Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 161

Where is Australia’s future growth?

We are told that Australia has the fastest growing economy in the developed world. True, but at 2.7% in the year to March 2016 and the same growth per annum over the past five years, we are not growing as fast as the average for Australia over the past 50 years (3.2% pa) or the 20th Century (3.5% pa). The slower growth is due to a lack of reform to our labour market, taxation and the parliamentary process, and having the worst broadband speed and capacity in the developed world - a disgrace in an age of digital disruption.

Australia should be part of the New World in Asia

It is small comfort to know that the rest of the developed world is growing slower than we are, has different problems such as national debt levels, larger government deficits, excessive taxation, and excessive legislation. This is less relevant when we realise we are not part of the old rich world of the European Union and North America, but are part of Asia which is bigger in GDP as well as population than both those regions and growing three times as fast as they are. And at more than double our speed. Asia is our new economic and demographic arena. It is where we are competing and need to be compared.

But, we do have a modern economy in terms of our mix of industries, and we do have growth in enough of them in terms of value-add and employment to keep the show on the road.

The first chart below shows the mix of industries as recorded by the ABS in the most recent National Accounts release (click on any image to enlarge it).

It is a mix dominated by service industries, as are all the developed economies of the world. Manufacturing is poised to fall to 5% of our GDP soon, having been almost six times that share at 29% in the early 1960s. However, our standard of living (real GDP/capita) is three times higher than in 1960, so clearly manufacturing has been replaced by more wealth-creating industries.

Where is Australia’s growth coming from?

The next two charts show where the growth has come from over the most recent year and five years.

 

The only goods-based industries contributing to our growth are mining and, to a lesser extent, construction. Most of our losses are in manufacturing. Mining of course has had an horrific fall in prices over the past few years, but volumes (upon which real GDP is measured) continue to grow. However, some 70% of all growth over the past five years has come from our service industries.

A not dissimilar picture emerges when we examine the structure and growth of our industries in employment terms. The first chart below shows where our 12 million employees were in March 2016, and the second exhibit reveals what sort of total earnings were being enjoyed in each of the nation’s 19 industry divisions in 2015.

(Note: Quaternary is defined as information &/or finance based, and Quinary is defined as more recently outsourced personal and household services, mostly in the post-industrial age.)

Again, it is a nation where the workforce is dominated by service industry jobs. And contrary to common belief, there are more above-average earnings in the service industries than in the goods-based industries. Manufacturing is well below the national average nowadays. Why do we still have some politicians suggesting we should go back there? Regressive economics.

The good news - that is not publicised enough to a society nervous about jobs for themselves and their children - is that we are creating far more jobs than we are losing. This is abundantly clear in the two exhibits below that cover the year to March 2016 and the five years to the same time.

In the latest year, we created three-and-a-half times more jobs than we lost, and in the past five years, we created six times more than we lost. So why on earth do we make big song-and-dance and hand-wringing routines about job losses, but practically no celebration of our new jobs?

We have a lot to cheer about, but we cannot be complacent about urgent and overdue reforms.

 

Phil Ruthven is Founder of IBISWorld and is recognised as one of Australia’s foremost business strategists and futurists.

 

9 Comments
Warren Bird
June 25, 2016

I think this view is incorrect. It has been a popular misconception for a while now. While manufacturing drove economic success in the wake of the industrial revolution, but this is because the rise in living standards was from a very low base. Consumers demanded things. But now, in the 21st century, consumers are on the whole well supplied with things and actually demand, spend more money, on services than ever before.

That is, economies that efficiently deliver what consumers want, not what producers want, are the successful ones.

Richard
June 24, 2016

At an open forum at the Detroit motor show in 2014, Ford chief Alan Mulally was asked by a university student about the importance of government assistance in manufacturing.

I think his general comments about manufacturing are particularly relevant especially when viewed in the context of value adding and reducing Australian foreign debt which seems to be on an exponential path. Should we be satisfied with being a farm, quarry, hotel to the rest of the world and providing services to one another.

"No country is ever successful in the long term … without a really strong and vibrant manufacturing base," said Mr Mulally.

"It's the foundation of all economic development. You actually make things that create value. That's why every country around the world is collaborating with the private sector … to figure out how to create an environment where manufacturing (is viable)."

Mr Mulally said 70 per cent of all the research and development in advanced technology and investment is associated with manufacturing, and it was the "foundation of wealth creation".

"You create value and you create jobs," he said

Maybe Phil would like to respond to this.

Leigh
June 24, 2016

Phil has said there has been significant growth in employment. I wonder if you are able to get him to provide in a future article the growth of part time vs full time positions as a whole AND/ OR by industry. I understand there have been many more part time positions created than full time positions. Maybe the growth in public vs private sector positions could be another aspect of this question, On a different matter, I wonder about the productivity / value created by employees and whether there is a relationship between the value created by employees and their salary/wages. [ I have an unproven belief that remuneration has grown at a rate faster than the output / value created - what I think we have seen is a raft of people moving into middle / senior levels and less recruitment at lower levels. This means income levels have been dragged higher while not necessarily delivering increased output and value]. Of course there are many other aspects to this discussion and it would be appreciated if someone like Phil could provide a commentary on these matters.

Nexus789
June 23, 2016

Like the multitude of economists, business academics and politicians there is no real understanding as to how to create and then sustain 'economic well being'. The current approach has failed and has mirred many economies in debt.

The focus should be on making the economy more 'competitive'. Increasing nation 'competitiveness' via the acquisition of technology is a prerequisite to and the only way to maintain existing industries, create new industries, create jobs and balance trade.

