AEC IMPLICATION: EFFECT TOWARDS THAILAND’S UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
Authors: Chatchawal Kittisowan Tutor: Lars Behrenz Bachelor of Economics Examiner: Dominique Anxo Subject: Bachelor's Thesis Nuttanee Piboonthanakiat Level and semester: Spring 2011 Bachelor of Economics
Salisa Orutsahakij Bachelor of Economics
ABSTRACT
Since ten members of ASEAN are moving towards ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) in 2015 which ten member countries are integrating competitively into regional and global markets as well as continuing to build a people-oriented AEC. From this integration the unemployment rate will be affected through the mechanism of the export and GDP. With economics and econometrics models used, this paper will discuss and prove that the implication of AEC will lead to the decrease in unemployment rate.
1
CONTENT 1. INTRODUCTION 3 2. OVERVIEW 4 2.1 Economic overview 4 2.2 Labor market overview 17 2.3 AEC overview 22 3. LITERATURE REVIEW 25 4. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 27 5. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 28 5.1 Okun’s Law 28 5.2 GDP components 29 6. UNEMPLOYMENT RATE ANALYSIS ,IMPLICATION OF AEC 30 6.1 AEC impacts Exports 30 6.2 Exports and GDP 33 6.3 Unemployment rate and GDP movement 35 7. CONCLUSION 37 8. LIMITATIONS 39 9. REFERENCE 40
2
1 INTRODUCTION
In 2008, ten member countries of ASEAN has agreed to sign ASEAN Economic Community or AEC in 2015 to integrate competitively into regional and global markets with their goods, services and investment, building up a strong economic foundation as the region changes as well as collectively continuing to build a people-orientated AEC. ASEAN trade figure had improved from 400 billion US dollars in 1993 to 1,710 billion US dollars in 2008; more than 80% is the international trade with the rest of the world. As well as, ASEAN trade with intra-ASEAN countries are rapidly rising; it increased from 82,444 in 1993 to 458,114 in 2008, about 5 times in the past 15 years. This extent to even a wider range of FDI from other parts of the world; the FDI was peaked in 2007 about 70,000 million US dollars, however, since the effected of subprime crisis spread all over the world, FDI to ASEAN in 2008 was dropped to around 62,000 million US dollars.
As the impact from AEC integration has improved the exports drastically, which is already the most important sector contributed to GDP, and then we linked it together with unemployment rate. The unemployment rate is also the main economic indicator and measurement of population’s welfare. It has been one of the major issues in most of the countries including Thailand. Even though from the data, we have really low unemployment rate, however the informal sector ranked very high. Thus, we would like to discuss this potential factor of how it can affect on the unemployment rate, whether if the employment rate in Thailand will increase or not. Through the relationship of net export, GDP and unemployment rate, which we will be using econometrics model, GDP formulation, and Okun’s law theory in the analysis further on.
3
2 OVERVIEW
2.1 Economic overview
The previous economic and financial crisis in 2008 has been largely affected on the ten member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), however, the region is rebounding better than many has predicted. According to year-on-year quarterly GDP growth, it indicates that economic growth in many countries in the region is currently in pre- crisis level with 5.4% grew of GDP in 2010, compare to a mere 1.4% growth in 2009
As well as in Thailand, the economy has rebounded to 12 % growth in GDP of the first quarter (Q1) in 2010, which accelerated from 5.9% of the previous quarter; faster than expected (3.5 – 4.5%) due to the domestic consumption and investment as well as the recovered in exports. However, in the second quarter (Q2) of 2010, the economy slowed down from Q1 partly due to some risks such as the EU over-budget crisis, which significantly affect the recovery in global economy and also our political unrest in Bangkok, which may affect the tourist industry private consumption, investments and also the investor’s confidences.
