the five most populous countries. Five of the top eight places in Figure 4. China Singapore Taipei. People's Rep. Rep. of Indonesia Thailand Vanuatu Cambodia Taipei. and Indonesia ($30).1 and 4. of Pakistan Hong Kong. The Central and West Asian countries are now heavily dependent on money remitted by workers in the Russian Federation. Rep. and money sent back to home countries by migrants working abroad for several years at a time. People's Rep. To avoid distortion. for simplicity. Rep. This is a measure of how dependent the population in each country is on remittances from family members working abroad.9. all three kinds of transfers are referred to here as migrants’ remittances. Rep.3 shows workers’ remittances per head. Migrant workers’ remittances consist of earnings of persons who work abroad for only a few months in a year. of Hong Kong.China 0 Sources: Tables 1. and Azerbaijan. Pakistan is the next most dependent ($52). of Georgia Sri Lanka Azerbaijan Nepal Viet Nam Mongolia Bangladesh Korea. respectively. Georgia. Tajikistan. The last of these is by far the largest component and. China Malaysia India China.4. Bangladesh is most dependent on migrants’ remittances. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . 0 20 40 2010 60 80 Figure 4. Tonga and Samoa are omitted from Figure 4. transfers of capital when people change their country of residence. the Kyrgyz Republic. 50 100 150 200 250 300 Migrants’ remittances are vital to the economy of many countries.2 Annual Percentage Growth of Merchandise Exports 2009 and 2010 Asia and the Pacific China.210 GLOBALIZATION Figure 4. Figure 4. of Japan Korea.3 where per capita remittances over the three years 2008 to 2010 average $967 and $745.3 are countries of Central and West Asia—Armenia. which were $70 per person in 2010.

Tajikistan Georgia Sources: Tables 1.4. Migrant work appears to be less formal and more loosely regulated in the countries of Central and West Asia. and Thailand. which shows a muted response to the 2009 crisis in the case of South and Southeast Asian countries.5 shows international tourist arrivals for the eight most popular destinations among developing economies in the region. Rep.000 20. Sri Lanka Pakistan Viet Nam India Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . During the period 2008–2010. In 2003. registering a growth of more than 8% except for Malaysia. the 10 most popular destinations accounted for 83% of all tourist arrivals. Migrant workers can be laid off on short notice and soon return home in times of economic crisis.1 and 4.000 50. India. the table also shows that relatively few countries currently benefit significantly from international tourism.5 International Tourist Arrivals (thousands) Figure 4.000 0 03 01 02 00 04 05 06 07 08 09 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 China. Table 4. The 2009 global crisis resulted in negative growth in international tourist arrivals in the PRC. and Hong Kong.25. Arrivals recovered well in 2010 in all the major destinations.25 shows that international arrivals for Asia and the Pacific as a whole grew on average about 7% per year between 2000 and 2010. and Malaysia. Malaysia Thailand Korea. Singapore. which grew by 4%. This is in sharp contrast to Figure 4. China Singapore Indonesia Source: Table 4. China.4a shows the dramatic rise in remittances to Central and West Asia starting a few years after the breakup of the Soviet Union. However. The figure also shows the drastic fall in 2009 followed by a modest recovery in 2010.000 30. the dip coincided with the SARS epidemic and the Bali nightclub bombing.1 and 4. International tourist arrivals in these destinations grew by 11% in 2010 as against a fall of 1% in 2009.4b Workers’ Remittances per Head: South and Southeast Asian Economies (US dollars) 250 200 150 100 50 0 08 01 02 03 07 09 00 04 05 06 10 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 60. Figure 4. of India Philippines Bangladesh Sources: Tables 1. Armenia Kyrgyz Republic Azerbaijan Figure 4. China (19%). Particularly high growths were seen in Japan (27%).4b.4. Migrant workers from these countries are often engaged on long-term contracts and need proof that they have jobs before they can enter North America and Western Europe. Singapore (22%). of Hong Kong.000 40. International tourist arrivals witnessed a robust recovery and grew by 13% in 2010 as against a fall of 1% in 2009 for 24 economies in Asia and the Pacific for which data are available for 2010. The same was observed in the next five most popular destinations as a whole. Hong Kong.4a Workers’ Remittances per Head: Central and West Asian Economies (US dollars) 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 01 00 02 03 08 05 06 07 09 20 20 20 20 04 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 211 REGIONAL TABLES International tourist arrivals in most popular destinations were up sharply after the 2009 downturn. Figure 4. People's Rep.000 10. the Republic of Korea. but the crisis seems not to have discouraged tourists from going to Indonesia.GLOBALIZATION Figure 4.

it usually involves the transfer of technology and managerial skills from more developed to less developed economies.000 500 0 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Georgia Maldives India Kyrgyz Republic China. China (27. Kazakhstan (9. India. Pakistan. undertaken to earn returns that may not be available in the home country. and Hong Kong. Malaysia’s receipts per tourist arrival at $725 are lowest for the seven economies in Figure 4.7.000 2. or have significant mineral resources. of Hong Kong. Armenia. 2008–2010 Hong Kong. FDI is profit-motivated. of Tajikistan Thailand Pakistan Foreign direct investment: Some recovery compared to 2009.2%). People's Rep.26. namely. Economies are arranged in order of their average FDI percentages for the three latest years.25 and 4.8%). Georgia. Figure 4.000 1.7 compares net inflows of FDI as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) for 2008.6 Tourism Receipts per International Arrival (US dollars) 3. The favored targets for FDI are economies that are growing rapidly. and 2010 for 21 economies.1%). Indonesia Sri Lanka Bangladesh Philippines Taipei. tourism receipts per international arrival in India were twice those in the Republic of Korea and three times higher than in the PRC. and Tajikistan. 2009. of India Korea. especially in India and Hong Kong.China Azerbaijan Nepal Korea.8%). and in four economies of Central and West Asia.6. have large markets. the Maldives. China Malaysia Sources: Tables 4. FDI is important because besides creating jobs. Rep.500 2. Singapore Thailand China. It may involve establishing a new company abroad or investing in an existing enterprise. FDI amounted to 9% or more of GDP in four economies: Viet Nam (9. Figure 4. and Thailand.500 1. receipts per international tourist have generally been rising over the period. China but these are not adjusted for inflation. of 0 Source: Table 4. FDI as percentages of GDP were between 2% and 8% in a further nine economies including the PRC.7 Foreign Direct Investment as a Percentage of GDP. Singapore (10. China Singapore Kazakhstan Viet Nam Armenia 03 01 02 00 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 In 2010. the Kyrgyz Republic. Rep. Foreign direct investment (FDI) is a financial investment made abroad with the purpose of acquiring significant influence or outright control over a foreign enterprise.212 GLOBALIZATION Figure 4. People's Rep. which shows the foreign exchange earnings per international arrival for the seven top economies. 5 10 2008 15 20 2009 25 30 2010 35 Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Averaged over these years. In current US dollar terms.

GLOBALIZATION Table 4. in 2009 and 2010. which can be assumed to be an impact of the global crisis. and Singapore—saw continued increases in FDI inflows. Countries follow guidelines of the International Monetary Fund in compiling these statistics and meet regularly to discuss methodology. International tourist arrivals and receipts data come from a specialized agency of the United Nations. and the larger Asian countries use standard forms and procedures for data processing. The top FDI recipients in the region—the PRC. 213 REGIONAL TABLES Data Issues and Comparability International trade statistics are closely monitored by the World Trade Organization and other international agencies. Most of the other international transactions in this section are taken from balance of payments statistics. Common definitions are used by all countries. while FDI inflows to India declined for two consecutive years. Hong Kong. The UNWTO serves as a global forum for tourism policy issues and a practical source of tourism know-how. which fell by nearly 26% compared with total FDI in 2008.6 shows that the 20 economies for which data are available for 2010 have already surpassed their total FDI levels in 2009. but many countries have difficulty in accurately recording nonofficial transactions such as migrant workers’ remittances and private capital flows. In 2009. two-thirds of economies reported declining FDI shares compared to the previous year. the World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). China. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .

1 –22.9 –45.9 … –11.3 3.4 2.6 3.8 … –56.6 –1.2 19.5 –58.1 –7.8 2005 –63.2 32.1 –2.6 –10.7 –3.7 –14.8 18.0 –9.9 17.2 –22.7 7.1 … –96.3 –3.4 –66.0 –16.8 –25.2 –24.1 2..3 –14.0 2.7 … .3 .1 –12.3 3.4 –14.1 –11.3 –29.8 –12.1 –28.1 4.8 –100.8 0.8 1.0 19.3 –19.8 –66.9 15..2 2.8 –46.6 –7.9 –44.4 –6.0 –3.. Sources: Country sources.2 –44.3 –16.9 18.4 .1 –15.0 3.3 9.8 –54.5 4. –14.3 –17.4 2007 –59.9 52.7 –1.6 –28.1 40.8 –39.9 –4.4 45.2 –3.4 0.1 8.1 –26.5 3.9 –0.6 8.5 –6.1 2.4 –12.7 8.9 –22.7 … –75.5 5.4 11.1 –4.5 –43. –5.5 –25..5 –40.3 –11.8 –0.3 –6.9 2.0 –2..6 –11.5 –0.8 –39.6 26.7 54.1 4.0 –5.5 –4.4 20..8 –7..9 –67.2 –4.4 8.5 –39. –22.9 –48.0 2009 –58.0 –6.5 –153.6 –14..2 –50.6 2008 –64.8 –47.7 –8.3 0.8 8.7 –20.3 .2 6.3 4.2 –9.0 –23.3 33.0 –8.4 –10.8 3.8 2000 … –24.5 20.6 –15.7 –4..3 .8 –41.7 –30.3 0.7 –8.3 –5.5 –17.8 0.6 –8.8 –14..6 –52.1 0.2 –55.7 –11.4 –14.1 –31.8 47..1 –5.4 –4.5 29.9 –2.4 –1.8 8.4 14.3 … –11. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.1 –16.1 –95.4 2006 –60.1 14.3 –6. 4.5 1.1 –7.8 12. .3 –1.3 –15.9 2.8 3.6 8.4 –142.0 –5. of Mongolia Taipei.2 –15.5 … –24.1 –12..1 2.6 … –31. Fed.3 … –45..7 –15.3 2.9 –18. but it is not classified as a developing member.1 23.0 –3.7 –23.2 10.2 –0.5 –15.4 4.5 22.1 –5.9 –25.4 –7.0 –0.6 10.0 .3 46.9 –9.9 5. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.0 –6.1 –22..0 –37.7 0.0 –12. –32.4 –39. .1 48.2 –31. –19.3 9.0 .0 0.2 1.0 25.9 –26.3 –41.0 0..2 4.6 –48.3 0.9 –47.. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … .1 –25.9 0.9 –45..6 8.9 –44.8 –5.0 –64.4 –17.9 … … 2.1 –37..9 –0.8 20.1 –22.6 … –34.7 –37.5 –14.4 –8.0 23.7 –12.9 … –21.3 6.4 –4.9 7.9 7.7 –45.6 –14.6 –22.3 –56.0 –40..8 2.0 36.2 –41.9 –6..5 … –16.2 –12.4 –12.8 2002 –29.8 2010 … –22.8 –17.7 –11.0 –8.4 –14.6 2.0 –7.5 –9.6 –9.9 –38.2 20.3 … –66.5 15.6 –5.1 … –28.1 1995 … –31.2 27..6 2.2 … –28.1 6.6 –6.0 –47.8 0.5 –39.4 –29.4 31.5 2003 –39.1 –5.3 –43.2 2.7 –5.0 24.0 6.2 –6.7 –9.9 –41.9 –36. –0.7 0.6 5.0 19.5 –46. 1.9 … –34.2 –4.3 .2 –8.9 –37.9 .0 –6.3 … –65.7 –13. . of Hong Kong.4 –18.4 –33.4 –4.7 –0.5 2.0 27.0 –4.1 18.6 … –25..5 –37.6 4. People’s Rep.8 –20.9 –10.5 –6. 7.1 –17.1 –1.4 … –65.0 11.0 11.4 0.7 –15. –6.7 7.0 –6.7 –18.2 23.8 –16.3 –12.4 –64.5 2.0 … –33.5 5.8 .0 10.2 –39.4 –45.7 … –29.8 –2. Rep.3 15.5 10.5 1..5 0.3 –5.1 –36.1 –7.7 4.6 –3..3 –33.9 47.7 –20. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ..1 –47.9 4.2 0.5 –1.5 –56.8 … –27.8 4.4 –1.6 4.3 –29.4 14.6 –14.0 30. .9 –8..7 0.9 18.9 –17.2 –21.9 –13.1 –67.9 –4.214 GLOBALIZATION Balance of Payments Table 4.2 –13..1 –4.1 9.0 –44.9 –11.0 –4.7 ...7 –1.2 45.0 36.4 –99.4 –19.7 –15.1 –41.9 –4.3 –15.5 51.4 –7. Rep.2 38.1 –11. .4 –10.9 26. 22.8 –8.8 –21.2 –66.5 … –16.6 –1.8 –6.9 –8.6 2.1 Trade in Goods Balance (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.2 –1.1 –4.7 3.. 0.5 –5.8 –10.1 … –27.5 –1.5 –41.4 –120.9 4.0 –8.8 –44.2 2.1 –17.0 –36.5 4. .1 –7.3 9.9 –2.5 1.5 2.6 … –63.6 –0..7 10.0 –103.8 –28.1 –30.0 0.2 –4.4 –44..3 –46. –47.8 28. … … 2.5 –15.6 7.4 .4 5.3 –2.1 –34.5 … –24.0 –1.9 .1 –13.2 –9.9 38.8 17.9 –4.3 –14.3 .3 –22.6 –6.6 5.5 .5 –2.3 18.6 –29.3 –12.9 … … 29.8 2.9 –8.7 –3.8 0.4 8.6 1.3 –2.7 –26.2 –14.6 –5.5 29.6 –7...9 –52.9 –6.0 –10.0 –46.3 –38..1 –48.1 –14.7 –36.0 –4. … … .3 13.5 –7.7 2001 … –19.6 6.9 –40..1 4.3 –27.3 2.3 –49..8 –10.3 5.2 –11.1 … –64.7 22..1 –5.4 –10.7 –16.5 3.8 –1.3 –37.7 –7. –0.1 –7.0 –9.5 7.4 4.7 –8.6 … –26.6 7.5 14..5 5.1 –14.9 2.7 –2.2 7..China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.1 –56.0 –1.4 46.8 10.5 … –63..9 0. China Korea.2 –66..9 –0.3 1..4 –10.5 0.0 –15.4 3.5 –4.1 –4.3 2.2 … –14.1 24.7 15.5 19.1 –7.8 0..3 –49.5 2004 –39.0 8.3 50.2 –50.6 33.6 1...1 11.7 5.0 … –17.7 –0.6 … –16.7 1.3 23.

2 7.0 –1.1 2.5 –0.9 –25.1 … 59.8 1.5 –20.8 –6.4 –0.4 13.3 –5.7 –11.0 16.4 –1.5 –4.0 –2.2 –1.9 … –4.1 … 5.5 16.6 –2.4 –21.7 … 28.3 8.0 –0.4 –1.4 1.0 –1.7 –1.1 –3.6 –0.1 –2.4 –6.8 4.1 –0.4 –5.5 25.3 –1. .3 –8.8 –1.1 –7.4 –3.8 –1.4 –22.6 238.2 –2.2 6.2 –1.4 0. … –0.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutanc India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamd Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. services.6 3.9 … 0.9 –4.5 –1.1 –3.5 –2.7 … 43. States of a Nauru Palaua Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Lestea.8 –9.2 0.2 –5.4 0.8 –6.4 –3..3 –1.8 –25.9 –8.6 –3.1 9.3 … … –0.1 0.2 20.6 … 30.1 3.1 –0.7 –6. and transfer receipts and payments were grouped as service transfer receipts and service transfer payments.7 –1.3 7.9 1995 .7 … … 11.5 –9.0 0.1 2.0 3.8 –3.9 … ..8 –35.1 0.7 0.6 2.2 –4.7 … –15.4 … 25.7 7..6 31.5 –6.4 –3.5 … –1.4 9..4 –3.3 –0.2 –19.0 –0. Fed.8 –7.2 .2 –5.2 4.5 5.8 –44. Sources: International Financial Statistics Online (IMF 2011).0 –1.4 –6.3 … –10.5 … 1.0 –2.2 1.5 0..7 –2.8 … … –6.3 30.5 –2.2 0.4 11.1 –9.0 –7.0 –0.2 –1.7 0.0 … … –6. People’s Rep. estimates include the value-added of United Nations activities.4 –0..0 … –6.7 –1.3 2000 .8 –0.3 –2.3 –4.1 10.1 –0.7 5.8 298.5 0. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.8 … 7.1 1.3 –0.8 … –0.9 –7.6 –4.9 –0.2 32.0 39.7 0.5 … 1.5 –4.3 … –0.3 … –2.0 –1.4 16.3 –9.1 –3.9 –0.4 … … 8.9 … –1.8 –1.3 17.9 –0.4 9.6 –1.7 –1.1 –14.0 … –14.3 … … … 1.4 … –4.6 –1.0 –0.9 … 43.6 15. Prior to 2000.5 –0.9 … –2.1 –4.1 … 0.8 –4.4 –2.4 24.0 –2.8 … 1.9 –2.4 33.7 –3.1 –1.1 … –2.2 0.4 … 36.9 –2..7 –4.6 –13.6 –0. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .6 0.7 –0.9 –4.4 … … –1. of Hong Kong.4 –1.0 –9.7 –28.0 –2.5 … 2.1 –22.8 –6.8 –1.7 –1.6 –3.0 –0.3 –4.2 –4.3 … 34.0 –4.0 –1.3 11.3 –1.3 –3.1 –0.3 … 5.1 –9.4 0.5 6. 15. China Korea.0 –2.4 … –0..5 –1.4 –4.3 –2.1 3.2 –21.0 2003 –9.7 –15.0 1.5 –1.2 … 70.6 –0.5 14.4 … –5.3 2007 –4.9 –1.8 –5.9 21.f Tonga Tuvalua Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand a b c d e f 1990 … … … … … … –1.3 4.3 –0.7 –2.8 1.5 –3.3 –1.3 –0.5 –1. –2.4 –11.2 –1.0 0.8 –2.3 –2.5 12.4 –7.8 5.3 –6.6 –4.1 –1.9 –4.0 0.3 … 9.0 –2.7 … 1.4 –0.3 10. but it is not classified as a developing member.5 0.5 … 6.6 –7.4 –0. –1.1 –0.1 –0.3 –2.9 –4.2 –0.5 20.7 –0.8 … … … 0.1 … –2.0 ..5 –6.0 … –3.4 0.0 –2.1 8.3 … … –1.0 –1.0 –1.7 –15..9 –3.1 … 247..0 … 10.5 –10.8 0.1 … 9.3 –1.2 Trade in Services Balance (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistana Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistanb East Asia China.0 –2.2 –2.3 –1..9 –3.4 –9.3 25.3 4.2 –1. –0.7 441.1 –1.5 5.5 –3.8 2.2 1.7 –0.2 –1.7 –0.1 7.3 –2.9 –1.2 –5.6 –0.9 –13.1 2001 .8 0.2 –0.2 –2.1 –0.8 1.7 0.7 –1.7 –18.8 15.5 –23.4 –2.9 –11.6 … .7 –2.0 –1.6 –9.4 –14.1 –2.9 –45.1 –1.8 –2.8 0.7 –0.9 –9.4 … 4.3 2009 –2.4 –12.0 2005 –8.6 –1.1 … –7.6 –3.4 … 1.8 21.4 –10.3 … 215 REGIONAL TABLES Includes income. … –0.4 20.3 20. income.7 … … … … … … … … … 12.2 –2.8 –3.7 –3.1 –0.2 –5.8 –5.7 –2.7 11.4 2006 –5.2 … –0.6 –1.4 –1.1 0. of Kiribati Marshall Islandse Micronesia.1 2010 … –2.3 –2.0 13.0 –1.2 –2. of Mongolia Taipei.8 –0.0 … … –2.4 … 2.7 5.1 –1.8 1.9 … 0.9 –0.6 –2.8 –1.8 … 6.8 0.1 6.3 … 2.6 38.3 8.4 24.5 9.3 0.2 –2.0 0.2 –10.5 –3.7 5.1 … 2.5 –0.9 1.8 … –6.9 0.0 –1.4 24.9 –1.1 1.2 5.8 5.6 –0.4 … –2.4 –5.2 –12.3 0.6 20.3 –0..0 … 9.3 … 0. GDP estimates refer to non-oil GDP Before 2002.1 –1.4 –1.1 … 4.0 … 10.8 –4.3 –3..5 –0.7 5.2 –10.9 –3.0 –2.7 –15.1 –3.6 … 11.5 –9.4 –1.2 –1.1 0. Rep. Includes other goods and income.1 –5.7 –4.2 … 0.1 –0.2 2002 –3.6 10.3 … 2.1 –0.1 –0.7 1.7 … 1.5 11. 16.3 0.1 –0.3 18.2 –1. country sources.2 2.4 6.4 –1.2 1. Includes other goods and income starting 2003.6 –3.9 –5.7 –2.5 … –1.1 –32.9 … 8.7 –13.4 –0.1 –0.0 … 0.2 2008 –2.3 –1.6 13.1 … 12.3 –0.1 136.3 –0.1 –1.2 4.9 0.2 … 34.4 0.4 2004 –8.GLOBALIZATION Balance of Payments Table 4.5 … … –3.4 –9.0 –1.5 0.1 0.2 –2.0 –3.6 17.1 … … 11.4 –1.1 … … –50.9 –4.3 21.8 –4.1 –0.0 –1.4 –1.5 8.9 1.3 –1.0 –0. Rep.