The current innovation hype is the wrong focus and more than likely to reduce Australia's 'competitiveness'. It should be noted that the US spends hundreds of billions on R&D and innovation and yets its 'competitiveness' continues to decline. Its a myth that throwing money at innovation will generate a competitive outcome. Cutting wages, increasing productivity, etc are all pointless if your economy is not 'competitive'.

Bruce Gregor
June 23, 2016

Interesting historical pictures but unfortunately no focus on Australia reliance on high migration for high past GDP.

Now that manufacturing has collapsed we have little scope to absorb high migration and maintain standards of living. We should be cutting migration significantly, learning to live on less and recycle financial assets and resources until we have a cost structure and infrastructure comparable with the rest of developed world,

The article does not answer where is our future growth but no-one else is answering this question, Turnbull's focus on innovation and trickle down company tax cut makes an effort for future growth but the thin evidence for how many jobs there are in this shows just how desperate our plight is. The regular claims by all governments of "how many jobs they created" is a scam as it makes no allowance for how many new full time jobs are required just to absorb migration.

lisa
June 23, 2016

I see nothing specifcally pro or against any party, just a collection of interesting factoids.

Craig
June 23, 2016

Unfortunately this article seems to be a political opinion piece - not that I necessarily disagree with the commentary - but wouldn't this be better placed in the tabloid press rather than an investment newsletter?

Andrew
June 23, 2016

I disagree Craig. If you have read any of Phil's articles in the last 10 years, you would know that he is fact based and stat based, and politic agnostic.

Craig
June 23, 2016

I'm refering to this article, not previous ones. Some quotes mentioned below with my comments:

"The slower growth is due a lack of reform to our labour market, taxation and the parliamentary process ..."

- if this is truly a politically agnostic piece, Mr Ruthven could well be advocating the compulsory adoption of workers advisory committees and associated representation on company boards as it exists in Germany? I doubt that is what he is referring to.

- the suggestion of the need to "reform the parliamentary process". How is this not a political opinion. He doesn't say how the parliamentary process needs to be reformed but that it is the cause of slower growth, but doesn't explain why.

"Why do we still have some politicians suggesting we should go back there? Regressive economics."

- which politicians? How is this not a political opinion?

"So why on earth do we make big song-and-dance and hand-wringing routines about job losses, but practically no celebration of our new jobs?"

- where is this song-and-dance and hand-wringing going on do you think? I assume the political arena.

"... we cannot be complacent about urgent and overdue reforms"

- political opinion

 

Leave a Comment:

     

RELATED ARTICLES

Changed visions: 2021 New Year resolutions

Goldilocks economy is keeping bears at bay

Are recessions a thing of the past?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

10 little-known pension traps prove the value of advice

Most people entering retirement do not see a financial adviser, mainly due to cost. It's a major problem because there are small mistakes a retiree can make which are expensive and avoidable if a few tips were known.

Check eligibility for the Commonwealth Seniors Health Card

Eligibility for the Commonwealth Seniors Health Card has no asset test and a relatively high income test. It's worth checking eligibility and the benefits of qualifying to save on the cost of medications.

Hamish Douglass on why the movie hasn’t ended yet

The focus is on Magellan for its investment performance and departure of the CEO, but Douglass says the pandemic, inflation, rising rates and Middle East tensions have not played out. Vindication is always long term.

Start the year right with the 2022 Retiree Checklist

This is our annual checklist of what retirees need to be aware of in 2022. It is a long list of 25 items and not everything will apply to your situation. Run your eye over the benefits and entitlements.

At 98-years-old, Charlie Munger still delivers the one-liners

The Warren Buffett/Charlie Munger partnership is the stuff of legends, but even Charlie admits it is coming to an end ("I'm nearly dead"). He is one of the few people in investing prepared to say what he thinks.

Should I pay off the mortgage or top up my superannuation?

Depending on personal circumstances, it may be time to rethink the bias to paying down housing debt over wealth accumulation in super. Do the sums and ask these four questions to plan for your future.

Latest Updates

Investment strategies

Three ways index investing masks extra risk

There are thousands of different indexes, and they are not all diversified and broadly-based. Watch for concentration risk in sectors and companies, and know the underlying assets in case liquidity is needed.

Investment strategies

Will 2022 be the year for quality companies?

It is easy to feel like an investing genius over the last 10 years, with most asset classes making wonderful gains. But if there's a setback, companies like Reece, ARB, Cochlear, REA Group and CSL will recover best.

Shares

2022 outlook: buy a raincoat but don't put it on yet

In the 11th year of a bull market, near the end of the cycle, some type of correction is likely. Underneath is solid, healthy and underpinned by strong earnings growth, but there's less room for mistakes.

Gold

Time to give up on gold?

In 2021, the gold price failed to sustain its strong rise since 2018, although it recovered after early losses. But where does gold sit in a world of inflation, rising rates and a competitor like Bitcoin?

Investment strategies

Global leaders reveal surprises of 2021, challenges for 2022

In a sentence or two, global experts across many fields are asked to summarise the biggest surprise of 2021, and enduring challenges into 2022. It's a short and sweet view of the changes we are all facing.

Shares

What were the big stockmarket listings in record 2021?

In 2021, sharemarket gains supported record levels of capital raisings and IPOs in Australia. The range of deals listed here shows the maturity of the local market in providing equity capital.

Economy

Let 'er rip: how high can debt-to-GDP ratios soar?

Governments and investors have been complacent about the build up of debt, but at some level, a ceiling exists. Are we near yet? Trouble is brewing, especially in the eurozone and emerging countries.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2022 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.