Figure 1: Thailand GDP Growth Forecast Source: The Bank of Thailand (July 2010)
4
Moreover, as we can see from the figure, Bank of Thailand (BOT) has forecasted the GDP growth of Thailand in 2011 to be around 3 – 5% for the whole year including risk factors that going forward including the recovery of the global economy, domestic political conditions. For inflation, core and headline inflation in 2010 will be lower than projected in April 2010, mainly due to the extension of various cost-of-living reduction measures to the end of the year and with firm’s cooperation in maintaining prices at prevailing levels until the end of 2010 Q3. Moreover, in 2011, the inflation forecast is revised up slightly in line with the robust economic recovery, higher labor costs due to a tightening of labor market, as well as the anticipated termination of various cost-of-living reduction measures.
Plus, there are some positive signs that supported the rapid growth in GDP in Q1 2010;
1) Export, the export value has expanded from 12.2 percent in the Q4 2009 to 32.0 percent. The main exported products are cars, electronic parts and devices, computers and parts etc. most of them expanded more than 50 percent from last year. 2) Domestic consumption has expanded 4 percent due to the increased in purchasing power from the increasing in employment in most sectors. 3) Private investment has increased 15.8 percent because of the real estate investors’ confidences increased from 57.8 percent to 59 percent due to the policy that reduce the transfer cost of construction unit which aims to stimulate economy. 4) Industrial sector increased by 22.8 percent, especially for electronic-related production industry and also the domestic-consumption production such as iron, rubber and rubber-based products. Moreover, manufacturing production index increased from 61.0 percent in 2009 to 68.4 percent. 5) Tourist sector, the number of tourists has significantly increased 28.4 percent or about 4.7 million compared to the same period in the last year, most of them came from China, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan, this also increased the number of hotel booking from 53.4 to 60.7 percent, year over year basis.
5
Figure 2: Quarterly GDP Growth, year-on-year (%) Source: International Labor Organization
Additionally, compare to the ASEAN member countries, Thailand and other countries moves in the same trends. As illustrated in figure 2, economic growth in ASEAN rebounded strongly beginning in the Q2 of 2009, supported by the significant fiscal stimulus policies undertaken in response. Singapore's economy grew by an estimated 13.1% in the Q1 of 2010 compared to the same period a year earlier, prompting the Bank of Thailand to significantly raise its growth forecast for the rest of 2011 up to 7.3%. As well as Malaysia's economy in 2010, it may have also expanded at its fastest rate since 1996. ASEAN as a region also is expected to rebound strongly in 2011, rising to 5.6%, compared to a mere 1.4% growth in 2009 (ILO, 2010). ASEAN Member Countries that experienced the greatest contractions in GDP in the region in 2009 (Cambodia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand) are heavily export dependent and with the exception of Cambodia, the share of domestic consumption in GDP is relatively low. Countries in the region that have fared comparatively better and registered positive output growth in 2009 have a relatively high share of domestic demand in GDP and with the exception of Viet Nam, are less reliant on exports. Gross capital formation is also relatively high in these countries compared to the other ASEAN Member Countries. Such impacts raise
6
important implications in terms of reducing excessive dependence on exports to drive growth in some countries in the region. (ILO 2010) Furthermore, as the recovery in the main trading partner economies such as Japan, the European Union and the United States is expected to be weak, ASEAN's export engine of growth has to come from trade within the region. Recent developments in the European Union concerning fiscal situations and their longer-term consequences further illustrate this challenge. While ASEAN's share of total exports to the mentioned developed economies has been declining over the past decades, they still accounted for about 30% of total exports in 2009. In the Philippines and Viet Nam, exports to the more developed economies represented nearly 50 percent of total exports. In Cambodia exports to the European Union and the United States represent around 77% of total exports. The expansion of intra-regional trade driven by ASEAN's commitment to establish the ASEAN Community by 2015 provides an important opportunity for Member Countries to benefit from regional integration and strengthen flexibility against future external shocks (ILO, 2010).