1 1.7 –17.3 6.7 –0.2 5.5 … … –2.4 11.6 –4.2 –5.4 –62.4 2005 –2.8 –0.0 2.8 –8.0 8.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.3 –6.9 –3.2 –23.1 12.1 –0.4 2..7 3.0 –29.8 4.1 –3..2 0.7 –0.4 –18..2 8.9 7.0 … –0.2 12..7 –1.4 –3.0 1.7 8.8 –7.0 0.1 … 4. –1.1 –5.6 1.8 –6.0 –18.7 –3.0 –2.3 –14.7 2.8 8.8 .8 –1..3 –1..6 –0..3 –7.8 … 10.8 10.6 10.2 12.4 26.5 3.4 2.6 –8.1 –9.2 –25.6 0.9 18. China Korea.0 –0.6 –17.5 –9.7 1.4 4.0 –16.6 2.8 –7.9 .9 1.8 5.6 5.2 18.3 –1.1 –10.3 0.5 238.9 –4.7 –1.2 .0 5.1 48.9 0.2 –18...6 2. –8. .7 –15.7 –0.6 6.3 –0.7 –3.5 5.7 –13.9 1.3 2.0 0.0 –4...0 –4.8 –2.1 –3.9 –6. –4.5 –0.1 –2.6 –2.1 –3.7 –6.5 2.2 12.6 2003 3.0 0.9 5. .7 –1.4 4.2 0.7 4.5 –3.5 54..2 –36.3 –6.7 3.3 15.7 –4.7 .2 ..0 1.3 –24. –1.2 –3..1 .6 –3.0 4.1 … … 13.8 17.6 19.9 0.8 –7.6 3.8 1.1 –19.. .3 –4.3 –4. .5 –14.3 –9.2 –2.1 –8. .8 2006 –4.7 –1.8 –22.6 .6 –5.2 8.2 –5.8 17.9 –11.9 11.0 … –7.9 2.. –3. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Lesteb Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand 1990 … .1 10.2 3.9 –1.1 –5.6 12.8 0..9 –2. –22.8 –15.4 –0.2 –8.1 –4.2 –4. –2.2 8.2 –34.3 –2.7 3.5 –32.0 –8..8 –36.8 –7.1 3.0 –1.3 … –19.0 3.2 8.8 18.4 2.9 4.7 –16.8 2009 –3.3 51.2 –7. –3.1 2.1 2..1 4.5 3.6 … –1.9 –3..4 16. –14.3 … –20.3 –6.3 –8.7 –13.1 –4.0 4.7 –22.9 1.9 1. .6 –5. a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.8 –5.1 14.4 12.1 8.8 … –23.0 –4.4 –8..3 –11.2 –2.4 –10.3 2..4 –11.6 –0.4 –4.2 … –2.9 –1.7 –3.0 … –8.0 –6.2 6.4 –2.0 1.2 –22.4 –4.4 –6.3 –6.8 … –20.3 –21.7 17.1 15.7 4.4 8. Fed.9 –5.0 1..1 14.3 –2.9 0.6 .0 4.1 –0.9 7.3 2..2 54.1 2.8 –10.3 … –29..5 10.6 17.6 10.6 1.4 –3.4 2.9 3.6 –5.4 –4.3 5.4 –4.4 3.6 –1.3 –14.7 .7 –15.9 –8.3 –12.0 –0.8 –8.2 3.9 1.4 –10.5 –9.6 –18.2 22..7 –4...0 0.8 –6.3 1.3 –37.0 –16.3 2.1 1.6 –8.3 –7.7 –3. but it is not classified as a developing member.6 3.7 –1.8 –24..1 –2.4 2000 .5 19.0 –5..8 –2.4 –0.5 4.0 12.7 0.8 –1.6 8.9 –1.9 –2.6 0.6 9.. –6.3 –0. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .2 2..9 –2.8 0.3 –6.5 –29. of Hong Kong.6 –1..2 2.2 –2.1 13.7 0.9 –6.4 –6.8 –10.9 1.9 3.4 ..1 1995 … –17.8 … –26.1 –12.8 –5.. Rep.1 4..3 31.2 0.4 –2.9 15.0 –1.2 –3.3 –19.9 –29.0 5.7 –7.3 56.6 9..5 –9.8 0.2 –12.4 24.2 2.6 1.8 17.4 –7.1 … –11.2 16.5 15.7 –14.1 2.3 200.5 0.8 .4 1.7 .5 11.6 –1..7 –8. … … 3.9 –15.9 –3.3 47.8 –9.3 6.4 7.7 –3.5 23.5 3.2 … 3.0 –5.7 … 1.4 –0.3 –4..3 12...8 1.3 –2.9 15.4 .8 –11.8 –1.0 –8.0 –4.8 … –4.5 –2.2 –2.5 –2.3 –3.2 –6.0 –0.4 6.1 –7.3 –3.6 2..7 –2.5 … –17.5 40. ADB staff estimates using CEIC data.6 –9.0 … –3.0 … –15.3 –17.1 2002 –3.8 –13. –13.9 29.9 –7.5 –7.6 3.2 –27.2 … –10. –3.1 –3..8 –0.7 10.3 2008 –1.0 1.3 Current Account Balance (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.1 –9.4 … –8.8 –27.4 –0. of Mongolia Taipei.. –2.8 0.2 0.0 … .8 2.1 7.4 2.3 34.7 –2.0 –6.1 –4.1 –1.0 2.1 16.0 … –20..6 –9.8 165.3 –3.2 –2.2 –1.3 –10. b GDP estimates refer to non-oil GDP Before 2002.3 1.9 –8.6 –6.4 –5..2 –1. estimates include the value-added of United Nations activities.3 –7.6 –9.1 –28..6 –9.3 –11.5 10.2 2001 .2 –3.2 7.0 –11.9 … 3.0 –5.0 … –5.3 9.4 0. People’s Rep.7 –1.0 1.9 –1.3 –1.5 –10.4 –4.9 –9.4 –5.2 –12.1 2.0 –8.8 –4.3 –1.1 51.5 8.8 –0.9 –0.9 328.6 … –14..9 21.7 52.7 .8 0. 5.2 –0.5 4.8 27. … … . 0.0 –8.8 4.8 –11.0 4.9 7.216 GLOBALIZATION Balance of Payments Table 4.9 –4.3 12.2 4.1 … –4.6 –4.5 … –11.9 –3.1 … –9.3 –12.2 –3.6 –8.8 33.6 3.1 –0. .7 2..9 3.7 –1.9 –7.7 –1.1 –1.3 –15.8 2010 ..5 –1.3 4.4 9.4 –2.0 11.6 –4.6 1.1 2004 1.3 –17.0 –9.5 –5. –0.0 2.3 9. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.8 0.4 15.4 3.3 2007 0.9 0.9 … –5.4 27.9 45..9 4. Rep.5 –7. Sources: Country sources.3 –15.3 455.9 –6.3 22..2 3.8 –10.2 –7. –9.5 0.1 –4.4 –2.1 –18.3 –29.9 … –2.1 6.0 –23.2 2.3 –4.

658 813 485 186 481 5121 1019 ... 14273 2 147 1185 .. .. 18750 3 823 1590 . .. ... . 1037 ... 2384 2 ... but it is not classified as a developing member... 175 ............ . 65 3 ... 94 .. 185 .. 131 182 230 205 37 3554 79 .......... .worldbank. .. .... 1187 4000 ..... 10 88 9 .. 325 6794 18 1329 116 18642 . 60 . 38791 317 866 178 430 6562 .... States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESb REGIONAL MEMBERSb WORLD 1990 ............. 15 143 3 ........... 14 1651 1151 1652 2000 . 10955 121 662 56 273 2858 ...... 878 . . . 5237 136 735 12 274 1968 . 6 5057 1820 845 217 REGIONAL TABLES 20330 34698 41806 53062 64786 71583 88182 105217 132133 167981 170209 183718 24784 38211 46413 57804 69256 76309 92992 110377 138190 175263 177326 191439 95066 125879 143273 169219 204295 236971 274532 317528 384523 443517 417313 439720 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB... 498 693 346 178 322 4280 467 .. . .. 66 . 369 7250 41 1512 133 21373 . 297 5722 4 1365 116 15251 ..... 138 1489 1 571 85 10243 ..... 35 1903 1374 236 2001 . 12883 2 111 1166 ... ...... 6 45 5 .. 7 110 7 ............ 6223 2 57 809 .. . 1622 3200 .. 1380 2714 ..... 28334 3 1453 2185 . . 8 2370 ... 338 6793 38 1315 116 19765 . . 4 2326 1078 1065 2004 ... ..... 48729 348 2555 200 455 10523 . 1062 1554 732 192 1232 7039 2544 .. 200 5420 1 1117 131 13566 . Fed... 1607 2700 .. .. 1080 . 51300 359 2744 250 500 10804 . 166 11 185 6 1465 . 1333 4800 ... 762 ... 401 .. 101 ... 15736 2 678 1309 .. .. 160 . 5 2837 931 958 2005 . .. 4 1772 1821 1148 2003 .... 53131 4 3507 4110 . 111 . of Mongolia Taipei.. 15059 120 827 129 261 3192 ..GLOBALIZATION Balance of Payments Table 4. .. .. . 142 1202 ...... 8 120 2 .. 22 5 . 6 45 4 . ... 5 43 . ..... 779 ... ..... 49468 4 2986 3363 . .. . ... . ....China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji........ ......... 27954 294 994 181 355 5428 . 83 .... ...... 15 135 2 . ..... ....... 7 45 4 . . 37217 3 1734 2527 ... .... . 33 .. .... 24102 297 848 180 323 4315 . .. 2006 . . ...... 94 104 181 171 11 1461 ...... 846 1287 695 223 715 5998 1691 .. ...... . 5 2990 1080 739 2006 ... 4 108 2 ............ .. .. Rep.. .. 6 4713 1776 628 2010 ..... People’s Rep... ...... .. 177 1866 1 802 118 11471 .. 124 ... 53 . Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .. 87 57 274 122 9 1075 .. 1252 2000 .... 7 45 4 . ....... 183 ... 99 ...... 53 1783 1984 841 2002 ..... 44 .. .... ..... 168 171 236 148 78 3964 146 . .. 1898 7200 .. 20186 240 800 203 278 3584 .. 69 ... .. 121 1190 1 342 104 6961 . ... 133 1046 1 367 117 8769 ... 973 ............. 1816 8000 .. 185 .. 62890 1995 ... . . 435 228 303 166 189 3945 252 ... . 24 . . 69 . . Receipts (US$ million) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China... 48524 355 2774 225 454 8941 .. ... .... 49977 3 2727 2947 .. for Taipei.... ....... 1635 5500 .. .. ... ....... 12 131 2 ... 20999 2 771 1438 .... ... 7037 153 652 25 275 2105 . 5 3131 1380 650 2007 . 79 . Rep. 1697 . . Sources: Migration and Remittances website (World Bank 2011.. . China Korea.........China: economy sources. .... . ... 154 . .. 16 41 . 140 1259 1 435 106 9735 .. 116 1 1712 . of Hong Kong.. 832 1404 808 132 1160 9683 2032 . go.. ..... . b For reporting economies only.... .. 173 ... 12 651 22 116 81 5360 ......... of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.. .. 769 1274 714 124 992 8717 1748 .. ........ . .. 94 ...org/092X1CHHD0). . 1695 . 6 4713 1929 641 2009 ...... 1637 6840 ......4 Workers’ Remittances and Compensation of Employees. . . 123 ..... 6 3826 1577 654 2008 .. 353 6174 6 1570 116 16302 . 22125 2 1212 1991 . . ..

7 2005 … 10.1 5.6 5.2 … 3.0 … 1.6 … 3.1 0.0 … 6.8 … 4.7 … 3. of Hong Kong.2 18.1 … … 0.1 6.6 7.4 … … 20.1 0.8 4.1 9.6 … 3.1 … 3.7 … 0.5 … … 1.3 0.8 0.2 17.4 … … 2.2 19.6 0.0 … 3.9 0.4 … … … … … 0.9 36.1 7.4 0.5 0.4 … 29.8 2010 … 8.0 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.1 7.2 20.5 … … … 12.8 … … 5.2 … 0.5 Workers’ Remittances and Compensation of Employees.8 0.0 9.6 0.0 11.2 … 1.7 0.1 0.2 7.9 0.3 0.1 0.8 0.0 0.3 4.4 0.9 … 3.0 0.3 … 27.9 0.9 35.9 6.2 0.0 1.0 2.4 0.0 1.5 … 0.3 … 1.9 0.9 0.4 1.8 … 3.2 16.0 … 1.0 … … 1.7 0.6 0.2 1.7 0.7 … 0.0 0.9 0. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .0 … 3.1 7.6 1.1 6. Rep.1 4.7 … … 1995 … 5.9 6.8 7.9 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.3 0.8 … 5.4 0.3 0.5 … 27.2 0. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESb REGIONAL MEMBERSb 1990 … … … … … … 5.7 … 19.4 … … 0.1 11.0 1.4 8.2 0.7 … 31.2 0.4 8.0 12.4 … … 0.1 5.7 … … … … … 0.2 … … … 0.2 21.5 0.4 0.3 0. Rep.1 … … 1.2 0.6 … 1.org/092X1CHHD0).1 23.0 … 3.5 … 0.4 0.9 … 6.1 0.0 10.4 … 3.1 1.3 0.China: economy sources.2 0.2 0.4 0.0 … 0.3 1.1 … 29.2 1.0 … 1.6 21.7 1.4 … 2.5 2.8 3.1 5.3 5.7 0.7 6.9 … 3.6 1.0 0.9 6.1 5.2 0.1 6.7 2006 … 10.0 0. Sources: ADB staff estimates based on the Migration and Remittances website (World Bank 2011.3 … … … … 0.3 5.0 0.6 … 1.8 2007 … 9. Fed.2 0.1 4.7 0.0 0. Receipts (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.4 0.7 … 5.7 … 36.6 1.1 0.1 25.2 11.3 2000 … 4.6 0.3 0.5 4.3 … 0.6 … … … … … 0.4 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.9 0.9 0.7 7.1 7.0 10.0 3.6 0.0 0.1 0.1 3.0 8.3 36.4 0.7 … 0.1 2.2 … 3.3 7.2 5.0 1. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.7 0.6 … 6.3 0.6 0.8 0.5 0.2 5.5 7.4 45.7 7.7 … 0.9 0.4 2001 … 4.2 … 1.3 0.2 0. People’s Rep.3 0.4 … … 2.5 0.2 … 4.1 6.9 7.6 … … … 0.2 15.9 0.2 14.3 … … … 0. for Taipei.2 … 0.6 0.4 … … … … … 0.9 0. but it is not classified as a developing member.1 25.1 … … 1.3 13.1 0. China Korea.9 0.3 7.1 21.3 0.7 … 1.0 0.0 … … 1.6 … 29.1 1.1 3.7 0.4 … 5.0 … … … … … 0.8 0.9 0.9 8.6 2002 … 5.2 0.9 … 0.9 0.8 0.0 5.7 0.2 … … … … … 0.2 0.7 7.4 12.2 23.3 … 26.7 … 4.5 … 1.3 6.1 0.4 … … … … … 0.3 11.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.0 1.1 21.9 0.1 0.0 0.1 … 1.4 1.5 1.0 1.8 0.0 12. go.9 2.7 … 4.0 0.1 5.2 0.2 23. of Mongolia Taipei.7 2.1 0.4 0.1 1.9 1.9 0.1 8.3 0.2 11.0 0.0 12.1 25.3 2.0 2.9 7.2 0.9 6.0 … 1.5 7.1 0.9 0.6 7.218 GLOBALIZATION Balance of Payments Table 4.1 3.4 0.3 3.8 0.1 9.7 0.0 0.5 1.6 … 0.0 0.0 11.7 0.6 … 3.1 2.3 0.1 … 0.1 1.4 0.0 10.6 … … 0.0 0.1 6.1 0.1 0.0 13.9 0.0 0.1 10.1 … 5.7 … 1.1 0.6 1.3 0.9 2009 … 8.2 3.1 0.1 6.7 … … … … … 0.8 2008 … 9.9 0.5 1.1 11.2 5.8 1. b For reporting economies only.7 2004 … 12.1 11.0 0.1 0.9 … … … … … 0.3 1.2 17.0 4.5 … 5.2 0.3 4.2 … … 1.3 … 3.2 23.5 1.6 2003 … 6.worldbank.2 22.3 0.1 4.7 … 3.3 … … 1.3 4.8 5.0 7.4 … 31.0 0.1 0.6 0.4 … … … … … 0.3 … 3.5 … … … … … 0.5 4.1 8.7 … … … 0.2 2.0 12.0 49.5 … 2.1 … 0.2 14.2 … 1.8 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.5 … 32.1 … … 1.1 24.2 18.7 8.0 0.5 0.0 … … 0.2 … 3.5 0.6 … 1.7 … 1.1 1.2 24.6 7.3 20.4 0.8 2.2 0.5 … … … … 5.3 0.4 0.2 0.0 1.0 0.9 2.2 38.1 0.0 … … … … … 0.6 1.5 1.4 0.7 0.0 … 5.6 0.1 4.

