What do you think?
Rate this book
匱乏: 中國到底還缺什麼?
Nearly everything you know about China is wrong! Yes, within a decade, China will have the world's largest economy. But that is the least important thing to know about China. In this enlightening book, two of the world's leading China experts turn the conventional wisdom on its head, showing why China's economic growth will constrain rather than empower it. Pioneering political analyst Damien Ma and global economist Bill Adams reveal why, having 35 years of ferocious economic growth, China's future will be shaped by the same fundamental reality that has shaped it for millennia: "scarcity." Ma and Adams drill deep into Chinese society, illuminating "all" the scarcities that will limit its power and progress. Beyond scarcities of natural resources and public goods, they illuminate China's persistent poverties of individual freedoms, cultural appeal, and ideological legitimacy -- and the corrosive loss of values and beliefs amongst a growing middle class shackled by a parochial and inflexible political system. Everyone knows "the 21st century is China's to lose" -- but, as with so many things that "everyone knows," that's just wrong. Ma and Adams get beyond cheerleading and fearmongering to tell the complex truth about China today. This is a truth you need to hear -- whether you're an investor, business decision-maker, policymaker, or citizen.
First published August 14, 2013
8 people are currently reading
223 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
June 30, 2017
I didn’t know a great deal about the situation in China, so I found the book to be a fairly in-depth, and well written critique of China’s present and possible future. I was especially intrigued by the information presented on China’s one-child policy and its unexpected ramifications, such as young couples beings saddled with the care of both sets of parents, a financial burden few can afford. Unfortunately, that’s about the only time the book focused on the issue of population, which was odd when considering its title.
I was also struck by how critical the book was. Many of the problems brought up are also problems in the US (income inequality, income inertia, schools in wealthier areas getting more money while those in poorer areas go without.) The authors name China “not deliberately cruel, but indifferent, enormously stratified, and self-interested,” without seeing its parallel here.
I was also struck by how critical the book was. Many of the problems brought up are also problems in the US (income inequality, income inertia, schools in wealthier areas getting more money while those in poorer areas go without.) The authors name China “not deliberately cruel, but indifferent, enormously stratified, and self-interested,” without seeing its parallel here.
February 23, 2015
I'd give this somewhere between 2 and 4 stars, depending on how much you've read about China before it. As a person who regularly reads the news, I honestly found very little new information in the book, and was mostly disappointed with the lack of depth in its coverage. However, I can imagine that for someone who hasn't followed the issues in the past, this would make a smoothly written and wide-ranging primer on the basics of the issues presently (well, in 2011--as the years pass any book about the "future of X" becomes less worth reading except as a curiosity of past predictions) facing China.
Basically my opinion is read it if you don't know anything about China. If you've read the Economist's Asia section over the last couple years, though, there's nothing you haven't seen before.
Basically my opinion is read it if you don't know anything about China. If you've read the Economist's Asia section over the last couple years, though, there's nothing you haven't seen before.
March 5, 2017
http://www.mycountryandmypeople.org/b...
This is a review of the above title written by Damian Ma and William Adams, two US American analysts, one of them with Chinese ethnical background. The book was first published in September 2013 and our Shanghai book club has chosen it as the third read in 2015. There was already a discussion of the title on Sinica some weeks ago.
The authors structure their book in three main chapters on which are each divided into 3 subchapters: Economic Scarcity: Resources, Food, Labor. Social Scarcity: Welfare, Education, Housing. Political Scarcity: Ideology, Values, Freedom.
I have felt in our discussion some criticism; there were people who said that the authors are not senior enough; there were others who felt that the last chapter on political scarcity was neither well written nor written in the right place; there were people who said that the book did not bring about any revelation, anything that has not been written before; and above all: the book is to critical of China and therefore censored.
I can not agree. The authors succeed to look at China from the point of scarcity and they do a great job in this. The book is well researched and boasts a huge volume of data, both in numbers and background references. This accomplishment alone deserves some credit, because I can’t remember such a comprehensive book being published on contemporary China during the last few years.
I think though that the title was sort of misleading. In Line Behind a Billion People prompted me to expect a book that would look at the impact of the largest population on this planet along its rise to become the largest per capita consumer. I expected a book that would analyze the economical implications of a rising China on the ROW. The authors look instead beyond the economics and go deep into politics. With all their thoughts they remain in effect hooked on China and do not provide what the title implies: a perspective for the ROW. What does it mean for the West to wait in line behind a billion people? What does it mean that a strong China will first secure resources for its own people and the leftovers will be shared amongst the ROW?
Albeit above questions not answered, Damian Ma and William Adams implicitly show that China suffers from two sorts of scarcity: a natural which is caused by a Malthusian overpopulation and an artificial which is caused by a government whose self interests keepss it from keeping up pace with the changes in society – but lets be honest: isn’t this the case in most societies?
The authors write “China, please slow down. If you’re too fast, you may leave the souls of your people behind … That for all the breathless economic development speeding along at bullet train pace, the public continues to feel that it is being left behind. The Chinese economic miracle that has captured the world’s attention is no longer so compelling to a large portion of Chinese.”
