• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Michael Pettis"
  ],
  "type": "commentary",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie China"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Carnegie China Commentaries"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie China",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [
    "China’s Reform Imperative"
  ],
  "regions": [
    "China"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Economy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Commentary
Carnegie China

China Needs a Very High Consumption Share of GDP Growth

It will require many years of real determination by Beijing to drive the role of consumption to much higher levels if China is to rebalance in a nondisruptive way.

Link Copied
By Michael Pettis
Published on Sep 9, 2024
Project mobile hero image

Project

China’s Reform Imperative

China’s Reform Imperative examines China’s economic reforms and their impacts on the global economy. Curated by Carnegie Senior Fellow Michael Pettis, China’s Reform Imperative will focus on China’s reform trajectory and on the challenges and opportunities Beijing faces along the way.

Learn More

This publication is a product of Carnegie China. For more work by Carnegie China, click here.

“In the first half of this year,” Xinhua noted in a recent article, “final consumption expenditure contributed 60.5 percent to economic growth, driving GDP growth by 3.0 percentage points.” The implication was that—because consumption now accounted for well over half of the period’s GDP growth, and well above the overall GDP share of consumption (53.4 percent in 2023)—Chinese consumption is finally starting to catch up to what is a more “normal” role in driving economic activity.

This might seem all the more likely when we consider that, in 2023, consumption accounted for a much higher share of GDP growth. By comprising 4.3 percentage points of last year’s 5.2 percent GDP growth, the growth in consumption contributed 82.5 percent of the period’s GDP growth. In most years, however, the contribution that the growth in consumption makes to total GDP growth has been much lower. Table 1 below lists the consumption contribution to GDP growth in recent years.

Still, what is clear from the table is that the growth in consumption over the past decade has comprised a higher share of GDP growth than it does of GDP. Does this imply that China is sustainably on its way to rebalancing its economy?

Probably not, and the urgency of this question lies in the fact that, once the rest of the world is no longer willing or able to accommodate a China in which much of its growth is driven by a surging trade surplus, if China cannot sharply increase the role of consumption in its economy, it will either have to accommodate explosive growth in debt (to fund increasingly nonproductive investment) or it will have to adjust rapidly and disruptively in the form of a contraction in GDP. 

The problem is that Chinese consumption levels are so low, relative to what is considered normal, that to rebalance the role of consumption in the overall economy to a meaningful level requires many more years during which consumption must contribute a much higher share to GDP growth than we have so far seen. 

Japan’s experience might shed some light on that process. In the 1980s, the Japanese economy suffered from many of the same imbalances that China’s does today (although not nearly to the same extent). In 1986, Tokyo formally recognized the problem with the Maekawa Commission report, which proposed that Japan substantially rebalance its economy toward consumption. The consumption share of Japan’s GDP, however, didn’t bottom out until 1991, at 63.3 percent (compared to a consumption share of roughly 74–75 percent of global GDP).

Over the next few years, Japan struggled to rein in debt, reduce nonproductive investment, bring down its trade deficit, and rebalance the economy toward a greater role for consumption. It nonetheless took 17 years for the consumption share of GDP to rise by ten percentage points—in 2008, it reached 73.8 percent.

 So how long would it take for Chinese consumption as a share of GDP to reach a normal level? To answer the question, let us assume that a sustainable level of consumption would be 63–64 percent of GDP, or ten percentage points higher than it is today. Note that this would still leave China with one of the lowest consumption rates in the world.

But while this target may be low, it nonetheless helps illustrate how far China has yet to go. Given this assumption, it is reasonably easy to calculate how long it would take for China to reach the target of 63–64 percent, assuming various growth scenarios. (We will assume a range of possible nominal annual GDP growth rates—either 2 percent, 4 percent, or 6 percent—and we will assume various rates at which consumption growth contributes to GDP growth, ranging from 65 percent to 90 percent in increments of 5 percentage points.) The calculations show the following:1

This exercise tells us, for example, that if China were to grow at an average rate of 4 percent, and if it could raise the share that consumption contributed to future GDP growth to an average of 80 percent, it would take twelve years for the consumption share of GDP to rise from 53–54 percent of GDP to 63–64 percent of GDP.

Alternatively, to take another scenario, if growth in consumption accounted for 70 percent of China’s future GDP growth, and if China’s nominal GDP grew by 6 percent on average, it would take 16 years for the consumption share of China’s GDP to rise to 63–64 percent of GDP. Even if we allowed for exceptional circumstances, with an annual average GDP growth rate of 6 percent and the growth in consumption accounting for nearly all of the country’s future GDP growth (90 percent), it would still take 6 years for the consumption share of China’s GDP to rise to 63–64 percent of GDP.

The point of this exercise is to show that, when the country is starting from such a low base, it is not enough that the consumption share of GDP growth is above average (say 60 to 70 percent) for a few years for China to really catch up to a more sustainable consumption share of GDP. It will instead require many years of real determination by Beijing to drive the role of consumption to much higher levels if China is to rebalance in a nondisruptive way.

Notes

About the Author

Michael Pettis

Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie China

Michael Pettis is a nonresident senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. An expert on China’s economy, Pettis is professor of finance at Peking University’s Guanghua School of Management, where he specializes in Chinese financial markets. 

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Is China’s High-Quality Investment Output Economically Viable?

      Michael Pettis

  • Commentary
    What GDP Means in a Soft Budget Economy Like China

      Michael Pettis

Notes

  • 1
    For each GDP growth assumption, and each assumption about the consumption contribution to GDP growth, I multiplied the two and added it to the last period’s consumption. I then added the GDP growth assumption to the last period’s GDP. The ratio between the two, of course, is this period’s consumption share of GDP. When I tried to do the same calculations on past data, however, the results are broadly in line but very uneven. As is often the case, it is very hard to get past Chinese data to reconcile.
Michael Pettis
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie China
Michael Pettis
EconomyChina

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

  • Servers
    Article
    The Geopolitical Debates Over Controlling Cloud Compute

    If U.S. policymakers continue down the path of restricting China’s access to frontier AI, they will eventually have to implement some sort of restriction on cloud access.

      Noah Tan

  • Article
    From Labor Scarcity to AI Society: Governing Productivity in East Asia

    The debate over AI and work too often centers on displacement. Facing aging populations and shrinking workforces, East Asian policymakers view AI not as a threat, but as a cross-sectoral workforce strategy.

      Darcie Draudt-Véjares, Sophie Zhuang

  • Article
    Governing AI in the Shadow of Giants: Korea’s Strategic Response to Great Power AI Competition

    In its version of an AI middle power strategy, Seoul is pursuing alignment with the United States not as an endpoint but as a strategy to build industrial and geopolitical leverage. Whether this balance holds remains an open question.

      Darcie Draudt-Véjares, Seungjoo Lee

  • China Financial Markets
    Commentary
    China Financial Markets
    Is China’s High-Quality Investment Output Economically Viable?

    China’s rapid technological progress and its first-rate infrastructure are often cited as refuting the claim that China has been systematically overinvesting in non-productive projects for many years. In fact, as the logic of overinvestment and the many historical precedents show, the former is all-too-often consistent with the latter.

      Michael Pettis

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    The Much-Touted Middle Corridor Transport Route Could Prove a Dead End

    For the Middle Corridor to fulfill its promises, one of these routes must become scalable. At present, neither is.

      Friedrich Conradi

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • 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.