China’s National Party Congress (NPC) – offensive growth signals
March 6, 2023
2022 was quite a poor year for the Chinese economy – with an official GDP increase by only 3 percent. This weak performance could be related to a large extent to the finally failing zero-covid strategy – a growth burden that eventually became embarrassing and uncomfortable for the political leadership. For this reason, the zero-covid strategy was abandoned unexpectedly in December 2022. I would guess that this action was a result of political emergency – with probably a positive growth impact in 2023.
How much GDP uncertainty is still there?
The abolition of the zero-covid strategy will probably give some stimulus to GDP growth this year (when applying ceteris paribus assumptions, for example by ruling out unforeseeable foreign-trade restrictions or distortions, bursting asset-price bubbles, major moves of the exchange rate, etc.).
However, no one can be sure about the exact starting-point level of total GDP in the beginning of 2023 because of at least previously motivated doubts about the quality of GDP statistics and, consequently, a wrong GDP-calculation history during quite a long time. Have these doubts in the meanwhile become unfair or are they still in place? The new official target for 2023 year’s GDP growth of around 5 percent may be in line with statistical reality – or not (quite yet). We simply do not know.
This is exactly a situation I have been warning for since many years back. How can one recognize an existing improvement of statistical quality? There was a time when (official) GDP statistics looked too easy to predict because GDP fluctuations were kept very low from quarter to quarter – just about right to meet the official growth goals at the end of the year. Thus: Without then having applied normal quarterly fluctuations, good statistical GDP quality seemed to be quite far away during a considerable period of time leading to the explained statistical trust problem.
By now, statistical quality of GDP may have improved. But no Western analyst knows about this exactly. However, one can see that the very recently at the NPC proclaimed official GDP-growth objective of around 5 percent in 2023 surpasses the outcome of 2022 by as much as 2 percentage points. 5 percent may not be quite easy to achieve but is definitely not out of reach because of all the (possible) statistical GDP effects from the low base in 2022 and a more expansionary economic policy this year.
Altogether, it remains interesting to look at the official objective for GDP growth that was announced on March 5 at the first session of the new14th National Party Congress (the 15th NPC starts in March 2028). Almost 3000 representatives from all over the country participate in this currently ongoing annual “parliamentary” convention of the Communist Party – a convention with a usual acceptance rate for all suggestions and laws of 100 percent.
What comes up at the NPC?
Even if the agenda of the ongoing NPC session is widely known, interesting confirmations or news can be expected. In this context, one may mention
¤ the formal installation of Presiden Xi Jinping’s third (unprecedented) term
¤ the presentation of the new Premier, probably Li Qiang (also China’s no 2)
¤ the presentation of the new governor of the People’s Bank of China
¤ the government’s annual work report for developments in 2022
¤ details, guidelines, goals for the society and economy in 2023 and beyond
¤ first initiatives how to meet the crucial demographic challenges (with now decreasing population), etc.
¤ a further strong rise of military expenditure – with a potential risk of not meeting the minus 3-percent budget objective.
The most remaining impression from the whole NPC is certainly the new and now even larger power of Chairman Xi Jinping. Also the probably new Chinese Prime Minister Li Qiang, is a close political ally of Xi. A logical conclusion should be that Xi Jinping in the future will meet more individual responsibility because of the high concentration of political power to him alone and his protégés. Looking at China’s many existing conflicts of goals, the challenge of concentrated power will not be easy to manage over time.
What s behind the new – fairly confident – GDP objective?
Finally, there may be a need of trying to elaborate a little bit more on the chosen numerical objective for this year’s GDP growth – “around 5 percent” which is a smartly chosen number, allowing for both 4.5 and 5.5 percent and everything in between. One can easily imagine that Chairman Xi Jinping definitely must have felt disappointed about last year’s weak GDP groyth and probably also worried about the emerging protests and social tensions in early winter as a consequence of the tough covid lockdowns at the time.
Thus, it certainly felt appropriate for Xi to lead the country into 2023 in a positive mood. Indeed, such a change of tone could be observed already in the past month. More optimism about the Chinese economy showed up domestically and outside China as well – strongly pushed by positive official comments but also additionally all over the whole globe by private institutions/analysts and their upward revisions of GDP for 2023.
Another psychological explanation for more optimism may have been/may be that Chairman Xi Jinping with his concrete ambition to develop China visibly into an economic global economic (and political) superpower simply did not/does want to be confronted with another weak economic year. Instead, Xi obviously wants in 2023 to contribute to more confidence on China – via some more expansionary policy action, keeping inflation down at planned 3 percent this year (as announced at the NPC), improving innovative reputation and attraction, and – also taken up at the NPC – by more open doors for foreign direct investors. Exemplified psychological tools!
Thus, we are reminded again that the analysis of China needs a lot of psychological understanding which is not easy to acquire! The Chinese often have another logical thinking than Westerners.
Hubert Fromlet
Affiliate Professor at the School of Business and Economics, Linnaeus University
Editorial board