I feel that the authors are not critical after all. They give a 7 out of 10 probability to a scenario in which the Chinese government adapts and responds to the requirements of the society. I am moreover convinced that the intensity with which China changes, both in terms of population and rapid economic development – although things look horrible now – will have a beneficial impact on humanity at large. Nowhere else but in China would it have been possible that all the technologies which we have been using for some decades in industrialized nations are applied on such a scale. If we would not see and feel the negative impact in China, we might continue to use fossil fuels for another 200 years or more. If Chinese solar panels would not have dumped the world price, we would invest less in green energy. If China’s urban centers would not be congested with individual vehicles at a scale which mankind has never seen before, we would not think so fast of other means of transportation.
After all there is a visible hand showing us unconsciously a path forward. And China is an integral part in this path. Many Chinese will and some already do ask themselves although not having tasted all of materialisms pleasures if GDP should not be substitutes with GWB, if more consumption does not equal more destruction. Many go abroad, because of domestic scarcities, some retire to the countryside from where have come – villagers turning urbanites and again villagers within ones own lifespan!
In Line Behind a Billion People was written at the same time as Thomas Piketty’s “Capital in the 21st Century”. Both books combined make more sense, if we want an answer to where scarcity and inequality will take us and how we can try to get the problem under control. Piketty’s central thesis is that when the rate of return on capital (r) is greater than the rate of economic growth (g) over the long term, the result is concentration of wealth, and this unequal distribution of wealth causes social and economic instability. Piketty proposes a global system of progressive wealth taxes to help reduce inequality and avoid the vast majority of wealth coming under the control of a tiny minority.
As long as the Chinese government continues to yield to the interests of its owning class, there will be no progress and more potential instability. As long as there is no redistribution of wealth which entails a human right for affordable shelter, there will be instability looming over the nation-continent. Ma and Adams say: The holy grail of Chinese housing policy seems to be a legitimate nationalized real estate tax, a policy twofer that replaces land sale revenue’s contribution to public finance and keeps property prices in check. But in politics there is no free lunch; demand taxes from your constituency and you can suddenly find yourself beholden to their demands. Can the government credibly manage the inevitable demands that educated and empowered people will have on public spending once they are forced to pay property taxes?
This interaction between real estate owners, between haves, have nots and the governments reminds me strikingly of Barrington Moore’s elaborations of feudalist societies, where the power struggle at the center of monarchies took place between the royalty and the land owning aristocracy. If you taxed the latter too much, the kind had them rallying against him. Has China after all made a step back in history from socialism to feudalism (with Chinese characteristics of course)?
There are more than a few indicators that speak for such a perception of contemporary China. One was given by a Chinese participant of our book club discussion: "The only thing that can save China from cracking up, is a strong leader. Xi Jinping must continue to exert full power during the next years or the system will fail." An absolutist ruler against a feudalist insurgence.
This is a review of the above title written by Damian Ma and William Adams, two US American analysts, one of them with Chinese ethnical background. The book was first published in September 2013 and our Shanghai book club has chosen it as the third read in 2015. There was already a discussion of the title on Sinica some weeks ago.
The authors structure their book in three main chapters on which are each divided into 3 subchapters: Economic Scarcity: Resources, Food, Labor. Social Scarcity: Welfare, Education, Housing. Political Scarcity: Ideology, Values, Freedom.
I have felt in our discussion some criticism; there were people who said that the authors are not senior enough; there were others who felt that the last chapter on political scarcity was neither well written nor written in the right place; there were people who said that the book did not bring about any revelation, anything that has not been written before; and above all: the book is to critical of China and therefore censored.
I can not agree. The authors succeed to look at China from the point of scarcity and they do a great job in this. The book is well researched and boasts a huge volume of data, both in numbers and background references. This accomplishment alone deserves some credit, because I can’t remember such a comprehensive book being published on contemporary China during the last few years.
I think though that the title was sort of misleading. In Line Behind a Billion People prompted me to expect a book that would look at the impact of the largest population on this planet along its rise to become the largest per capita consumer. I expected a book that would analyze the economical implications of a rising China on the ROW. The authors look instead beyond the economics and go deep into politics. With all their thoughts they remain in effect hooked on China and do not provide what the title implies: a perspective for the ROW. What does it mean for the West to wait in line behind a billion people? What does it mean that a strong China will first secure resources for its own people and the leftovers will be shared amongst the ROW?
Albeit above questions not answered, Damian Ma and William Adams implicitly show that China suffers from two sorts of scarcity: a natural which is caused by a Malthusian overpopulation and an artificial which is caused by a government whose self interests keepss it from keeping up pace with the changes in society – but lets be honest: isn’t this the case in most societies?
The authors write “China, please slow down. If you’re too fast, you may leave the souls of your people behind … That for all the breathless economic development speeding along at bullet train pace, the public continues to feel that it is being left behind. The Chinese economic miracle that has captured the world’s attention is no longer so compelling to a large portion of Chinese.”
