Agricultural output in 2008
Industrial output in 2008
Service output in 2008This is a list of countries by GDP sector composition based on nominal GDP estimates and sector composition ratios provided by the CIA World Fact Book at market or government official exchange rates with figures in millions of United States dollars.

Agricultural sector
Agriculture (a term which encompasses farming) is the process of producing food, feed, fiber and other goods by the systematic raising of plants and animals. Agricultural output is a component of the nominal Gross Domestic Product of a nation. Though China and the EU lead the world in agricultural output, the US still leads the world in agricultural productivity per farmer among large economies.[citation needed]

Industrial sector
Industry is the segment of economy concerned with production of goods (including fuels and fertilisers). Industrial output is a component of the nominal Gross domestic product of a nation. The proliferation of "Made in China" labels clearly signify the next wave of industrial revolution in the modern era.

Service sector
A service is the non-material equivalent of a good. Service provision is defined as an economic activity that does not result in ownership, and this is what differentiates it from providing physical goods. It is claimed to be a process that creates benefits by facilitating either a change in customers, a change in their physical possessions, or a change in their intangible assets. Service output is a component of the nominal Gross domestic product of a nation. Gigantic supermarkets, luxury showrooms and serviced offices are peculiar features of the advanced economies.[citation needed]

If the economy continues moving at the same rate, China should overtake Germany as 3rd ranking in 2009, Japan as second in 2012 and should replace the United States of America as the world's biggest economy on earth in 2030, meaning that the United States will have been the world's richest nation for 90 years. Great Britain was the world's richest nation and had the largest economy from May 1759 till November 1940.

On a similar note, India should overtake Germany in 2020 and Japan in 2023. It could well put the United States into third position by 2041, although this speculation would assume similar average rates of growth over the next 30 years.

The position of the European Union is unclear, as there is much debate as to whether it will ever be one united country.

It should be noted that the service sector includes (but is not limited to) farm and factory related activities.


'Nominal GDP sector composition, January 2008 (sortable)
Composition in percentages Composition in million dollars

Nr.
—
—
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
Country GDP Agri. Indus. Serv. Agri. Indus. Serv.
World &0000000046660000.00000046,660,000 4% 32% 64% &0000000001866400.0000001,866,400 &0000000014931200.00000014,931,200 &0000000029862400.00000029,862,400
European Union &0000000013620000.00000013,620,000 2.1% 27.3% 70.5% &0000000000286020.000000286,020 &0000000003718260.0000003,718,260 &0000000009602100.0000009,602,100
United States &0000000013220000.00000013,220,000 0.9% 20.4% 78.6% &0000000000118980.000000118,980 &0000000002696880.0000002,696,880 &0000000010390920.00000010,390,920
Japan &0000000004911000.0000004,911,000 1.6% 25.3% 73.1% &0000000000078576.00000078,576 &0000000001242483.0000001,242,483 &0000000003589941.0000003,589,941
Germany &0000000002858000.0000002,858,000 0.9% 29.1% 70% &0000000000025722.00000025,722 &0000000000831678.000000831,678 &0000000002000600.0000002,000,600
People's Republic of China &0000000002512000.0000002,512,000 11.9% 48.1% 40% &0000000000298928.000000298,928 &0000000001208272.0000001,208,272 &0000000001004800.0000001,004,800
United Kingdom &0000000002341000.0000002,341,000 1% 25.6% 73.4% &0000000000023410.00000023,410 &0000000000599296.000000599,296 &0000000001718294.0000001,718,294
France &0000000002154000.0000002,154,000 2.2% 20.6% 77.2% &0000000000047388.00000047,388 &0000000000443724.000000443,724 &0000000001662888.0000001,662,888
Italy &0000000001780000.0000001,780,000 2% 29.1% 69% &0000000000035600.00000035,600 &0000000000517980.000000517,980 &0000000001228200.0000001,228,200
Brazil &0000000001566253.0000001,566,253 8% 38% 54% &0000000000125300.000000125,300 &0000000000595176.000000595,176 &0000000000845777.000000845,777
Canada &0000000001089000.0000001,089,000 2.3% 29.2% 68.5% &0000000000025047.00000025,047 &0000000000317988.000000317,988 &0000000000745965.000000745,965
Spain &0000000001081000.0000001,081,000 3.9% 29.4% 66.7% &0000000000042159.00000042,159 &0000000000317814.000000317,814 &0000000000721027.000000721,027
India &0000000000796100.000000796,100 19.9% 19.3% 60.7% &0000000000158424.000000158,424 &0000000000153647.000000153,647 &0000000000483233.000000483,233
South Korea &0000000000768500.000000768,500 3.3% 40.7% 56% &0000000000025361.00000025,361 &0000000000312780.000000312,780 &0000000000430360.000000430,360
Mexico &0000000000741500.000000741,500 3.9% 25.7% 70.5% &0000000000028919.00000028,919 &0000000000190566.000000190,566 &0000000000522757.000000522,757
Russia &0000000000733000.000000733,000 5.3% 36.6% 58.2% &0000000000038849.00000038,849 &0000000000268278.000000268,278 &0000000000426606.000000426,606
Australia &0000000000645300.000000645,300 3.8% 26.2% 70% &0000000000024521.00000024,521 &0000000000169069.000000169,069 &0000000000451710.000000451,710
Netherlands &0000000000612700.000000612,700 2.1% 23.9% 73.9% &0000000000012867.00000012,867 &0000000000146435.000000146,435 &0000000000452785.000000452,785
Switzerland &0000000000386800.000000386,800 1.5% 34% 64.5% &0000000000005802.0000005,802 &0000000000131512.000000131,512 &0000000000249486.000000249,486
Sweden &0000000000371500.000000371,500 1.1% 28.1% 70.9% &0000000000004087.0000004,087 &0000000000104392.000000104,392 &0000000000263394.000000263,394
Belgium &0000000000367800.000000367,800 1% 24% 74.9% &0000000000003678.0000003,678 &0000000000088272.00000088,272 &0000000000275482.000000275,482
Turkey &0000000000358200.000000358,200 11.2% 29.4% 59.4% &0000000000040118.00000040,118 &0000000000105311.000000105,311 &0000000000212771.000000212,771
Taiwan &0000000000353900.000000353,900 1.5% 25.2% 73.3% &0000000000005309.0000005,309 &0000000000089183.00000089,183 &0000000000259409.000000259,409
Austria &0000000000309300.000000309,300 1.8% 30.4% 67.8% &0000000000005567.0000005,567 &0000000000094027.00000094,027 &0000000000209705.000000209,705
Saudi Arabia &0000000000286200.000000286,200 3.3% 67% 29.8% &0000000000009445.0000009,445 &0000000000191754.000000191,754 &0000000000085288.00000085,288
Poland &0000000000265400.000000265,400 4.8% 31.2% 64% &0000000000012739.00000012,739 &0000000000082805.00000082,805 &0000000000169856.000000169,856
Indonesia &0000000000264400.000000264,400 13.1% 46% 41% &0000000000034636.00000034,636 &0000000000121624.000000121,624 &0000000000108404.000000108,404
Norway &0000000000261700.000000261,700 2.3% 41.4% 56.3% &0000000000006019.0000006,019 &0000000000108344.000000108,344 &0000000000147337.000000147,337
Denmark &0000000000256300.000000256,300 1.4% 24.6% 74% &0000000000003588.0000003,588 &0000000000063050.00000063,050 &0000000000189662.000000189,662
Greece &0000000000222500.000000222,500 5.1% 20.6% 74.4% &0000000000011348.00000011,348 &0000000000045835.00000045,835 &0000000000165540.000000165,540
Argentina &0000000000210000.000000210,000 9.5% 35.8% 54.7% &0000000000019950.00000019,950 &0000000000075180.00000075,180 &0000000000114870.000000114,870
Ireland &0000000000202900.000000202,900 5% 46% 49% &0000000000010145.00000010,145 &0000000000093334.00000093,334 &0000000000099421.00000099,421
South Africa &0000000000200500.000000200,500 2.6% 30.3% 67.1% &0000000000005213.0000005,213 &0000000000060752.00000060,752 &0000000000134536.000000134,536
Ukraine &0000000000198000.000000198,000 9.3% 31.7% 58.9% &0000000000018414.00000018,414 &0000000000062766.00000062,766 &0000000000116622.000000116,622
Thailand &0000000000196600.000000196,600 10% 44.9% 45.2% &0000000000019660.00000019,660 &0000000000088273.00000088,273 &0000000000088863.00000088,863
Finland &0000000000196200.000000196,200 2.7% 30.3% 67% &0000000000005297.0000005,297 &0000000000059449.00000059,449 &0000000000131454.000000131,454
Iran &0000000000194800.000000194,800 11.2% 41.7% 47.1% &0000000000021818.00000021,818 &0000000000081232.00000081,232 &0000000000091751.00000091,751
Hong Kong &0000000000187100.000000187,100 0.1% 9% 90.9% &0000000000000187.000000187 &0000000000016839.00000016,839 &0000000000170074.000000170,074
Romania &0000000000179170.000000179,170 10.1% 34.7% 55.2% &0000000000018096.00000018,096 &0000000000062172.00000062,172 &0000000000098902.00000098,902
Portugal &0000000000176600.000000176,600 6.6% 28.6% 64.9% &0000000000011656.00000011,656 &0000000000050508.00000050,508 &0000000000114613.000000114,613
Venezuela &0000000000147900.000000147,900 3.7% 41% 55.3% &0000000000005472.0000005,472 &0000000000060639.00000060,639 &0000000000081789.00000081,789
Malaysia &0000000000131800.000000131,800 8.3% 48.1% 43.6% &0000000000010939.00000010,939 &0000000000063396.00000063,396 &0000000000057465.00000057,465
Pakistan &0000000000124000.000000124,000 22% 26% 52% &0000000000027280.00000027,280 &0000000000032240.00000032,240 &0000000000064480.00000064,480
Israel &0000000000121600.000000121,600 2.6% 30.8% 66.6% &0000000000003162.0000003,162 &0000000000037453.00000037,453 &0000000000080986.00000080,986
Singapore &0000000000121500.000000121,500 0% 33.8% 66.2% &-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1.0000000 &0000000000041067.00000041,067 &0000000000080433.00000080,433
Czech Republic &0000000000118900.000000118,900 2.8% 37.8% 59.4% &0000000000003329.0000003,329 &0000000000044944.00000044,944 &0000000000070627.00000070,627
Hungary &0000000000113100.000000113,100 3.1% 32.1% 64.8% &0000000000003506.0000003,506 &0000000000036305.00000036,305 &0000000000073289.00000073,289
United Arab Emirates &0000000000110600.000000110,600 2.3% 61.9% 35.8% &0000000000002544.0000002,544 &0000000000068461.00000068,461 &0000000000039595.00000039,595
Colombia &0000000000105500.000000105,500 12% 35.2% 52.7% &0000000000012660.00000012,660 &0000000000037136.00000037,136 &0000000000055599.00000055,599
Chile &0000000000100300.000000100,300 5.9% 49.3% 44.7% &0000000000005918.0000005,918 &0000000000049448.00000049,448 &0000000000044834.00000044,834
New Zealand &0000000000098770.00000098,770 4.3% 26.9% 68.8% &0000000000004247.0000004,247 &0000000000026569.00000026,569 &0000000000067954.00000067,954
Philippines &0000000000098480.00000098,480 14.3% 32.1% 53.7% &0000000000014083.00000014,083 &0000000000031612.00000031,612 &0000000000052884.00000052,884
Algeria &0000000000092220.00000092,220 9.4% 58.1% 32.5% &0000000000008669.0000008,669 &0000000000053580.00000053,580 &0000000000029972.00000029,972
Egypt &0000000000084510.00000084,510 14.7% 35.5% 49.8% &0000000000012423.00000012,423 &0000000000030001.00000030,001 &0000000000042086.00000042,086
Nigeria &0000000000083360.00000083,360 17.3% 53.2% 29.5% &0000000000014421.00000014,421 &0000000000044348.00000044,348 &0000000000024591.00000024,591
Peru &0000000000076090.00000076,090 8.5% 26.4% 53.1% &0000000000006468.0000006,468 &0000000000020088.00000020,088 &0000000000040404.00000040,404
Bangladesh &0000000000069020.00000069,020 19.9% 20.6% 59.5% &0000000000013735.00000013,735 &0000000000014218.00000014,218 &0000000000041067.00000041,067
Kuwait &0000000000058300.00000058,300 0.4% 48.3% 51.3% &0000000000000233.000000233 &0000000000028159.00000028,159 &0000000000029908.00000029,908
Morocco &0000000000056720.00000056,720 13.3% 31.2% 55.5% &0000000000007544.0000007,544 &0000000000017697.00000017,697 &0000000000031480.00000031,480
Kazakhstan &0000000000052600.00000052,600 6.3% 41.1% 52.7% &0000000000003314.0000003,314 &0000000000021619.00000021,619 &0000000000027720.00000027,720
Vietnam &0000000000048260.00000048,260 20.1% 41.8% 38.1% &0000000000009700.0000009,700 &0000000000020173.00000020,173 &0000000000018387.00000018,387
Slovakia &0000000000046900.00000046,900 3.8% 31.4% 64.8% &0000000000001782.0000001,782 &0000000000014727.00000014,727 &0000000000030391.00000030,391
Iraq &0000000000046500.00000046,500 7.3% 66.6% 26.1% &0000000000003395.0000003,395 &0000000000030969.00000030,969 &0000000000012137.00000012,137
