Dhaka down to 107th position in global competitiveness ranking

FE Team | Published: November 01, 2007 00:00:00 | Updated: February 01, 2018 00:00:00

FE Report
Bangladesh has been placed on the lower rung of global competitiveness ranking this year, slipping back to the 107th position out of 131 countries.
Dhaka ranked 92 out of 125 countries in 2006 in the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) as tallied by Switzerland-based World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness Report (GCR) 2007-08.
In parallel, the country's position has significantly slid down to 118 as far as the Business Competitiveness Index (BCI) is concerned over the same period.
The Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) on behalf of the Forum has analysed global business environment for the year 2006.
The Bangladesh country survey was carried out among 92 corporate bodies between February-April 2006 and January-March 2007.
"This is worrying for the economy … This (WEF ranking) has practical importance and implications," executive director of the CPD Mustafizur Rahman said Wednesday in the city while releasing the GCR.
Rahman pointed out that foreign investors took such ranking into consideration as they had to make comparative analysis while taking investment decision.
"The country's position came down by 15 places in 2007 compared to that of 2006," the CPD executive said, adding that "If the comparison was made with the same set of countries which was covered last year, Bangladesh's ranking would have declined by six positions (98 in 2007)."
"There's no single indicator where Bangladesh's performance has improved in 2006 compared to previous year; rather in terms of some indicators Bangladesh was ranked as one of the bottom 10 countries of the world, such as institutions, higher education and training, and technological training," Rahman concluded as he analysed the key findings of the report.
"Notable deterioration was observed in health and primary education, market size, infrastructure, macro-economic stability, financial market sophistication, innovation and higher education and training," the CPD executive told the newsmen, referring to an array of indicators.
Asked if there was a possibility of improvement in the next year's ranking, Rahman said the institutional reforms, new initiatives for good governance and regulatory reform measures would not deliver "overnight benefits. "These (reforms) will have positive implications in the long-run," he added.
At the same time, Rahman sought to remind all concerned of the challenges facing the economy and particularly mentioned about what he dubbed "imported inflationary pressures."
He, however, stressed that the recent business forum organised by the interim administration would help boost confidence of the business community, on one hand, and alleviate the "initial uncertainty," on the other.
The GCR suggested: "… These (poor performing) countries must make efforts in all areas measured by the GCI to improve their competitive standing, most urgently by improving health and educational standards, upgrading infrastructure and technology and creating market-friendly business environments."
Only in respect to institutions, labour market efficiency and technological readiness, the report noted, the score has improved, albeit "insignificantly."
By regional comparison, this year's ranking of India and Pakistan slid down, while those of Sri Lanka and China improved.
The GCI ranking of India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and China are 48, 92, 70 and 34 respectively.
Turning to the BCI, the report pointed out Bangladesh's ranking in this area has been deteriorating over the time.
"A significant decline took place in 2007 compared to that in 2006, down by 19 positions," the report said, adding if only the original set of countries is considered, even then Bangladesh's position came down by 19 positions.
Meanwhile, the CPD has released its own Bangladesh Business Environment Study covering the period between February, 2006 and January, 2007 that also shows disquietingly poor performance in case of the country's business climate.
The report identified very low level of public trust about financial honesty of politicians, favouritism of government officials for well connected firms and individuals when deciding upon policies and contracts, ineffective national parliament and wasteful public spending as the deteriorating indicators.