UNEQUAL EXCHANGE 1965 - 1995
WORLD TREND AND WORLD TABLES
Gernot Köhler
School of Computing and Information Management
Sheridan College
Oakville, Ontario
Canada L6H 2L1
gernot.kohler@sheridanc.on.ca
November 1998
This study continues my measurements of unequal exchange and includes
data for the years 1965 and 1995. (The previous study has data for 1995;
see, Köhler 1998). I am presenting
(1) highlights and a summary of
global trends of unequal exchange, 1965 - 1995; and (2) the statistical
tables upon which this summary is based (in the Appendices). The calculations
are based on trade data from U.N. trade statistics and on purchasing power
parity data from the World Bank (and Penn World Tables). The underlying
theory and method are explained in the previous study.
2. Corroboration of Amin’s Estimate
Professor Amin published an estimate
of the magnitude of unequal exchange between developing and advanced countries
for the year 1966. According to Amin the global total of unequal exchange
in 1966 was US $ 22 billion (22 thousand million) at exchange rates of
1966 (Amin 1976:144). My estimate for 1965 is US $ 19 billion (see, Appendix
B). Amin's and my estimates are thus very similar even though they are
based on two different methods of estimation. (More on Amin's numbers,
see Appendix D)
3. National Trends: Selected Countries
Table 1 shows trends of unequal exchange
for selected countries; other countries are listed in Appendix A.
1965
1995
% %
AFRICA
Mozambique -8
-75
Nigeria -1
-172
Egypt -1
-21
ASIA
Indonesia -8
-52
India -1
-18
China (mainland) 0
-47
AMERICA, Central and South
Brazil -5
-4
Mexico -3
-28
Peru -6
-5
EUROPE, Central and East
USSR/Russia 0
-10
Czechosl./Czech R +1 -46
Romania +1
-29
OECD Countries
USA +1
+6
France +2
+7
Germany-W/Germany +2 +11
Japan +1
+11
United Kingdom +3
+6
Sources and notes: see, Appendix A
Table 1 shows significant increases in the magnitudes of unequal exchange
between 1965 and 1995; that means increased losses for many non-OECD
countries (e.g., Indonesia, from a loss of -8% of GDP in 1965 to a loss
of -52% of GDP in 1995, due to unequal exchange) and increased gains
for OECD countries.
4. Trends by Center/Periphery of the World-System
When the world is subdivided into but two groups of countries -- namely,
center versus periphery, or, OECD versus non-OECD countries, the trends
are, as shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Unequal Exchange 1965 and 1995, by Center/Periphery
Unequal
Exchange
Gain
(+)
Loss (-)
CENTER
PERIPHERY
(% of
OECD GDP) (% of NON-OECD GDP)
1965 +1.4%
-
1.8%
1995 +8 %
-24 %
(Number of countries: OECD N=19 (1965) and N=22 (1995); NON-OECD N=88 (1965)
and N=97 (1995))
Sources and notes: see, Appendix A
Table 2 shows that OECD countries (center) increased their gains from
unequal exchange from +1.4 % of their combined GDPs (1965) to +8 % (in
1995). The losses for non-OECD countries (periphery) increased from -1.8%
of their combined GDPs (1965) to -24 % (in 1995). ("Non-OECD"
in this table includes China and USSR, as well as (ex-)Warsaw Pact countries).
5. Trends by "Three Worlds"
The center-periphery view above can be refined by separating out the Socialist/Communist
camp. In Cold War times, the West (First World, NATO, OECD) was rivalling
the East (Second World, Warsaw Pact, COMECON), both competing for allies
in the South (Third World, non-aligned countries, developing countries).
The trends of unequal exchange for these groups of countries are presented
in Tables 3 and 4.
Table 3. Unequal Exchange and "Three Worlds"
OECD USSR
China NON-OECD NON-OECD
countries /Russia
excl. China, incl.
China,
USSR/Russia
USSR/Russia
YEAR (A) (B)
(C) (D) (E)
percent
of aggregate GDP
gain(+)
loss(-)
1965 +1.4% 0
% 0 % - 3.9% -
1.8%
1995 +8 % -10
% -47 % -20 % -24
%
Sources and notes: see, Appendices A,B and Kohler (1998: Appendix)
Table 3 shows that the two major Socialist/Communist states -- namely,
(mainland) China and the USSR, had fairly equitable trade with the West
in 1965 (unequal exchange = 0% of GDP). By 1995 this favourable situation
had deteriorated to -10% for Russia and - 47% for China. The "South"
("Third World" without China and USSR) had already a significant
amount of unequal exchange losses in 1965 -- namely, -3.9 percent of the
combined Third World GDPs. This deteriorated to -20 % in 1995.