Cuba &0000000000040000.00000040,000 5.1% 27.2% 67.6% &0000000000002040.0000002,040 &0000000000010880.00000010,880 &0000000000027040.00000027,040
Slovenia &0000000000037640.00000037,640 2.3% 34.7% 62.9% &0000000000000866.000000866 &0000000000013061.00000013,061 &0000000000023676.00000023,676
Croatia &0000000000037350.00000037,350 6.8% 30.9% 62.3% &0000000000002540.0000002,540 &0000000000011541.00000011,541 &0000000000023269.00000023,269
Libya &0000000000034830.00000034,830 7.3% 51.3% 41.4% &0000000000002543.0000002,543 &0000000000017868.00000017,868 &0000000000014420.00000014,420
Luxembourg &0000000000034370.00000034,370 1% 13% 86% &0000000000000344.000000344 &0000000000004468.0000004,468 &0000000000029558.00000029,558
Tunisia &0000000000032950.00000032,950 12.8% 31% 56.2% &0000000000004218.0000004,218 &0000000000010215.00000010,215 &0000000000018518.00000018,518
Ecuador &0000000000032570.00000032,570 6.3% 33.5% 60.2% &0000000000002052.0000002,052 &0000000000010911.00000010,911 &0000000000019607.00000019,607
Qatar &0000000000030760.00000030,760 0.1% 77.2% 22.6% &0000000000000031.00000031 &0000000000023747.00000023,747 &0000000000006952.0000006,952
Guatemala &0000000000028840.00000028,840 22.5% 18.8% 58.7% &0000000000006489.0000006,489 &0000000000005422.0000005,422 &0000000000016929.00000016,929
Belarus &0000000000028560.00000028,560 9.3% 31.6% 59.1% &0000000000002656.0000002,656 &0000000000009025.0000009,025 &0000000000016879.00000016,879
Angola &0000000000028370.00000028,370 9.6% 65.8% 24.6% &0000000000002724.0000002,724 &0000000000018667.00000018,667 &0000000000006979.0000006,979
Bulgaria &0000000000027850.00000027,850 8.9% 30.1% 61% &0000000000002479.0000002,479 &0000000000008383.0000008,383 &0000000000016989.00000016,989
Oman &0000000000027230.00000027,230 2.6% 38.8% 58.7% &0000000000000708.000000708 &0000000000010565.00000010,565 &0000000000015984.00000015,984
Syria &0000000000027230.00000027,230 25.5% 22.1% 52.4% &0000000000006944.0000006,944 &0000000000006018.0000006,018 &0000000000014269.00000014,269
Lithuania &0000000000025780.00000025,780 5.5% 33.3% 61.2% &0000000000001418.0000001,418 &0000000000008585.0000008,585 &0000000000015777.00000015,777
Sudan &0000000000025500.00000025,500 35.5% 24.8% 39.7% &0000000000009053.0000009,053 &0000000000006324.0000006,324 &0000000000010124.00000010,124
Sri Lanka &0000000000023520.00000023,520 17.3% 27.3% 55.3% &0000000000004069.0000004,069 &0000000000006421.0000006,421 &0000000000013007.00000013,007
Costa Rica &0000000000020770.00000020,770 8.6% 31% 60.4% &0000000000001786.0000001,786 &0000000000006439.0000006,439 &0000000000012545.00000012,545
Dominican Republic &0000000000019910.00000019,910 11.2% 30.6% 58.2% &0000000000002230.0000002,230 &0000000000006092.0000006,092 &0000000000011588.00000011,588
Lebanon &0000000000019620.00000019,620 7% 21% 72% &0000000000001373.0000001,373 &0000000000004120.0000004,120 &0000000000014126.00000014,126
Serbia &0000000000019190.00000019,190 16.6% 25.5% 57.9% &0000000000003186.0000003,186 &0000000000004893.0000004,893 &0000000000011111.00000011,111
Kenya &0000000000017390.00000017,390 16.3% 18.8% 65% &0000000000002835.0000002,835 &0000000000003269.0000003,269 &0000000000011304.00000011,304
Cote d'Ivoire &0000000000017190.00000017,190 27% 18.5% 54.5% &0000000000004641.0000004,641 &0000000000003180.0000003,180 &0000000000009369.0000009,369
Cameroon &0000000000016370.00000016,370 45.2% 16.1% 38.7% &0000000000007399.0000007,399 &0000000000002636.0000002,636 &0000000000006335.0000006,335
Republic of Cyprus &0000000000016350.00000016,350 3.7% 19.6% 76.8% &0000000000000605.000000605 &0000000000003205.0000003,205 &0000000000012557.00000012,557
Panama &0000000000016200.00000016,200 7.2% 16.4% 76.4% &0000000000001166.0000001,166 &0000000000002657.0000002,657 &0000000000012377.00000012,377
Turkmenistan &0000000000016160.00000016,160 24.4% 33.9% 41.7% &0000000000003943.0000003,943 &0000000000005478.0000005,478 &0000000000006739.0000006,739
Latvia &0000000000016130.00000016,130 3.7% 26.3% 70% &0000000000000597.000000597 &0000000000004242.0000004,242 &0000000000011291.00000011,291
Yemen &0000000000015160.00000015,160 12.5% 43.8% 43.7% &0000000000001895.0000001,895 &0000000000006640.0000006,640 &0000000000006625.0000006,625
El Salvador &0000000000015140.00000015,140 9.7% 29.6% 60.7% &0000000000001469.0000001,469 &0000000000004481.0000004,481 &0000000000009190.0000009,190
Trinidad and Tobago &0000000000014990.00000014,990 0.7% 57.7% 41.5% &0000000000000105.000000105 &0000000000008649.0000008,649 &0000000000006221.0000006,221
Uruguay &0000000000014300.00000014,300 9.3% 33.7% 57% &0000000000001330.0000001,330 &0000000000004819.0000004,819 &0000000000008151.0000008,151
Azerbaijan &0000000000014050.00000014,050 14.1% 45.7% 40.2% &0000000000001981.0000001,981 &0000000000006421.0000006,421 &0000000000005648.0000005,648
Iceland &0000000000013850.00000013,850 8.4% 15.6% 76% &0000000000001163.0000001,163 &0000000000002161.0000002,161 &0000000000010526.00000010,526
Estonia &0000000000013620.00000013,620 3.4% 28% 68.6% &0000000000000463.000000463 &0000000000003814.0000003,814 &0000000000009343.0000009,343
Tanzania &0000000000013130.00000013,130 43.3% 17.7% 39% &0000000000005685.0000005,685 &0000000000002324.0000002,324 &0000000000005121.0000005,121
Jordan &0000000000012320.00000012,320 3.6% 30.5% 65.9% &0000000000000444.000000444 &0000000000003758.0000003,758 &0000000000008119.0000008,119
Bahrain &0000000000012120.00000012,120 0.5% 38.7% 60.8% &0000000000000061.00000061 &0000000000004690.0000004,690 &0000000000007369.0000007,369
Macau &0000000000011560.00000011,560 0.1% 7.2% 92.7% &0000000000000012.00000012 &0000000000000832.000000832 &0000000000010716.00000010,716
Uzbekistan &0000000000010780.00000010,780 31.1% 25.7% 43.2% &0000000000003353.0000003,353 &0000000000002770.0000002,770 &0000000000004657.0000004,657
Bolivia &0000000000010220.00000010,220 12.8% 36.1% 51.2% &0000000000001308.0000001,308 &0000000000003689.0000003,689 &0000000000005233.0000005,233
Ghana &0000000000010180.00000010,180 37.3% 25.3% 37.5% &0000000000003797.0000003,797 &0000000000002576.0000002,576 &0000000000003818.0000003,818
Ethiopia &0000000000009789.0000009,789 49.2% 9.1% 41.7% &0000000000004816.0000004,816 &0000000000000891.000000891 &0000000000004082.0000004,082
Botswana &0000000000009697.0000009,697 2.4% 46.9% 50.7% &0000000000000233.000000233 &0000000000004548.0000004,548 &0000000000004916.0000004,916
Albania &0000000000009306.0000009,306 23.3% 18.8% 57.9% &0000000000002168.0000002,168 &0000000000001750.0000001,750 &0000000000005388.0000005,388
Bosnia and Herzegovina &0000000000009158.0000009,158 14.2% 30.8% 55% &0000000000001300.0000001,300 &0000000000002821.0000002,821 &0000000000005037.0000005,037
Jamaica &0000000000008579.0000008,579 5.3% 33.9% 60.8% &0000000000000455.000000455 &0000000000002908.0000002,908 &0000000000005216.0000005,216
Senegal &0000000000008562.0000008,562 18.3% 19.2% 62.5% &0000000000001567.0000001,567 &0000000000001644.0000001,644 &0000000000005351.0000005,351
Uganda &0000000000008502.0000008,502 29.4% 22.1% 48.5% &0000000000002500.0000002,500 &0000000000001879.0000001,879 &0000000000004123.0000004,123
Honduras &0000000000008414.0000008,414 13.6% 31.4% 55% &0000000000001144.0000001,144 &0000000000002642.0000002,642 &0000000000004628.0000004,628
Dem. Rep. of the Congo &0000000000008061.0000008,061 55% 11% 34% &0000000000004434.0000004,434 &0000000000000887.000000887 &0000000000002741.0000002,741
Myanmar &0000000000007845.0000007,845 54.7% 10.6% 34.7% &0000000000004291.0000004,291 &0000000000000832.000000832 &0000000000002722.0000002,722
Paraguay &0000000000007696.0000007,696 22.4% 18.4% 59.2% &0000000000001724.0000001,724 &0000000000001416.0000001,416 &0000000000004556.0000004,556
Equatorial Guinea &0000000000007644.0000007,644 2.8% 92.6% 4.5% &0000000000000214.000000214 &0000000000007078.0000007,078 &0000000000000344.000000344
Nepal &0000000000007154.0000007,154 38% 21% 41% &0000000000002719.0000002,719 &0000000000001502.0000001,502 &0000000000002933.0000002,933
Mauritius &0000000000007135.0000007,135 5.1% 25.2% 69.7% &0000000000000364.000000364 &0000000000001798.0000001,798 &0000000000004973.0000004,973
Afghanistan &0000000000007095.0000007,095 38% 24% 38% &0000000000002696.0000002,696 &0000000000001703.0000001,703 &0000000000002696.0000002,696
Gabon &0000000000007052.0000007,052 5.9% 59.7% 34.4% &0000000000000416.000000416 &0000000000004210.0000004,210 &0000000000002426.0000002,426
Armenia &0000000000006600.0000006,600 23.9% 32.8% 43.3% &0000000000001577.0000001,577 &0000000000002165.0000002,165 &0000000000002858.0000002,858
Mozambique &0000000000006431.0000006,431 21.1% 30.9% 48% &0000000000001357.0000001,357 &0000000000001987.0000001,987 &0000000000003087.0000003,087
The Bahamas &0000000000006159.0000006,159 3% 7% 90% &0000000000000185.000000185 &0000000000000431.000000431 &0000000000005543.0000005,543
Haiti &0000000000005947.0000005,947 28% 20% 52% &0000000000001665.0000001,665 &0000000000001189.0000001,189 &0000000000003092.0000003,092
Mali &0000000000005847.0000005,847 45% 17% 38% &0000000000002631.0000002,631 &0000000000000994.000000994 &0000000000002222.0000002,222
Burkina Faso &0000000000005821.0000005,821 32.6% 19.7% 47.7% &0000000000001898.0000001,898 &0000000000001147.0000001,147 &0000000000002777.0000002,777
Zambia &0000000000005806.0000005,806 19.9% 28.9% 51.2% &0000000000001155.0000001,155 &0000000000001678.0000001,678 &0000000000002973.0000002,973
Rep. of Macedonia &0000000000005649.0000005,649 13% 27.7% 59.3% &0000000000000734.000000734 &0000000000001565.0000001,565 &0000000000003350.0000003,350
Brunei &0000000000005486.0000005,486 3.6% 56.1% 40.3% &0000000000000197.000000197 &0000000000003078.0000003,078 &0000000000002211.0000002,211