‘
Figure 3: Thailand Gross Domestic Products (GDP) Year 2002-2010 Source: The Bank of Thailand
7
From the figure 3, Thailand Gross Domestic Product has been growing substantially since 2002. From 2002 until 2010, Thailand’s average Gross Domestic Product was 257.8 billion dollars reaching a high historical of 336.8 billion dollars in 2010 and a low of 181.7 billion dollars in 2002. GDP has increased since 2002, primarily because of improved exportation and increasing in domestic spending. However, in 2008 and 2009, overall Thai economic growth has fallen sharply due to a global downturn and political crisis issues, eroded investor and consumer confidence. One reason of low GDP is due to the slowdown of counterpart countries that Thailand exports to. High GDP growth implies high level of consumer confidence, which means the likeliness than consumer will spend However, it appears that Thailand’s economy is moving in the right direction with expecting that the GDP in 2015 will be at 427.802 billion dollars.
Figure 4: Private consumption expenditure at 1988 prices.
Source: Office of the National Economic and Social Development Board, Office of the Prime Minister.
As shown from figure 4, the private consumption has been increasing since 2002 to 2008. In 2008, the private consumption declined to 75,089 million of US dollars due to political instability. Private consumption and investment were negatively affected as political instability dampened consumers' and investors' confidences (Bangkok Bank, 2010). The Bank
8
of Thailand launched the policies to help stimulating and restoring the economy that most consumers and investors lacked of confidence in economic situation. Such policy by the Bank of Thailand is to adjust the policy rate downward to counter Baht appreciation and to stimulate domestic consumption and investment (The Bank of Thailand, 2009). Moreover, the government played the role in absorbing excess liquidity in the system to channel capital investment that occurred after the Bank of Thailand adjusted the policy rate downward.
Figure 5: Thailand Investment (% of GDP), year 2002-2010 Source: The Bank of Thailand
Figure 5 shows total investment as a percentage of GDP during the period 2002-2010. Its share of GDP remained at 23.801 percent in 2002 and increased gradually since then until reaching 31.442 percent of GDP in 2006. After 2006, it declined to 28.297 and 26.434 percent in 2006 and 2007 consecutively. In 2009, it has the lowest percent of GDP at 21.241 percent. One of the main reasons is due to the political instability within the country that make the investors felt unconfident to invest in Thailand. Thus, it makes the overall economic to slowdown in 2009.
9
Figure 6: Government appending at 1988 prices Source: Office of the National Economic and Social Development Board, Office of the Prime Minister.
From the Figure 6, it illustrates the government spending at 1988 prices from 2002- 2010. The trend of the government spending has been increasing gradually since 2002 at 9,353.30 millions of US Dollars. The world financial problem significantly affected the private and business sector on the ability to purchase and invest in 2008. In consequence, Thai government has launched the fiscal stimulus packages to help relieving the economy. This leads to the fiscal budget has turned from being surplus to being deficit. The government spending in Thailand was about 13,310.47 millions of US Dollars in 2008.
10
Figure 4: Thailand Exports year 2002-2010 Source: Customs Department (Complied by The Bank of Thailand)
The economy of Thailand is an emerging country, which is heavily export-dependent with exports accounting for more than two thirds of gross domestic product (GDP). As shown from figure 4, the exports value of Thailand had been gradually increased since 2002 until 2008. After the recession in economy, it causes the declining in value of exports to 150,743 million dollars in 2009. The considerably fall in export of goods and services were resulted from the severe contraction of Thailand’s trading partners’ economies as well as shrinking tourism revenues stemming from political problems and risk associated with the epidemic of Influenza A/H1N1 (MOF, 2010). However, due to economic recovery by the government policies, the export values became strong again in 2010, accounted for 193,662 millions of dollars.
