Good morning! Shall we discuss something a bit more structural, although this is a cyclical theme in 2022 across Asia, from China to India and Southeast Asia. Let's talk about #infrastructure , which is the theme of the hour & the next decade🛣️🌉🚆📶⚡️
Today, infrastructure stocks are soaring in China as hope of government policy leaning towards this sector to shore up domestic demand in sagging growth momentum.
In India, infrastructure has been a big theme & even more so after the expanded budget that prioritizes it ⏫📈.
Why is infrastructure the theme of the hour and the next 2 decades? Simply put: infrastructure is essential for the improvement of the quality of life, production of goods, services and to raise productivity of labor.
Demand for infrastructure is high & will sky rocket.
We published a research note on the rise of demand and supply of infrastructure in Asia and estimated the gap. Let's look at demand. Chart 1 below shows you the rise of population on the x-axis & the increase of urbanization in the y-axis based on UN estimates.
What do u see?
You should see that there will be more urbanized people in the next two decades.
Population: India will add 213m people, Pakistan 81m and Indonesia 45 million people.
In Youthful Asian economies (the ones below ex China) there'll be +462 m urbanites n top of 895 now.
So what?
While Asia, esp India, Pakistan, Indonesia, the Philippines, Bangladesh, Vietnam, China & Malaysia may have a lot of people & even more urban people in the future, the stock of infrastructure remains inadequate to meet the needs of its people currently & worse in the future.
Let's look at roads 🛣️. Did you know that India has more road per capita than China? 🇮🇳🇨🇳 . I think population is a better metric.
Roads are key for accessibility & trade & transport. Everyone has invested in road building except the Philippines & Pakistan.
Let me explain.
We take total road length & divide that by the population at that particular time to see whether road length/hm has improved.
Contrary to perception, India has invested a lot in road building. Most growth is Malaysia, Vietnam, India, China & Indonesia.
But not the Philippines.
The Philippines results aren't shocking as we know infrastructure is poor but it is rather striking in that it hasn't invested much relative to the growth of the population so both the stock & change is WORST (yes, worse than Pakistan).Absolutely & relatively worst at road infra.
That makes me sad because I like that country & its people & so its people have WORSE road than in 2005 as we have more people but not enough investment so stock of road per capital FELL. Let's talk about quality of roads. India is ahead of China in QUANTITY due to investment but
Quantity of roads doesn't account for quality of roads & in trade & transport, expressway matters because it boosts productivity by lubricating mobility.
Expressway/capita: China has invested the most (easier due to centralized gov vs India fragmented) & India worst but better!
Here you can see that everyone has built more expressway per capita in the past 15 years, which is good but there is still a lot of room for improvement, especially for India, the Philippines and Pakistan. Again, Pakistan expressway road infra is better than the Philippines.
Vietnam has invested the most in Southeast Asia on expressway building, & so its stock of expressway per capita has increased sharply and now third amongst these countries, only below China and Malaysia. Has helped its manufacturing & trade competitiveness as exports >100% of GDP
Bottom line about Youthful Asian economies + China roads:
*A lot of investment in road building in the past 15 years, EXCEPT THE PHILIPPINES & Pakistan
*Regarding expressways, China invested most & best stock, almost as good as developed
*Vietnam improved
*India needs more
Actually, they all need to invest more, even China to get to DM benchmark, although close. But most needed are India, the Philippines, Pakistan, Indonesia and Vietnam.
Expressways are key to transport links & trade & productivity.
What about rail?
Let's look at rail line length, we deflate it by population to make it more comparable regarding infrastructure stock.
Sadly, only China, Malaysia & Indonesia have invested in rail infrastructure in the past 15 years on an absolute basis.
Relative to population, only CH & MA👇
How should u read this chart? Orange dots = growth rates; bars are stock deflated by population.
Rail length is where China shines and the rest of Youthful Asia sags. Sad to see Vietnam stock WORSE relative to its rising population as no investment is made so things are worse.
But of course the Philippines & Indonesia are worst despite higher investment by Indonesia as stock level is worse. That said, Indonesia is getting up there & will surpass Vietnam if it continues w/ its rail line push. The Philippines once more WORST in infrastructure stock.
Rail is clearly a sad point for South Asia and Southeast Asia except for Malaysia (Thailand is not included because it is an aging country and we only measured Youthful Asia economies, including China as a benchmark). While China stock is best & increased, still not as good as DM
The Philippines is WORST for road & rail due to lack of investment. Asia as invested in expressways but not so much rail. More needed!