Malta &0000000000005390.0000005,390 3% 23% 74% &0000000000000162.000000162 &0000000000001240.0000001,240 &0000000000003989.0000003,989
Namibia &0000000000005304.0000005,304 11.8% 30.2% 58.1% &0000000000000626.000000626 &0000000000001602.0000001,602 &0000000000003082.0000003,082
Georgia (country) &0000000000005272.0000005,272 17.7% 27.5% 54.8% &0000000000000933.000000933 &0000000000001450.0000001,450 &0000000000002889.0000002,889
Chad &0000000000005255.0000005,255 32.5% 26.6% 40.8% &0000000000001708.0000001,708 &0000000000001398.0000001,398 &0000000000002144.0000002,144
Cambodia &0000000000005122.0000005,122 35% 30% 35% &0000000000001793.0000001,793 &0000000000001537.0000001,537 &0000000000001793.0000001,793
Madagascar &0000000000005097.0000005,097 26.9% 16.5% 56.6% &0000000000001371.0000001,371 &0000000000000841.000000841 &0000000000002885.0000002,885
Rep. of the Congo &0000000000005093.0000005,093 6.2% 55.3% 38.5% &0000000000000316.000000316 &0000000000002816.0000002,816 &0000000000001961.0000001,961
Nicaragua &0000000000004816.0000004,816 17.3% 25.8% 56.8% &0000000000000833.000000833 &0000000000001243.0000001,243 &0000000000002735.0000002,735
Benin &0000000000004622.0000004,622 32.8% 13.7% 53.5% &0000000000001516.0000001,516 &0000000000000633.000000633 &0000000000002473.0000002,473
Papua New Guinea &0000000000004148.0000004,148 35.7% 37.1% 27.2% &0000000000001481.0000001,481 &0000000000001539.0000001,539 &0000000000001128.0000001,128
Guinea &0000000000003737.0000003,737 23.7% 36.1% 40.2% &0000000000000886.000000886 &0000000000001349.0000001,349 &0000000000001502.0000001,502
Niger &0000000000003638.0000003,638 39% 17% 44% &0000000000001419.0000001,419 &0000000000000618.000000618 &0000000000001601.0000001,601
Zimbabwe &0000000000003146.0000003,146 17.7% 22.9% 59.4% &0000000000000557.000000557 &0000000000000720.000000720 &0000000000001869.0000001,869
Laos &0000000000002768.0000002,768 43.4% 30.6% 26% &0000000000001201.0000001,201 &0000000000000847.000000847 &0000000000000720.000000720
West Bank & Gaza Strip &0000000000003450.0000003,450 8% 18.2% 73.9% &0000000000000276.000000276 &0000000000000628.000000628 &0000000000002550.0000002,550
Barbados &0000000000003157.0000003,157 6% 16% 78% &0000000000000189.000000189 &0000000000000505.000000505 &0000000000002462.0000002,462
Guernsey &0000000000002742.0000002,742 3% 10% 87% &0000000000000082.00000082 &0000000000000274.000000274 &0000000000002386.0000002,386
Moldova &0000000000002588.0000002,588 21.5% 22% 56.5% &0000000000000556.000000556 &0000000000000569.000000569 &0000000000001462.0000001,462
Liechtenstein &0000000000002487.0000002,487 6% 39% 55% &0000000000000149.000000149 &0000000000000970.000000970 &0000000000001368.0000001,368
Somalia &0000000000002483.0000002,483 65% 10% 25% &0000000000001614.0000001,614 &0000000000000248.000000248 &0000000000000621.000000621
Isle of Man &0000000000002260.0000002,260 1% 13% 86% &0000000000000023.00000023 &0000000000000294.000000294 &0000000000001944.0000001,944
Aruba &0000000000002258.0000002,258 0.4% 33.3% 66.3% &0000000000000009.0000009 &0000000000000752.000000752 &0000000000001497.0000001,497
Kyrgyzstan &0000000000002240.0000002,240 34.5% 19.5% 46.1% &0000000000000773.000000773 &0000000000000437.000000437 &0000000000001033.0000001,033
Swaziland &0000000000002212.0000002,212 11.8% 51.4% 36.8% &0000000000000261.000000261 &0000000000001137.0000001,137 &0000000000000814.000000814
Malawi &0000000000002172.0000002,172 35.4% 17.6% 47% &0000000000000769.000000769 &0000000000000382.000000382 &0000000000001021.0000001,021
Togo &0000000000002109.0000002,109 39.5% 20.4% 40.1% &0000000000000833.000000833 &0000000000000430.000000430 &0000000000000846.000000846
Tajikistan &0000000000002066.0000002,066 22.7% 28.5% 48.8% &0000000000000469.000000469 &0000000000000589.000000589 &0000000000001008.0000001,008
Fiji &0000000000002038.0000002,038 8.9% 13.5% 77.6% &0000000000000181.000000181 &0000000000000275.000000275 &0000000000001581.0000001,581
Rwanda &0000000000001968.0000001,968 39.4% 23.3% 37.3% &0000000000000775.000000775 &0000000000000459.000000459 &0000000000000734.000000734
Mauritania &0000000000001641.0000001,641 25% 29% 46% &0000000000000410.000000410 &0000000000000476.000000476 &0000000000000755.000000755
Central African Republic &0000000000001542.0000001,542 55% 20% 25% &0000000000000848.000000848 &0000000000000308.000000308 &0000000000000386.000000386
Mongolia &0000000000001540.0000001,540 20.6% 21.4% 58% &0000000000000317.000000317 &0000000000000330.000000330 &0000000000000893.000000893
Lesotho &0000000000001419.0000001,419 16.1% 43% 40.9% &0000000000000228.000000228 &0000000000000610.000000610 &0000000000000580.000000580
Suriname &0000000000001398.0000001,398 13% 22% 65% &0000000000000182.000000182 &0000000000000308.000000308 &0000000000000909.000000909
Eritrea &0000000000001244.0000001,244 9.9% 25.4% 64.6% &0000000000000123.000000123 &0000000000000316.000000316 &0000000000000804.000000804
Sierra Leone &0000000000001233.0000001,233 49% 31% 21% &0000000000000604.000000604 &0000000000000382.000000382 &0000000000000259.000000259
Belize &0000000000001141.0000001,141 22.5% 14.8% 62.6% &0000000000000257.000000257 &0000000000000169.000000169 &0000000000000714.000000714
Cape Verde &0000000000001128.0000001,128 12.1% 21.9% 66% &0000000000000136.000000136 &0000000000000247.000000247 &0000000000000744.000000744
Antigua and Barbuda &0000000000000905.000000905 3.8% 22% 74.3% &0000000000000034.00000034 &0000000000000199.000000199 &0000000000000672.000000672
Liberia &0000000000000902.900000902.9 76.9% 5.4% 17.7% &0000000000000694.000000694 &0000000000000049.00000049 &0000000000000160.000000160
Bhutan &0000000000000840.500000840.5 25.8% 37.9% 36.3% &0000000000000217.000000217 &0000000000000319.000000319 &0000000000000305.000000305
British Virgin Islands &0000000000000839.700000839.7 1.8% 6.2% 92% &0000000000000015.00000015 &0000000000000052.00000052 &0000000000000773.000000773
Guyana &0000000000000826.600000826.6 35.5% 19.3% 45.2% &0000000000000293.000000293 &0000000000000160.000000160 &0000000000000374.000000374
Saint Lucia &0000000000000825.000000825 5% 15% 80% &0000000000000041.00000041 &0000000000000124.000000124 &0000000000000660.000000660
Maldives &0000000000000817.000000817 20% 18% 62% &0000000000000163.000000163 &0000000000000147.000000147 &0000000000000507.000000507
Burundi &0000000000000778.900000778.9 44.9% 20.9% 34.1% &0000000000000350.000000350 &0000000000000163.000000163 &0000000000000266.000000266
Seychelles &0000000000000712.000000712 3.2% 30.1% 66.7% &0000000000000023.00000023 &0000000000000214.000000214 &0000000000000475.000000475
Djibouti &0000000000000702.000000702 17.9% 22.5% 59.6% &0000000000000126.000000126 &0000000000000158.000000158 &0000000000000418.000000418
The Gambia &0000000000000461.200000461.2 30.5% 13.9% 55.6% &0000000000000141.000000141 &0000000000000064.00000064 &0000000000000256.000000256
Grenada &0000000000000454.000000454 5.4% 18% 76.6% &0000000000000025.00000025 &0000000000000082.00000082 &0000000000000348.000000348
Saint Kitts and Nevis &0000000000000453.000000453 3.5% 25.8% 70.7% &0000000000000016.00000016 &0000000000000117.000000117 &0000000000000320.000000320
Snt. Vinc. & Grenadines &0000000000000428.000000428 10% 26% 64% &0000000000000043.00000043 &0000000000000111.000000111 &0000000000000274.000000274
Comoros &0000000000000402.000000402 40% 4% 56% &0000000000000161.000000161 &0000000000000016.00000016 &0000000000000225.000000225
Samoa &0000000000000399.000000399 11.4% 58.4% 30.2% &0000000000000045.00000045 &0000000000000233.000000233 &0000000000000120.000000120
East Timor &0000000000000349.000000349 8.5% 23.1% 68.4% &0000000000000030.00000030 &0000000000000081.00000081 &0000000000000239.000000239
Vanuatu &0000000000000341.000000341 26% 12% 62% &0000000000000089.00000089 &0000000000000041.00000041 &0000000000000211.000000211
Guinea-Bissau &0000000000000295.100000295.1 62% 12% 26% &0000000000000183.000000183 &0000000000000035.00000035 &0000000000000077.00000077
Solomon Islands &0000000000000286.000000286 42% 11% 47% &0000000000000120.000000120 &0000000000000031.00000031 &0000000000000134.000000134
Dominica &0000000000000279.000000279 17.7% 32.8% 49.5% &0000000000000049.00000049 &0000000000000092.00000092 &0000000000000138.000000138
Tonga &0000000000000244.000000244 23% 27% 50% &0000000000000056.00000056 &0000000000000066.00000066 &0000000000000122.000000122
Micronesia &0000000000000232.000000232 28.9% 15.2% 55.9% &0000000000000067.00000067 &0000000000000035.00000035 &0000000000000130.000000130
Cook Islands &0000000000000183.200000183.2 15.1% 9.6% 75.3% &0000000000000028.00000028 &0000000000000018.00000018 &0000000000000138.000000138
Palau &0000000000000145.000000145 6.2% 12% 81.8% &0000000000000009.0000009 &0000000000000017.00000017 &0000000000000119.000000119
Marshall Islands &0000000000000144.000000144 31.7% 14.9% 53.4% &0000000000000046.00000046 &0000000000000021.00000021 &0000000000000077.00000077
Anguilla &0000000000000108.900000108.9 4% 18% 78% &0000000000000004.0000004 &0000000000000020.00000020 &0000000000000085.00000085
Kiribati &0000000000000076.40000076.4 8.9% 24.2% 66.8% &0000000000000007.0000007 &0000000000000018.00000018 &0000000000000051.00000051
Sao Tome and Principe &0000000000000071.38000071.38 16.6% 15.3% 68.1% &0000000000000012.00000012 &0000000000000011.00000011 &0000000000000049.00000049
Tuvalu &0000000000000014.94000014.94 16.6% 27.2% 56.2% &0000000000000002.0000002 &0000000000000004.0000004 &0000000000000008.0000008
Niue &0000000000000010.01000010.01 23.5% 26.9% 49.5% &0000000000000002.0000002 &0000000000000003.0000003 &0000000000000005.0000005