11
Figure 5: Exports Classified by Product Group (UD$) 2002-2010, (Unit: Millions of US Dollars)
Source: Custom Department (Complied by The Bank of Thailand)
By comparing the data of Thai exports classified by product group from 2002 to 2010, in figure 5, it shows that the economy of Thailand is heavily exporting dependent. It exports mainly agriculture and manufacture products. The export products in each industry have increased in number of value since 2002 to 2010, except in 2009, that fell in number of export
12
values from 2008, especially in agriculture, fishery, mining and manufacturing sectors. In 2010, manufacturing products experienced the highest number of Thai exports value of 173,161.99 million dollars while; the second highest export product is agriculture products which were 17,112.59 million dollars.
Figure 6: Thailand Imports year 2002-2010 (Unit: Millions of US Dollars) Source: Customs Department (Complied by The Bank of Thailand)
As shown from the data in figure 6, import values have increased gradually since 2002 until reaching the dramatically high in 2008 of 175,603 million dollars, but as far as imports are concerned, they declined to 131,355 million dollars in 2009 due to economic downturn mainly from political unrest issues within the country. However, in 2010, they were worth 179,631 million dollars increasing by 48,276 million dollars from 2009. This is due to the effective government policies provided.
13
Figure 7.1
14
Figure 7.2
Figure 7.1, 7.2: Imports Classified by Economic Classification (US$) 2002-2010, (Unit: Millions of US Dollars)
Source: Customs Department (Complied by The Bank of Thailand)
15
From figure 7.1, 7.2, it shows the imports classified by economic classification from 2002- 2010. Thailand’s principal imports are electronic integrated circuits, crude oil and fuels, vehicles, machinery and parts, iron and steel. The values of import products have been increasing since 2002. In 2010, raw materials and intermediate goods were the highest number of Thailand imports accounted for 73,062.78 million dollars, while, capital goods were the lowest accounted for 45,384.13 million dollars.
Figure 8: Trade Balance (Value of Exports – Value of Imports) year 2002-2010 Source: The Bank of Thailand
Figure 8 shows the trade balance (Value of Exports – Value of Imports) year 2002- 2010. Thailand faces trade surplus when value of exports is more than value of imports in a given year, but facing trade deficit when value of imports more than value of exports in a given year. Thailand had a highest trade surplus equivalent to 19,388 million dollars in 2009, while facing the highest trade deficit of 8,253 million dollars in 2005. After 2005, the rapid increase in the automobile exports manufactured by Japanese firms, helped Thailand significantly
16
improved in trade balance of 994 million dollars and 12,782 million dollars in 2006 and 2007 consecutively.
2.2 Labor market overview
Chart 1: The number of population by labor force Source: The labor force survey, NSO, Q1 2010.
According to the chart, it shows major findings of Labor Force Survey in the first quarter of 2010, which conducted by National Statistical Office, or called NSO, showed that for people aged 15 years and over of 53.37 million persons, 38.27 million were in the labor force, accounted for 71.70 percent (37.52 million were employed, 0.46 million were unemployed and 0.29 million were seasonally inactive labor force) and 15.1 million were not in the labor force. Note: Total population in Thailand is 67.39 million.
17
Figure 9: Unemployment persons and rates by sex year 2001-2010
Source: National Statistical Office
Note:
- % Male unemployed rate is total unemployed male divided by total male labor force multiply by 100
- % Female unemployed rate is total unemployed female divided by total female labor force multiply by 100
- Total Unemployment rate is total unemployed persons divided by total labor force multiply by 100
18
Figure 10: Unemployment rate by sex year 2001-2010 Source: National Statistical Office
As shown from figure 9 and 10, from 2001 to 2010, Thailand faced low unemployment rate averaged of 1.88 percent reaching an historical high of 3.32 percent in 2001 and a record low of 1.23 percent in 2010. In 2009, the total unemployment rate was slightly higher than 2008 for 0.11 percent from 1.38 percent to 1.49 percent. By taking year 2002 to 2010 into consideration, year 2009 was the only year that the unemployment rate was higher than the previous year, this is due to the economic crisis in Thailand as mentioned in economic overview that caused the business and consumer confidence within the country to slow down. Thus, it leads to low investment, implying high unemployment rate. Note: Unemployment rate is total unemployed persons divided by total labor force multiply 100 (as percentage). By taking sex into consideration, from 2001 to 2010, male unemployment rate was higher than female unemployment rate due to higher number of male unemployment. Male unemployment rate is calculated by unemployed male divided by male labor force multiply 100 (as percentage). This is also applied to female unemployment rate. In 2010, male unemployment rate was 1.25 percent, while female unemployment rate was 1.19 percent.