What about air infrastructure? Let's take a look at air passenger/capita. Explosive growth everywhere except Pakistan. The Philippines invested!
Air is key for for trade and transport & especially key for places like the Philippines and Indonesia where u can only enter via air or water. So if it wants to promote tourism, it needs to invest in air infrastructure to get people in & out. Malaysia BEST! Look at Vietnam growth
Vietnam has the best growth & second best in air passenger/capita & China third. Note that we're not talking about quality of air infrastructure at all & just people up in the air.
This gives you a sense that air infra has ways to go except Malaysia. We need more investment!
What about electricity? Here, I don't go into details about generation but if u look at distribution, India has the highest electricity transmission loss! Close to 20%!
Across Asia, the transmission loss has declined a lot to close to the 5% benchmark of DM but not India.
What about digital infrastructure like fast internet? Here we look at fixed broadband subscription per capita & China is best. Vietnam is second and Malaysia third.
Worst are Pakistan & India. This is interesting b/c @elonmusk is trying to sell Starlink to India but hits a wall!
Finally, let's put this all together - mostly use transport infrastructure as we think it is key to economic development & life. We created a @natixis@NatixisResearch Asian Infrastructure Metric putting all these factors together to assess the relative supply of infrastructure.
How do u read this index? First, u know the subcomponents b/c I just explained to u & who's best/worst etc. These subcomponents all have equal weights to keep it simple. And then u normalize the data & sum to get composite.
Best? Malaysia! 🇲🇾 Driven by road, railroad & air
Meaning, he countries here & why investors put money in higher skilled manufacturing such as semiconductor as the infrastructure for trade is better.
Second is China, driven by broadband, electricity, rail & road.
Third is Vietnam.
Vietnam is decent everything except railway (relative to these emerging markets but still way off the mark for DM).
Note that Malaysia, China and Vietnam are the biggest exporters in all the countries included here & good infrastructure is key to be competitive!
Indonesia needs a lot more investment and also India. But the countries that need the most is the Philippines and Pakistan as the stock of infrastructure is WORST.
And they all need more if we compare to our developed markets benchmark.
But that is now. What about the future? We know that supply is INADEQUATE to meet demand of the population now, esp the Philippines and Pakistan. MORE people will be added to woefully inadequate infrastructure!
@natixis Infrastructure Gap = existing supply + future demand 👇
Allow me to explain our @natixis Infrastructure Supply Gap: We take the increase of urban population into 2040 & then taking the existing supply to calculate the gap. Voila, India has the LARGEST gap due to its sizeable increase, followed by Pakistan & Bangladesh. Malaysia least.
In Southeast Asia, the Philippines and Indonesia will have a sizeable gap and also will need to increase investment as its demographic transition will add more pressure on infrastructure.
Note that all the countries below will have a GAP of infra - it's the question how BIG.
Since u guys like pictures, let me give you a summary infographic of @natixis infrastructure gap (note that this accounts for existing supply + future demand using urbanization growth).
For every transport infrastructure, the gap is BIGGEST for India so its overall gap is WIDEST
But it isn't the only one - Pakistan is desperately needing more. In Southeast Asia, both Indonesia and the Philippines have rather large gaps for road infrastructure. Indonesia has a rather large gap of air and fixed broadband. In short: DEMAND GAP WIDE NOW & worse in the future
We want to end on a rather positive note, because all weaknesses are opportunities (India & the Philippines infra). Strengths are also opportunities, as Malaysia is more competitive. The good news is that governments understand this, and it's not just China infra stock rallying..
Key infrastructure projects/plans in Asia, including India's Gati Shakti that includes large spending for roads and railways in the FY2023 budget released. Vietnam is planning to beef up its road infrastructure with modernizing highways and expressways!
Sincerely, @Trinhnomics
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
US April inflation came over night softer, and that's no surprise really - we knew that energy, food and service costs were going lower. Everyone said, well, what pain for China if April exports were strong, not to the US of course, but to the world (+8.1%)YoY. The same is said about US CPI. It's actually slower to 2.3%YoY despite a very soft USD & tariffs that started since February.
What does that mean? Why did the the US-China both come to the table to stop the embargo of trade?
Can both of these arguments be true? Of course. First, we must talk about these different balance sheets. They are one and the same. But they interact differently.
