Foreign investments still restricted in China - Arthur Kroeber

Arthur Kroeber

Foreign companies and their business organizations used the G20 meeting in Hangzhou as an opportunity to point at the restrictions they face when they want to invest in China, while outbound investments from China go through the roof. You only have to look at the basic figures to see they are right, says author Arthur Kroeber of China's Economy: What Everyone Needs to Know® to the South China Morning Post.

The South China Morning Post:

While global direct investments declined, China’s outbound investment surged 62 per cent to a record US$100 billion in the first seven months of 2016, according to China’s Ministry of Commerce. 

An “asymmetric investment environment” exists in China, said Gavekal Research’s economist Arthur Kroeber. 

“China in fact runs one of the most restrictive regimes in the world for foreign direct investment, according to the OECD, and is far more closed than other big emerging economies including Brazil, India and Russia,” Kroeber said. “China is especially unwelcoming to investment in the fast-growing service sectors.”

More in the South China Morning Post.

Arthur Kroeber is a speaker at the China Speakers Bureau. Do you need him at your meeting or conference? Do get in touch or fill in our speakers´request form.

Are you looking for more financial experts at the China Speakers Bureau? Do check out this list.

Related articles

• Hotels in Guangzhou not Allowed to Accept Guest From 5 Muslim Countries
• No Messi or Ronaldo for China soon - Rowan Simons | China Speakers Bureau
• China and US to ratify landmark Paris climate deal ahead of G20 summit, sources reveal | South China Morning Post
• Theresa May to seek stronger relationships with G20 countries

How good is China's education?

Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday I got a surprise phone call from a Dutch journalist who wanted my comment on a report stating that a survey said China's education belonged to the best in the world. I had not seen such a report yet and the journalist had only 60 seconds time for a thorough interview on this rather complicated subject, I summarized it as "a load of bullshit".
Even after she explained the survey was done by the OECD, I could not change my verdict. Together with health care, education is one of the most problematic areas in China - as also Shaun Rein explained earlier in the week. Any survey saying differently must be a load of bullshit.
But my interest was triggered on how such a misunderstanding could emerged and during the day the OECD report popped up on my radar screen, as reported here by the New York Times.
For the defense of the OECD: the journalist made a classic mistake by assuming that the report - which was actually about Shanghai students - would easily apply on the whole of China. That is an unfortunate lack of logic.
But then, how come Shanghai students score better than countries in Europe and the US where they love to received their education. Are Chinese students wrong by leaving their own country for a better education and should they move to Shanghai in stead?
The tested subjects in the survey were reading, math and science. I'm still not sure what that really means, some of the assessments of the OECD test were rather critical. Shanghai will be ahead of the curve, at least in their own country.

Related articles

• OECD warns West of losing global edge in education (calgaryherald.com)
• Shanghai Students World Champs on Science, Math, Reading Test (news.sciencemag.org)
• Shanghai students ranked best in the world at maths and science - Telegraph.co.uk (news.google.com)
• West loses edge to Asia in education: Top five OECD findings - Christian Science Monitor (news.google.com)