[edit] Source
GDP (nominal): Field Listing GDP (official exchange rate) - CIA world factbook
GDP Sector composition: Field Listing - GDP composition by sector - CIA world factbook
[hide]v • d • eLists of countries with rankings

Geography
Agriculture Area: land use · forest · water · Border · Coastline · EEZ · Time zones · Extreme points: N · S · W · E · highest · lowest · Freshwater: withdrawal · irrigation · Agricultural output: fish · milk · fruit · banana · apple · tomato · orange · citrus · tobacco · coffee · cacao · tea · wine · sugarcane · maize · rice · wheat · triticale · rye · barley · oat · buckwheat · millet · sorghum · soybean · sunflower · potato · sugar beet

Population
Quality of life Population: density · growth · history · Urbanization · Life expectancy · Sex ratio · Fertility · Birth rate · Infant mortality · Death rate · Median age · Net migration · Immigrants · HDI: education · Undernourishment · HIV/AIDS · Literacy · English speakers · School leaving age · Student performance · IQ · Innovation · Patents · Labour force · Employment · Unemployment · Gender Gap · Income equality · Billionaires · Welfare · Poverty · Charity · Prosperity · Quality-of-life · Satisfaction with Life · Happiness · Consumption of: tea · coffee · tobacco · beer · wine · alcohol · EPI · Ecology · Bioreserves · WH Sites · Tourism: visits · competitiveness · Nation Brands

Religion
Law Religion: Buddhism · Christianity (Orthodoxy · Protestantism · Roman Catholicism) · Hinduism · Islam · Judaism · Sikhism · Irreligion · Age of: legal drinking · consent · legal marriage · 1st marriage · Divorces · Cannabis use: annual · lifetime · Cocaine · Opiates · Abortion · Euthanasia · Suicides · Homicides · Guns: ownership · deaths · Death penalty · Incarceration · Prisoners

GDP
Finance Nominal: per capita · past · future · future per capita · PPP: per capita · per hour · past · future · future per capita · GNI: nominal · PPP · Growth: real · per capita · 1990-2007 · industry · Sectors · FDI: at home · abroad · GFI · Debt: external · public · Aid · Budget · Imports · Exports: per capita · Account: % GDP · Reserves: forex · gold · SWF · Pension fund · Minimum wage · Income · Taxes: revenue · Inflation · Interest: central bank · commercial · $ exchange

Energy
Industry Energy: consumption · intensity · Electricity · Oil · Natural gas · Coal: reserves · production · Uranium: reserves · production · Nuclear power · Renewable energy: hydro · wind · Minerals: bentonite · feldspar · fluorite · mica · asbestos · salt · diamond · Chemicals: As · Sb · I · Hg · Metallurgy: iron · steel · bauxite · Al2O3 · Al · Mn · Co · Ni · Cu · Zn · Sr · Zr · Nb · Mo · Cd · Sn · W · Bi · Pd · Pt · Ag · Au · Cement · Automobiles · Ships · Emissions: CO2 · CO2 per capita · GDP per CO2

Transport
Mass media Airports · Heliports · Railways: usage · Rapid transit · Roadways: vehicles · fatalities · Waterways · Merchant marine · Pipelines · Telephone lines · TV stations · TV sets · Mobile phones · Internet: broadband · censorship · hosts · E-readiness: E-Government · Books

Politics
Military Freedom: economic · trade · press (FH) · press (RWB) · Privacy · Corruption · Bribes · Property rights · Ease of business · Competitiveness · Globalization · Democracy · Stability · Empires · Date of nationhood · Police officers · Armed forces · Active troops: per capita · Conscription · Defense budget · Aircraft carriers · Nuclear weapons · Arms exports · UN peacekeepers: contribution · Global Peace

Sports Olympics: medals · hosts · FIFA WC: men · rankings · clubs · women · women's rankings · Beach soccer · Futsal · Softball · American football · Rugby: men · rankings · women · Baseball: men · rankings · Curling: men · women · Ice hockey: men · women · rankings · Bandy · Field hockey: men · women · Cricket: Test · ODI · Polo · Water polo · Basketball: men · women · rankings · Handball: men · women · Volleyball: WC · Tennis: Davis Cup · Fed Cup · Badminton: men · women · BWF · Athletics · Wrestling · Rhythmic Gymnastics · Figure skating · Speed skating: men · women · men sprint · women sprint · Luge: natural track · Bobsleigh · Alpine skiing · Nordic skiing · Biathlon · Canoe · Equestrian · Cycling: men · women · F1: drivers · constructors · Bowling · Chess

List of billionaires (2009)

Jump to: navigation, search
This list of billionaires is based (where not otherwise noted) on an annual ranking of the world's wealthiest people compiled and published by Forbes magazine on March 11, 2009.[1] The listed net worth represents the estimated value of assets less debt as of February 13, 2009.[2] The list does not include heads of state whose wealth is tied to their position (see list of heads of government and state by net worth).

The world's 5 wealthiest people Bill Gates Warren Buffett Carlos Slim Helú Lawrence Ellison Ingvar Kamprad

Contents [hide]
1 Top billionaires
2 See also
3 References






Top billionaires
The following list is the ranking of the world's richest billionaires as of February 13, 2009, and does not reflect changes since then.


Legend
Icon Description
▬ Has not changed from the list for 2008.
▲ Has increased from the list for 2008.
▼ Has decreased from the list for 2008.

No. Name Net worth (USD) Age Citizenship Residence Sources of wealth Ref.
&0000000000000001.0000001▲ Gates, BillBill Gates $40.0 billion ▼ 53 United States United States Microsoft [3]
&0000000000000002.0000002▼ Buffett, WarrenWarren Buffett $37.0 billion ▼ 78 United States United States Berkshire Hathaway [3]
&0000000000000003.0000003▼ Helú, Carlos SlimCarlos Slim Helú $35.0 billion ▼ 69 Mexico
Lebanon Mexico Telmex, América Móvil [3]
&0000000000000004.0000004▲ Ellison, LawrenceLawrence Ellison $22.5 billion ▼ 64 United States United States Oracle Corporation [3]
&0000000000000005.0000005▲ Kamprad, IngvarIngvar Kamprad and family $22.0 billion ▼ 83 Sweden Switzerland IKEA [4]
&0000000000000006.0000006▲ Albrecht, KarlKarl Albrecht $21.5 billion ▼ 89 Germany Germany Aldi Süd [4]
&0000000000000007.0000007▼ Ambani, MukeshMukesh Ambani $19.5 billion ▼ 51 India India Reliance Industries [4]
&0000000000000008.0000008▼ Mittal, LakshmiLakshmi Mittal $19.3 billion ▼ 58 India United Kingdom Arcelor Mittal [4]
&0000000000000009.0000009▲ Albrecht, TheoTheo Albrecht $18.8 billion ▼ 87 Germany Germany Aldi Nord, Trader Joe's [5]
&0000000000000010.00000010▲ Ortega, AmancioAmancio Ortega $18.3 billion ▼ 73 Spain Spain Inditex Group [6]
&0000000000000011.00000011▲ Walton, JimJim Walton $17.8 billion ▼ 61 United States United States Wal-Mart [7]
&0000000000000012.00000012▲ Walton, AliceAlice Walton $17.6 billion ▼ 59 United States United States Wal-Mart [7]
&0000000000000012.00000012▲ Walton, ChristyChristy Walton $17.6 billion ▼ 54 United States United States Wal-Mart [7]
&0000000000000012.00000012▲ Walton, S. RobsonS. Robson Walton $17.6 billion ▼ 65 United States United States Wal-Mart [7]
&0000000000000015.00000015▼ Arnault, BernardBernard Arnault $16.5 billion ▼ 60 France France LVMH Moët Hennessy • Louis Vuitton [8]
&0000000000000016.00000016▼ Ka-shing, LiLi Ka-shing $16.2 billion ▼ 80 Hong Kong Hong Kong Cheung Kong Holdings, Hutchison Whampoa [9]
&0000000000000017.00000017▲ Bloomberg, MichaelMichael Bloomberg $16.0 billion ▲ 67 United States United States Bloomberg L.P. [6]
&0000000000000018.00000018▲ Persson, StefanStefan Persson $14.5 billion ▼ 61 Sweden Sweden Hennes & Mauritz
&0000000000000019.00000019▲ Koch, CharlesCharles Koch $14.0 billion ▼ 73 United States United States Koch Industries [10]
&0000000000000019.00000019▲ Koch, David H.David H. Koch $14.0 billion ▼ 68 United States United States Koch Industries [10]
&0000000000000021.00000021▼ Bettencourt, LilianeLiliane Bettencourt $13.4 billion ▼ 86 France France L'Oréal [3]
&0000000000000022.00000022▼ Alsaud, Prince Alwaleed Bin TalalPrince Alwaleed Bin Talal Alsaud $13.3 billion ▼ 54 Saudi Arabia
Lebanon Saudi Arabia Kingdom Holding Company, Citigroup [11]
&0000000000000023.00000023▲ Otto, MichaelMichael Otto and family $13.2 billion ▼ 65 Germany Germany Otto GmbH
&0000000000000024.00000024▲ Thomson, DavidDavid Thomson and family $13.0 billion ▼ 51 Canada Canada The Thomson Corporation [12]
&0000000000000025.00000025▲ Dell, MichaelMichael Dell $12.3 billion ▼ 44 United States United States Dell
&0000000000000026.00000026▲ Bren, DonaldDonald Bren $12.0 billion ▼ 76 United States United States Irvine Company
&0000000000000026.00000026▲ Brin, SergeySergey Brin $12.0 billion ▼ 35 United States United States Google [3]
&0000000000000026.00000026▲ Page, LarryLarry Page $12.0 billion ▼ 36 United States United States Google [3]
&0000000000000029.00000029▲ Ballmer, StevenSteven Ballmer $11.0 billion ▼ 53 United States United States Microsoft [13]
&0000000000000029.00000029▲ Westminster, The Duke ofThe Duke of Westminster and family $11.0 billion ▼ 57 United Kingdom United Kingdom Grosvenor Group [14]
&0000000000000029.00000029▲ Soros, GeorgeGeorge Soros $11.0 billion ▲ 78 United States United States Soros Fund Management
&0000000000000032.00000032▲ Allen, PaulPaul Allen $10.5 billion ▼ 56 United States United States Microsoft [11]
&0000000000000032.00000032▼ Kwok, RaymondRaymond Kwok, Thomas Kwok, and Walter Kwok $10.5 billion ▼ 57, 58, and 59 Hong Kong Hong Kong Sun Hung Kai
&0000000000000034.00000034▼ Ambani, AnilAnil Ambani $10.1 billion ▼ 49 India India Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group [4]
&0000000000000035.00000035▲ Johnson, AbigailAbigail Johnson $10.0 billion ▼ 47 United States United States Fidelity Investments
&0000000000000035.00000035▲ Klatten, SusanneSusanne Klatten $10.0 billion ▼ 46 Germany Germany BMW
&0000000000000035.00000035▲ Perelman, RonaldRonald Perelman $10.0 billion ▲ 66 United States United States Revlon
&0000000000000035.00000035▲ Rausing, HansHans Rausing $10.0 billion ▬ 83 Sweden United Kingdom Tetra Laval [14]
&0000000000000039.00000039▲ Rausing, BirgitBirgit Rausing and family $9.9 billion ▼ 85 Sweden Switzerland Tetra Laval
&0000000000000040.00000040▲ Ferrero, MicheleMichele Ferrero and family $9.5 billion ▼ 82 Italy Monaco Ferrero SpA
&0000000000000040.00000040▼ Prokhorov, MikhailMikhail Prokhorov $9.5 billion ▼ 43 Russia Russia Interros [15]
&0000000000000040.00000040▲ Taylor, Jack C.Jack C. Taylor and family $9.5 billion ▼ 86 United States United States Enterprise Rent-A-Car
&0000000000000043.00000043▲ Al Amoudi, MohammedMohammed Al Amoudi $9.0 billion ▬ 63 Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia Corral Petroleum Holdings
&0000000000000043.00000043▼ Chambers, Anne CoxAnne Cox Chambers $9.0 billion ▼ 89 United States United States Cox Enterprises
&0000000000000043.00000043▲ Icahn, CarlCarl Icahn $9.0 billion ▼ 73 United States United States American Car and Foundry Company [16]
&0000000000000043.00000043▲ Kaiser, GeorgeGeorge Kaiser $9.0 billion ▼ 66 United States United States BOK Financial Corporation
&0000000000000043.00000043▼ Kee, Lee ShauLee Shau Kee $9.0 billion ▼ 81 Hong Kong Hong Kong Henderson Land Development
&0000000000000043.00000043▲ Mars, Jr., Forrest EdwardForrest Edward Mars, Jr. $9.0 billion ▼ 77 United States United States Mars, Incorporated [16]
&0000000000000043.00000043▲ Mars, JacquelineJacqueline Mars $9.0 billion ▼ 69 United States United States Mars, Incorporated [16]
&0000000000000043.00000043▲ Mars, JohnJohn Mars $9.0 billion ▼ 72 United States United States Mars, Incorporated [16]
&0000000000000051.00000051▼ Abramovich, RomanRoman Abramovich $8.5 billion ▼ 42 Russia Russia Millhouse Capital [17]
&0000000000000052.00000052▲ Bertarelli, ErnestoErnesto Bertarelli $8.2 billion ▼ 43 Switzerland Switzerland Serono
&0000000000000052.00000052▲ Knight, PhilipPhilip Knight $8.2 billion ▼ 71 United States United States Nike
&0000000000000054.00000054▼ Al-Kharafi, NasserNasser Al-Kharafi and family $8.1 billion ▼ 65 Kuwait Kuwait M. A. Kharafi & Sons
&0000000000000055.00000055▲ Simons, JamesJames Simons $8.0 billion ▲ 70 United States United States Renaissance Technologies
&0000000000000055.00000055▲ Wertheimer, AlainAlain Wertheimer and Gerard Wertheimer $8.0 billion ▼ 60 and 59 France United States
Switzerland Chanel
&0000000000000057.00000057▲ Al Ghurair, Abdul AzizAbdul Aziz Al Ghurair & family $7.8 billion ▲ 55 United Arab Emirates United Arab Emirates Mashreq Bank
&0000000000000057.00000057▲ Alakbarov, VahidVahid Alakbarov $7.8 billion ▼ 58 Russia Russia LUKoil
&0000000000000059.00000059▲ Mittal, SunilSunil Mittal and family $7.7 billion ▼ 51 India India Bharti Airtel
&0000000000000060.00000060▼ Pinault, FrançoisFrançois Pinault and family $7.6 billion ▼ 72 France France PPR
&0000000000000061.00000061▲ Batista, EikeEike Batista $7.5 billion ▲ 51 Brazil Brazil
&0000000000000062.00000062▲ Al Jaber, Mohamed Bin IssaMohamed Bin Issa Al Jaber $7.0 billion ▲ 50 Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia
&0000000000000062.00000062▲ Al-Sanea, MaanMaan Al-Sanea $7.0 billion ▼ 54 Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia Saad Group
&0000000000000062.00000062▲ Johnson, III, EdwardEdward Johnson, III $7.0 billion ▼ 78 United States United States Fidelity Investments
&0000000000000062.00000062▲ Krishnan, AnandaAnanda Krishnan $7.0 billion ▼ 70 Malaysia Malaysia Maxis, Astro
&0000000000000062.00000062▲ Kuok, RobertRobert Kuok $7.0 billion ▼ 85 Malaysia Hong Kong Perlis Plantations Bhd
&0000000000000062.00000062▲ Safra, JosephJoseph Safra $7.0 billion ▼ 70 Brazil Brazil Safra Group
&0000000000000068.00000068▲ Bezos, JeffreyJeffrey Bezos $6.8 billion ▼ 45 United States United States Amazon.com
&0000000000000069.00000069▲ von Finck, Jr., AugustAugust von Finck, Jr. $6.7 billion ▼ 79 Germany Switzerland Allianz
&0000000000000070.00000070▲ Berlusconi, SilvioSilvio Berlusconi and family $6.5 billion ▼ 72 Italy Italy Fininvest
&0000000000000071.00000071▲ Del Vecchio, LeonardoLeonardo Del Vecchio $6.3 billion ▼ 73 Italy Italy Luxottica
&0000000000000071.00000071▲ Engelhorn, CurtCurt Engelhorn $6.3 billion ▼ 82 Germany Switzerland Roche
&0000000000000071.00000071▼ Fridman, MikhailMikhail Fridman $6.3 billion ▼ 44 Russia Russia Alfa Group
&0000000000000074.00000074▲ Al Rajhi, SulaimanSulaiman Al Rajhi $6.2 billion ▼ 89 Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia Al-Rajhi Bank
&0000000000000075.00000075▲ Goodnight, JamesJames Goodnight $6.1 billion ▼ 66 United States United States SAS Institute
&0000000000000076.00000076▲ Fontbona, IrisIris Fontbona and family $6.0 billion ▼ Chile Chile Antofagasta PLC, Quiñenco
&0000000000000076.00000076▲ Kellner, PetrPetr Kellner $6.0 billion ▼ 44 Czech Republic Czech Republic PPF Group
&0000000000000076.00000076▲ Kluge, JohnJohn Kluge $6.0 billion ▼ 94 United States United States Metromedia [6]
&0000000000000076.00000076▲ Paulson, JohnJohn Paulson $6.0 billion ▲ 53 United States United States
&0000000000000076.00000076▲ Yanai, TadashiTadashi Yanai & family $6.0 billion ▲ 60 Japan Japan Fast Retailing
&0000000000000081.00000081▲ Duncan, DanDan Duncan $5.9 billion ▼ 76 United States United States Enterprise Products
&0000000000000081.00000081▲ Matte, EliodoroEliodoro Matte & family $5.9 billion ▼ 63 Chile Chile Compañía Manufacturera de Papeles y Cartones
&0000000000000083.00000083▲ Bailleres, AlbertoAlberto Bailleres & family $5.7 billion ▼ 76 Mexico Mexico Grupo Bal
&0000000000000083.00000083▼ Premji, AzimAzim Premji $5.7 billion ▼ 63 India India Wipro Technologies
&0000000000000083.00000083▲ Wyss, HansjorgHansjorg Wyss $5.7 billion ▼ 74 Switzerland United States Synthes
&0000000000000086.00000086▼ Ruia, ShashiShashi Ruia and Ravi Ruia $5.6 billion ▼ 65 India India Essar
&0000000000000087.00000087▲ Cohen, Steven A.Steven A. Cohen $5.5 billion ▼ 53 United States United States SAC Capital Partners
&0000000000000087.00000087▲ Ng Teng Fong, Ng Teng Fong $5.5 billion ▼ 80 Singapore Singapore Sino Group
&0000000000000087.00000087▲ Soon-Shiong, PatrickPatrick Soon-Shiong $5.5 billion ▲ 57 United States United States American Pharmaceutical Partners
&0000000000000090.00000090▼ Dassault, SergeSerge Dassault and family $5.4 billion ▼ 83 France France Dassault Group
&0000000000000090.00000090▲ Haub, ErivanErivan Haub & family $5.4 billion ▼ 76 Germany Germany Tengelmann Group
&0000000000000092.00000092▲ Lemann, Jorge PauloJorge Paulo Lemann $5.3 billion ▼ 69 Brazil Brazil Investment Bank & Inbev beverages
&0000000000000093.00000093▲ Broad, EliEli Broad $5.2 billion ▼ 75 United States United States KB Home
&0000000000000093.00000093▲ Busujima, KunioKunio Busujima & family $5.2 billion ▼ 83 Japan Japan Sankyo
&0000000000000093.00000093▲ Kipp, Karl-HeinzKarl-Heinz Kipp $5.2 billion ▼ 85 Germany Switzerland Massa
&0000000000000093.00000093▼ Lisin, VladimirVladimir Lisin $5.2 billion ▼ 52 Russia Russia Novolipetsk Steel [15]
&0000000000000093.00000093▲ Wurth, ReinholdReinhold Wurth $5.2 billion ▼ 73 Germany Germany Wurth Group
&0000000000000098.00000098▲ Anschutz, PhilipPhilip Anschutz $5.0 billion ▼ 69 United States United States The Anschutz Corporation
&0000000000000098.00000098▼ Kerkorian, KirkKirk Kerkorian $5.0 billion ▼ 91 United States United States Tracinda Corporation [16]
&0000000000000098.00000098▲ Oppenheimer, NickyNicky Oppenheimer & family $5.0 billion ▼ 63 South Africa South Africa De Beers & Anglo American
&0000000000000098.00000098▲ Reuben, David and SimonDavid and Simon Reuben $5.0 billion ▼ NA United Kingdom United Kingdom real estate
&0000000000000098.00000098▼ Singh, Kushal PalKushal Pal Singh $5.0 billion ▼ 77 India India DLF Group [4]
&0000000000000098.00000098▲ Weston, GalenGalen Weston & family $5.0 billion ▼ 68 Canada Canada George Weston Limited, Associated British Foods