CPI is a domestic phenomenon. US inequality/lack of affordable housing/high costs of college/healthcare/etc are DOMESTIC IN NATURE. We call it NON-TRADEABLE. Sure, higher steel & timber make building a house more expensive. Higher appliances also make it expensive. But let's be honest here, the biggest costs of the house is the land & next costs is the regulations and the permits and the actual time and capital erecting it.
California/NYC/Seattle where the jobs are all have regulations that make it very expensive to build. And that has been the case during LOW TARIFF REGIME.
So listen, just think if you live anywhere. When you get a paycheck, where does your money go? Well, if you rent or mortgage, then it's HOUSING.
Next, if you live in the US and send your children out of state or private for education, it's not a rounding error on two middle class incomes.
Of course, another essential - FOOD.
Another one is transport - that includes FUEL + Car (and indirect cost is TIME).
Goods, while you know, nice to have, durable goods you buy once and hopefully last you a decade or two, like a washing machine or a fridge or a microwave.
Toys, definitely like you buy according to age and once & don't repeat and prolly can get used because everyone disposes of this once the child is done.
So when you look at US inflation, the largest weights aren't GOODS or IMPORTED goods for a consumer.
It may be a very big part of a producer that imports intermediates. Say an oil driller that needs steel to build infra to drill or a domestic producer of appliances that need parts that are cheaper to source, say China.
Irrespective, an AVERAGE American person isn't going to feel tariffs. They will feel it via the news, via tiktok, via social media, via the financial markets that have exposure to the higher costs, but they are not feeling it much if they don't have a lot of financial assets.
So the reality is that inflation in the US is GOING DOWN for core goods. Egg inflation is lower after a flu supply shock. US food exporters will sell more domestically if selling abroad faces tariffs. But food isn't the bulk of inflation.
It's the services like housing etc. And they are going down.
Of course - China would say it didn’t care that there was an embargo on Chinese goods by it’s #1 customer but a 1trn surplus country with manufacturing share of GDP key to investment and consumption & indirect sector like services would care.
Why? Factories shut first (impact on China), shortages/empty shelves later (impact on the US & due to front loading much later & most goods are discretionary), & so the pain that China feels from trade war is real while the US is expectations of pain via financial assets movement, which may or may not come.
And the reality is who blinked/caved first doesn’t matter. But anyone who laughed at this & said China can just hunker down & accept massive unemployment of 5 to 8millions is not realizing the importance of jobs, especially manufacturing job.
It anchors the entire economy, including services.
Like people that lose steady paying jobs that pay for pensions etc will not want services like restaurant, movies, haircuts as often, nails, music lessons for kids etc.
Not all services are equal. Services were lost during COVID & never recovered & anyone who has lived in a country with high services & informal jobs know that u cannot steadily gain income on gigs.
U need a steady pay check. At the national level, it is millions & hundreds of millions account compounding to give national savings and investment.
UK-US trade-deal and what does it tell you about Asian trade deals?
The UK got 100k auto for 10% vs 232 25% for autos & that's basically 100% of UK auto exports to the US (exported 104k in 2024)
UK got jet engines & plane parts at 0%, which is also a top export
UK got 0% on steel but the UK is on the verge of closing the last steel plant, which is Chinese owned anyway, so no benefit here but maybe it will help beef up some production.
10% on the rest of exports.
Mutual reduction of tariffs on ethanol + beef (agri win for the US but not so much)
For autos, given the 10% tariff but at 100k quota, which is basically all of UK autos, there is no room for "rerouting" of other autos that won't get tariffed. Meaning, the lower tariff from 25% to 10% but with a quota is an interesting move that sets up for EU trade talks on autos.
Steel - UK not a threat so 0% means maybe UK can beef up product but less competitive than the US as the US is almost self-sufficient w/ steel
Agri - US will need to produce beef that UK standard to export. I suppose that can't be hard
Ethanol is at 0% tariff so a win for US agri. For US soybean producers etc, ethanol is a win but how big is it if its biggest export market, China, is shut?
There are talks that the US will slash tariffs on Chinese goods. But let's remind ourselves this:
The US has 20% tariffs on China from Trump 1.0 to Biden (roughly) + 20% of fentanyl tariff on China + reciprocal that was later escalated to 145%.
If the US lowers 145% to say 50%, you still have close to 100% tariffs on China on most goods and higher levels for say autos.