19
20
From figure 11, it shows the number of unemployed persons by industry year 2002- 2010. Non-agriculture industry, especially in manufacturing industry, has the highest number of unemployment persons on average from 2002 to 2010. Comparing from 2008 to 2010, unemployment persons in manufacturing industry were 95.28, 93.41 and 86.63 thousand persons in 2008, 2009 and 2010 consecutively. While in agriculture sector, accounted in the large share of GDP, the unemployment persons were 115.88, 153.72 and 109.13 thousand persons in 2008, 2009 and 2010 consecutively.
Figure 8: Unemployment rate, selected ASEAN countries recent quarters (%) Source: ILO Department of Statistics, national statistical offices.
Let’s look at the ASEAN region. Asia, as the largest share of job created, is affected by the financial crisis in 2008. It faced slow and contracted economy that has significantly effect on unemployment rates in many parts of ASEAN region. The trend of unemployment rates in many parts of ASEAN region was worsening in 2009 except in Indonesia. Singapore faced the most impact on unemployment rates. The non-seasonally adjusted unemployment rate was more than doubled between the third quarter of 2008 and the second quarter of 2009. In the first half of 2009, unemployment rate increased to 3.8 percent in Malaysia compared to the same period the previous year. However, in low and middle-income ASEAN member countries, a significant impact of the crisis on labor markets is a rise in informal employment rather than in unemployment rates.
21
2.3 AEC overview The AEC is the realization of the end goal of economic integration as espouse in the Vision 2020, which is based on a convergence of interests of ASEAN Member Countries to deepen and broaden economic integration through existing and new initiatives with clear timelines. In establishing the AEC, ASEAN shall act in accordance to the principles of an open, outward-looking, inclusive, and market-driven economy consistent with multilateral rules as well as adherence to rules-based systems for effective compliance and implementation of economic commitments. (ASEAN Secretariat, 2008) The main objective is to change ASEAN countries into a single market and production base. The goal is to transform ASEAN into a single market and production base. There is a commitment to use new mechanisms and measures ―to strengthen the implementation of its existing economic initiatives; accelerate regional integration in the priority sectors; facilitate the movement of business persons, skilled labor and talents; and strength the institutional mechanisms of ASEAN. At the same time, the AEC will address the development divide by accelerating the integration of Cambodia, Laos PDR, Myanmar and Vietnam (CLMV) with the older member countries. With external trade as the main consideration, the AEC‘s goals in the roadmap are: (a) a single market and production base, (b) a highly competitive economic region, (c) a region of equitable economic development, and (d) a region fully integrated into the global economy. Elimination of non-tariff barriers and liberalization of tariffs are the main goals by 2015. Recently, a section of the statement by economic ministries in Bangkok on August 13 & 14, 2009, shows some specific plans to achieve the goals of the AEC: “Enhance transparency by abiding to the Protocol on Notification Procedure and setting up an effective Surveillance Mechanism; Abide by the commitment of a standstill and roll-back on NTBs (non-tariff barrier); Remove all NTBs by 2010 for ASEAN-5 by 2012 for the Philippines, and by 2015 with flexibilities to 2018 for the CLMV, in accordance with the agreed Work Program on Non- Tariff Barriers (NTBs) elimination; Enhance transparency of Non-Tariff Measures (NTMs); and
22
Work towards where possible having regional rules and regulations consistent with International best practices.”