The data for (ex-)Socialist/Communist states are incomplete. Here is the
available information (Table 4):
Table 4. (Ex-)Socialist/Communist Countries
Unequal
Exchange
Gain
(+)
Loss
(-)
As
% of GDP
1965
1995
%
%
Bulgaria .
-54
China 0
-47
Czechoslov./Czech R +1 -46
Estonia ..
-16
Hungary .
-16
Kasakstan ..
- 6
Kyrgystan ..
0
Latvia ..
- 7
Lithuania ..
-22
Poland .
-18
Romania +1
-29
USSR/Russian Fed 0
-10
Slovakia ..
- 8
Ukraine ..
- 1
Uzbekistan ..
- 3
Yugoslavia 0
.
All above +0.1%
-31% (percent of aggregated GDPs)
Sources and notes: Appendix A
"." = data incomplete ".." = did not exist
as an independent country
Table 4 shows that the Socialist/Communist countries had fair trade with
the OECD countries in 1965 (unequal exchange ranging between 0% or +1%
per country). By 1995 this situation deteriorated to unequal exchange amounting
to -31% of their aggregate GDP.
6. World Trend
The global trend of unequal exchange between OECD countries and non-OECD
countries is summarized in Table 5.
Table 5. World Trend of Unequal Exchange 1965 - 1995
World Total of Unequal Exchange
in
current in constant as
a percent
U.S.
dollars U.S. dollars of global
GDP
at
current (1995=100)
exchange
rates
(billions)
(billions)
(A)
(B)
(C)
1965 19
84
0.9
%
1995 1752 1752
6.6
%
Sources: Appendices A, B and Kohler (1998:Appendix)
Note: price deflator of 0.2274 based on World Bank. World Tables, various
years.
Table 5 shows the global trend, as follows:
Column (A) shows the amount of unequal exchange
in current U.S. dollars of 1965 and 1995. The figure of 19 billion in 1965
is similar to Amin's estimate of 22 billion for 1966. By 1995 the total
volume of unequal exchange had increased to 1752 billion (= 1.75 trillion)
U.S. dollars. -- These two figures include the effect of inflation and
cannot be compared directly.
In column (B) the values from column (A) have been converted
into constant U.S. dollars at 1995 values (1995=100). The figure for 1995
remains unchanged (namely, 1752) and the figure for 1965 becomes 84 billion
(in terms of 1995 dollar values). The total amount of unequal exchange
between non-OECD and OECD increased 21-fold between 1965 and 1995. This
reflects two developments -- namely, (a) more trading volume (6 times more)
and (b) greater exchange rate deviations.
Column (C) shows the trend of unequal exchange
relative to global GDP. Unequal exchange between non-OECD and OECD increased
from 0.9% of global GDP (in 1965) to 6.6 % of global GDP (in 1995).
7. Impact of the Exchange Rate System
The data suggest that the neoliberal
system of exchange rates prevailing in 1995 created significantly more
unequal exchange than the exchange rate system prevailing in 1965 which
had some Keynesian features. A major reason for this is that the neoliberal
exchange rate system allows for greater exchange rate deviations from purchasing
power parity.
8. Historical Trend of Unequal Exchange 1865-1995
Going back a century, what was the magnitude of unequal exchange in
the 19th century? The following quotation provides a preliminary estimate:
"Mandel, Amin, and Arghiri Emmanuel (1972) contend that the core/periphery
relationship altered during the late nineteenth century due to the emergence
in the 1880s of a wage differential between core workers and peripheral
workers. Previous to that, workers in both the core and the periphery had
received subsistence wages, but in the late nineteenth century, due to
the diminishing reserve army of labor in England and because of partial
success of labor struggles there, wages for English workers began to rise
above subsistence. This brought about the "unequal exchange"
analyzed by Emmanuel (1972)..."(Chase-Dunn 1989: 59)
Based on this observation, it may be estimated that unequal exchange prior
to 1880 may have been equal to zero (null). When we use this observation
as an estimate for unequal exchange in 1865, we can construct an historical
trend, as follows (Table 6):
Table 6. Historical Trend of Unequal Exchange 1865 - 1995
Unequal
Exchange
as
a
% of World
GDP % of Periphery GDP % of Center
GDP
1865 0
% 0
% 0
%
1965 0.9 %
-
1.8% +1.4%
1995 6.6 %
-24
% +8
%
Sources: Chase-Dunn 1989:59 and Table 2 above.
Table 6 shows an historical "explosion" of unequal exchange over
the last three decades from 0.9% of world GDP to 6.6% of world GDP.
9. Conclusion
The findings suggest that the absolute and relative magnitude of unequal
exchange has increased significantly within the last thirty years, taking
from the poor and giving to the rich.
For further details the reader
is invited to examine the tables in the Appendices and to pursue some questions
of his/her own.
10. References
Amin, S. (1976) Unequal Development. New York, USA: Monthly
Review Press [translated from the 1973 French original]
Chase-Dunn, C. (1989) Global Formation: Structures of the World-
Economy. Cambridge, USA: Basil Blackwell
Emmanuel, A. (1972) Unequal Exchange: A Study of the Imperialism
of Trade. New York, USA: Monthly Review Press [translated from the 1969m
French original]
Köhler,
G. (1998) "The Structure of Global Money and World Tables of Unequal
Exchange", Journal of World Systems Research 4: 145-168
Penn World Tables (1998) available on the internet at:
http://datacentre.chass.utoronto.ca:5680/pwt
United Nations (1965) International Trade Statistics Yearbook 1965
APPENDIX
The appendices are organized, as
follows:
Appendix A -- World Table of Unequal Exchange 1965-1995 (Comparison Table)
Appendix B -- World Table of Unequal Exchange 1965 (Base Table)
Appendix C -- Methodological Details Concerning Base Table 1965
Appendix D -- Amin's Estimate for 1966
APPENDIX A -- WORLD
TABLE OF UNEQUAL EXCHANGE 1965 - 1995
(COMPARISON
TABLE)
GROUP = NON-OECD (N=88 countries (1965) and 97 countries (1995))
Country UNEQUAL
EXCHANGE
gain
(+)
loss
(-)
1965
1995
%
of GDP
Algeria . -47%
Angola -25%
-203%
Argentina -1% 0%
Armenia . 0%
Bahamas . -1%
Bahrain .
-11%
Bangladesh . -33%
Barbados -13%
-5%
Belize . -34%
Benin . -11%
Bhutan .
0%
Bolivia -23%
-26%
Brazil -5%
-4%
Bulgaria . -54%
Burkina Faso . -7%
Cameroon -7%
-68%
Cape Verde .
-2%
Central Afr R -11% -29%
Chad -7%
.
Chile -1%
-26%
China 0%
-47%
Colombia -3%
-24%
Comoros . -8%
Congo -15%
-99%
Costa Rica -8%
-35%
Cyprus
-1% .
Czech R/Czechoslov. +1% -46%
Dominican Republic -3% -33%
Ecuador -10%
-53%
Egypt -1%
-21%
El Salvador -13%
-4%
Estonia .. -16%
Ethiopia
-3% -10%
Fiji -17%
-39%
Gabon -7%
.
Gambia -25%
-10%
Ghana +2%
-30%
Greece 0%
-4%
Guatemala -6%
-12%
Guyana -8%
.
Honduras -7%
-39%
Hong Kong -13%
-7%
Hungary . -16%
India -1%
-18%
Indonesia -8%
-52%
Iran -19%
.
Iraq -41%
.
Israel +2%
-2%
Ivory Coast -17% .
Jamaica 0%
-39%
Jordan 0%
-8%
Kasakstan .. -6%
Kenya -6%
-35%
Korea (note a) -7%
Kuwait . -13%
Kyrgystan .. 0%
Latvia ..
-7%
Liberia +2%
.
Lithuania .. -22%
Madagascar -11% -18%
Malawi -4%
-93%
Malaysia -12%
-79%
Maldives .
-16%
Mali -1%
.
Malta +1%
.
Mauritania -1%
.
Mauritius -40%
-127%
Mexico -3%
-28%
Morocco -4%
-28%
Mozambique -8%
-75%
Myanmar -1%
.
Nepal .
-36%
Nicaragua -53%
-112%
Niger
0% -33%
Nigeria -1%
-172%
Oman . -23%
Pakistan -6%
-27%
Panama -1%
-21%
Papua New Guinea -27% -46%
Paraguay -3%
-4%
Peru -6%
-5%
Philippines -11%
-36%
Poland . -18%
Portugal (note a) -5%
Qatar . -4%
Reunion +7%
.
Romania +1%
-29%
Rwanda -12%
.
Saint Kitts and N .
-10%
Saudi Arabia -1% .
Senegal -5%
-12%
Sierra Leone -54% .
Singapore +1%
+4%
Slovakia .. -8%
Solomon I . -116%
Somalia -10%
.
Southern Africa -2% -8%
Spain (note a) -2%
Sri Lanka -12%
-60%
Suriname -13%
-228%
Syrian Arab Republic -1% -55%
Taiwan -9%
.
United R of Tanzania -4% -31%
Thailand -9%
-40%
Togo -3%
-18%
Trinidad and Tobago -39% -42%
Tunisia -2%
-56%
Turkey -3%
-10%
Uganda +2%
-16%
Ukraine .. -1%
Russian Fed./USSR 0% -10%
United Arab Emirates . 0%
Uruguay -22%
-2%
Uzbekistan .. -3%
Vanuatu . -7%
Venezuela . -35%
Yugoslavia 0%
.
Zaire +2%
.
Zambia -6%
-17%
Zimbabwe -3%
-56%
NON-OECD SUMMARY
number of countries 88 97
average (arithmetic) -8% -33%
unequal exchange as
% of NON-OECD GDP -1.8% -24%
GROUP = OECD (N=19 countries (1965) and 22 countries (1995))
Country UNEQUAL
EXCHANGE
1965
1995
%
of GDP
Australia +1%
+6%
Austria +1%
+9%
Belgium-Lux +4% +14%
Canada +1%
+5%
Denmark +2%
+9%
Finland +4%
+9%
France +2%
+7%
Germany, Fed R +2% +11%
Iceland +8%
+6%
Ireland +2%
+13%
Italy +1%
+6%
Japan +1%
+11%
Korea, R (note a) +10%
Netherlands +2% +17%
New Zealand +1% +6%
Norway +3%
+7%
Portugal (note a) +4%
Spain (note a) +6%
Sweden +3%
+7%
Switzerland +1% +7%
United Kingdom +3%
+6%
United States +1% +6%
OECD SUMMARY (note a)
number of countries 19 22
average (arithmetic) +2% +8%
unequal exchange as
% of OECD GDP (a) +1.38% +8%
LEGEND
(.) insufficient data
(..) country did not exist as a sovereign state
SOURCES
for 1965: World Table of Unequal Exchange 1965 (Base Table), see Appendix
B
for 1995: World Table of Unequal Exchange 1995 see, Kohler 1998: Appendix
NOTE (a)
Three countries (Republic of Korea, Portugal and Spain) were "developing
countries" in 1965 and are placed with the "NON-OECD"
group for 1965. The group summaries for 1965 treat these three countries
as NON-OECD for the year 1965. However, in 1995 these three countries
were OECD countries and are placed in "OECD" for 1995 and
are included in the group summaries for OECD for the year 1995.
APPENDIX B --
WORLD TABLE OF UNEQUAL EXCHANGE 1965 (BASE TABLE)
1. INTRODUCTION
Losses or gains from unequal exchange are calculated as the difference
between a "fair value" of exports/imports and the "actual
(unfair) value" of exports/imports. The estimation formula is:
T =
d*X - X
where
d = the exchange rate deviation index (also designated as "ERD"
in the literature)
X = the volume of exports from a low- or middle-income country to high-income
countries (valued at the actual exchange rate)
T = the unrecorded transfer of value (gain or loss) resulting from
unequal exchange
In the table (below) this formula is applied to the data for 107 countries for the year 1965.
2. HOW TO READ THE TABLE
The table presents the step-by-step
calculations. Countries are arranged in alphabetical order and in two groups
-- first, non-OECD countries and, secondly, OECD countries. The losses
or gains from unequal exchange are shown at the right-hand side (in terms
of U.S. dollars and as a percent of the country's GDP).
WORLD TABLE OF UNEQUAL EXCHANGE 1965 (BASE TABLE)
GROUP = NON-OECD (N=88)(= all except "industrialized countries")
Exchange
Fair
Country GDP Popul GDP
per capita Exports to Rate Value of
UNEQUAL EXCHANGE
1965
1965 1965 1965
OECD Deviat'n exports LOSS(-) GAIN(+)
US$
US $ PPP $ US $ D/C (G/1.2)*F
J=F-H K=J/A
(mln) (mln) (mln) (mln) year (mln)
(ratio) ($ mln) ($mln) %of GDP
(A)
(B) (C) (D) (E)
(F) (G) (H) (J)
(K)
Angola 580
5.3 109 306 1965 106 2.82
249 -143 -25%
Argentina 21,454 22.3 963 1529
65 926 1.59 1225 -299 -1%
Barbados 118 0.2
500 988 65 23 1.97
38 -15 -13%
Bolivia 584 3.8
152 412 65 105 2.71
237 -132 -23%
Brazil 21,071 84.3
250 576 65 1197 2.30 2298 -1101
-5%
Cameroon 729 5.8
125 211 64 131 1.69
184 -53 -7%
C.Afr.Rep. 153 1.7 88
200 65 18 2.26 35
-16 -11%
Chad 286 3.3
85 217 65 17 2.54
37 -19 -7%
Chile 6,667 8.6
772 1029 65 612 1.33 680
-68 -1%
China 70,177 715.2
98 170 65 600 1.73
866 -266 0%
Colombia 5,914 18.5 320
548 65 437 1.71 623
-187 -3%
Congo 169 1.1
158 309 65 40 1.95
65 -25 -15%
Costa Rica 593 1.5
398 742 65 88 1.87
138 -49 -8%
Cyprus 363
0.6 623 811 65 49
1.30 53 -4
-1%
Czechoslov. 8,834 14.1 626 556
65 403 0.89 298 +105 +1%
Dominican R 965 3.8 252
382 64 108 1.52 137
-29 -3%
Ecuador 1,106 5.3
209 484 64 115 2.32
222 -107 -10%
Egypt 5,614 29.4
191 295 65 157 1.54
202 -45 -1%
El Salvador 796 3.0 264
550 65 138 2.08 239
-101 -13%
Ethiopia 1,371 25.4
54 89 65 92 1.65
127 -35 -3%
Fiji 153 0.5
329 639 65 41 1.94
66 -25 -17%
Gabon 203
0.5 422 592 65 84 1.40
98 -14 -7%
Gambia 44
0.4 106 244 65 12
2.31 23 -11 -25%
Ghana 2,067 7.8
265 263 65 212 0.99
176 +37 +2%
Greece 5,996 8.6
701 912 65 207 1.30
224 -17 0%
Guatemala 1,333 4.5 295
581 65 135 1.97 221 -87
-6%
Guyana 212
0.6 348 506 65 76
1.46 92 -16 -8%
Honduras 513 2.3
224 359 65 103 1.60 138
-35 -7%
Hong Kong 2,181 3.6 609
1009 65 754 1.66 1042 -287 -13%
India 53,740 487.3 110
225 65 962 2.04 1636 -674
-1%
Indonesia 5,978 106.0 56
167 62 341 2.96 841
-500 -8%
Iran 6,480
24.1 269 763 65 923
2.84 2180 -1257 -19%
Iraq 2,478
8.0 311 961 65 644
3.09 1660 -1016 -41%
Israel 3,650 2.6
1424 1340 65 292 0.94
229 +63 +2%
Ivory Coast 956 4.6 208
434 65 227 2.08 394
-167 -17%
Jamaica 930
1.7 534 634 65 195
1.19 193 +2
0%
Jordan 417
2.0 212 496 65 2
2.33 3 -1 0%
Kenya 1,037
9.6 108 205 65 99
1.90 156 -58 -6%
Korea, R 3,012 28.4 106
318 65 131 3.00 328
-197 -7%
Liberia 297
1.2 248 282 65 126
1.14 119 +6 +2%
Madagascar 819 6.0 136
358 65 77 2.63
169 -92 -11%
Malawi 231 3.9
59 124 65 12 2.11
21 -9 -4%
Malaysia 2,711 9.5
285 509 65 678 1.79 1011
-332 -12%
Mali 245
4.7 52 149 65
1 2.87 3 -2
-1%
Malta 148 0.3
463 525 65 15 1.13
14 +1 +1%
Mauritania 188 1.1
172 273 64 5 1.58
7 -2 -1%
Mauritius 230 0.7
311 950 65 59 3.05
151 -92 -40%
Mexico 21,739 44.9
485 1015 65 837 2.09 1460
-623 -3%
Morocco 3,019 13.6
222 376 65 314 1.70
444 -130 -4%
Mozambique 744 8.4
88 387 65 24 4.38
87 -63 -8%
Myanmar 2,000 24.3
82 119 64 59 1.44
71 -12 -1%
Nicaragua 384 1.8
213 679 65 122 3.19
325 -203 -53%
Niger 587
3.7 160 183 65 15
1.14 15 +1
0%
Nigeria 6,967 58.5
119 158 65 668 1.33
739 -70 -1%
Pakistan 5,486 52.6 104
285 65 243 2.73 553
-310 -6%
Panama 635 1.3
479 617 65 69 1.29 74
-5 -1%
Papua New G 345 2.1 161
508 65 58 3.15 152
-94 -27%