I feel that the authors are not critical after all. They give a 7 out of 10 probability to a scenario in which the Chinese government adapts and responds to the requirements of the society. I am moreover convinced that the intensity with which China changes, both in terms of population and rapid economic development – although things look horrible now – will have a beneficial impact on humanity at large. Nowhere else but in China would it have been possible that all the technologies which we have been using for some decades in industrialized nations are applied on such a scale. If we would not see and feel the negative impact in China, we might continue to use fossil fuels for another 200 years or more. If Chinese solar panels would not have dumped the world price, we would invest less in green energy. If China’s urban centers would not be congested with individual vehicles at a scale which mankind has never seen before, we would not think so fast of other means of transportation.
After all there is a visible hand showing us unconsciously a path forward. And China is an integral part in this path. Many Chinese will and some already do ask themselves although not having tasted all of materialisms pleasures if GDP should not be substitutes with GWB, if more consumption does not equal more destruction. Many go abroad, because of domestic scarcities, some retire to the countryside from where have come – villagers turning urbanites and again villagers within ones own lifespan!
In Line Behind a Billion People was written at the same time as Thomas Piketty’s “Capital in the 21st Century”. Both books combined make more sense, if we want an answer to where scarcity and inequality will take us and how we can try to get the problem under control. Piketty’s central thesis is that when the rate of return on capital (r) is greater than the rate of economic growth (g) over the long term, the result is concentration of wealth, and this unequal distribution of wealth causes social and economic instability. Piketty proposes a global system of progressive wealth taxes to help reduce inequality and avoid the vast majority of wealth coming under the control of a tiny minority.
As long as the Chinese government continues to yield to the interests of its owning class, there will be no progress and more potential instability. As long as there is no redistribution of wealth which entails a human right for affordable shelter, there will be instability looming over the nation-continent. Ma and Adams say: The holy grail of Chinese housing policy seems to be a legitimate nationalized real estate tax, a policy twofer that replaces land sale revenue’s contribution to public finance and keeps property prices in check. But in politics there is no free lunch; demand taxes from your constituency and you can suddenly find yourself beholden to their demands. Can the government credibly manage the inevitable demands that educated and empowered people will have on public spending once they are forced to pay property taxes?
This interaction between real estate owners, between haves, have nots and the governments reminds me strikingly of Barrington Moore’s elaborations of feudalist societies, where the power struggle at the center of monarchies took place between the royalty and the land owning aristocracy. If you taxed the latter too much, the kind had them rallying against him. Has China after all made a step back in history from socialism to feudalism (with Chinese characteristics of course)?
There are more than a few indicators that speak for such a perception of contemporary China. One was given by a Chinese participant of our book club discussion: "The only thing that can save China from cracking up, is a strong leader. Xi Jinping must continue to exert full power during the next years or the system will fail." An absolutist ruler against a feudalist insurgence.
February 14, 2018
A really insightful analysis of contemporary China that still holds up today. The engaging writing style helps to cut through the dense content, as do the graphs and other visuals.
If I was to find a flaw, it would be this: William Adams’ and Damien Ma’s use of the female pronoun seems a superficial tribute to a conversation on Chinese gender inequality, and particularly so for a book on problems facing China. A focus on male experiences in marrying, and assertions that Chinese women have standards that prove all-too-high fail to take into account the pressures that Chinese women also face, particularly those perpetuated by the government to encourage marriage and childbirth. I would have liked to see this fleshed out, or at least acknowledged.
Another tiny note: I query the change from Peking University to Beijing University by the authors. I understand that Peking is the romanised Beijing, but this continues to be the English name of the university. If Peking is changed to Beijing, why wasn’t Tsinghua changed to Qinghua for consistency’s sake at least?
All in all, a great read with an oversight and a minor point, in my mind.
If I was to find a flaw, it would be this: William Adams’ and Damien Ma’s use of the female pronoun seems a superficial tribute to a conversation on Chinese gender inequality, and particularly so for a book on problems facing China. A focus on male experiences in marrying, and assertions that Chinese women have standards that prove all-too-high fail to take into account the pressures that Chinese women also face, particularly those perpetuated by the government to encourage marriage and childbirth. I would have liked to see this fleshed out, or at least acknowledged.
Another tiny note: I query the change from Peking University to Beijing University by the authors. I understand that Peking is the romanised Beijing, but this continues to be the English name of the university. If Peking is changed to Beijing, why wasn’t Tsinghua changed to Qinghua for consistency’s sake at least?
All in all, a great read with an oversight and a minor point, in my mind.
September 25, 2014
Amazing! I've often wondered how China will react to its myriad of challenges- environmental, population diversity, and economic disparity. This book looks at all those things and more. Importantly it looks at how all these challenges are piling up and interacting with each other. The tongue-in-cheek writing style helps the book read easily, though at times it can seem snarky. Ultimately though the level of research and the analysis of what is happening to China comes through as thoughtful and insightful.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews