The Weakness of the Global Competitiveness Report

In the 2018 Global Competitiveness Report (GCR) among 140 economies, the Philippines ranked 64 places. Prominently, information communication technology (ICT) and economic stability posed the most definite challenge to the country. Among the nine members of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), the country slipped to the sixth from the fifth spot last year.

The competitiveness of countries is based on the 12 pillars, such as business dynamism, financial system, health, innovation, institutions, infrastructure, ICT adoption, labor market, macroeconomic stability, market size, product market, and skills. Health posed the greatest challenge to the country, placing 102nd place as the report highlighted life expectancy in the country shortened to only 65.6 years from 67.6. On the positive note, the country improved in terms of institutions from 87th last year to 50. Similarly, other pillars such as market size, labor market and financial system, business dynamism, and product market all improved in the ranking. Singapore is the most competitive country, dislodging the US in the first place, while Hong Kong was third in the ranking.

However, the Global Competitiveness report is not a comprehensive ranking system. There are several criticisms in its objectivity. For instance, research of Bergstein and Avery (2012) claimed that GCR has a strong bias towards countries with neoliberal traditions such as the US and UK. The GCR methods strongly rely on inputs instead of outputs. Removing the GCR predisposition towards the liberal market economy will undoubtedly reduce the international competitiveness ranking of the US and UK. The GCR penchant for the high ranking of the US and UK raises a global concern on legitimizing an economic model with enormous flaws and shortcomings. In truth, the poor track record of the neoliberal model sustained the myth that the US and UK have the most competitive economies elicit serious ethical concern. Three major factors contributed to the weakness of the GCR ranking report: mixing inputs and outputs, strong ideological bias and abandoning the social and environmental outcome

Last February 22, 2020, there were eight students whose name appear below attended the lecture seminar on Globalization and International Business, Corporate Environmental Frameworks, Principal and Agents of Business which include the competitiveness of the Philippines. The students have a deeper understanding of the ranking system. One realization is the difficulty of coming up with an objective that will strongly reflect competitiveness. A robust model, is the first step towards a reliable ranking system.

1. DAVE DARLANA DEGAMO

2. ANDREA O. CARMELOTES

3. SHEENA MAE PALAMOS

4. ALEMAR OMAR

5. ALFINE MANTALABA

6. KILE RAMOS

7. JACKIYA RAMATA

8. KHAILA RIZZ SUBIDO

References:

Bergsteiner, H., & Avery, G. C. (2012). When ethics are compromised by ideology: The Global Competitiveness Report. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(4), 391–410.

Bergsteiner, H., Avery, G.C. Misleading Country Rankings Perpetuate Destructive Business Practices. J Bus Ethics 159, 863–881 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3805-6