Paraguay 443 2.1
214 390 65 28 1.82
42 -15 -3%
Peru 4,800 11.5
416 753 65 562 1.81
848 -286 -6%
Philippines 5,582 32.4 172 378
65 722 2.19 1319 -597
-11%
Portugal 3,777 9.1
414 764 65 357 1.85
550 -192 -5%
Reunion 230
0.4 588 379 65 33
0.64 18 +15
+7%
Romania 3,605 19.2
188 188 65 253 1.00
212 +42 +1%
Rwanda 129
3.2 40 104 65 13
2.57 29 -15 -12%
Saudi Arabia 2,320 4.8 484 595
65 900 1.23 921 -22
-1%
Senegal 832 3.9
212 349 65 118 1.65
162 -44 -5%
Sierra Leone 340 2.5 137
337 65 174 2.46 357
-183 -54%
Singapore 1,266 2.5 511
570 65 265 1.11 246 +19
+1%
Somalia 274
3.0 90 290 65 17
3.21 45 -28 -10%
South Afric 10,774 20.1 535 767
65 1086 1.43 1297 -211
-2%
Spain 23,778 32.1
742 1393 65 704 1.88 1101
-398 -2%
Sri Lanka 1,731 11.1 156
350 65 229 2.25 430
-201 -12%
Suriname 166 0.3
499 885 64 45 1.77
66 -21 -13%
Syria 1,632
5.3 306 565 65 40 1.84
62 -22 -1%
Taiwan 2,794 12.6
221 501 65 293 2.26
552 -259 -9%
Tanzania 884 11.6
76 118 65 120 1.55
155 -35 -4%
Thailand 4,079 30.7 133
359 64 288 2.70 650
-361 -9%
Togo 170
1.7 97 144 65 25
1.48 31 -6 -3%
Trinidad & T 709 0.9 782
1897 65 273 2.42 552
-279 -39%
Tunisia 1,016 4.6
219 354 65 72 1.61
97 -25 -2%
Turkey 8,425 31.2
270 563 65 321 2.08
557 -236 -3%
Uganda 1,745 8.1
216 179 65 124 0.83
85 +38 +2%
U.S.S.R. 283,214 230.1 1231 892 65
1388 0.72 838 +550 0%
Uruguay 978
2.7 363 1158 65 130 3.19
345 -215 -22%
Yugoslavia 12,274 19.4 632 735
65 436 1.16 423 +13 0%
Zaire 4,521 17.6
257 161 65 178 0.63
93 +85 +2%
Zambia 1,054 3.6
292 403 65 452 1.38
520 -68 -6%
Zimbabwe 1,042 4.4
238 329 65 217 1.38
249 -33 -3%
NON-OECD SUMMARY N=88
1. sum (for N=88):
670,279 2437.8
24047
-11870
2. sum without China, USSR (for N=86):
316,888 1492.6
22059 -12153
3. average (arithmetic, for N=88) 1.91
-8%
4. average (weighted by exports (for N=88) 1.79
5. unequal exchange as
% of NON-OECD GDP (for N=88) -1.77%
% of NON-OECD GDP (for N=86) without China, USSR
-3.84%
GROUP = OECD (N=19) (="industrialized countries")
Country GDP Popul GDP
per capita Imports from Exchg Rate Fair Value UNEQUAL EXCHANGE
1965
1965 1965 1965 NON-OECD
c's Deviat'n of imports LOSS(-) GAIN(+)
US$
US $ PPP $ US $
D/C (1.79/G)*F J=H-F K=J/A
(mln) (mln) (mln) (mln) year (mln)
(ratio) ($ mln) ($mln) %of
GDP
(A)
(B) (C) (D) (E)
(F) (G) (H)
(J) (K)
Australia 24,142 11.4 2120 2733
65 618 1.29 858 +240
+1%
Austria 9,539 7.3
1315 1871 65 420 1.42 528
+108 +1%
Belgium-Lux 16,543 9.4 1751 2082 65
1274 1.19 1919 +644 +4%
Canada 51,801 19.7 2632
2560 65 878 0.97 1615 +738
+1%
Denmark 10,172 4.8 2138
2616 65 508 1.22 743 +235
+2%
Finland 8,295 4.6
1818 1981 65 526 1.09 865
+338 +4%
France 99,277 48.8 2036
2243 65 3620 1.10 5882 +2262
+2%
Germany-W 114,391 58.6 1951 2400
65 4717 1.23 6866 +2149 +2%
Iceland 496 0.2
2559 1905 65 27 0.74 66
+39 +8%
Ireland 2,695 2.9
937 1215 65 166 1.30 229
+63 +2%
Italy 67,843 52.0
1305 1740 65 2792 1.33 3748
+956 +1%
Japan 91,022 98.9
920 1399 65 4166 1.52 4906
+740 +1%
Netherlands 20,048 12.3 1631 2289 65
1493 1.40 1904 +411 +2%
New Zealand 5,461 2.6 2072 2855
65 94 1.38 122
+28 +1%
Norway 6,984 3.7
1876 2034 65 309 1.08 510
+201 +3%
Sweden 22,305 7.7
2884 2912 65 788 1.01 1397
+609 +3%
Switzerland 13,914 5.9 2376 3300 65
437 1.39 563 +126
+1%
UK 100,026 54.4