GLOBALIZATION Balance of Payments Table 4. China Korea. Rep.6 Foreign Direct Investment. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. for Taipei. of Mongolia Taipei. Rep.China: economy sources. Fed. World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011). b For reporting economies only. Sources: International Financial Statistics Online (IMF 2011). Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . People’s Rep. but it is not classified as a developing member. Net Inflows (US$ million) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. of Hong Kong. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIES b REGIONAL MEMBERSb 1990 … … … … … … 245 … … … 3487 … 789 … –3913 3 … … 6 0 43 … … 1093 6 2332 163 530 5575 2444 180 … 92 0 … … … … 155 7 10 … 0 … 13 8111 1777 1735 … … 1995 –0 25 330 … 964 96 723 … 233 –24 35849 … 1776 10 1559 2 … 2144 7 0 56 … 151 4346 95 4178 280 1478 11535 2068 1780 … 70 … … … … … 455 3 2 … 1 … 31 12026 39 3316 2000 0 104 130 131 1283 –2 308 … 131 75 38399 61924 9283 54 4928 280 … 3584 22 0 173 … 149 –4550 34 3788 258 2240 16485 3366 1298 … 1 18 … … … … 96 –2 13 … 5 … 20 13618 8227 3841 2001 1 70 227 110 2835 5 383 … 170 83 44241 23776 3528 43 4109 79 … 5472 21 0 172 61 149 –2977 24 554 210 195 15087 5067 1300 … 41 15 … … … … 63 1 –9 … 1 … 18 8261 6191 –299 2002 50 111 1392 160 2590 5 823 36 276 65 49308 9682 2392 78 1445 52 … 5626 25 –6 197 230 145 145 5 3203 152 1542 6402 3342 1400 … 31 15 … … … … 18 –0 –0 … –0 … 14 16992 9087 1481 2003 58 121 3285 335 2092 46 534 32 226 83 47077 13624 3526 132 453 268 3 4323 32 15 229 124 84 –597 19 2473 251 491 11941 5232 1450 … 40 16 … … … … 118 1 –2 … 3 … 18 8024 6238 2267 2004 187 248 3556 492 4157 175 1118 272 354 177 2005 271 239 1680 453 1971 43 2201 54 418 192 2006 238 453 –584 1170 6278 182 4273 339 731 174 2007 243 699 –4749 1750 11119 208 5590 360 804 705 2008 300 935 15 1564 14322 377 5438 376 820 711 2009 185 777 473 658 13771 189 2338 16 1355 750 2010 … 577 563 549 9961 234 2016 16 … … 219 REGIONAL TABLES 54937 117208 124082 160052 175148 114215 185081 34032 33618 45054 54365 59614 52395 68915 9246 6309 3586 1784 3311 2249 –150 93 185 344 373 845 624 … 1898 1625 7424 7769 5432 2805 2492 449 3 5771 53 –0 233 113 131 1896 17 4624 214 688 21026 5860 1610 … 251 19 … … … … 31 2 6 … 5 … 20 813 9 7606 53 2 272 175 381 8336 28 3966 237 1854 15460 8055 1954 … 156 1 … … … … 38 –3 19 … 7 … 13 697 6 20336 64 –7 480 88 483 4914 187 6076 279 2921 29056 9453 2400 … 412 13 … … … … 13 21 34 … 10 … 43 26415 –6784 4563 653 73 25483 91 6 603 258 867 6928 324 8590 258 2916 37033 11324 6700 … 338 –8 … … … … 102 7 64 … 28 … 34 41076 22180 3079 1010 30 43406 135 1 752 222 815 9318 228 7376 283 1544 8588 8531 9579 … 309 2 … … … … –30 12 95 … 4 … 40 47281 24552 5121 713 36 35596 112 38 404 326 530 4877 319 1387 323 1963 15279 4976 7600 … 56 2 … … … … 423 3 118 … 15 … 35 27246 11834 –1259 968 … 24159 164 88 478 … … 12736 … … … 1713 38638 5762 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 30576 –1359 822 36827 –35601 7807 3214 2340 1564 70223 144025 105061 90720 98030 153850 215725 271635 343486 361236 267607 354959 85605 169710 119275 118510 114683 200937 185076 295917 410078 438412 305753 384998 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam a Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.

6 3.2 1.1 2.9 0.9 1.6 –14.6 20.3 5.7 2.7 1.2 14.3 –5.9 7.4 12.7 2.7 … … … … 1.0 3.0 –0.3 45.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.5 1.0 1.2 –0.4 0.6 … 2.5 0.1 1.1 30.3 4.9 4.6 0.5 –3.7 0.6 23.7 4.2 0.9 5.1 2.4 0.8 0.1 1.4 1.8 1.3 1.0 … 0.0 1.3 25.7 8.6 26.8 6.8 2.7 6.0 2.4 3.6 0.9 –6.7 3.5 1.4 1.2 0.5 0.1 3.1 0.2 0.2 4.1 1.4 3.1 2004 3.5 0.6 7.4 2.3 0.6 3.3 6.1 0.4 … … … … 0.6 3.5 2.0 5.0 4.2 18.8 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 2.0 0.9 41.2 0.3 4. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .8 … … … … 5.6 1.4 2.7 5.3 0.8 5.6 1.9 7.0 –0.5 1.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.3 14.1 9.8 1.8 0.4 20.2 3.0 0.9 5.8 4.7 Foreign Direct Investment.5 … … … … … 9.8 3.4 1.0 0.4 0.0 2.6 9.0 4.6 1.1 1.9 17.2 … –0.1 4.8 18.5 3.0 0.6 4.4 2010 … 6.1 7.3 … … 3.6 9.5 3.1 2009 1.5 … 13.9 0.7 2.3 3.0 13.7 2.1 2.4 0.3 1.2 … … … … 4.1 8.6 3.0 9.4 … 9.9 2.2 1.9 2.7 17.9 4.6 0.7 7.8 2.1 –2.3 6.8 –1.7 5. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESb REGIONAL MEMBERSb 1990 … … … … … … 0.0 0.3 7.9 1.0 … … … 0. b For reporting economies only.6 –0.0 0.6 0.3 0.6 2.8 5.8 1.3 4.5 … 8.0 1.2 1.4 0.5 2.7 10.4 4.3 0.7 6.5 9.5 3.1 3.3 5.0 2.7 0.4 17.7 2.4 2.7 –0.7 0.7 3.9 … 13.2 2.5 1.9 1.7 4.2 … 5.4 1.8 … 3.4 7.9 2.0 0.1 3.2 7.9 1.4 3.4 10.5 8.9 7.5 … … … … 3.9 4.9 4.8 … … … … 2.6 … 0.1 1.0 0.6 … 0.0 … 3.0 4.9 2001 … 3.2 4.3 4.1 2.1 3.8 0.2 3.7 0.0 –0.2 4. of Mongolia Taipei.5 0.1 6.3 17.1 1.2 8.2 4.2 0.5 0.7 –0.9 … 5.5 0.7 … … … … 2.3 5.6 7.7 22.7 … … … 0.0 3.8 15.7 0.9 3.8 20.5 1.9 8. of Hong Kong.8 2.2 2.3 1.0 1.3 7.9 0.8 2.4 … 0.6 5.0 1.7 3.2 2.8 0.0 2000 … 5.7 3.0 1.9 … 0.6 … 5.5 … … … … –0.5 –0.6 0.2 5.3 … –2.9 1.0 1.6 1.4 0.5 … … … … 0. Rep.8 8.0 2.0 1.4 … … … … 0.5 2.0 … 1.6 0.0 0.5 4.8 6.4 4.2 3.0 … 8.0 … 2.1 2.2 1.4 … 9.1 4.9 1.4 1.7 1.6 1.0 –0.8 2.220 GLOBALIZATION Balance of Payments Table 4.1 10.2 –0.6 0.9 … … 1995 … 2.3 2. Rep.4 2.8 … … … 0.5 0.6 … 0.4 1.1 10.8 … 1.8 1.3 0.0 … 4.0 0.5 … 9.9 7.5 0.5 1.1 1.6 0.7 7.2 3.1 0.0 1.6 1.3 5.2 8.9 … 1.8 –0.6 12.0 0.8 6.3 2.5 0.8 2.4 … 4.2 0.5 7.7 … … … … 0.4 1.0 20.1 2.2 2.7 0.2 10.7 1.2 8.2 … 1. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.3 3. but it is not classified as a developing member. and economy sources.3 4.4 15.6 12.2 36.0 1.4 2006 2.2 … 1.4 0.5 … 2.0 6.0 1.2 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.3 13.1 … 1.4 1.2 17.0 13.9 2.4 7.5 0.7 19.7 … 1.3 2.3 12.0 2007 2.4 2.3 0.7 4.5 2.6 3.4 … 4. People’s Rep.2 15. World Development Indicators Online (World Bank 2011).0 3.2 10.6 … 4.2 –1.9 2.0 5.4 6.6 … 5.7 1.5 9.4 1.0 25.2 18.8 0.8 12.0 … 2.1 1.3 2008 2.7 0.3 3.3 2.3 0.4 2.8 6.1 0.4 2.7 … 5.2 2. Fed.3 1.1 2.2 0.4 4.4 5.7 … 6.0 –0.7 … 5.7 3.3 1.2 4.0 1.6 9.2 0.0 2.8 0.5 0.9 27.9 0.8 2.8 6.6 2.5 … … 1.2 … 8.1 0.2 … 0.2 1.6 7.4 … 3.6 … 2.5 … 7.1 1.2 0.6 –0.2 3.8 … 6.7 0.0 –0.1 0.1 11.0 0.0 1.0 … 1.7 1.7 0.5 1.8 … 2.4 5.9 1.9 5.0 1.8 –0.9 … 0. Net Inflows (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.8 3.0 –2. China Korea.2 13.5 4.5 23.1 2.8 0.2 4.2 4.9 12.6 0.2 4.0 3.6 … 3.8 3. Sources: ADB staff estimates using International Financial Statistics Online (IMF 2011).0 1.0 5.8 17.4 3.2 … 6.6 0.3 2.7 2005 4.4 0.7 0.3 0.4 2002 1.3 2.7 0.0 0.9 2.0 … 0.3 2003 1.1 3.0 … … 1.3 2.0 0.9 … 6.1 1.

GLOBALIZATION External Trade Table 4. 5250 409 7972 779 2084 3720 148780 173753 125058 473 111405 3260 103 32798 85 340 3807 2392 854 45418 308 73865 899 17447 118186 55455 5449 5 623 7 23 39 29 14 2672 9 168 … 15 0 28 53127 441538 13641 2000 137 300 1745 323 8812 505 8335 784 2508 3265 249203 201855 172268 536 151458 4780 103 45297 109 701 5456 3903 1397 62124 330 98229 1982 38078 137953 68083 14483 9 543 4 25 17 28 12 2089 14 65 … 9 0 26 63980 479323 13292 2001 68 342 2314 318 8639 476 8765 652 2623 3170 266100 189901 150439 521 125866 5809 106 44296 110 743 4815 3640 1571 56323 320 87969 2563 32150 121685 63075 15029 7 536 3 23 18 13 17 1802 15 47 4 7 0 20 63375 403025 13734 2002 100 505 2168 346 9670 486 9464 737 2862 2988 325600 200094 162471 524 135079 5344 113 52486 132 603 4702 3702 1770 57106 301 94061 3036 35208 125043 66053 16706 5 518 3 26 14 9 20 1640 14 50 77 14 0 20 64903 415582 14353 2003 144 686 2590 461 12927 582 11346 797 3465 3725 438228 223769 193817 616 150301 6464 133 62977 152 656 5133 4421 2087 61035 336 104706 2324 36231 159902 77935 20149 8 670 3 29 18 29 8 2195 15 67 143 16 0 30 70014 470516 16490 2004 305 723 3615 647 20096 721 12583 915 3854 4853 593326 259260 253845 869 182432 7420 183 82826 181 732 5771 5057 2589 71585 363 126646 2906 39681 198562 95042 26485 7 696 2 30 14 14 6 2612 12 86 106 16 0 50 86614 565378 20357 2005 384 974 7649 866 27849 674 14453 909 4944 5409 761953 289325 284419 1064 198168 8259 258 103496 162 823 6351 6249 2908 85660 553 140949 3584 41255 229832 109564 32447 5 705 5 34 13 4 14 3271 12 105 43 14 0 46 106211 595697 21698 2006 416 985 13015 936 38250 891 16468 1399 7156 6390 2007 454 1152 21269 1232 47755 1321 17107 1468 9114 8992 2008 545 1057 30586 1495 71184 1856 17642 1409 11786 11573 2009 403 711 21097 1134 43196 1673 16934 1010 14500 11771 2010 . but it is not classified as a developing member. . International Financial Statistics Online (IMF 2011). Sources: Country sources..... . 1011 26476 1583 57244 1812 17812 1195 .. Rep.. China Korea. Rep.8 Merchandise Exports (US$ million) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.. .. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . b Prior to 2003. c For reporting economies only.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singaporeb Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. People’s Rep. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia...... Fed.. data exclude Indonesia. 151 … 62091 82143 65016 661 67044 1415 68 18601 53 176 1913 2237 86 25675 79 29446 472 8186 52527 23053 2404 5 608 3 3 4 60 … 1175 9 70 … 12 0 19 39726 286321 9402 1995 166 271 637 . of Mongolia Taipei... States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESc REGIONAL MEMBERSc 1990 235 . 4960 . of Hong Kong. 13045 221 REGIONAL TABLES 968969 1217780 1430690 1201610 1577900 316823 344490 362683 318520 390134 325465 371489 422007 363534 466384 1542 1948 2535 1885 2909 223763 246267 254161 202686 273543 10264 414 126201 225 828 6896 7608 3692 100799 882 160638 5191 47410 271604 127719 39826 4 694 3 28 9 … 14 4198 10 121 61 9 0 49 123311 647006 22459 12211 674 158619 228 894 7645 7668 4088 114101 923 175793 6349 50466 299003 150999 48561 5 751 11 28 16 … 11 4741 14 165 19 11 0 50 140901 712769 26867 14111 519 193254 331 850 8109 10544 4708 137020 1092 198755 6873 49078 336968 175038 62685 4 923 9 32 … … 12 5798 10 211 49 8 … 56 186500 783851 30153 15526 495 174677 169 873 7081 7172 4196 116510 1053 156765 7481 38436 268900 150355 57096 3 628 6 34 … … 12 4385 11 165 35 7 … 58 153297 578931 19392 16131 544 244680 200 831 8294 9340 5068 157779 1746 198513 8804 51432 351182 193176 72192 5 613 5 … … … 12 5611 12 227 42 8 … 49 211953 767825 31376 … 942663 1283979 1199271 1318168 1586905 2002663 2369412 2830256 3328214 3817713 3205620 4148204 … 1453361 1844476 1683044 1816708 2148347 2680069 3099267 3630640 4216418 4828761 3964411 5168699 a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB... .

1 39.8 34.4 49.5 14.3 5.6 5.0 2000 –17.4 40.7 37.5 –17..8 81.0 12.9 21..1 –51.5 28.5 40.5 23.8 13.9 18.4 … 6.7 –16.9 33.7 –31. .2 21.6 17.8 … 2.6 9.5 3.2 11.7 –33.5 25.8 55.0 18.1 23.5 21. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.6 12.9 –27.6 18.8 30. 11.0 63.3 –2.4 111.2 20.1 11.6 –2.0 14.2 9.4 3. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESd REGIONAL MEMBERSd a b c d –25. 48.5 0.1 –4.5 –68.1 9.6 … … … 4.9 11.5 50.2 70.6 22.9 74.7 17.3 6.5 26.1 48.2 21.7 138.6 –36.3 15. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.0 –12.4 0.4 28.3 –27.8 48.8 8.6 17.6 12.7 12.8 –31.5 –53.0 10.4 10.3 8.9 –8.2 33.6 34.2 248.0 –43.9 115.1 29.7 59.7 –43.5 154.4 101.5 15.7 –1.7 19.7 19.2 30.9 14.7 20.5 19.5 2.0 –6.3 50.1 26.4 39.0 22.5 33.3 19.6 21.9 2010 … 42.5 7.3 60.9 .7 87..7 25.3 41.9 26.3 2004 111..2 28.0 –2.2 28.9 6. of Mongolia Taipei.1 40.1 –30.9 20.9 … –16.7 –15.0 62.7 10.9 27.0 –3.0 –11.7 12..1 27.0 –9..6 16.3 35.4 43.8 12.9 1.4 25.3 43.0 –17.3 23..6 –49.1 –2.1 17.6 11.5 24.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singaporec Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.3 3.1 9.4 10.6 … … – –24.1 2008 20.5 8.1 –20.3 –13.6 32.0 41.9 14.2 18.4 … 1850. For reporting economies only.7 7.8 –21. Fed.7 –21.3 –10.3 –24.3 10.5 14.3 –24.2 16.5 24..6 61.9 –48.5 18..7 33.4 65..3 –58.2 85.0 25.9 –23.8 30.4 17.8 –7.1 18.3 8.6 25.4 9.9 3.9 7.5 7.8 5.9 8.3 22.5 8.0 22.7 33.7 20.4 –5.4 5.7 59.6 1. Prior to 2003.8 19.4 8.3 17.3 –31.6 –22.7 22.2 14.1 8.9 31.9 Rates are based on US dollar values of exports.6 –6. .2 19.4 24.5 74.2 8.3 22.5 11.3 15.5 22.0 25.0 6.4 44.4 22.5 53.8 –2.2 … –15.3 1.0 19.2 20.1 47.5 7.1 19.0 44.9 –0.1 5.9 39.2 –14.5 2009 –26.7 34.4 20.2 21.0 6.4 17.2 11.6 12.7 32.0 10.3 28.5 2.2 –39.4 22.1 19.1 14.3 21..7 15.5 3.9 –33.9 –1.7 27.6 28..8 –22.1 –91. –2.7 3.7 32.8 2.5 –24.3 23.0 28.7 13.9 12.6 14.6 40.0 13.8 35.0 10.9 6. data exclude Indonesia.1 3.2 19.1 –17.4 1.8 23.6 –9.9 34.2 15.9 27.2 .5 62.3 32.3 10.0 20. Sources: Country sources.0 18.1 2007 9.0 5.3 23.9 37.8 4.0 63.1 11..1 –32.9 21.2 38.5 38.2 1.1 19.5 28.6 30.9 9.1 –25.3 1.1 19.9 24.3 22. … … 18.2 –25.5 –30.4 –50.4 31.9 8.3 –58.3 14.3 –6.5 12.0 –51.8 –9.8 16.4 –15.5 18.8 –5.2 12.4 15.5 9.9 13.3 35.9 –2.8 16.4 22.3 25.4 6.6 11.9 –14.7 14.4 18.6 –21.5 24.7 –16.6 27.2 4.7 12.1 –3.0 –20. International Financial Statistics Online (IMF 2011).9 29.1 8.3 –15.2 12. Rep.2 18.0 3.1 14.5 19.7 –2.9 2.4 31. People’s Rep.9 –15.2 20.6 67.3 11..5 –26.2 23.1 212.1 21.8 –4..1 17.3 –4.4 87.6 –11.3 19.4 4.6 –2.0 –10.8 –9.9 … … 1995 58.7 25.3 –26.5 21.6 2.4 15.0 –10.8 6.6 57.7 –54.6 –8.0 15.5 20.8 19.4 30.0 0.4 14.1 30.9 20.2 9.4 6.0 8.9 20.1 1. China Korea.8 17.4 … 13.0 44.3 11.9 8.7 52.1 –18.9 54.6 24.7 28.3 –15. 18.0 17.7 –29.9 –12.3 10.8 14.0 –28.0 –3.0 2001 –50.1 22.6 68.8 9.2 8. .7 8.5 13.7 14.6 16.4 14.7 –20..4 29.9 6.8 2002 47. Rep.5 … –20.5 9. but it is not classified as a developing member.2 –5.8 45.6 –31.1 24.8 29.8 14.5 –9.6 11.8 26.6 6.7 18.1 –8.4 8.5 –1.222 GLOBALIZATION External Trade a Table 4.2 13.7 –8.2 18.2 –8.7 9.7 –0.4 9.2 –13.8 31.0 –5.7 1.3 … 1.0 1.2 –16.9 –25.5 39.3 … 10.1 –35.0 –7.6 29.0 29.6 12.8 10.0 2.1 18.9 4.5 813.8 11.9 11. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .5 5.8 38.9 .0 33.9 31.9 0.2 0.1 8.5 –11.8 17. .2 44.8 24.2 2003 44.1 –5.4 29.2 16.0 –4.4 12.3 13.6 –38.0 –24.4 11.3 –4.6 23.8 21.6 5.3 13.8 37.7 22.3 13.3 21.3 0.6 24.7 20.6 –21.6 –1.9 –24.8 0.3 32.8 149. of Hong Kong.6 33.4 10..8 8.9 13.4 Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.0 35.2 55.3 4.6 3.0 –8.4 12.4 3.1 4.4 –12.1 18.4 33..3 –23.0 22.4 2.4 .9 18.9 2.7 –32.8 –12.6 10.1 4.2 4.9 –15.7 11.5 –26.5 –6.1 37.2 13.3 32.9 –10.7 –13.5 2.0 14.9 Growth Rates of Merchandise Exports (percent) 1990 –0.6 –20.0 11.0 –5.7 36.7 –6.2 0.6 14.9 18.4 .5 14.1 –59.6 2006 8.2 24.7 17.8 –26.8 –6.2 14.0 10.8 … 23.0 23.3 –72.9 24.4 10.3 –8.5 26.6 4.8 –13.8 2005 25.1 21.3 –3.7 –16.7 –32.4 5.9 39.0 156.3 –9.6 8.9 4.7 … –23.1 … –27.9 47.3 54.3 6.6 10.5 14.9 40.7 … … 4.3 4.6 –16.0 17.6 2.1 37.1 8.7 35.9 18.2 37.2 16.7 15.

