Reference no: EM133264947

Assignment:

Comment on the issue mentioned at the end.

Competitiveness is itself at the heart of business and political agendas across the world. Not surprisingly, many countries and institutions have established different indices for measuring and improving competitiveness. There are many critics (including Paul Krugman, the noted economist) to using these indices as the end-all in assessing country competitiveness. A key criticism is that many factors including unique aspects of the country are often ignored. The indices also assume that countries compete like 'companies' or 'firms'.

The argument is also that, competitiveness seems to give a lower importance to the domestic market (by pitching countries against each other for international business), though it is quite likely that the domestic market is the one which is holding up the economy! The supporting argument is that, a company goes out of business doing business in international markets - but a country's economy does not. It sputters along.

An illustrative measure is the World Economic Forum's - WEF's Global Competitiveness Index that was seen in one of the class sessions.

The WEF ranks BRIC countries specifically in global competitiveness. In the 2019 report, China is ranked 28, India is ranked 68, Brazil is at 71. How useful/relevant are these competitive indices/rankings in your view? From a business stand point? From an investors stand point? From a country's stand point?

(You can also refer/add any other indices - Marsh/Freedom/WB/IMF/Heritage- many that we have seen; and you feel is in the same bracket for argument)