Okay, I want to talk about tariffs a bit because there are a lot of tariffs. On everyone:
1) Steel + aluminium +25% 2) Autos is 25% (and some auto parts except USMCA qualified) - but note that Trump has realized that steel & alum are INTERMEDIATE GOODS and when you tax that then you got a big problem so he's BACKTRACKING on that for the auto sector, as in, they don't get steel & alum on top of auto 3) 10% on everyone ex China on top of above until early July in Asia. 4) China gets embargo level of tariffs or >100% and some >200%. 5) Exemptions for semiconductor, energy, pharma, ICT (phones, laptops etc), commodities.
How bad is this?
Tariffs are a tax on investment so Trump is PUTTING A TAX ON INVESTMENT ABROAD.
Specifically: steel & alum & auto ex USMCA and specifically China.
More to come of course but this is now.
He is starting to understand that when you tax a lot of stuff, especially sectoral, especially intermediates, you are SHORTENING SUPPLY CHAINS AS THIS COMPOUNDS.
A car is made of thousands of parts. Steel is part of it of course. So he has to make exemptions to make sure things don't kill the auto sector that he is trying to rescue/prop up. But supply chains are complicated.
The US used to be almost tariff free. Low single digit of trade-weighted tariff. That means a lot of PING PONG OF TRADE.
As in you can ship intermediates back and forth and have things assembled etc. SUPPLY CHAINS LENGTHENED.
Tariffs SHORTEN SUPPLY CHAINS.
So this complex supply chains that is stretching across US-Canada-Mexico and Asia (ping-ponged across Asia from Japan to Malaysia/Thailand/China) etc is all going to get shortened.
So that is what tariffs will do. Supply chains will be more REGIONALIZED.
No matter what the negotiations will be - US w/ China for example, or US with other Asians or Europeans, the fact is that Trump tariffs are starting at MAXIMALIST positions and will settle at a MORE REASONABLE POSITION BUT STILL VERY HIGH TARIFF REGIME VS BEFORE.
And they will be very TARGETED to shorten supply chains to favor US/Canada/Mexico & maybe key allies in Asia and key allies in Europe.
US trade will China will ultimately be to serve rest of the world or to feed into the above. It will ultimately be cutoff. Because China and the US are strategically decoupling. They are putting a floor on that speed but the speed is towards decoupling.
I'm back in Hong Kong after being in Poland for two weeks. Poland is a country that is better every year (I have been going there every year since 2015) & a country that is very mindful of its geography and being next to two giants (Germany & Russia) that have historically invaded. Kaliningrad (Russia, which was a former Prussian or German town) borders the north & so the Pols are painfully aware the very thin line between peace and a potential invasion. The entrance to my husband's family farm marks several grave cites. One of them is the Tomb of Unknown soldiers from WW1 and we regularly find WWII remnants on the farm ground as well as rubbish from the communist collectivist era when it was part of the Soviet Union or Russian empire.
Poland is an interesting country for me to visit as it is am EM with world class infrastructure but at the same time you can see in the people the pain of the past. If you see older Pols, they look like they have had a hard life in their body and face. This is very similar to what you see in China or other parts of Asia where the impoverish past is very recent and generational differences in skin/look/aesthetic reflect not just time but also transformation of society.
What I find interesting about Warsaw is that brutalist of Soviet architecture - the Nazi invasion (Germany & German soldiers) leveled the city w/ extreme severity and so most of the city is newer than the "new world" as they were built post war or re-created post war. If you find an older building/neighborhood, it's actually pretty rare and very treasured, like the Polytechnic University neighborhood that looks like Paris while the rest look, well, brutal at best.
It is a marathon & not a sprint. Produce below costs & run losses & still produce & gain market share as your goods are much cheaper (selling below costs & hence running losses) & competition goes out of business.
Once you reach a critical mass of market share (monopoly) then the sector consolidates and u can raise prices.
These companies can survive because they are backed by state policy that want certain sectors to develop & not worry about profit margins.
This is why Chinese equities underperform Indian equities or American equities over a long period but China dominates global manufacturing.
Foreign companies find it cheaper to import products that are produced in China & resell at a much higher price & then in the process have high profit margins.
The issue here is that it vacuums out domestic industries as they cannot compete & eventually we are left with the US where it is.
It does not have the capacity to have self-sufficiency in strategy sectors required for defense.
This is the biggest flaw of globalisation, beyond of course the vacuuming out of industries.