• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
Democracy
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Yukon Huang"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "AP",
  "programs": [
    "Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "East Asia",
    "China"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Economy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

How China’s Consumption Matters

In response to the slowing growth of China’s GDP, Beijing should make reforms that would spur more production.

Link Copied
By Yukon Huang
Published on Aug 31, 2015
Program mobile hero image

Program

Asia

The Asia Program in Washington studies disruptive security, governance, and technological risks that threaten peace, growth, and opportunity in the Asia-Pacific region, including a focus on China, Japan, and the Korean peninsula.

Learn More

Source: Wall Street Journal

As the growth of China’s economy continues to slow, many observers bemoan the fact there’s been little progress on rebalancing. These people insist China should move faster toward “consumption-driven” growth. If only consumption growth was stronger, they argue, the economic slowdown could be checked, even reversed.

Yet the logic behind this thinking is misleading. A country’s gross domestic product grows with increased investment and productivity, and to a lesser extent with growth in the labor force. Consumption doesn’t drive growth. It’s the result of growth.

Household consumption’s share of the Chinese economy, for instance, is around 35%—the lowest of any major economy. Yet over the past decade per-capita consumption in China has increased by about 8% to 9% in real terms after adjusting for inflation—multiples faster than any other developed economy and on average twice that of developing economies. But it’s also unlikely to increase much further. As economic growth moderates, it’s more likely to decline.

What’s important, then, is the maximization of consumption’s growth over time, not its share of GDP in the near term.

Many analysts have attributed China’s unbalanced growth to distorted interest and exchange rates, which are seen as repressing consumption and encouraging excessive investment. But the decline in consumption’s share of GDP is actually the consequence of a broadly successful urban industrialization process.

The economist Arthur Lewis showed how the transfer of surplus workers from the agricultural sector to the modern industrial economy, complemented by rising investment, leads to rapid but unbalanced growth. The shift of workers from labor-intensive activities to more capital-intensive urban industrial activities increases the share of profits that accrue to firms and entrepreneurs. But this needn’t be at the expense of workers, as some have argued, since workers are earning and consuming multiples more than they used to. The country also benefits from higher productivity and rapid GDP growth.

China’s unbalanced growth also mirrors other East Asian economies that took a similar industrialization path decades ago. In Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, consumption’s share of GDP fell by 20 to 30 percentage points over several decades before bottoming out when these countries reached high income levels. The widening but temporary imbalances in these economies were associated with high growth rates, but this allowed them to escape the middle-income trap and eventually transition to a more balanced and mature economy.

Misinterpreting the reasons why China’s growth is unbalanced leads to the wrong policy prescriptions. Growth in consumption matters when the focus is on short-term deficiencies in demand. As investment has fallen sharply and global trade has stagnated, China—like every other country these days—has excess capacity. But this is a cyclical concern, not a matter of long-term growth.

Consumption as a share of GDP has in fact increased slightly over the past several years, as the pace of urbanization has slackened and the service sector, which is more labor intensive, has been growing faster than industry. Some of this shift is not to be cheered, because it’s partly the result of the growth slowdown. However, some of it is a desired shift in composition of activity.

The challenge now is to increase productivity through reforms so that moderately rapid growth and continued increases in personal consumption can be sustained. Whether consumption as a share of GDP rises or falls is incidental. It should not be seen as an objective in its own right.

Fortunately, there are growth-enhancing possibilities that—with the right reforms—China can take advantage of. A more efficient urbanization process is one such option. Current policies favor labor migration to the smaller cities while limiting migration to the largest cities. But it’s China’s larger cities that are more productive. A more market-driven urbanization strategy that facilitates their development would be more effective.

Another much-needed reform would make it easier for private investors to operate in important service sectors such as finance, health and telecommunications, since China’s barriers to entry into these industries are among the world’s most restrictive.

Such reforms would increase the returns on investment and make a more sustainable 7% GDP growth rate possible. That, in turn, would spur a rapid growth in consumption.

This article was originally published in the Wall Street Journal.

Yukon Huang
Senior Fellow, Asia Program
Yukon Huang
EconomyEast AsiaChina

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Japan’s “Militarist Turn” and What It Means for Russia

    For a real example of political forces engaged in the militarization of society, the Russian leadership might consider looking closer to home.

      James D.J. Brown

  • Wide shot of Trump and Modi, with Trump pointing
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Trump-Modi Trade Deal Won’t Magically Restore U.S.-India Trust

    Washington and New Delhi should be proud of their putative deal. But international politics isn’t the domain of unicorns and leprechauns, and collateral damage can’t simply be wished away.

      Evan A. Feigenbaum

  • people sitting on a stage
    Commentary
    From Loss and Damage to Climate Mobility Action

    Senior climate, finance, and mobility experts discuss how the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage could unlock financing for climate mobility.

      • Alejandro Rodriguez

      Alejandro Martin Rodriguez

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europe Falls Behind in the South Caucasus Connectivity Race

    The EU lacks leadership and strategic planning in the South Caucasus, while the United States is leading the charge. To secure its geopolitical interests, Brussels must invest in new connectivity for the region.

      Zaur Shiriyev

  • Three men shaking hands at once
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Trump Wants “Peace Through Construction.” There’s One Place It Could Actually Work.

    An Armenia-Azerbaijan settlement may be the only realistic test case for making glossy promises a reality.

      • Garo Paylan

      Garo Paylan

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.