. compilation methodology shifted from cif to fob. Starting 2000. Starting 2000. Rep... 400 … 53345 82484 69844 924 54734 3580 78 24677 137 624 2635 1995 387 674 668 . . 3807 522 10144 838 1644 2893 132084 192755 135119 415 103598 5823 112 37832 268 1227 5311 2000 1176 885 1172 709 5040 554 9967 675 1742 2947 225094 212800 160481 615 140630 8080 193 51372 389 1526 7198 2001 1696 877 1431 753 6446 467 10137 688 2108 3137 243550 201083 141098 638 107816 9026 191 51964 394 1544 5963 2002 2452 987 1666 796 6584 587 10638 721 1832 2712 295170 207647 152126 691 113330 8473 207 61141 392 1379 6110 2003 2101 1280 2626 1141 8409 717 12376 881 2579 2964 412760 231903 178827 801 128132 2004 2177 1351 3516 1846 12781 947 15425 1191 3148 3816 561229 271074 224463 1019 169252 2005 2470 1802 4350 2490 17353 1189 20630 1330 2947 4091 659953 299520 261238 1177 182709 2006 2744 2192 5269 3675 23677 1931 28401 1725 2558 4782 791461 334689 309383 1435 203014 2007 3022 3268 6045 5215 32756 2789 30492 2547 3780 5236 2008 3020 4426 7575 6302 37889 4072 35689 3273 5363 7504 2009 3336 3321 6514 4366 28409 3040 33331 2570 6600 9438 2010 .. of Hong Kong..... . Rep.. International Financial Statistics Online (IMF 2011). .. of Mongolia Taipei. compilation methodology shifted from cif to fob. 1271 73 … . Fed. Prior to 2003.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodiab Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singaporec Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.. data exclude Indonesia. 6859 . China Korea..10 Merchandise Imports (US$ million) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China... For reporting economies only. Starting 2005. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . People’s Rep. 3783 6746 5095 24024 3236 29474 2658 … 8800 223 REGIONAL TABLES 955950 1132560 1005920 1394800 367627 388513 347322 433102 356846 435275 323085 425212 2062 3245 2138 3200 219591 239588 173934 251003 21629 540 315924 1388 3181 14083 2573 6508 129197 1403 155825 4617 60420 318684 175466 80714 150 2259 74 138 155 … 130 3133 249 328 269 158 … 313 189523 763888 34099 22577 527 281734 967 3668 10202 2400 5830 96829 1461 123328 4138 45878 244962 130839 69949 181 1434 67 158 172 … 104 2863 205 268 295 152 … 291 156451 550383 20209 23581 843 349227 1095 5117 13502 2456 6783 135663 2060 164291 6366 58229 310391 179303 84801 . ... States of d Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoae Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESf REGIONAL MEMBERSf a b c d e f 1990 936 .. compilation methodology shifted from fob to cif.GLOBALIZATION External Trade Table 4. Sources: Country sources... but it is not classified as a developing member. … 113 3436 280 405 298 150 … 284 192695 692242 30532 9616 10797 12575 14381 17204 249 411 386 420 526 77089 110570 149753 185513 244824 471 642 745 927 1096 1633 1850 2094 2389 2931 6670 8016 8869 10265 11303 1012 2089 1106 1159 1556 1327 1422 1491 1669 2101 164 1187 1936 2094 2361 2668 3269 3918 4771 5432 21837 40654 33515 30962 31289 32551 46525 57701 61066 74473 185 589 535 510 447 462 713 882 1060 1065 29250 77601 81963 73744 79761 83299 105166 114602 130350 146046 880 1836 2346 2749 2268 2205 1973 1999 2911 3313 13042 28488 33807 34939 41092 42576 46102 49487 54078 57996 60583 124394 134675 115918 116337 136218 173549 200187 238477 262743 33005 70457 62662 60578 63302 74185 93580 117688 126813 138279 2752 8155 15637 16218 19746 25256 31969 36761 44891 62765 52 751 27 56 84 34 … 1107 81 91 … 62 … 96 48 892 35 75 100 29 60 1266 92 154 … 77 5 95 51 856 39 116 107 27 127 999 91 92 … 70 5 84 47 886 39 118 114 21 100 934 120 82 253 73 3 90 47 901 50 102 104 26 97 1077 129 69 316 89 11 94 70 1205 52 116 118 25 88 1181 128 94 222 93 16 109 76 1443 59 115 133 17 107 1453 155 121 146 105 11 135 81 1610 76 132 130 26 108 1519 187 185 109 116 13 165 100 1805 62 127 138 … 115 1984 219 220 101 115 13 217 106 1795 70 134 143 … 108 2623 227 294 206 128 15 229 38880 57426 67806 60899 69362 84301 103877 118924 132600 157207 233820 335412 379886 349016 336775 382652 454897 516698 579062 621091 9483 13945 13963 13319 14956 18455 23143 26248 26403 30770 … 992411 1202986 1131597 1235351 1486161 1912443 2225355 2600460 3033299 3611228 3002404 3938695 … 1401283 1665748 1555990 1658000 1972896 2495782 2888715 3340194 3844467 4601312 3731846 4856620 Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia..

1 Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.5 13.6 8.9 49.7 44.9 27.6 49.8 20.0 .8 4.7 22.6 18.5 –30.9 –6.1 .0 16.1 7.4 .4 30.5 2000 16.3 15.4 47.9 14.3 43.7 21.7 –16.6 15.4 31.1 49.9 24.4 –13.6 16.9 54.3 32.3 3.2 10..4 6.4 9.0 –12. States of e Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoaf Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESg REGIONAL MEMBERSg a b c d e f g Rates are based on US dollar values of imports..6 20.4 19.8 25.5 16.9 25.6 4.8 –19.5 1.2 17.7 104.5 32..1 31.0 4..5 –10.2 9.7 41...8 –30.1 –25.5 11.4 26.7 22.0 26.3 17.2 –5.7 11..4 –2.5 33.4 –24.5 –16.2 21.1 35.7 18. Rep.7 –16.0 3.2 25..8 –3.2 12.2 3.0 10.1 –3.6 –5.2 3.5 –9.0 28.9 43. China Korea.7 22.4 .2 18.9 .7 11.8 15.3 15.5 20.8 .5 –1.9 28.2 19. of Hong Kong. Starting 2000.6 51.2 21.4 19.1 20.9 6.3 7.5 8.1 14.8 .7 21.3 3. .9 5.0 28.6 40. –3.2 –36..6 –5.2 33.7 18.2 –10.7 8.4 36.9 19.9 35.4 9.1 –23.0 –21.0 –8.2 –7.5 59.4 2.1 6.8 11.0 57.0 13. 3.4 4.9 16.0 15.6 33.6 –6..9 11.7 52.7 –13.5 34.6 … … 1995 –1.4 25.2 10. 13.2 15..1 35.0 0.8 . data exclude Indonesia. ..6 5.1 4.7 6. Starting 2000. compilation methodology shifted from cif to fob.0 13.4 8.1 13.4 16.2 18.3 9.7 .7 1.4 33.1 –4.1 –22.2 16..8 21. … … –9.4 40.2 16.0 –25.8 24.2 21.5 27.1 37.7 –6.7 –29.9 2010 .8 21.5 37.1 24.5 23. –6.7 1.6 –17.3 2.7 1.9 –8.3 12.7 12.8 5.3 –27..2 3...3 20.7 218.7 52.1 –13.6 … 17.7 6.2 –14.5 8..8 –0.6 –7.9 4.0 10. International Financial Statistics Online (IMF 2011).6 36.4 8.6 21.5 18.8 –11.0 7.9 –18.7 28.0 –1.5 33.8 30..1 3.3 9. 6.0 13.0 –21.2 7.2 10. ..3 20.4 15.5 2005 13.7 2006 11..6 –0.3 29.3 10.1 26.5 23.7 29..8 –13.8 7.8 3.3 –4.6 6.8 4.1 –6.9 24.2 40.5 20.0 –39.6 16.5 –27.4 .5 6..3 19.8 21.3 9.1 47.1 19.11 Growth Rates of Merchandise Imports (percent) 1990 13.3 22.2 –8.2 13.6 –21.4 16.5 –4.2 43.8 –23.0 21.0 21.7 –0.3 1.7 2..2 6.7 –15.2 39. –6.2 .5 15.7 25.3 22.224 GLOBALIZATION External Trade a Table 4.3 22.4 4.0 4.6 2.0 14.5 13.1 3.5 –25.1 –17.7 26.8 9.6 0.6 5.1 13.4 14.1 28.4 0.3 –1.9 19..1 19...8 34.3 146.0 11.2 39. –20.3 26.9 –40.5 31.0 17..6 33..7 39.3 –10.9 –18.4 –25.3 23.6 12.1 –12.9 13.4 27.1 2008 –0.7 24.8 17.3 7.6 9..6 35.0 15. For reporting economies only.0 33.0 21.3 39..9 .4 5. of Mongolia Taipei.3 22.6 –25.5 41.0 36.7 2009 10.9 15.3 26.7 –2.3 18.7 17.5 34.0 .0 17.8 15.7 –10.0 17. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .5 23.5 12.9 20.9 –10.7 4.0 32.5 17.1 –18.2 27.0 19.2 9.6 23.7 2.6 3. 9.4 26.5 24.5 27.8 29.0 20.. but it is not classified as a developing member.1 15.9 21.1 14.7 .4 7. –14.0 16.6 57.9 –3.0 39.8 –5.0 4.4 59.6 39..6 2003 –14.4 20.8 9.6 23.7 10.5 –13.2 –17.0 39.9 25..2 15.8 19.1 –20..8 40.1 13.8 26.. –2. 33.2 –10.5 21.6 25.3 44.4 –11.3 11.9 3.0 6..4 –34.0 23.4 62..7 32.6 2002 44.3 13.9 26.5 17.6 30.7 22.6 –7.5 5. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.5 .4 15.8 0.4 –25.8 9.3 1.7 23.6 –0.1 21.8 22.8 38.5 6.9 –3.. 13.5 –12..9 11. 104. 4..8 15.8 9. –24.6 13.0 –2.9 21. .7 –1.4 –10.8 –4.8 15.8 –26.8 26.6 15.8 –17.4 9.2 .2 30.8 8.2 1.7 30.2 22.5 16.3 4.3 6...5 12.0 6.3 27.4 7.3 5.4 14.5 31. compilation methodology shifted from fob to cif.9 13.2 19.6 16.0 –0.3 25.0 2004 3.1 –5.8 10.9 3.9 23.3 –10.9 29.7 23.3 .1 25..9 11.1 41.1 5.5 19.6 –22.3 –13.4 19.8 8.8 18.7 –25.7 29.2 35.2 –1.5 11.9 49.0 –30..3 12.4 4.7 20..7 –10.1 16.0 –14. Sources: Country sources..4 4.3 16. 12..8 3. –28.5 9.6 10. Starting 2005.3 –13.6 7.8 22. Fed.9 –3.1 2..1 21.8 6.4 13.1 25.6 –4.0 7.0 20.2 –0.2 27.4 15.7 36.6 47.5 32.2 –7.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodiac Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapored Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. .7 33.8 73.6 7.6 31.6 12..3 65.5 21.7 24.5 .2 53.5 13.4 8.2 1.1 32.4 .2 26.8 22..2 1. 36.1 25.6 16.9 2001 44. Rep.0 60.3 40.6 –4.3 –32.3 22.0 18.0 25.8 14.9 26. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.5 24.3 16.5 28.2 11.6 35.6 –4.2 16.3 18.8 9.1 22.3 13.7 –7.6 –3.3 –6.6 4..3 22.0 13.6 –8.7 45.4 –2.2 3.7 22.3 21.9 19.6 –8.9 –15.0 1.9 2.1 12.4 8.5 20.3 32. –11. compilation methodology shifted from cif to fob.4 25.8 51. 21.9 –7.5 16.6 2007 10.7 43..3 31.5 8.0 –15.5 3.5 42.2 72.1 .6 22.6 23. People’s Rep.9 61.3 36. . Prior to 2003.7 31.1 0.2 –11.4 –6.3 6.4 28.1 6.1 4.5 22.8 5.6 13.2 22.5 12..9 .5 31.8 15.. –6.7 1.6 3.9 38.2 4.1 25.8 –36.7 13.1 33..1 8..4 21.1 –27.5 20.7 46.5 –6.6 –3.3 19.7 37.8 –34.

8 114.6 76.3 0.4 87.2 0.8 35.6 0.0 2010 … 51.0 37.6 50.2 69.6 78.6 35.4 54.0 82.8 36.6 65.3 83.0 95.1 79.4 65.2 55.0 71.6 63.1 58.1 21.0 39. Starting 2000.8 45.7 88.8 77.7 97.9 116.3 113.8 74.8 123. Starting 2000.6 33.5 148.4 33.4 40.6 90.0 … 54.3 145.8 123.1 124.1 1.8 60.7 34.5 2006 38.5 66. compilation methodology for imports shifted from fob to cif.0 72.2 49.0 2000 … 62.4 42.1 … 42.2 67.4 78.8 85.2 62.5 76.9 35.1 47.7 77.5 87.4 57.8 24.9 … 37.2 48.6 170.2 104.4 137.4 60.7 92.1 108.6 89.9 39.3 33.9 70.9 291.6 … 45.4 0.7 2005 41.4 34.6 106.5 … 82.4 75.7 87.3 … … 56.6 214.0 54.5 90.7 159.0 61.6 0.4 45.4 52. For reporting economies only.2 54.9 41.6 157.6 37.1 45.3 5.0 62.5 133.1 88. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .8 90. Rep.1 21.2 57.4 81.5 54. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.7 94.8 99.1 75.6 30.0 136.3 47.5 52.2 35.7 83.3 36.9 39.8 … 59.0 32.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodiac Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapored Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.4 … … … … 95.0 29.6 65.7 101.2 43.7 46.1 60. Starting 2005.1 60.5 91. but it is not classified as a developing member.4 62.2 43.3 … 62.3 17.0 77.9 46.8 39.0 65.1 42.5 101.8 51.3 43.8 24.4 76.2 56.3 49.1 88.9 80.6 55.2 56.5 32.1 58.8 108.6 68.6 … 61.8 147.3 185.0 103.4 45.8 87. People’s Rep.3 26.9 55.3 44.2 47.6 47.8 266.6 93.6 62.0 81.4 32.3 77.4 99.2 48.7 38.8 80.9 51.7 66.0 55.8 86.7 57.3 109.1 24.2 67.7 65.2 64.4 64.8 2002 61.5 75.7 46.2 85.4 121. compilation methodology for imports shifted from cif to fob.3 318.8 110.7 118.3 2007 34.7 79.9 58.9 121.2 64.8 50.4 69.9 69.9 38.2 54.4 56.0 45.4 98.12 Trade in Goods a (percent of GDP) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.5 52.0 42.0 89.2 72.5 28. of Mongolia Taipei.9 330.3 44.8 61.9 97.8 117.9 … 59.4 65.4 39.1 124.8 0.0 122.6 84.5 77.0 88.9 84.0 78.0 34.8 110.8 14.2 93.7 80.4 42.0 96.9 308. China Korea. International Financial Statistics Online (IMF 2011).4 54.5 43.3 68.3 88.5 42.4 65.4 107.1 82.8 29.7 89.1 55.2 104.6 66.9 39.6 79.7 249.4 62.6 39.6 59.1 35.1 101.9 14.0 331.2 43.4 50.6 19.9 128.6 107.1 61.9 75.6 70.8 41.8 75.0 66.5 34.3 67.9 48.3 84.7 2004 43.7 35.7 40.9 192.6 366.0 81.7 82.8 56.9 42.8 0.1 108.0 57.1 116.6 41.2 60.4 54.8 90.7 138.0 46.7 61.5 38.8 31. data exclude Indonesia.2 62.7 289.6 48.7 66.3 2003 46.5 33.3 45.3 98.3 102.8 29.3 1.9 139.8 … … 34.2 49.5 57.3 44.3 37.3 22.9 111.0 49.0 119.7 56.3 33.2 47.4 89.1 … … 75.7 34.1 55.7 … 21.9 22.2 2001 … 57.2 107.1 75.1 64.1 96.1 49.3 83.9 70. Sources: Country sources.6 20.1 88.2 116.9 100.7 49.6 169.9 297.3 72.6 41.9 65.3 48.2 35.3 … 56.0 66.9 58.1 62.2 80.0 82.7 107.9 287.2 24.1 89.8 75.6 37.4 45.1 82.4 71.2 41.3 58.9 58.6 94.9 41.0 122.2 113.3 51.2 101.6 254.2 343.0 31.0 342.4 66.9 107.7 123.6 48.4 121.5 62.9 37.1 280.5 30.5 62.5 94. of Hong Kong.6 31.0 33.7 54.2 45.9 346.7 103.3 51.7 63.3 62.8 110.4 50.8 185.4 64.0 71.2 96.9 44.9 89.0 63.4 57.9 52.1 45.8 65.1 31.6 63.6 2008 33.1 52.6 89.6 130.1 52.6 245.8 76.5 29.8 319.7 348.2 128.1 39.6 62.4 34.0 174.1 59. States of e Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoaf Solomon Islands Timor-Lesteg Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESh REGIONAL MEMBERSh a b c d e f g h 1990 … … … … … … 33.8 … 21.6 97.0 29.9 58.3 0.1 43.1 111.5 50.3 106.8 92.7 89.0 102.3 45.0 278.2 90.5 78.4 50.9 130.0 95.2 48.6 79.7 55.4 … 29.3 109.3 225 REGIONAL TABLES Sum of merchandise exports and imports.3 79.0 270.9 17.1 54.3 62.6 86.8 48.2 54.4 93.2 0.3 27.2 42.1 156.7 113.2 108.3 42.7 49.2 25.2 33.2 18.0 29.0 52.4 28.5 58.1 106.6 45.9 62.9 100.6 114.9 57.2 82.4 49.0 32.5 119.4 94. Prior to 2003. compilation methodology for imports shifted from cif to fob.0 351.6 17.6 316.9 18.3 55.4 170.1 49.2 75.8 47.6 30.9 33.2 114.1 59.9 78.7 89.5 33.1 … 69.7 39.5 96.8 93.9 116.5 49.9 … … 70.9 69.6 86.1 29.1 54.8 185.5 25.1 52.1 63.6 106.9 65.6 63.4 52.8 44.3 92.0 126.1 50.9 343.9 28.6 67.9 39.7 42.8 79.7 115.8 38.9 74.4 107.GLOBALIZATION External Trade Table 4.6 64.4 50.5 2.9 92.7 57.8 46.9 37.3 284.3 93.9 … 73.8 62.5 … … 1995 … 73. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.2 42.6 74.1 57.9 61.4 36.2 50.9 59.7 84.4 55.3 45.1 44.4 62.0 71. GDP estimates beginning 2002 exclude value added of activities of the United Nations.8 67.9 92.8 89.0 38.4 59.8 128.7 … 42.1 100.3 122.4 54.9 81.4 31.3 2009 29. Rep.9 152.9 205.1 32.5 35.4 98.0 52.2 44.9 96.9 71.6 56.3 87.3 65.0 50.5 57.3 50.5 234.6 109.6 52.6 47.5 172.0 104.4 43.4 51.1 73.1 44.2 48.8 87. Fed.5 172.8 … 76.7 115.9 44.9 74.7 63.7 88.5 80.6 22.