1839 2310 65 6294 1.26 8971 +2677
+3%
USA 695,821 194.3
3581 3581 65 7905 1.00 14151 +6245
+1%
OECD SUMMARY
sum (for N=19):
1,360,776 37033
55843 +18810
average (arithmetic, for N=19) 1.21
+2%
average (weighted by imports from NON-OECD) 1.21
unequal exchange as
% of OECD GDP (N=19)
+1.38%
WORLD SUMMARY OF UNEQUAL EXCHANGE 1965 (N=107 countries)
1. World GDP 2,031,05. U.S.$ millions
=2.03 trillion
(=sum
of GDPs for N=107)
2. Gains (OECD) +18,810 U.S.$ millions
(N=19)
3. Losses (NON-OECD) -11,870 U.S.$ millions (N=88)
4. Error -6,940 U.S.$ millions
due to missing data for NON-OECD
countries
5. Gains (OECD) +0.93 % of
world GDP
6. Losses (NON-OECD) -0.58 % of world
GDP
7. Error
-0.35 % due to missing data for NON-OECD countries
SOURCES
Source 1= U.N., International Trade Statistics Yearbook 1965,
Table A and
country tables #4 or #5 "Trade by principal countries..."
Source 2= Penn World Tables (1998), from the internet at:
http://datacentre.chass.utoronto.ca:5680/pwt
Source 3= for classification of countries as "industrialized"
or not:
World Bank.
World Tables 1980, p. 471
CALCULATIONS
variable P [not shown in the table, but used in some of the calculations]=
"price
level" from Penn World Tables (variable P in source)
col. A = B * C
col. B = from source (Penn World Tables)
col. C = D * P / 100
col. D = from source (Penn World Tables, variable CGDP)
col. E = from source (U.N., International Trade Statistics Yearbook 1965)
col. F = from source 1 (U.N.),
using the following
conversions from local currency data to U.S. dollars:
(1) for exports
of NON-OECD country to OECD:
(a)
sum in local currency and obtain % of total exports
(b)
apply percent (from a) to total exports given in U.S. dollars
(2) for imports
by OECD country from NON-OECD:
(a)
sum in local currency and obtain % of total imports in local
currency
(b)
calculate total imports in U.S. Dollars =
total
imports in local currency (from source 1), divided by
exchange rate (from source 2, Penn World Tables)
col. G = 100 / P (from source 2)
col. H = two formulae:
(1) for NON-OECD
country: H = (d/1.2)*exports = (G/1.2)*F
(1.2
is the average exchange rate deviation of OECD countries, see
above)
(2) for OECD:
H = (1.79/d)*imports =(1.79/G)*F
(1.79
is the average exchange rate deviation of NON-OECD countries,
see above)
col. J = F - H (for NON-OECD) and J = H - F (for OECD)
col K = J/A as a percent
CHINA DATA
China (mainland) was not recognized by the U.N in 1965 and is not included
in Source 1 (U.N.) like the other countries. However, the imports
from China (mainland) to OECD countries are given under each OECD country in
local currency (e.g. French francs). I converted these local values to
U.S. Dollars, using the exchange rates from Source 2 (Penn World Tables).
The resulting total for exports from China (mainland)is US$592 million.
The total of US$592 million is composed of trade flows from China
(mainland) to OECD countries, as follows, in US $ millions (1965),
to:
Australia 26; Austria 5; Belgium-Luxembourg 14; Canada 13;
Denmark 10; Finland 6; France 44; Germany FR 72; Iceland 0; Ireland
0; Italy 38; Japan 224; Netherlands 25; New Zealand 1; Norway 5; Sweden
15; Switzerland 12; United Kingdom 81; USA nil.
**end of 1965 Base Table
APPENDIX C -- FURTHER METHODOLOGICAL
DETAILS CONCERNING THE WORLD TABLE
FOR 1965 (Base Table)
(a) Exclusion of countries:
Countries which are not shown
in the tables are missing due to missing data. For these countries either
trade data or PPP data or both were missing in my sources.
Luxembourg is lumped together with Belgium
because the export/import data were given that way in the source. (The
GNP-related data are for Belgium.)
(b) Two calculation models:
There are two calculation models, one for non-OECD countries and one for
OECD countries. Both use the same formula (see above) with two slight variations.
MODEL 1 for non-OECD countries:
Here I measure the export flow from each individual non-OECD country to
the block of OECD countries. Since the exchange rate deviation for the
block of OECD countries is d = 1.2 (i.e. deviation from the U.S. dollar),
the exchange rate deviation between the individual non-OECD country and
the block of OECD countries is not d(to OECD) = d/1.0 since the d calculated
from the source gives the deviation to the U.S. dollar. Instead, the deviation
to the block of OECD is d(to OECD) = d/1.2 .
MODEL 2 for OECD countries:
Here I measure the import flow from the block of non-OECD countries to
each individual OECD country. Since the exchange rate deviation for the
block of non-OECD countries is d = 1.79 (i.e. deviation from the U.S. dollar),
the exchange rate deviation between the individual OECD country and the
block of non-OECD countries is not d(to non-OECD) = 1.0/d since the d calculated
from source gives the deviation to the U.S. dollar. Instead, the deviation
to the block of non-OECD is d(to non-OECD) = 1.79/d .
(c) Statistical discrepancies and errors:
There are three statistical discrepancies and errors which the reader should
be aware of, namely:
(1) The world GNP shown in the table is not exactly the same as the world GNP which may be shown elsewhere. This is due to the fact that numerous non-OECD countries are missing in the table. However, I did not correct that in order to keep the numbers in the table consistent with each other. (The same applies to world population.)
(2) The total of exports from non-OECD to OECD shown in the table is not the same as the total of imports by OECD from non-OECD. This is a result of a large number of missing non-OECD countries. As the data for the OECD countries are complete, the larger of the two totals (namely, total imports by OECD from non-OECD) is the correct figure and the total of exports from non-OECD to OECD is understated.
(3) The total losses shown for non-OECD countries are not the same as the total gains by OECD countries. This is a consequence of missing data for non-OECD countries. As the data for OECD countries are complete, the total gains by OECD countries is the correct total for global exploitation due to unequal exchange. The total of losses by non-OECD countries is understated. However, the losses for individual non-OECD countries shown in the table are correct for each individual country.
APPENDIX D -- Amin's Estimate for 1966
Amin writes with reference to the
year 1966:
"The hidden transfer of value from the periphery to the center, due
to the mechanism of unequal exchange, are of the order of $22 billion ...The
imports that the advanced countries of the West receive from the Third
World represent, it is true, only 2 or 3 percent of their gross national
product, which is about $1.2 billion in 1966. But these exports from the
underdeveloped countries represent 20 percent of their product,
which was about $150 billion. The hidden transfer of value due to unequal
exchange is thus of the order of 15 percent of this product ... The contribution
that this transfer makes ... comes to about 1.5 percent of the center's
product."
(Amin, Unequal Development, 1976, p. 144)
Comments:
(a) Amin estimates the magnitude of total unequal exchange (1966)
as $22 billion. My estimate for 1965 is $19 billion. Both estimates are
very similar.
(b) Amin expresses the $22 billion as a percent of the center's combined
GDP as 1.5% (1966). My corresponding estimate for 1965 is 1.4%. Both estimates
are very similar.
(c) Amin expresses the $22 billion as a percent of the periphery's
combined GDP as 15% (1966). My corresponding estimate for 1965 is 3.9%
(if China and USSR are excluded from "non-OECD") or 1.8% (if
China and USSR are included). This discrepancy results from a difference
in the numbers used for the periphery's product (Third World aggregate
GDP). Amin uses $150 billion as the product of "the underdeveloped
countries" (see quotation above). In my base table for 1965 (see,
Appendix B) the combined GDP for non-OECD is $670 billion (with China,
USSR included) or $317 billion (with China, USSR excluded). It appears
that Amin's figure of $150 billion refers to the group of countries which
the World Bank classifies as "low-income", whereas my figure
is more inclusive and refers to NON-OECD (which includes low and middle-income
countries).
**end