Chart 2: Roadmap to ASEAN Economic Community Source: ASEAN Secretariat, 2010
According to the chart, in order to create a single market and production base which is stable, prosperous, highly competitive and economically integrated with effective facilitation for trade and investment in which there is free flow of goods, services and investment; facilitated movement of business persons, professionals, talents and labor, and free flow of capital, and now it’s 73.6% of all targeted achieved (ASEAN Secretariat, 2008).
23
Figure 9: Share of Global GDP (projected) between 1990 and 2014 Source: IMF World Economic Outlook, 2010
Nevertheless, according to the figure that, the future of ASEAN+6 which includes China, Japan, the Republic of Korea, India, Australia, and New Zealand seems to be brighter, compared to those for USA and EU, as we can see that in 2014, the shared ASEAN+6’s GDP is around 28 percent of total GDP and those for USA and EU are gradually decreasing. Therefore, ASEAN+6 region will become the largest economic region in the world.
24
3 LITERATURE REVIEW From the past experience with ASEAN Free Trade Agreement (AFTA), it was concluded by Park I. (2000) that it would improve intra-ASEAN trade and accelerates the ASEAN’s economic growth of each member countries. Especially, economies with higher pre- FTA tariff barriers and larger intra-regional trade volume including Thailand and Philippines, which share larger gains from free trade. This conclusion resemble with paper of Ismail et al. (2007), which found that the GDP, population, relative endowment, distance and common language are the main factors that determines bilateral trading in ASEAN. The ASEAN dummies were used to measure the intra ASEAN trade to proven that there was trade creation among the 5 ASEAN members (Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, Indonesia and Thailand). Similarly to what has shown by Cabalu and Alfonso (2007) that the AFTA for ASEAN- 6 was trade creating as it was able to stimulate the trading environment and strengthen the economic relations between economies of the member countries. There was also no evidence of trade diversion since the major trade partners of ASEAN remained outside the agreed region. This paper, later, also discuss that the trade liberalization on a multilateral basis would generate even greater benefits to ASEAN economies. For the reviews from the experiences of the current AEC implication, CWK King et al. (2010) by using the dummies ASEAN, concludes that there is trade creation among the 5 ASEAN members enhanced subsequent to the AEC formation, proven from the measurement of ASEAN dummies of intra trade. In general, the formation of AEC will facilitate the region to participate competently in developing an international trading that is more approachable to its requirements. The paper then concludes that AEC plays important roles towards attracting trade among ASEAN member countries. Moreover, from Peter A. (2010), by comparing with those of European Union, AEC would yield similar benefits, which is surprising, as ASEAN economies are not as integrated today, and are less complementary than the EU at the initiative of European’s integration. However, by given the relatively early stage of development of some ASEAN members, existing barriers to trade are greater and their elimination could yield larger productivity gains relative to current trade. These benefits appear to outweigh the effect of lower initial
25
integration. In the future as the ASEAN economies continue to develop and work more closely together, the benefits from AEC should grow higher. From the previously mentioned researches, it can be conclude that implementation of AEC will lead to trade creation, as it was proven with econometrics model of the current imposition of AEC as well as the past data of AFTA experiences. This information will be use in the further analysis of this paper.
26
4 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS
• Single market AEC and Implication production based
•previous Impact on literature and Export regression model
Impact on •GDP GDP components
Unemploy •Okun's Law •Regression ment effect model
From the figure, you can see that this paper is based on the implication of AEC effect to Thailand. By providing overview information of economic, labor and AEC, which is aimed to provide understanding about the targets of AEC. The paper will first discuss the effects from AEC towards export from the previous literature review, which has been proven. Then the will see how net export could impact the overall income through using GDP formulation model. The linkage between GDP to unemployment rate, then will be analyzed by using Okun’s law and proven their relationship through regression model.
27
5 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS
5.1 Okun’s Law Generally, economic theory that can be used in explaining the relationship between growth and unemployment is Okun’s law. Okun’s law is an empirical observation on the relationship between unemployment rate and economic growth. In 1962, Arthur Okun observed that, U.S. unemployment was likely to drop by 1 percentage point for every 3 percentage point increase in GDP. In other words, the United States had an Okun coefficient of 3. He also stated further that, the measured unemployment usually less volatile than output because fluctuations in hours per worker and labor force participation hide some underemployment. There would also be other factors that might affect the coefficient, e.g. labor market regulation, labor union, etc. For instance, in Japan, unemployment rates tend to vary less for a given gross domestic product (GDP), due to the strong social job protection. Okun coefficients can change over time because the relationship of unemployment to output growth depends on laws, technology, preferences, social customs, and demographics.
Even though the model was invented in the 60s and the economy of U.S. has changed. However, it was proved again to still be a precise measurement in 1993 and 2005 by Martin Prachowny and Andrew Abel and Ben Bernanke.
28
5.2 GDP Components GDP is referred to all final goods and services produced within a country given a period of time, which often use as indicator of a country’s standard of living. GDP can be determined mainly 3 ways, product or output approach, income approach, and expenditure approach. However, in this paper, we will be concerning the expenditure approach. In economy, people spend their money on products which came from the production, thus, by measuring the total expenditure of money used to buy products is one way determine production. In expenditure approach GDP (Y) is a sum of consumption (C), investment (I), government spending (G) and net exports (X-M). Or Y = C + I + G + ( X – M ) Consumption (C) is normally the largest GDP component in the economy, consisting with household final consumption expenditure or private expenditure. Investment (I) includes business investment in productions, for example, construction a new mine, purchase machinery and equipment for factory. However, buying financial products doesn’t conclude as investment, instead it is classed as saving, which is opposed to investment. Government Spending (G) is the sum of government expenditures on final goods and services. For example, public servants’ salaries purchase of weapons for military, and any investment expenditure by a government. However, it doesn’t include any transfer payment such as, social securities or unemployment benefits. Exports (X) represent gross exports. GDP also captures the amount of a country production, including goods and services produced for other nations’ consumption, thus exports are concerned. Imports (M) represent gross imports. Imports are subtracted since imported gods will be including in the terms G, C or I and must be deducted to avoid counting foreign supply as domestic.
Note that C, G, and I are expenditures on final goods and services; expenditures on intermediate goods and services do not count. (Intermediate goods and services are those used by businesses to produce other goods and services within the accounting year.)
29
6 UNEMPLOYMENT RATE ANALYSIS, IMPLICATION FOR AEC
To outline this part, Economics methodology has been included in order to clarify the research questions. The use of ordinary least square (OLS) will be placed. This research will try to estimate an impact of Asean Economic Community (AEC) agreement on unemployment rate. Previous researches shown that AEC will have impacts on the total exports of Thailand. That would probably drive up the exports value. Then, we’ll see the relationship between the exports and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by basic macroeconomics theory. Finally, it will be connected further to the unemployment rate change with respect to a change in GDP that could be explained by the Okun’s law. The data were collected quarterly since 2002 to 2010. Total observations are 36 observations.
6.1 AEC impacts on exports From previous researches, CWK King et al. (2010) has proven that AEC has created a trade among members of ASEAN. It played important role in an international trade aspect among countries. Because the formation of AEC will facilitate the regions to participate in developing an international trading that is more approachable to its requirements. Thus, in this part, we hypothesize that AEC agreement, once introduced, will create more trade between Thailand and other ASEAN members which should also increase a level of exports during the period. The method of ordinary least squared (OLS) will be used further on This method used is intended to identify the variables that seem to have significant effect on exports movements. Some variables are noticed to have an impact on exports. Those are the world demand (world imports), real exchange, lagged term of export, and of course the Asean Economic Community which is treated to be dummy variable. Since exports amount is varying on the amount of world imports, real exchange rate, exports of the previous period which can smooth the movement of exports, and also AEC. Therefore, the equation is;
ln = + ln + ln + + ln
30
Where; is amount of exports (million baht)