3 22.0 0.4 7.5 26.3 26.8 10.4 69...7 19.4 0..8 8. Sources: Direction of Trade Statistics CD-ROM (IMF 2011).8 1.8 44.0 0.8 23.7 52.1 1. Taipei.4 2.5 12..9 45.8 4.3 14.0 1.1 56.0 … 1.5 17.0 0.4 12.5 2.5 0.0 12..0 1.4 3.7 17.8 4.3 32..4 2.4 6.0 0.1 2.8 24.7 0.0 4.0 1.3 0.5 0.4 0.0 3.China’s trade groupings.0 4.7 68.8 11.4 11.4 1.6 … 25.8 1.0 27.2 76.1 0. 10.0 0.4 15.0 1.9 87.4 0.0 0.0 … 0.8 12. 4.7 0.5 2.0 64.2 5.7 18.0 1.0 .0 9.7 7.0 0.2 26.0 0.1 1.7 7.8 11.7 12.0 3.0 0.8 0.5 40.0 2.0 0.0 0. States of f Nauruc Palauc Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvaluc Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESg REGIONAL MEMBERSg WORLD a b c d e f g Asia 1990 2010 17.7 5.1 3.8 4.3 48.5 0.9 11.3 1.0 58. 0.3 0.6 40..0 0.7 3.6 90.3 0.0 1.1 0.0 0. data for 1990 refer to 2000.4 25.1 0.0 1.0 2.8 .7 0.2 0.3 3.5 41.8 91.0 0.1 5..8 0. Rep.3 1.1 0.0 0.2 0.5 1.2 1.0 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.4 1.1 65.4 0. and Timor-Leste: economy sources.1 4.4 0.6 38.0 0.1 0.3 3.2 2.1 0.5 4..0 0.2 23.6 4.7 1.7 33.4 20.0 38.0 0.2 2.9 64.8 1.3 18.4 3.0 2.1 0.9 4.0 1.0 0.3 0.8 2.5 18.9 16..4 60.0 0.0 30.7 13.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 10.0 5.9 3.7 9.4 2.1 1.0 5.0 1.7 4. Data under the heading “Middle East” refer to those of “Middle and Near East” economies.5 45.0 58.1 2. 40.2 0.4 1.0 .9 .6 84.2 2. data for 1990 refer to 1992. 4.2 7.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 18.0 24.4 0.5 0.6 1.5 3.3 97.0 0.0 10.0 1.8 33.9 11.1 0.4 84.0 0.2 16.1 1.2 30.0 0.0 0. Data for 1990 refer to 1991.3 .3 48.0 0.1 22.13 Direction of Trade: Merchandise Exports (percent of total merchandise exports) North and Central America 1990 2010 4.1 14.2 55.4 16.0 0.9 39.6 6.5 3.2 3.9 9.. of Hong Kong.0 .4 23.2 24.2 67.6 14.0 3.0 22.0 3.7 0.0 18.0 45.8 23.7 12.5 40.4 6.6 10.2 0.0 80.0 0. of Mongolia Taipei.6 65.4 34.4 0.7 1. 51.6 17. 0.4 0..1 0.2 0.2 69.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.4 10.5 17.0 0.8 0.6 55..0 0.8 99.5 11.3 42.2 10.0 0.0 Africa 1990 2010 0. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 ..8 32..1 0.1 2.0 0.1 2.4 19.1 0.7 57.9 Rest of the World 1990 2010 0.7 1.5 0.5 4.0 1.7 49.0 23..0 0.6 13.0 0.1 0. and for 2010 to 2007.5 5.0 19.2 0.0 25.6 26.1 53.1 3.4 0. Data for 1990 refer to 1993.0 24.2 3.2 5.0 0. 0.3 7.6 30.0 15.0 0.7 10.0 0.3 4.4 13.0 0.4 2. 0.3 0.2 16.4 0.6 57. Based on reporting partner-country data.9 0.8 92.3 56.7 0.8 10.7 2.0 20.0 0.5 0.9 0.0 1.4 15..5 1.0 0.2 0.7 20.6 6.5 0.0 0.7 52.0 0.0 28.1 1.5 5.0 0.7 0.8 .8 0.3 16. For Palau.2 0.5 1.2 4. 0.9 3.4 19.2 0.5 63.4 8.0 0.2 97.6 .3 0.6 0.2 33.7 29.0 0.3 0.0 4. 88.9 10.0 0.2 37.1 12.5 14.3 0.4 11.0 3.6 13.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 4.5 0.7 45.2 34.3 3.9 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 27.2 1.7 4.3 2.1 1.2 6.3 0.4 12.0 0. For reporting economies only.0 16.0 0.0 0.5 60.0 0.6 2.0 0.5 4.0 2.8 21.8 .7 2.5 0.0 2.0 3.3 24.2 0.7 0.6 9.4 10.226 GLOBALIZATION External Trade Table 4..0 1.5 0. Economies are classified following Taipei.0 0.0 5.0 17.4 4.0 … 0.4 Except for Afghanistan and Pakistan.0 0.6 89.3 0.3 77.7 3.2 3.0 0.6 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 37.4 0.4 3.1 .3 0..0 0..3 Oceania 1990 2010 0.7 0.0 0.4 4.0 0.1 3.7 6.8 0.7 73.2 0.1 0.0 2.1 65.3 39.1 0.4 36.4 0.0 47.1 0.8 0.3 1.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 4.4 11.2 16.0 0.2 57.4 68.4 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.3 2.2 44.5 11.0 0.8 37.2 20.0 12.9 0.4 98.0 0.0 30.3 0.8 5.4 0..0 0.0 0.0 2.8 17.0 0.1 17.6 1.7 14.0 1.2 0..3 0.0 0.2 Europe 1990 2010 73.9 59.1 28. People’s Rep.9 0.8 3..1 55.0 0.2 2.9 1.4 0.6 38.0 0.5 8.1 12.2 0.1 16.0 0.4 64.1 1.9 0.9 1. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.5 12.2 15.4 13.1 56.7 2.0 4.0 0.1 17.9 0.1 69.1 2.1 0.2 25.2 7.3 0.5 43.9 1.0 0.3 42.4 5. the Federated States of Micronesia.0 8.4 1.0 0.6 26.7 14.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 3.0 3.5 1.1 Middle East 1990 2010 3.1 1.3 0.6 8.5 11.1 17.7 0.7 6.6 9.5 .2 0.0 0.6 68.7 1.0 1.1 2.4 2.2 0.3 1.3 2. Fed.8 4.0 0.1 0.9 38.5 0.4 20.0 0.5 To From Developing Member Economies Central and West Asiaa Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.9 3.5 7.2 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.0 1.8 1.1 0.0 0.2 87.1 5.1 51.8 2. For the Cook Islands.0 … 0.0 0.1 4.0 20.4 0.2 0.6 1.1 8.2 41.2 0.0 0.6 31.1 0.3 0.8 11.1 3.9 0.8 17.9 1.9 18.0 0.9 36.3 1.0 0.4 6.6 1.4 4.1 0.3 2.6 1. but it is not classified as a developing member.0 … 30.0 8.7 1.0 0.6 3.9 0..7 1.3 2.0 1.0 .5 2.5 0. 0.3 0.8 3.2 8.2 6.4 54.1 2.1 0.1 81.0 0.3 15.2 0.8 50.1 0.2 14.4 50.4 3.8 0.9 0.3 21.1 22.4 71.8 37..2 4.7 86.3 0.1 0.0 14.2 0.0 31.9 1.3 23.4 3.2 0.0 20.0 9.3 31.3 0.0 0.2 0.4 29.0 7.0 0.0 … 6.1 3.0 1.0 0.9 0.5 0.0 32.0 0.China.1 1.0 6.3 3.0 13.0 0.4 0.9 0.1 28.8 3.2 18.3 0.0 1.0 1.3 … 36.2 38.3 72.0 2.1 4.8 40.0 1.3 0.2 4..8 40.6 3.0 1.6 2.0 1.1 26.6 0.4 0.0 .4 South America 1990 2010 0.4 10.5 27.9 67.1 11.0 21.0 0.7 2.0 0.1 0.5 66.9 8.1 27.1 16.0 0. 0.2 1.0 2.9 0.0 0. 0.2 66.9 .0 34.9 0.4 0.4 2..6 9.0 1.0 0.3 .1 29. Rep.8 0.8 0.2 0.4 0..4 0.6 5.0 . 0.3 21.7 0.0 2.3 2.6 37.1 19. 0.3 3.8 1.0 0.9 2.4 15. China Korea.3 0.5 3.0 18.9 0.9 4.8 6.9 21.5 1.2 6.5 1.0 0.1 26..7 17.9 51.1 2.6 47.1 0..7 4.0 0.1 6.3 4.1 2.. of Kiribatic Marshall Islands Micronesia.2 0.2 1.8 20..4 85.Chinab South Asia Bangladesh Bhutanc India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamd Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islandse Fiji.8 45.7 8.

6 9.7 0.2 36.6 0.6 3.0 Africa 1990 2010 0.0 0.7 0.2 40.6 58.1 15.7 3.0 3.Chinab South Asia Bangladesh Bhutanc India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamd Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islandse Fiji.0 0.8 2.1 4.China’s trade groupings.1 41.3 1.5 0. Data for 2010 refer to 2009.3 3.7 17.0 10.3 10.0 0.0 10.8 3.0 87.7 12.2 1.1 29.7 3.5 1.6 11.5 64.7 53.1 … 0.4 12.2 0.0 0.0 4.6 3.6 0.8 7.0 0.0 0.8 56.0 1.8 0.8 0.2 44.8 2.0 0.2 0.9 12.5 81.5 33.1 21.6 8.4 75.8 0.2 3.0 0.0 0.5 2.4 43.5 6.0 0.4 65.4 58.0 3.1 5.4 21.1 1.4 Except for Afghanistan and Pakistan.9 21.5 … 16.8 8.1 6.3 24.0 80.0 0.0 0.4 2.0 2.8 18.0 14.0 0.9 Rest of the World 1990 2010 1.1 0.0 0.9 12.7 46.7 35.0 0.0 15.7 98.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 85.1 0.3 1.0 0.2 37.5 41.2 0.0 0.4 9.4 6.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.2 4.6 20.5 0.8 0.4 0.1 12.4 14.0 2.0 3.4 1.4 9.0 2.1 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 13.0 19.1 0.6 13.8 43.8 55.2 4.0 0.7 6.1 46.0 2. Economies are classified following Taipei.5 6.1 12. data for 1990 refer to 1992.0 0.0 2.0 0.6 0.3 33.8 8.1 0.7 46. Fed.9 19.7 19.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 10.0 2.0 0.6 0.6 2.0 1.4 5.5 61.1 0.4 0.6 2.3 53.9 3.0 59.0 0.6 46.9 74.2 Europe 1990 2010 17.2 1.5 9.4 70.0 0.6 0.0 0.1 1.1 4.9 29.2 4.2 0.0 3.6 1.7 25.1 0.1 3.2 0.4 1.0 60.9 32.3 11.2 1.4 9.8 24.0 0.2 17.2 0.1 14.0 0.8 0.0 0.2 19.5 5.3 53.6 2.1 3.5 7. Data for 2010 refer to 2007.7 1.1 0.0 0.8 3.5 6.0 0.9 23.5 5.3 1.3 0.1 6.7 51.2 14.6 0.3 4.3 0.0 0.1 0.7 4.1 6.1 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.1 44.4 48.3 13.3 0.6 0.7 5.0 0.5 66.4 9.3 0.3 0.4 0.1 1.2 31. of Kiribatic Marshall Islandsf Micronesia.9 72.6 5.9 47.7 0.8 19.0 39.0 4.8 0. States of e Nauruc Palauc Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvaluc Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESh REGIONAL MEMBERSh WORLD a b c d e f g h Asia 1990 2010 79.8 1.4 5.0 17.0 0.4 6.1 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.4 4.0 0.9 27.0 0.2 0.0 7.7 0.9 2.7 50.7 0.5 10.4 0.2 15. China Korea.0 2.1 44.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.8 7.0 2.2 3.1 1.9 19.5 22.7 4.3 31.4 0.0 11.2 13.1 41.1 0.4 0.7 20.4 51.0 0.1 3.1 8.0 5.9 4.6 69.5 19.6 66.3 5.6 0.3 0.1 66.2 6.1 0.6 0.0 0.3 60.0 0.6 3.0 1.4 1.5 0.7 12.0 2.7 15.8 50.2 0.2 12.0 18.3 82.7 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.4 1. Rep.4 0.1 0.0 4. the Marshall Islands.4 7.2 1.6 5.2 11.3 59. For reporting economies only.0 0.3 39.4 1.GLOBALIZATION External Trade Table 4.6 0.5 6.1 13.3 5.1 6.0 1.0 0.1 4.0 0.8 0.0 0.4 15. Rep. the Federated States of Micronesia.China.2 13.3 26.8 0.6 29.7 1.1 2.0 61.7 2.4 5.0 0.2 0.4 0.2 10.0 0.0 0.1 1.6 12.5 35.2 0.0 3.0 47.2 4.2 17.5 0.5 0.2 6.2 4.3 6.2 17.1 0.6 6.8 1.6 33.5 33.0 2.3 0.6 0.5 38.0 0.2 0.5 0.6 2.5 2.6 0.1 0.7 32.5 19.7 0.0 0.9 81.7 4.3 2.8 25.5 89.0 6.2 13.5 0.0 0.9 3.1 43.6 41.1 95.0 0.0 1.3 17.2 2.0 20.0 71.0 0.9 0.0 14.2 1.0 0.5 21.3 3.3 0.0 … 0.2 46.8 39.8 33.2 0.7 58.2 26.0 7.6 37.3 56.1 4.7 0.9 0.9 8.9 … 8.0 0.1 0.6 92.4 1.2 98.1 0.1 0.1 41.3 0.4 7.3 32.5 0.1 0.4 17.0 2.3 76.9 81.8 2.2 5.8 2.5 0.4 11.4 25.1 1.4 13.0 5.4 31.0 1.5 12.3 2.3 0.0 15.0 46. Data for 2010 refer to 2006.1 0.0 11.0 0.7 2.14 Direction of Trade: Merchandise Imports (percent of total merchandise imports) North and Central America 1990 2010 1.7 33.0 5.8 93.7 0.0 2. Data under the heading “Middle East” refer to those of “Middle and Near East” economies. Sources: Direction of Trade Statistics CD-ROM (IMF 2011). but it is not classified as a developing member.7 62.2 42.1 3.0 0.5 0.1 17.6 25.3 6.1 3.0 0.0 43.4 11.4 46. For Palau.9 1.6 2.0 0.6 5.5 0.0 2.5 63.7 0.6 1.0 1.4 27.3 5.3 26.1 0.1 49.2 2.2 0.0 3.9 0.8 2.9 0.0 0.3 2.0 24.6 1.9 1.6 3.5 2.4 0. For the Cook Islands.8 0.1 16.2 0.5 2.8 2.4 3.9 52.2 6.8 1.9 51.3 7.6 0.9 0.1 Middle East 1990 2010 0.0 0.7 1.0 0.5 1.7 30.9 66.3 0.0 7.5 2.4 18.0 0.0 6.5 0.2 10.3 20.7 0.8 … 1.3 8.7 59.6 7.0 0.1 0.6 28.1 1.0 1.4 47.0 0. of Hong Kong.5 12.2 0.4 35.2 45.1 0.7 1.0 0.2 0.2 7.7 2.2 2.8 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 11.1 2.1 4.3 0.0 … 0.5 29.8 2.2 69.3 0. People’s Rep.2 7.1 8.4 5.7 44.4 3.1 0.4 9.2 9.0 0.0 2.2 0.7 21.3 0.5 22.0 3. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.1 0.0 0.0 0.7 31.6 0.8 8.1 0.3 0.0 20.8 0.8 0.4 0.5 5.2 0.4 5.8 14.4 0.2 5.0 1.3 0.1 30.3 0.7 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.4 1.0 7.3 5.6 6.7 0.5 0.6 47.6 11.5 0.8 11.0 3.9 16.5 6.1 1.2 4.0 0.7 6.1 10.5 5.3 3.0 62.0 0.8 9.0 0.2 0.4 0.0 1.7 1.0 0.6 0.4 1.2 6.2 0. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .2 2.7 2.1 12.0 1.3 3.4 0.1 11.0 26.2 0.9 58.1 43.6 87.4 2.8 12.1 43.2 2.3 12.6 1.0 3. data for 1990 refer to 2000.3 0. and Timor-Leste: economy sources.2 8.0 0.2 8.6 0.1 11.1 1.9 0.8 42.9 38.2 2.3 0.8 55. of Mongolia Taipei.0 0.7 11.3 13.7 12.2 0.0 1.0 0.3 29.7 0.1 1.0 72.1 43.2 13.9 63.6 5.4 1.1 0.3 10.0 2.0 1.6 2.0 0.0 0.3 4.8 18.4 0.9 45.0 0.9 0.6 0.3 50.1 17.5 227 REGIONAL TABLES From To Developing Member Economies Central and West Asiaa Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.9 3.7 37.9 4.4 South America 1990 2010 0.0 0.5 0.0 5.9 15.0 0.4 0.1 2.9 1.8 0.0 0.3 20.6 9.0 0.0 0.1 0.8 62.0 3.3 1. Based on reporting partner-country data.0 6.3 0.8 … 62.7 2.2 16.6 8.2 21.0 0.5 0.1 33.2 20.8 2.2 3.1 0.1 3.9 26.5 0.9 0.3 0.3 Oceania 1990 2010 0.2 0.1 … 10.2 2.9 70.1 0.1 17.2 35.0 2.7 8.1 48.1 0.4 8.0 0.9 7.8 2.1 18.5 2.7 0.0 1.4 34.0 0. Taipei.0 2.1 0.1 11.8 0.

Kiribati. . – 985 . Palau.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. Samoa. Sources: International Financial Statistics Online (IMF 2011).. data refer to international reserves without gold...15 International Reserves a (end of year. .. but it is not classified as a developing member. For Afghanistan... Bhutan.. Fed... and Vanuatu. 405 2875895 268731 291571 2288 387206 76036 168856 218698 295202 412225 55424 107560 111174 111919 118388 32712 96198 102821 121414 155355 152 202 207 268 204 95911 111370 126572 166046 211140 2367 130 21591 48 593 2094 – 192 14787 93 23899 573 7799 68816 36945 1379 … 349 0 … 69 … … 263 55 16 . Rep... of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia... b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.. .. Solomon Islands. 31 … 38 1995 7 110 121 199 1660 124 2453 0 1170 . 2000 6 314 680 116 2096 262 2056 94 1808 1273 2001 6 330 725 162 2508 287 4235 94 2055 1212 2002 7 431 720 202 3141 317 8762 90 2346 1215 2003 1 502 803 196 4962 399 11674 118 2673 1659 2004 0 548 1075 387 9277 565 10616 172 2714 2147 618574 123569 199069 208 246560 2005 0 669 1178 479 7070 612 10948 189 4457 0 825588 124278 210391 333 257952 2006 0 1072 2500 931 19127 817 12816 204 8059 0 1072564 133210 238956 718 270840 2007 0 1659 4273 1361 17629 1177 15689 45 13222 0 1534354 152693 262224 1001 275027 2008 0 1407 6467 1480 19872 1225 8903 59 . .. Singapore.... Rep. 24 … 38 1722 2624 3222 2825 3877 5278 5789 10343 11178 355 367 399 467 545 699 765 891 . Timor-Leste. for Taipei.. c For reporting economies only. People’s Rep.. … 424 0 … 90 … … 520 84 37 61 40 … 44 … 478 0 … 55 … … 660 86 81 182 55 … 62 … 315 0 … 50 … … 749 82 95 153 47 … 67 … 310 0 … 47 … … 1427 81 104 84 48 … 105 … 520 0 … 48 … … 2087 95 119 230 65 … 120 … 317 0 … 40 … … 1987 87 90 210 70 … 115 … 567 8 … 56 … … 2607 166 146 250 96 … 149 … 717 8 … 56 … … 3092 209 266 406 105 … 161 19328 14951 18817 18664 21567 33258 36926 43257 55079 26908 32924 41742 42268 79707 184510 356021 396237 462357 664569 835228 835506 880977 954145 1010686 1023590 1062816 4129 4410 3952 3565 4963 6085 6947 8893 14069 17247 11052 15594 16723 … 448215 728361 811693 997429 1274513 1645372 1892458 2315427 3036131 3433221 4204517 4862633 … 652086 1107559 1230541 1486764 1978899 2524963 2780605 3266066 4035099 4488634 5286800 5984439 a Data refer to international reserves with gold at national valuation unless otherwise specified... 982 1118 1159 1411 2143 2641 3288 3802 36253 36303 34731 42588 56925 51641 66119 96211 213 227 239 336 540 639 713 806 44116 66176 70153 82426 101313 91528 96713 106498 562 685 782 1248 ... 25 … 39 1305 323 48200 93 1044 1357 382 698 28018 133 29817 411 15692 75677 33041 3765 … 367 0 … 98 … … 430 57 19 . 1 1953334 182527 201220 657 296389 2009 201 2004 5364 2110 23220 1585 13771 82 ... China Korea.. 9 8 100 94 1705 2334 2205 2735 2837 3508 2561 5358 7197 449 914 32047 194 33656 481 16365 82221 38915 4232 … 359 0 … 117 … … 343 62 18 43 25 … 37 475 489 492 514 667 751 1357 . 70377 102261 130401 136026 176105 273859 254024 274668 287051 133 159 204 186 231 308 241 261 350 1024 1229 1469 1504 .. US$ million) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. of Mongolia Taipei.. 30209 24657 14825 23 78064 649 89 5188 24 302 433 – 0 8520 2 9871 325 2048 27790 14273 0 … 261 0 … – … … 415 69 18 .China: economy sources.... Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . Turkmenistan. . Tonga.228 GLOBALIZATION International Reserves Table 4. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESc REGIONAL MEMBERSc 1990 266 … – – ... 17063 16228 18494 22967 33751 37551 44243 62373 96246 112579 116172 136260 162957 174193 187803 225715 42148 49831 52065 66985 87455 111008 138418 172129 6359 7186 9216 13591 23748 24176 16803 ... of Hong Kong. 413 2425855 255842 270012 1327 352967 2010 198 1859 6409 2264 28291 1720 17210 161 . 29 … 48 1516 318 40155 123 952 1147 408 611 29268 140 28624 234 15063 80170 32661 3510 … 412 0 … 113 … … 296 64 32 ....

