Back in 1994, Paul Krugman enraged Asians with his Foreign Affairs article “The Myth of Asia’s Miracle”. In it, he argued that seemingly remarkable growth in countries such as Singapore was not so remarkable after all. None of the expansion was the result of a rise in productivity, he said. Rather, all could be explained by an increase in measured inputs, namely of labour and capital.
Mr Krugman’s paper triggered not a little outrage. Leaders who had overseen what seemed to them like a startling transformation of their economies didn’t take kindly to his arguments. They saw themselves as statesmen who had engineered economic miracles, not lucky beneficiaries of favourable demographics and of thrifty populations whose savings could be recycled into factories and roads.
Good demographics may be a precondition for high growth. But it is not enough. Countries in Latin America that had the same demographic profile as south-east Asia in the 1970s grew at a far slower pace. One needs at least a semblance of decent government, if only to persuade people their savings won’t be confiscated or eroded by hyperinflation.