6 15.3 4.3 11.3 3.7 7.2 3.9 8.7 11.3 3.2 … 5.5 8.7 5.2 0.9 1.0 … – … … 4.7 11.4 5.5 3.8 7.0 6.8 0.6 6.9 6.7 4.5 4.4 5.7 4.3 3.6 7.3 8. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.3 … 3.5 6.9 0.3 15.6 5.0 20.4 2.8 5.9 3.5 3.1 4.4 0.3 12.3 6.0 3.2 6.7 5.0 13.6 18.9 11.7 6.4 3.4 6.3 6.8 15.6 4.8 0.4 1.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.9 9.9 … 4.2 4.0 2008 0.3 4.0 … 4.6 3.1 2.0 4.1 15.8 8.6 0.7 9.4 … 6.1 8.4 6.5 3.0 15.5 4.9 12.1 4.4 5.4 1.2 1.8 8.5 6.9 … 5.5 2.0 4.8 2.9 5.6 1.9 19.3 4.3 0.5 15.6 3.0 6.9 2000 … 4.6 12.3 2.7 3.9 … … 5.4 4.0 6.1 4.8 8.2 17.5 6.0 5.8 5.5 0.4 … 5.8 … 2.0 4.4 9.9 … 3.1 7.2 0.5 11.9 4.5 5.4 6.2 10.8 2002 0.5 2010 0.0 6.4 … 7.0 … 12.4 5.3 4.6 8.2 7.4 11.5 9.1 8.2 8.3 7.6 2005 0.7 12.4 8.2 1.0 3.4 … 3.3 … 12.0 8.0 6.1 4.3 1.2 10.2 6.7 13.9 4.6 2.5 … 4.7 8. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESc REGIONAL MEMBERSc 1990 … … … … … … 1.3 12.0 … 5.9 6.7 8.5 2. but it is not classified as a developing member.0 20.4 20.3 3.0 9.0 9.9 20.0 15.0 9.2 … 12.9 3.1 5.7 4.7 … 7.1 8.6 … 5.6 … 5.1 16.0 3.4 11.3 10.0 2.3 3.0 3.0 5.0 7.7 7.6 6.7 3.6 10.6 26.6 … … … 8.4 … 4.2 … 5.2 2.3 5.0 6.2 … 0. Fed.3 11.6 4.5 6.9 4.4 15.1 … 7.1 5.5 15.3 6.5 … … 9.9 … 11.8 3.5 … … … 1.9 3.6 6.4 13.3 9.2 4.3 9.4 3.4 7.4 12.4 6.2 … 2.9 5.9 3.0 14.2 4.3 8.8 3.0 4.8 … 1.0 5.5 10.6 4.5 30.1 2001 … 5.8 0.4 5.1 3.2 … 4.6 18.6 6.9 5.7 5.7 229 REGIONAL TABLES a Merchandise imports from the balance of payments were used in the computation.5 9.4 … 8.2 5.1 7.7 6. of Mongolia Taipei.6 7.6 2.2 4.4 17.16 Ratio of International Reserves to Imports a (months) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. Rep.7 4.0 4.1 4.1 0.8 4.0 7.4 3.6 … 2.0 … 7.5 7.8 7.7 6.6 6.6 3.0 … 4.3 8.9 3.7 0.4 6. Sources: ADB staff estimates using International Financial Statistics Online (IMF 2011).6 5.8 11.6 7.7 8.8 1.2 4.0 4.4 4.3 1.9 2.2 7.4 1.0 2.2 3.6 12.1 4.7 18.2 13.3 6.0 5.9 6.4 0.1 4.1 4. People’s Rep.0 5.5 1.9 9.7 11.8 5.2 10. Rep.4 8.7 9.5 6.6 9.2 3.9 2006 0.3 1.0 … 8.5 11.1 2007 0.3 3.6 2.7 0.9 16.8 0.4 8.0 0.3 4.7 … 0.0 7.5 17.1 17.8 12.3 21.0 7.6 21.8 2. China Korea.8 7.3 … … 7.7 11.3 8.8 3.6 … 4.6 20.4 6.7 4.5 10.7 23.0 0.4 3.0 8.8 4.3 11.4 0.7 3.4 4.2 6.3 1.7 10.5 … 8.0 17.9 … 0.3 … … … … 10.1 8.3 8.3 7.7 8.2 8.3 12.9 5.1 … 5.2 12.6 0.1 7.7 2.6 4.2 2.3 7. c For reporting economies only.6 13.5 10.0 … 6.5 15.3 … … 8.1 4.7 21.7 2.1 3.3 3.6 … 7.0 9.2 1.7 5.5 … 5.5 4.5 3.1 6.1 2.0 3.8 … 7.2 3.3 15.2 24.9 4.8 3.9 3.5 4.9 3.4 2.7 0.4 2.8 … 8.1 6.5 7.7 … … 5.7 24.1 1.4 … … 10.3 8.0 … 12.0 8.5 1.4 5.8 9.5 2004 0.0 1.8 10.1 7.3 3.9 9.2 4.1 2.1 26.8 9.4 10.3 17.3 2.8 5.3 … … 5.2 24.7 10.5 6.2 9.4 8.8 4.0 7.2 4.6 11.6 4.2 2.0 … 4.5 12.7 6.3 4.6 6.1 … 5.8 2.9 … 8.6 6.9 0.5 5.2 12.1 7.9 4.4 … 6.4 10. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.9 5.2 13.6 17.5 4.4 6.6 8.7 3.0 … 4.1 17.4 … 0.4 1.5 9.9 5.5 6.5 6.8 2.9 12.2 … 4.0 … 3.0 3.1 2003 0.0 1.0 5.8 … 4.9 5.1 5. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .7 2.5 6.0 … 4.4 … 6.1 3.2 4.6 2.8 5.3 3.1 7.0 11.2 2.9 20.3 0.1 5.7 … 6.4 … … 3.5 0.5 … 8.5 … … 2.7 – 1.8 8.4 3.2 10.0 … … 1995 … 2.4 3.0 7.3 8.1 5.5 6.8 6.9 3.9 18.2 32.3 4. and economy sources.8 3.1 3.7 18.0 … 9.2 2.7 … 7.0 9.5 2.9 0.0 21. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development Transition Report 2007 (EBRD 2007).7 9.5 3.9 12.1 4.2 2009 0.8 … 3.4 0. of Hong Kong.0 5.9 2.6 … … 3.8 … … 5.6 7.GLOBALIZATION International Reserves Table 4.7 7.0 … 6.9 1.8 6.

c Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singaporeb Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islandsb Fiji. Timor-Leste. China b Korea. the Republic of Korea. the Cook Islands.aspx).230 GLOBALIZATION Capital Flows Table 4. b Refers to net official development assistance only. Singapore. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . and containing a grant element of at least 25%. Fed. concessional flows to developing economies and multilateral institutions provided by official agencies. Rep.Chinab South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb. of Hong Kong. the Federated States of Micronesia.China. of Kiribatib Marshall Islandsb Micronesia. data for 2009 only include net flows of long-term public and publicly guaranteed debt from official creditors for economies whose data were sourced from the Global Development Finance Database. States of b Naurub Palaub Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Lesteb Tonga Tuvalub Vanuatu DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESd DEVELOPING ECONOMIESe 1990 122 0 0 0 0 0 1547 0 0 0 2359 38 52 13 36 1818 49 3158 23 401 633 4 42 3099 223 539 157 1538 –3 522 107 12 23 20 … … 0 … 535 46 41 0 30 5 50 17240 67038 1995 213 229 191 219 460 201 1301 94 27 321 8796 18 57 213 0 1249 72 –41 60 437 611 4 518 1870 279 513 80 –133 17 859 635 13 37 15 39 77 3 142 398 42 50 0 38 8 47 20277 73364 2000 136 205 277 136 151 217 613 84 267 334 2346 … … 199 … 1131 72 513 17 344 317 … 372 2236 263 696 105 335 … 724 1522 4 21 18 57 102 4 39 351 25 70 231 21 4 46 14607 48192 2001 405 190 191 247 151 168 1709 145 86 337 3001 … … 191 … 1168 122 1248 24 353 383 … 411 1174 237 2167 124 96 … 32 1505 5 22 12 74 138 7 34 269 37 78 194 23 10 30 16799 56865 2002 1288 263 313 282 137 184 1263 155 –37 105 –302 … … 186 … 963 145 –2788 30 332 432 … 461 481 261 –103 130 332 … –3960 1173 4 31 21 63 112 12 32 185 38 39 219 23 12 27 2546 46131 2003 1591 198 268 209 269 178 1371 164 4 87 –1995 … … –7 … 1205 153 –4169 42 430 742 … 530 –19 283 9 115 533 … –3881 2030 6 50 19 57 115 16 26 175 31 81 175 30 6 33 1159 53623 2004 2303 203 171 207 220 247 –271 202 –31 215 1374 … … 265 … 1514 150 781 68 409 580 … 502 –1881 246 748 116 –123 … –2407 2007 9 63 17 51 86 14 20 217 30 121 161 19 8 39 8670 67055 2005 2818 182 194 234 –656 272 1644 231 –54 142 2091 … … 219 … 1183 148 2571 80 548 1268 … 572 517 326 –168 137 –246 … –1623 1779 8 73 28 57 107 9 24 250 43 200 185 31 9 40 15472 56584 2006 2956 228 377 224 129 272 2496 372 –100 49 2253 … … 211 … 1678 127 2367 60 497 866 … 651 –10 330 –353 134 383 … –465 1736 32 62 27 55 109 17 37 242 47 204 209 20 15 49 2007 3965 359 330 314 61 283 2474 393 –47 97 1494 … … 244 … 1535 83 3672 52 563 851 … 689 –1449 442 –1424 195 471 … –717 2444 9 54 27 52 115 26 22 229 46 245 278 30 12 61 2008 4865 318 367 899 329 326 2476 559 –35 165 2504 … … 254 … 3066 82 4128 52 789 880 … 944 214 463 –660 530 –419 … –682 2356 6 52 27 53 94 31 43 278 59 219 278 31 16 102 2009 6235 920 296 357 587 340 2374 174 –90 246 716 … … 153 … 807 51 1886 85 –13 603 … 185 11 148 –1006 –9 625 … –391 3147 8 5 27 59 121 24 35 –22 19 –6 217 14 18 8 18963 56671 18593 18584 26059 89268 101266 128169 a Refers to net flows of long-term public and publicly guaranteed debt from official creditors and grants. i. Palau. For Afghanistan. including technical cooperation grants.StatExtracts website (stats. Sources: Global Development Finance Online (World Bank 2011). Nauru. org/Index. or by their executing agencies. d For reporting economies only. For developing member economies not covered by the World Bank.. e Includes data for all developing economies as reported in World Bank’s Global Development Finance Online. Hong Kong. People’s Rep.e. Kiribati.oecd. and Tuvalu: OECD. China. Rep. including state and local governments. the Marshall Islands. but it is not classified as a developing member. Brunei Darussalam. c Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.17 Official Flowsa from All Sources to Developing Member Economies (US$ million) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistanb Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. Taipei. of b Mongolia Taipei. data are from OECD’s Geographical Distribution of Financial Flows to Aid Recipients. However. administered with the objective of promoting the economic development and welfare of developing economies.

For developing member economies not covered by the World Bank. the Federated States of Micronesia. Sources: Global Development Finance Online (World Bank 2011). and net flows of total private nonguaranteed debt. China. Rep. the Cook Islands. net flows of long-term public and publicly guaranteed debt from private creditors. d For reporting economies only. Rep. and Tuvalu.oecd.18 Net Private Flowsa from All Sources to Developing Member Economies (US$ million) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistanb Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.StatExtracts website (stats. People’s Rep. –2 18 45 –2 10 . States of b Naurub Palaub Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Lesteb Tonga Tuvalub Vanuatu DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESd DEVELOPING ECONOMIESe 1990 –2 0 0 0 0 0 182 0 0 0 8107 3482 1572 0 428 59 –3 1831 7 –7 54 –2 0 2891 6 476 155 639 3220 4370 180 4 79 0 … … 1 … 204 7 7 –5 0 … 13 1995 0 25 330 0 1204 96 1050 10 253 177 40862 3758 7596 –4 428 –33 –2 4974 9 –5 159 32 164 8147 95 7850 315 2372 4290 10146 2136 27 69 … 5 –0 1 –0 111 3 4 9 1 –0 31 2000 21 124 167 157 2171 –63 –18 12 –40 –1 40644 … … 51 … 327 0 10153 13 –8 323 … 149 –10640 34 4957 241 3782 … –1137 592 –31 1 0 108 . OECD. Taipei. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .org/Index. Palau.Chinab South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalam b. Hong Kong. but it is not classified as a developing member. e Includes data for all developing economies as reported in World Bank’s Global Development Finance Online.. of Hong Kong. c Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.c Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singaporeb Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islandsb Fiji. for Afghanistan. 4 –4 20 2001 –19 70 207 123 5019 –73 –326 26 –167 66 41073 … … 42 … 123 0 6964 12 21 34 … 149 –6741 24 1505 184 2224 … –1472 707 0 41 0 789 –0 0 11 2 1 –13 54 1 1 18 2002 –0 104 1384 144 4142 –11 350 17 –38 –7 47107 … … 78 … 53 0 7401 25 –6 108 … 145 –5254 137 5150 111 1917 … 779 755 –2 32 –0 968 –0 1 1 –77 –0 –3 164 –0 25 14 2003 15 121 3264 317 5675 –3 –58 –8 1 110 53515 … … 131 … 253 3 16224 10 14 118 … 84 –4625 22 2107 230 1570 … 5030 1191 –23 41 … 396 … 6 2 169 1 –4 53 3 0 18 2004 34 262 3678 555 12322 122 1342 249 192 9 73698 … … 93 … 439 3 18676 10 –1 171 … 131 1939 174 9157 192 2515 … 8983 1600 –4 250 0 1132 … 223 7 74 2 –2 374 5 0 20 2005 –12 305 1926 502 8728 42 3407 52 334 –47 107008 … … 184 … 817 9 18619 17 2 212 … 381 7265 309 1862 220 4403 … 14635 2669 –29 157 1 2737 0 2 1 234 –3 12 0 7 –1 13 2006 19 503 –516 1349 34835 316 6230 346 655 –116 128456 … … 359 … 704 6 48741 24 –7 350 … 483 10425 453 10616 278 4835 … 16373 3617 3 559 –1 1397 1 –0 1 53 21 35 –64 10 4 43 2007 13 1201 –4517 1859 33220 319 7877 363 762 507 172492 … … 438 … 789 73 90220 33 5 1139 … 867 12971 1080 6488 257 8642 … 14246 12830 1 342 –8 4427 16 –0 3 –109 2 82 0 28 –1 34 2008 37 1308 370 2305 26364 309 5747 392 784 566 168654 … … 725 … 968 30 37355 47 0 428 … 815 16996 593 –3696 283 –1922 … 3526 8898 –0 311 … 3333 49 2 –2 119 13 96 3 4 … 32 2009 30 820 873 907 17179 219 1876 –38 1331 632 94264 … … 483 … 507 36 65853 –9 38 660 … 530 16650 577 161 323 3596 … 6351 7707 –1 238 2 1143 9 2 –0 449 1 130 2 15 … 27 231 REGIONAL TABLES 27956 96696 52176 50682 65712 85972 138631 176979 271395 368994 275845 223573 50349 172059 171188 163076 161993 217544 315146 457098 597354 930646 733414 516242 a Refers to the sum of net foreign direct investment. the Republic of Korea. Timor-Leste. b Refers to the sum of direct investment. Brunei Darussalam.aspx). portfolio investment. and private net exports credits of Development Assistance Committee countries only.. Singapore. the Marshall Islands. Kiribati. data are from OECD’s Geographical Distribution of Financial Flows to Aid Recipients. of Kiribatib Marshall Islandsb Micronesia.China. Chinab Korea.GLOBALIZATION Capital Flows Table 4. of b Mongolia Taipei. OECD. Fed. portfolio equity flows. Nauru.

Nauru.org/Index.232 GLOBALIZATION Capital Flows Table 4. For developing member economies not covered by the World Bank. Sources: Global Development Finance Online (World Bank 2011). Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . but it is not classified as a developing member. c For reporting economies only. of Hong Kong. the Republic of Korea. Singapore. Rep. OECD. the Federated States of Micronesia. for Afghanistan. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. Brunei Darussalam.StatExtracts website (stats. Kiribati. oecd. of Mongolia Taipei. However. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESc DEVELOPING ECONOMIESd 1990 120 0 0 0 0 0 1729 0 0 0 10466 3520 1624 13 464 1877 46 4989 30 395 687 1 42 5990 229 1015 312 2178 3216 4893 287 17 103 20 … … 1 … 739 52 48 –5 30 5 63 1995 213 254 521 219 1664 297 2350 104 280 498 49658 3776 7653 209 428 1216 69 4933 69 432 771 36 681 10017 375 8363 395 2240 4307 11005 2771 40 106 15 44 77 3 142 509 45 54 9 40 8 78 2000 157 329 444 293 2323 154 596 96 227 333 42990 … … 250 … 1457 72 10667 30 336 640 … 521 –8404 297 5653 346 4117 … –413 2114 –27 22 18 165 102 2 57 396 23 80 231 25 –0 66 2001 386 261 398 371 5170 95 1383 172 –81 404 44075 … … 233 … 1291 122 8212 36 374 417 … 561 –5567 261 3672 308 2320 … –1441 2212 5 63 13 863 137 7 46 271 38 66 248 24 10 48 2002 1288 367 1697 426 4279 173 1613 172 –75 98 46806 … … 264 … 1016 145 4613 55 326 540 … 606 –4772 398 5047 240 2249 … –3181 1928 2 63 21 1030 112 13 33 107 38 36 383 23 37 41 2003 1606 319 3532 526 5944 175 1313 156 5 197 51519 … … 124 … 1458 155 12055 52 445 860 … 614 –4644 305 2116 344 2103 … 1149 3221 –17 90 19 452 115 22 27 344 32 76 228 33 6 51 2004 2337 466 3849 762 12542 369 1071 451 161 224 2005 2806 487 2121 736 8072 314 5051 283 279 95 2006 2975 732 –139 1573 34963 589 8725 718 555 –67 2007 3977 1561 –4187 2173 33281 602 10351 757 716 604 173986 … … 683 … 2324 156 93892 85 569 1990 … 1557 11522 1523 5064 453 9113 … 13528 15274 10 396 19 4479 131 26 25 120 49 326 278 58 11 95 2008 4902 1627 737 3204 26693 635 8223 951 749 731 171158 … … 979 … 4034 112 41484 100 790 1307 … 1759 17210 1056 –4356 814 –2341 … 2843 11254 6 363 27 3387 143 33 41 398 71 314 280 35 16 134 301903 861583 2009 6266 1739 1169 1264 17765 559 4250 136 1241 878 94980 … … 636 … 1314 87 67738 76 25 1263 … 715 16661 725 –845 314 4221 … 5960 10853 7 243 29 1202 130 26 35 427 21 124 218 30 18 36 242535 572913 75072 109099 130709 … … … … … … 358 403 570 … … … 1954 153 19457 78 408 751 … 633 59 420 9905 308 2393 … 6576 3608 5 313 17 1183 86 237 27 291 32 119 535 23 8 59 2000 157 21190 96 550 1479 … 953 7782 634 1694 357 4157 … 13012 4448 –22 230 29 2794 107 12 25 484 40 212 185 38 9 53 2382 134 51108 83 489 1216 … 1134 10415 782 10263 412 5218 … 15908 5354 35 621 26 1452 109 17 39 296 68 239 145 31 19 92 45197 116973 66783 67481 68258 87131 147301 192451 289988 387578 117387 250846 219380 219941 208125 271167 382201 513682 686623 1031912 a Refers to the sum of official and net private flows. Hong Kong. the Marshall Islands. d Includes data for all developing economies as reported in World Bank’s Global Development Finance Online. Taipei. China Korea. data for 2009 official flows only include net flows of long-term public and publicly guaranteed debt from official creditors for economies whose data were sourced from the Global Development Finance Database. OECD. Rep.aspx). Fed. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. Timor-Leste. Palau.China. the Cook Islands.19 Aggregate Net Resource Flows a from All Sources to Developing Member Economies (US$ million) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. People’s Rep.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji. data are from OECD’s Geographical Distribution of Financial Flows to Aid Recipients. China. and Tuvalu.

and estimated short-term debt.. private nonguaranteed long-term debt. short-term debt refers to debt due within a year of the reference period and long-term debt refers to the residual. c Beginning 1998. Henceforth.. b Total external debt refers to long-term debt to OECD countries and capital markets. Sources: Global Development Finance Online (World Bank 2011).c Korea. d Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. e For reporting economies only. use of IMF credit.c Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalub. 48644 22737 35 347 13 99 67 … 72 1430 186 177 … 86 12 98 2008 2089 3406 4315 3380 107278 2466 48471 2313 638 3983 378245 663372 317370 1833 90361 22886 692 224713 716 3685 15611 … 4215 146247 4955 66181 8002 64875 .. 49 2000 … 916 1328 1638 12433 1827 32732 1034 2518 4633 145711 208260 141429 896 34757 15535 204 100243 206 2867 9089 … 2628 143358 2501 41874 5975 58304 220298 79720 12823 55 173 8 69 82 … 10 2292 138 155 … 65 4 74 2001 … 1291 1278 1729 14887 1717 31665 1058 2271 4867 184803 179877 121346 885 34336 14865 265 98643 235 2733 8668 … 2697 132057 2493 45089 5763 58252 222073 67191 12583 54 159 10 90 66 … 20 2037 134 163 … 63 5 72 2002 … 1592 1480 1839 17981 1851 33567 1142 1975 4798 186114 174527 132757 1036 45033 16569 378 104816 272 2990 9688 … 2900 127800 3047 48272 6728 59906 234393 59381 13325 59 169 10 88 59 … 20 1858 147 180 … 72 5 90 2003 … 1864 1727 1935 22767 2024 35785 1149 1743 4921 208431 372708 141650 1472 63054 18315 486 117872 295 3163 10402 … 3193 133434 2323 48557 7509 62589 245233 51009 15971 67 184 16 91 61 … 19 1867 167 178 … 85 .c Vanuatu DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESe DEVELOPING ECONOMIESf 1990 … … … … … … 20589 … … … 55301 12339 34968 … 17703 12285 84 85661 78 1627 5863 … 1845 69872 1766 15328 4695 30580 3772 28094 23270 1 308 3 72 20 … … 2594 92 120 … 44 .. 38 1995 … 371 321 1240 3750 609 30169 634 402 1799 118090 29177 113002 531 27077 15726 106 95174 155 2410 8395 … 2284 124413 2155 34343 5771 39379 8368 100039 25428 25 178 7 149 130 … . 82 2006 929 2004 2586 1970 72443 2373 36111 1014 886 4031 325260 516382 225199 1440 85833 20032 713 158493 488 3392 11888 … 3527 125348 3377 55026 7262 60282 313551 45893 18610 39 354 13 100 64 … 59 1826 164 174 … 82 11 83 2007 1974 2898 3593 2271 95542 2504 40892 1150 743 3923 373773 711057 333428 1682 94525 21296 775 202793 630 3602 14369 … 3761 133917 4388 61566 8237 65910 . Rep.. 54858 24964 35 380 10 94 70 … 75 1418 206 166 … 89 12 126 2009 2328 4935 4865 4231 109873 2900 53710 2514 576 4109 428442 668484 345391 2212 81958 23820 762 237692 780 3683 17208 … 4364 157517 5539 66390 8186 62911 ..c Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islandsc Fiji... Fed. of Hong Kong.20 Total External Debt of Developing Member Economies a (US$ million) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.Chinab South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamd Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singaporeb. People’s Rep.GLOBALIZATION External Indebtedness Table 4. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. 58755 28674 41 432 10 90 83 … 80 1555 235 156 … 105 11 130 233 REGIONAL TABLES … 794738 1288862 1258490 1298910 1584412 1774085 1863189 2109310 2265203 2274797 2395736 … 2038233 2727138 2695563 2776637 3194519 3457734 3492207 3784573 4319397 4496896 4641381 a Refers to the sum of public and publicly guaranteed long-term debt. of Mongolia Taipei. Statistical Compendium 2004–1.China for data prior to 1999 and to Palau for data prior to 2001. 2005–2 CD-ROM (OECD 2004 and 2005). data are from country sources... 2005–1... OECD applied a new data series that provides total identified external debt and no longer distinguishes between long-term and short-term debts. country sources.. but it is not classified as a developing member.. f Includes data for all developing economies as reported in World Bank’s Global Development Finance Online. For developing member economies not covered by the World Bank. States of Nauru Palaub. 2506 160 159 … 63 . Rep. and long-term debts to non-OECD creditor economies only... This applies to Taipei. 121 2005 … 1842 2043 1909 43478 2027 33269 1062 1058 4282 283986 454593 161413 1327 86732 18381 649 120224 392 3180 11373 … 3515 134353 2844 51981 7012 61658 300359 46354 19035 71 186 11 92 63 … 59 1880 168 166 … 80 . Chinab. multilateral loans.. 97 2004 … 1970 1949 2064 32815 2111 35581 1038 1522 4823 247679 430121 150625 1518 80888 19586 593 122587 366 3357 11044 … 3439 137124 2616 52156 7483 60968 287785 49434 17993 74 246 13 95 62 … 20 1784 175 177 … 85 .. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .

2 … 58.5 14.6 26.6 37.1 40.4 82.8 35.6 … 71.7 60. 46..1 27.5 38.8 45.4 30.4 65.2 17.0 47.8 31. 53.5 14.6 49.5 119.8 55.7 32. but it is not classified as a developing member.0 50.0 81.1 14.7 … 42.5 51.1 66.9 23.0 59.3 95...4 56.1 30.8 28..6 21..9 16. 15.7 … 46.4 … 76. 64..5 37.9 10..5 43. country sources.1 42.3 16.6 16.1 45.6 20.6 2000 .6 51..6 46.7 a GDP is used in lieu of GNI.2 92.1 146.2 … 33.2 104.5 16.3 12.8 39.... 23.7 9.9 49.4 81.5 29.2 8.3 51.Chinaa South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islandsa Fiji..6 40.2 28.0 29.1 13.9 54.9 46.2 25..1 25. of Mongolia Taipei. 32.4 19.8 48. 23.8 55.4 110.3 69.7 71.0 27...7 66.3 10.7 73.3 27.0 ..2 … 73.0 24.3 59.6 51.2 50..0 56.0 41.6 57.0 … 67.7 19. of Kiribatia Marshall Islandsa Micronesia.1 47. Rep. 21.. of Hong Kong. 64.1 40.2 2002 . 37.0 12. 33.7 32.4 92..7 9.0 108.2 18.2 44.8 38.4 13.2 56.234 GLOBALIZATION External Indebtedness Table 4.0 125. .0 12. 37..7 93.0 17.2 36.4 100.3 29.9 24.4 53.0 25.5 10.5 2009 ..2 49.2 … 51.6 48.6 53. 41.2 12.2 20..5 85.7 2005 ..5 20.8 22.3 41.0 26.6 … 78. 10. 36.5 50.2 117.7 35..2 95.1 10.0 28.6 12.0 65.1 12.7 82.2 58.9 28.6 27.7 62.5 … 70.3 384.2 … … 57.4 … 69.7 22.8 … 15.8 40.9 .3 20.9 24. 22.0 1.0 30.7 44.2 27.5 16.9 … 38..8 45. .5 74.0 31.5 29. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.2 20.3 105.5 40.7 .8 43.7 41.1 63.6 36.6 … 28. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .3 54.5 35.9 56.7 43... 25..2 23.8 70.6 9.6 24..8 … 46.6 27.2 12.2 49.2 23.0 28.5 62.5 11.5 49..2 37..4 39.6 … 51.2 26..8 59.6 … 50.5 .9 27. 27.0 56.6 .0 66.4 … 16.4 .1 35.4 35.7 6.0 102.3 109.6 52..4 .1 10..5 64..9 39.0 48.1 44.0 71. 55.1 11.4 9..2 ...5 … 35.5 46.8 2001 ..9 32.7 39.5 … 62...4 33.2 10.0 76.8 . 21.7 81.3 48.0 204.. ...5 8.7 40.2 85.5 … 165.0 81.3 … 67.. .3 82.0 39.7 47.0 12.1 48.7 9.0 32.9 7..8 56.6 14.8 94...8 … 74.5 49.3 .3 12.7 15..2 .1 … 38.3 … 47..9 58.0 113.1 … 25. 19.1 172.8 .9 … 45.5 20..6 22.0 28.7 55. .5 84. 22.2 71. Rep.0 26. 49. .2 34.4 33.1 40.9 36.8 33.5 24.5 26..6 26.7 52.9 11.2 98.5 12. 32. 59.7 24.1 46.9 58.7 7.9 36. Statistical Compendium 2004–1 CD-ROM (OECD 2004)..2 8.7 22.8 30.3 74..1 .1 75..6 46. Chinaa Korea..1 114.8 60.6 63.6 40. People’s Rep.8 71.8 53.9 14..3 .7 15.5 10. 31.6 25..1 16.3 2004 .3 34.3 31.5 10.6 73.0 33..6 58..3 48.8 .4 59.3 .1 39.3 … 27.0 49.7 65.0 14.1 9.8 ..4 150.7 … … 83.9 88.6 21.0 33.. 39.4 12..5 1995 ...0 23..7 66.1 12.3 41.1 32.3 25.3 54.0 26.8 84.4 41.6 69.6 … 72.7 … 35.3 32.0 2008 19.4 2007 19.1 22.1 … 70.5 57.6 … 40.6 59.4 102.8 22..4 .8 39..1 47.7 6. 20.4 19. .2 .1 44.2 25.7 38.6 29.5 … 37.0 34.3 … 42.1 31..9 13.9 101.1 92.3 12.9 .0 65..0 20..1 … 70.8 45.9 44.3 34.3 30.2 60.7 67. 23.. 33.7 78.5 . Sources: Global Development Finance Online (World Bank 2011).4 122.0 36.4 … 16.8 2003 .6 .8 30.1 … 30..0 40.8 37.5 124.3 78.. 23.9 22.7 18.9 29.5 38..2 55.3 … 27.0 15.7 11...9 .1 17.. Fed...2 … 8..0 55.3 10.5 32.21 Total External Debt of Developing Member Economies (percent of GNI) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.4 16.8 21.1 50.5 4. 31.0 30.6 19.0 141.6 2006 11.4 44.5 44..9 101.3 40.1 58.6 17.0 77.6 30.8 35.6 29.8 18.2 3.0 55.6 11. 20.4 25.2 43.3 23.7 ..9 12. 45.1 40.0 37..4 14.8 .2 34. States of a Nauru Palaua Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalua Vanuatu 1990 .2 … 29.2 35.1 24.6 52. 20.8 125.1 .5 54.0 … 15.0 57.0 41.

5 184. External debt as percent of exports was derived using exports data from the balance of payments.8 337.2 232.4 2003 … 174..4 22.3 229.1 28.6 143...3 … 36.3 46.8 2849.4 215.2 58. 209.1 75.0 … … 36.8 … 22.2 203.6 216.6 28.4 519.6 309.4 51.5 2434..8 131.1 2312.2 .6 84.9 105.3 448.3 33.4 2008 47.7 40. States of d Nauru Palaud Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalud Vanuatu a b c d 1990 … .6 … 636.1 34.1 92.1 74.4 373.7 88.4 179.9 182.1 … 72. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . 169.8 … 85.4 143..6 243.7 38.0 54.0 334.7 173.6 102.2 80.1 39.3 175. ...4 62.9 77.4 2001 … 200.8 148.3 … 138.0 … 150.8 581.7 88..8 65.3 121.8 13.2 .3 68.2 431.8 116.7 479.0 172.6 ..3 438..3 … 344.4 44.6 75.2 194.7 109.7 132..7 73.7 245.0 … 31.1 130.8 .5 295.6 136..c Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji..9 … 40.6 .5 89.6 136.6 133.9 161.1 132.1 … 19.0 344. 152.8 147.4 154. Sources: Global Development Finance Online (World Bank 2011).5 222.0 2865.8 648.1 .1 231..0 79.3 270.3 189.3 33. … … 59.4 128..7 … 65...1 .1 332.4 1459.4 151.1 216.8 .0 … 65.3 … 366.4 … … 49.22 Total External Debt of Developing Member Economies (percent of exports of goods..4 257..9 281.4 178. … … 77.2 300.5 181.2 40.4 36..4 … 16.8 … 120.3 84.5 … 31.4 38.7 53.5 49. of Kiribatid Marshall Islandsd Micronesia.0 75.6 86.6 115.0 .8 196.4 148.6 134. 177.4 106.9 42..7 142.4 52.7 .4 240.8 2000 … 166..0 43.5 … … 174.7 96.3 2005 … 98.6 107.0 93.0 67. . 163. . country sources..8 45. Data before 1998 and from 1998 onward are not comparable due to a change in coverage/compilation methodology.6 81.3 … 102.GLOBALIZATION External Indebtedness Table 4.0 238.4 … 99. 23.. 235.6 93.2 .6 45.2 68.6 520..4 403.8 42.3 145.....5 70.2 165.1 168.9 2357..9 116.7 48.0 80.. … 35.8 … 69.2 123.6 290.3 116.2 55.6 2007 52..5 104. 184. Statistical Compendium 2004–1 CD-ROM (OECD 2004).5 74.8 216. of a Mongolia Taipei.1 213.9 145.0 69..3 210.8 103. … 39. 102.1 112.1 254..1 … … 134.7 . Fed.2 30.8 81.5 … 25.0 … 160.2 34.2 205.8 343.7 5.7 434. 197.3 95.0 123.4 66.6 516.4 445.8 256.9 … 119.3 119.China a South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singaporea.5 577..4 … 233.7 27.3 60.0 282.6 301.1 52.5 . and income) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.6 .3 36. 297.3 … 119..4 .8 … .3 … 27.2 157.9 134.3 … 16.3 59.7 209.8 71.5 .8 23.3 108.9 290.3 … … 83.6 66.9 126.6 112. … … 91. 62.2 92.0 33..2 173.5 121.3 . 186.4 92.1 39. .7 76.5 44.8 251.3 148.3 … 101.9 148.2 170.6 344.8 2002 … 190.0 68. 1393.8 … 13. services.0 31.4 96. of Hong Kong.8 268.0 189.1 43.4 … 142.7 139.2 1688.7 38.4 286.9 436.5 28.7 227.9 414.2 49.4 … … 41.2 248. People’s Rep. 133. Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.1 … 676.6 70.0 35.2 189.1 1995 … 104.3 … 64.0 96.6 61.3 134.1 2006 25.1 557.0 172.8 ..1 … … 29.6 … 2009 82.6 168. Rep.0 48.5 238..3 366.3 135.3 633..4 181..3 73. .0 298. 344..5 134. … … 49.4 100.6 61.3 153.0 2004 … 134.8 21..2 105.1 29..6 12.3 130.5 132.8 123.7 85.9 234.2 2416.4 61.2 135. 165.6 137. … 15.8 70.8 77.3 69.9 … 414..3 235.3 23.1 45...0 … 125.6 ..0 … 420.9 407.3 … 118.0 52.0 … 25.5 … 241.6 2283..0 352.4 … 87. 148.8 537.4 363.1 223.0 190..0 138.2 … 16...2 … … 22.1 … … 32.4 35..9 129..0 64.3 101.9 116.7 … 632.8 39.8 123.6 236.6 145..2 … … 29.8 51.4 258.9 64.7 40.9 … 15.7 62.2 487..8 433.1 ..8 152..8 160.2 78.0 218.7 156.5 … 235 REGIONAL TABLES External debt as percent of exports was derived using exports of goods and services data from the national accounts.0 149.6 225.6 274.8 38.5 .2 .8 143.. ..3 115.8 583.1 … 230.1 211.9 139.9 54.8 139.5 393.7 233.9 168.3 42.4 651.0 20.3 … 98..8 5..8 . Rep.1 127.7 … 57.9 86.3 296.7 … 60.4 142.7 163.6 190.7 83.1 194.9 18.6 67. Chinaa Korea.8 319.8 … 20..2 139.0 224. 120.5 153.1 101.0 15.9 67.9 . but it is not classified as a developing member.6 … 62.5 … 11..1 118.0 504.5 14.5 … … 26.5 403.4 498.1 20.

People’s Rep... of Hong Kong.23 Total Debt Service Paid by Developing Member Economies (US$ million) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China. … … … … 553 5 12 … 2 … 2 1995 … 11 10 20 235 60 3216 0 104 245 15066 3159 11870 52 2677 755 10 13607 11 85 452 … 7 16421 25 6041 250 5363 1349 8586 364 1 42 . Sources: Global Development Finance Online (World Bank 2011).... Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .......Chinaa South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singaporea Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islandsa Fiji.236 GLOBALIZATION External Indebtedness Table 4. Rep.... … … … … 326 7 4 … 4 … 4 2007 5 189 202 181 27171 178 2620 64 200 753 32186 … 4538 55 7546 990 31 39364 55 147 837 … 30 23931 190 10437 54 10136 … 22222 1254 2 26 . … … … … 1007 7 14 … 5 … 4 2008 8 365 292 190 33426 328 2951 126 170 692 34389 … … 81 11473 888 81 30936 66 162 1231 … 42 21368 204 8772 33 12199 … 17084 1338 2 24 . country sources. … … … … 626 5 8 … 3 … 2 2000 … 46 130 118 3371 173 2855 63 468 886 27089 … 22905 39 45 766 7 10920 20 102 787 … 32 16625 40 6445 36 7059 … 13991 1309 1 25 . but it is not classified as a developing member. Fed.. Chinaa Korea... of a Mongolia Taipei. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.... States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu 1990 … … … … … … 1902 … … … 7057 1700 8274 … 1715 735 5 8141 9 68 384 … 30 9946 9 4333 60 3590 525 5290 174 0 81 . … … … … 269 5 7 … 3 … 2 2002 … 80 165 129 4107 129 2888 96 558 760 31083 … 25002 52 10 716 6 15425 22 104 708 … 21 16876 94 7938 64 10201 … 19720 1196 2 17 .. … … … … 304 5 9 … 5 … 2 2001 … 55 126 77 3354 177 2996 81 544 864 24535 … 22712 45 11 663 6 11751 22 94 742 … 22 15477 44 6231 40 9363 … 20312 1219 1 17 . … … … … 276 5 6 … 3 … 2 2003 … 116 209 181 5302 163 3076 82 449 810 36989 … 16288 288 11 662 7 25747 22 114 594 … 25 18475 102 9593 50 10200 … 15263 807 2 16 . Statistical Compendium 2004–1 CD-ROM (OECD 2004)... Rep. … … … … 308 6 14 … 5 … 3 2006 9 150 271 268 14475 87 2292 67 255 851 27479 … 7340 48 9001 711 10 17359 41 139 928 … 31 28282 182 7630 64 13699 … 14751 971 12 14 . of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia. … … … … 543 8 10 … 4 … 6 a Refers to principal repayments on long-term debts plus interests on short-term and long-term debts. … … … … 974 8 15 … 5 … 5 2009 11 431 397 263 40686 361 3432 471 168 618 41830 … … 112 6079 957 75 16150 69 177 1418 … 49 24852 242 11070 29 9881 … 12623 1139 2 26 .. … … … … 191 5 9 … 4 … 2 2004 … 169 232 234 8774 161 4272 99 405 871 23254 … 9081 41 5916 652 12 17486 33 117 758 … 28 20494 124 9191 65 11478 … 12953 823 3 13 . … … … … 251 6 17 … 4 … 3 2005 … 138 234 187 13181 127 2425 70 307 787 27366 … 7224 43 11006 799 7 23893 36 117 420 … 31 20228 132 9389 71 9962 … 18185 977 3 14 .

9 ...1 7.5 4.8 … 3.2 30.0 7.3 1.4 5. … … 11.0 34.8 28.2 8.8 19.2 7. Rep.4 … … 8.9 1. ..6 … 34.3 4.7 2.. 13.2 8.4 6.6 2.1 346..6 11.4 2003 … 10..7 .3 80. 7.1 … … … 1.3 23.5 5.1 2.9 15.8 11.9 .3 .0 10.. 11.5 .6 3..0 .8 6.. services. 2.. 2009 0.9 41.2 33.2 10.5 12.9 8.0 … … 2.6 52.4 20.1 7.8 17. but it is not classified as a developing member.4 2..4 .3 … … 7.9 … 9.2 4.9 … 6.. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 .3 38.. .7 7.3 2. 25.2 4. c Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB.5 7. 18..6 7. 3.2 1.9 9..9 1.0 36.4 2..2 … 1. 16.9 .5 9.2 24...4 ..4 24.9 9. 0.4 5.. Sources: Global Development Finance Online (World Bank 2011).3 5..3 .5 5.5 4. … … 9..0 16..9 4.9 49..5 4.7 … … … … … 12.5 .3 . … … 9.1 8.2 21.4 … … … … … 12..3 .8 1..8 27. Statistical Compendium 2004–1 CD-ROM (OECD 2004). 3.8 1.7 2007 0..2 … … … … … 7.2 6.4 12.1 … 10.7 … 4. … … 7.0 0.7 … … 2.2 2.9 1.GLOBALIZATION External Indebtedness Table 4. 0.8 … 9.9 ..3 0.9 25. 15.2 … 1. and income) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.7 12.3 5.7 17.6 .5 17...2 22.. b Refers to debt service as percent of exports of goods and services under the national accounts.9 4..8 16.5 … 2.8 ..2 8..1 11.1 ..2 … 1.3 1995 … 3.6 42...1 .2 2.5 2008 0..0 11.2 ..9 5.7 15. 1.1 … 8...7 … … … … … 20.1 … 34.3 2000 … 8.6 … … … … … 19.8 2...9 13.7 20..0 .1 . People’s Rep.8 6.0 9.7 10..5 12..1 3.8 .0 1.8 … … … … … 9.Chinab South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamc Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singaporeb Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islandsa Fiji..0 2002 … 9.6 24. Chinaa Korea.2 … 20. 0.9 11.1 11.4 .3 5.3 7..1 … 8..8 11.9 23. 9.3 2004 … 11.3 .. 0.. 0.4 9..7 6.9 1.5 8.8 .3 0.6 5.6 … … 3.8 19.7 24. 33..5 34.3 30.6 ..6 1.4 10. .9 4..8 6.3 8.4 11.2 … 1.2 ..8 7.9 10.0 26.9 7.3 0.0 10..3 11.5 1.7 .9 16.1 16.0 24.7 .7 6.6 18.1 … … 3.7 .9 … 7.7 13.1 … … 2.1 2001 … 8...4 … 9.5 8.5 12.3 33.2 12..4 .2 5. 1.1 7.0 3.24 Total Debt Service Paid by Developing Member Economies (percent of exports of goods.6 11...0 13..9 4.8 7. Fed.9 … … … … … 7.4 … … 2.8 7.8 11.4 3.8 69..3 10..2 0. .0 8.3 12.1 ..1 … 8..6 6.8 18.8 2.9 .1 .1 6.0 1. 7. 2.3 .0 0..3 10...1 16.7 9.6 . 5.1 6. .0 2. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu 1990 … … … … … … 27. 12.7 4. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.7 1.0 6.3 6. 11.8 5.2 2.0 18... 9.1 19.0 1.8 24.8 15.1 29. 1.3 ...9 0.9 0.2 8.9 21.8 7.2 3. 19.0 . 2. 15..3 0.4 ..8 … 1.6 7.2 7..9 2.0 1.1 … … … … … … 11..0 10.9 9.3 2006 0.0 21. 1.2 13.5 5. country sources.2 29....2 … … … … … 15...7 … 7. of Hong Kong.3 34..9 4.5 13..4 28.7 3.9 … 7.2 5..7 7.6 1..1 8.8 14.1 .9 8..0 8.9 26.6 0.6 6.9 .3 .6 … 17.4 27.2 8..9 32..6 42.3 6.5 … 17.. 1. 3.8 … … … 1...6 20.6 0.7 .. 237 REGIONAL TABLES a Refers to debt service as percent of total exports as reflected under direction of trade..9 ..9 10..6 11.7 30..5 32.7 16..0 2.6 5.2 2.3 … 1.8 2.7 3.9 .4 3. 0.2 16.8 2005 … 7.1 … … … … … 37.9 … 1. Rep.. 26..7 7..6 … … … … … 15.0 23.1 4.2 3.0 5.0 38. 11.2 33.6 10.6 … 5.7 2...5 .5 .2 9..2 13.0 15.2 14..7 22.2 .5 4. 0.4 15. 0. of b Mongolia Taipei.. 7.7 35.9 … … … … … 8. 6. 23. 13..9 4. 4.4 7. 0.5 .7 14.

mkt. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia.org/en/content/tourism-highlights). Taipei. but it is not classified as a developing member. c For reporting economies only. Sources: World Tourism Organization Online (UNWTO 2011). New Zealand. b Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB. the Republic of Korea. and Viet Nam. Fed. Rep. People’s Rep. Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011 . of Mongolia Taipei. Japan.China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalamb Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji.238 GLOBALIZATION Tourism Table 4.unwto. For the rest of the economies. China Korea.25 International Tourists a (thousand) Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China.China. data refer to international visitor arrivals at frontiers (including tourists and same-day visitors). data refer to international tourist arrivals at frontiers (excluding same-day visitors). States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESc REGIONAL MEMBERSc 1995 … 12 … 85 … 36 378 … 218 92 20034 … 3753 108 2332 156 5 2124 315 363 403 … … 4324 60 7469 117 1760 6070 6952 1351 48 318 4 6 … … 53 42 68 12 … 29 1 44 3726 3345 1409 2000 … 45 … 387 1471 59 557 4 3 302 31229 8814 5322 137 2624 199 8 2649 467 464 400 … … 5064 191 10222 208 1992 6062 9579 2140 73 294 5 5 21 … 58 58 88 5 … 35 1 58 4931 4757 1787 2001 … 123 … 302 1845 99 500 4 5 345 33167 8878 5147 166 2831 207 6 2537 461 361 337 … … 5153 173 12775 205 1797 5857 10133 2330 75 348 5 5 15 … 54 54 88 … … 32 1 53 4856 4772 1909 2002 … 162 576 298 2832 140 498 … 11 332 36803 10689 5347 229 2978 207 6 2384 485 275 393 … … 5033 215 13292 217 1933 5855 10873 2628 73 398 5 6 19 … 59 54 89 … … 37 1 49 4841 5239 2045 2003 … 206 768 313 2410 342 501 … 8 231 32970 9676 4753 201 2248 245 6 2726 564 338 501 … … 4467 196 10577 206 1907 4703 10082 2429 78 431 5 7 18 … 68 56 92 7 … 40 1 50 4746 5212 2104 2004 … 263 989 368 3073 398 648 … 15 262 41761 13655 5818 301 2950 271 9 3457 617 385 566 119 987 5321 407 15703 242 2291 6553 11737 2928 83 504 3 9 19 … 95 59 98 6 … 41 1 61 5215 6138 2334 2005 … 319 693 560 3143 319 798 … 12 242 46809 14773 6023 338 3378 208 14 3919 395 375 549 126 1333 5002 672 16431 232 2623 7079 11567 3477 88 545 4 9 19 … 86 69 102 9 … 42 1 62 5499 6728 2365 2006 … 382 682 983 3468 766 898 … 6 560 49913 15821 6155 386 3520 200 17 4447 602 384 560 158 1591 4871 842 17547 264 2843 7588 13822 3583 92 549 4 6 19 … 87 78 116 11 14 39 1 68 5532 7334 2409 2007 … 511 732 1052 3876 1656 840 … 8 903 54720 17154 6448 452 3716 289 21 5082 676 527 494 179 1873 5506 1142 20973 248 3092 7957 14464 4229 97 540 5 7 21 … 93 104 122 14 22 46 1 81 5644 8347 2455 2008 … 558 1409 1290 3447 2435 823 … … 1069 53049 17320 6891 446 3845 467 28 5283 683 500 438 226 2001 6234 1295 22052 193 3139 7778 14584 4236 95 585 4 6 26 … 83 114 122 16 36 49 2 91 5586 8351 2459 2009 … 575 1430 1500 3118 2147 855 … … 1215 50875 16926 7818 433 4395 267 23 5168 656 510 448 157 2046 6324 1239 23646 243 3017 7489 14150 3747 101 542 4 5 … … 84 … 129 18 44 51 2 101 5584 6790 2458 2010 … … 1495 2033 3393 … 914 … … … 55665 20085 8798 456 5567 … 27 5584 792 … 654 … 2399 7003 … 24577 … 3520 9161 15842 5050 … 632 … … … … … … … … … … … … 5885 8611 2525 59142 91300 96474 105481 94427 122954 132319 143786 159794 162722 161341 173647 67622 102775 108011 117606 106489 136760 147037 159219 176419 179344 176330 190668 a For Australia. Rep. of Hong Kong. UNWTO Tourism Highlights (UNWTO 2011. Georgia.

GLOBALIZATION
Tourism
Table 4.26 International Tourism, Receipts (US$ million)
Developing Member Economies Central and West Asia Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Pakistan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan East Asia China, People’s Rep. of Hong Kong, China Korea, Rep. of Mongolia Taipei,China South Asia Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Brunei Darussalama Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Viet Nam The Pacific Cook Islands Fiji, Rep. of Kiribati Marshall Islands Micronesia, Fed. States of Nauru Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Developed Member Economies Australia Japan New Zealand DEVELOPING MEMBER ECONOMIESb REGIONAL MEMBERSb 1995 … 1 70 … 122 5 110 … … … 8730 9604 5150 21 3287 25 5 2582 211 177 226 … 53 5229 51 3969 151 1136 7611 8035 … 28 291 2 3 … … … 25 35 16 … 10 … 45 8130 3224 2318 57016 70688 2000 … 38 63 97 356 15 81 … … 27 16231 5868 6834 36 3738 50 10 3460 321 158 248 … 304 4975 114 5011 162 2156 5142 7483 … 36 189 3 3 17 … 53 7 41 4 … 7 … 56 9289 3373 2272 63394 78328 2001 … 65 43 117 452 24 88 … … 22 17792 5904 6384 39 4335 48 9 3198 327 144 213 155 380 5277 104 6863 109 1742 4641 7075 … 38 205 3 3 15 … 59 5 39 5 … 7 … 46 9224 3306 2340 65821 80846 2002 … 63 51 126 622 36 97 2 … 22 20385 7410 5936 130 4583 57 8 3102 337 103 363 113 454 5285 107 7118 120 1761 4458 7901 … 46 260 … 3 17 … 57 3 45 1 … 6 … 54 9971 3497 3159 71128 87868 2003 … 73 58 147 564 48 122 2 … 24 17406 7072 5358 143 2977 57 8 4463 402 199 441 124 389 4037 74 5901 56 1544 3842 7856 1400 69 345 … 4 17 … 76 4 54 2 … 10 … 64 12438 8848 4232 2004 … 171 65 177 718 76 179 1 … 28 25739 8918 6069 185 4054 67 13 6170 471 230 513 181 603 4798 119 8203 84 2017 5327 10043 1700 72 423 … 5 17 … 97 6 69 4 … 13 … 75 15214 11265 5098 2005 … 220 78 241 701 73 182 2 … 28 29296 10179 5806 177 4977 70 19 7493 287 131 429 191 840 4522 139 8846 68 2265 6205 9577 2300 91 485 3 6 17 … 97 4 79 2 … 15 … 85 16848 12430 5211 2006 … 271 117 313 838 167 255 2 … 43 33949 11461 5788 225 5136 80 23 8634 512 128 410 224 963 4448 158 10427 46 3501 7545 13393 2850 90 480 2 7 18 … 90 4 90 26 20 16 … 92 17840 8470 4792 2007 … 305 178 384 1013 346 276 3 … 51 37233 13566 6138 312 5213 76 28 10730 602 200 385 233 1135 5346 189 14050 … 4933 9083 16667 3750 107 499 4 5 … … … 4 103 27 26 14 … 119 22308 9345 5414 2008 … 331 190 447 1012 514 316 4 … 64 40843 15304 9774 247 5937 75 36 11832 664 336 342 242 1219 7378 276 15277 … 2499 10714 18173 3930 105 547 3 3 … … … 2 112 37 14 19 … … 24755 10821 5037 2009 … 334 353 476 963 459 269 2 … 99 39675 16450 9819 235 6816 70 42 11136 608 371 350 254 1185 5598 268 15772 … 2330 9364 15663 3050 … 422 3 3 … … … 1 116 44 18 … … … 25384 10305 4586 2010 … 403 621 659 1005 … 363 4 … … 45814 22951 9765 244 8648 81 … 14160 714 388 576 … 1260 6980 … 17819 … 2783 14124 19760 4450 … … … … … … … … 124 … … … … … 30103 13199 4855

239 REGIONAL TABLES

65307 87518 96034 112617 133101 148576 142364 173697 90949 119276 130714 143943 170401 189431 182893 221854

a Brunei Darussalam is a regional member of ADB, but it is not classified as a developing member. b For reporting economies only. Sources: World Tourism Organization Online (UNWTO 2011); UNWTO Tourism Highlights, (UNWTO 2011, mkt.unwto.org/en/content/tourism-highlights); International Financial Statistics Online (IMF 2011); for Taipei,China, economy sources.

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

240

Transport, Electricity, and Communications
More than two thirds of Asia’s rail network are operated by just three economies—the People’s Republic of China, India, and Japan. Road networks in Asia are growing rapidly to accommodate the increase in vehicle ownership. More vehicle use comes with a cost and road accidents are high in many Asian economies. Industrialization and household electrification are leading to massive increases in per capita electricity consumption, and cellular phone subscriptions have rapidly grown over the last decade.

Key Trends
Just three economies operate more than two thirds of Asia’s rail network: the People’s Republic of China (PRC), India, and Japan. India had the largest rail network in Asia and the Pacific in 1990 but by 2009, the PRC’s rail network had become the largest (Figure 5.1). Since 1990, the PRC’s rail network has grown by more than 20% while India’s by only 1%. Significant growth was also reported by Cambodia (8%); the Republic of Korea (9%); Taipei,China (49%); and Thailand (15%). The Bangladesh network grew by 3%, while in several economies rail networks have actually declined—by 11% in Pakistan and 17% in Viet Nam. Some economies of Central and West Asia reported smaller reductions in rail networks. some economies of Central and West Asia. Since 1990, growth of about 9% per year was recorded in Bhutan and Brunei Darussalam, and the PRC’s network, which is already the largest in Asia, grew on average by 7% each
Figure 5.2 Average Annual Percentage Increase in Road Networks, 1990 to Latest Year
Bhutan Brunei Darussalam China, People's Rep. of Nepal Thailand Lao PDR Afghanistan Malaysia India Taipei,China Kyrgyz Republic Korea, Rep. of Viet Nam Pakistan Indonesia Bangladesh Hong Kong, China Philippines Solomon Islands Mongolia Fiji, Rep. of Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Singapore Papua New Guinea Myanmar Cambodia Japan Sri Lanka New Zealand Azerbaijan Australia Armenia –0.4 –0.7 –2.9 –4 –2 0 10.0 8.9 6.6 6.2 5.9 5.2 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.0 3.5 3.4 3.0 2.7 2.3 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 Georgia Tajikistan Kazakhstan 2 4 6 8 10

Figure 5.1 Percentage Breakdown of Rail Networks in Asia and the Pacific, Latest Year Korea, Rep. of 1.5 New Zealand 1.8 Uzbekistan 1.9 Thailand 2.0 Pakistan 3.5 Australia 4.4 Kazakhstan 6.4 Japan 9.1 Source: Table 5.4.

Others 11.2 China, People's Rep. of 29.6

India 28.6

In contrast to rail, road networks have been growing rapidly in most economies since 1990. Roads play an important role in accessing employment, markets, education, and health services. In most economies, road networks have been growing at 2% or more each year, although some roads have been abandoned since 1990 in

Source: Table 5.1.

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

TRANSpORT, ELEcTRIcITy, ANd cOmmuNIcATIONS
year between 1990 and 2007. Other economies with high growth rates are Nepal and Thailand (6%) and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (5%). Afghanistan; India; the Kyrgyz Republic; Malaysia; and Taipei,China all grew by 4%. Growth was lower in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Pakistan, the Philippines, Viet Nam, and other developing economies. Vehicle ownership is growing rapidly together with expanding road networks. At 696 vehicles per thousand population, Brunei Darussalam had more vehicles compared to Australia (687) and Japan (593), and close to New Zealand’s 733. Vehicles per thousand population in Brunei Darussalam have increased five-fold between 1990 and 2008. The economies in Figure 5.3 fall broadly into three groups: eight economies with 20 vehicles per thousand population in 2008, 15 economies with between 21 and 99, and 14 economies with more than 100 per thousand. The first group includes Bangladesh (2), Pakistan (11), and India (15); the middle group includes the PRC (37) and Indonesia (77); and the top group includes Singapore (150) and Malaysia (334), as well as three developed economies—Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. Increasing road traffic is a fast growing source of pollution in many cities, creating a major impact on health. Higher vehicle use comes with a cost. Road accidents are exceptionally high in Asia. The decade of 2011–2020 has been declared by the United Nations as the “Decade of Action for Road Safety.” Figure 5.4 presents deaths due to road accidents. Six economies have rates in excess of 20 fatalities per 100,000 population; in ascending order these are Thailand (20), Georgia (20), Kazakhstan (21), Mongolia (22), the Kyrgyz Republic (22), and Malaysia (24). Eighteen of the 42 economies in Figure 5.4 have rates in excess of 10. By comparison, the four largest economies in Europe (Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and Italy), all with high vehicle ownership, had reduced road fatalities per 100,000 population in 2008 to between 4 in the United Kingdom and 8 in Italy. For 24 economies, comparisons are available between 2000 and 2008. Eleven economies reduced their death rates over the period. Some of these were economies like Bangladesh, the PRC, and Pakistan, that already had low rates of fatal accidents associated with low rates of vehicle ownership. Among economies with higher rates of ownership, Japan; the Republic of Korea; and Taipei,China achieved reductions of 30% or more. Malaysia with the highest rate in 2008 reduced fatalities by just 6% compared with 2000. Safer road construction, better protection for pedestrians, and stricter enforcement of traffic regulations are needed to reduce road accidents and fatalities.

241 REGIONAL TABLES

Figure 5.3 Motor Vehicles per 1,000 population, 1990 and 2008 or Latest Year New Zealand Brunei Darussalam Australia Japan Korea, Rep. of Malaysia Taipei,China Kazakhstan Fiji, Rep. of Singapore Kiribati Georgia Turkmenistan Armenia Azerbaijan Indonesia Hong Kong, China Mongolia Sri Lanka Samoa Kyrgyz Republic Bhutan Tajikistan China, People's Rep. of Micronesia, Fed. States of Philippines Afghanistan Maldives Lao PDR Cambodia India Viet Nam Pakistan Papua New Guinea Myanmar Nepal Bangladesh 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 1990 Source: Table 5.2. Latest year

Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2011

242

TRANSpORT, ELEcTRIcITy, ANd cOmmuNIcATIONS
Despite these increases, many economies in Asia and the Pacific suffer from what the International Energy Agency (IEA) describes as “energy poverty” in its World Energy Outlook 2010 (IEA 2011, Chapter 8). Electrification rates are still low in Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Myanmar, and Nepal (Table 5.6) so that many people suffer from respiratory diseases through the burning of firewood and animal dung in poorly ventilated dwellings. The same IEA report states that “the number of premature deaths from household air pollution is greater than the number of premature deaths from malaria or tuberculosis” (IEA 2011, 245). Electricity is also required for most modern productive activities as well as telecommunications, and without wider access to electricity, these economies cannot likely achieve the Millennium Development Goal of poverty elimination.

Figure 5.4 Road Accident Deaths per 100,000 Population, 2000 and 2008 or Nearest Years Malaysia Kyrgyz Republic Mongolia Kazakhstan Georgia Thailand Bhutan Brunei Darussalam Viet Nam Turkmenistan Armeni