See also
List of heads of government and state by net worth

References
1.^ Luisa Kroll, Matthew Miller and Tatiana Serafin (2009-03-11). "The World's Billionaires". Forbes. http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/11/worlds-richest-people-billionaires-2009-billionaires_land.html. Retrieved on 2009-03-11.
2.^ "The World's Billionaires – Methodology". Forbes. 2009-03-16. http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/16/billionaires-methodology-numbers-2009-billionaires-methodology.html. Retrieved on 2009-03-18.
3.^ a b c d e f g DeBare, Ilana (2008-03-06). "47 Bay Area billionaires on Forbes list". San Francisco Chronicle. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/06/BUS1VEBPS.DTL. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
4.^ a b c d e f "Ambani brothers, L N Mittal among top 10 billionaires". The Times of India. 2008-03-06. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Anil_Ambani_Lakshmi_Mittal_among_top_10_billionaires/articleshow/2842665.cms. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
5.^ "Pair of Grocery Giants Remain Germany's Richest Businessmen". Deutsche Welle. 2008-03-06. http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,1791525,00.html. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
6.^ a b c "Forbes ranks "intriguing" heiresses". China Daily. 2007-11-20. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/lifestyle/2007-11/20/content_6267416.htm. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
7.^ a b c d "Number of Billionaires Up to Record 793". FOX News. 2006-03-10. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,187400,00.html. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
8.^ "25 most powerful people in business". Fortune. 2007-11-30. http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2007/fortune/0711/gallery.power_25.fortune/index.html. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
9.^ "Asia's booming billionaires". Agence France Press. 2008-03-06. http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gPISYBCvfomF_o23rcIEbS0__zqQ. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
10.^ a b Knapp, Adam (2008-03-06). "Koch brothers tied for 37th on Forbes list". Wichita Business Journal. http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2008/03/03/daily23.html. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
11.^ a b Boughey, Steve (2007-06-29). "Philanthropy a common theme among the filthy rich". The New Zealand Herald. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/author/story.cfm?a_id=223&objectid=10448644. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
12.^ "Buffett ousts Gates as world's richest man". CBC News. 2008-03-05. http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2008/03/05/forbes-list.html. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
13.^ Moore, Heidi (2008-03-06). "Microsoft-Yahoo: Ballmer, Gates Take $7.9 Billion Hit for the Team". The Wall Street Journal. http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2008/03/06/microsoft-yahoo-ballmer-gates-take-79-billion-hit-for-the-team/?mod=googlenews_wsj. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
14.^ a b Low, Valentine (2008-03-06). "Billionaire London is home to 36 on Forbes richest list". Evening Standard. http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23449629-details/Billionaire+London+is+home+to+36+on+Forbes+richest+list/article.do. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
15.^ a b Halpin, Tony (2007-02-13). "Abramovich must keep his crown but is relegated in oligarch league". The Times Online. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article1375282.ece. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
16.^ a b c d e Robison, Jennifer (2008-03-07). "Hard times: LV billionaires take a beating in Forbes magazine's current list". Las Vegas Review-Journal. http://www.lvrj.com/business/16377861.html. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
17.^ "Moscow: World's 'Billionaire' Capital". One India. http://living.oneindia.in/insync/2008/moscow-billionaire-capital-070308.html. Retrieved on 2008-04-04.
[hide]v • d • eLists of billionaires

By citizenship Australia · Brazil · Canada · China (PRC) · Denmark · France · Germany · Hong Kong · Iran · India · Indonesia · Japan · Korea · Malaysia · Mexico · Netherlands · Philippines · Russia · Saudi Arabia · Singapore · Sweden · Taiwan · Thailand · Turkey

By region South East Asia

By year 2004 · 2005 · 2006 (more) · 2007 (more) · 2008 · 2009

Forbes 400 2008 (more)

In history Historical figures (without inflation)

Other African-Americans · Black billionaires · Women · Heads of state · Countries by number of billionaires

Energy policy

Energy portal
See also: Nuclear energy policy
Energy policy is the manner in which a given entity (often governmental) has decided to address issues of energy development including energy production, distribution and consumption. The attributes of energy policy may include legislation, international treaties, incentives to investment, guidelines for energy conservation, taxation and other public policy techniques.

Contents
1 National energy policy
1.1 Measures used to produce an energy policy
1.2 Factors within an energy policy
2 State, province or municipal energy policy
3 United States
4 Europe
4.1 European Union
4.1.1 United Kingdom
4.2 Russia
5 Asia
5.1 Thailand
5.2 India
5.3 China
6 Oceania
6.1 Australia
7 See also
8 References
9 External links
10 Quotes


National energy policy

Measures used to produce an energy policy
A national energy policy comprises a set of measures involving that country's laws, treaties and agency directives. The energy policy of a sovereign nation may include one or more of the following measures:

statement of national policy regarding energy planning, energy generation, transmission and usage
legislation on commercial energy activities (trading, transport, storage, etc.)
legislation affecting energy use, such as efficiency standards, emission standards
instructions for state owned energy sector assets and organizations
active participation in, co-ordination of and incentives for mineral fuels exploration (see geological survey) and other energy-related research and development
fiscal policies related to energy products and services (taxes, exemptions, subsidies ...
Energy security and international policy measures such as:
international energy sector treaties and alliances,
general international trade agreements,
special relations with energy-rich countries, including military presence and/or domination.
Frequently the dominant issue of energy policy is the risk of supply-demand mismatch (see: energy crisis). Current energy policies also address environmental issues (see: climate change). Some governments state explicit energy policy, but, declared or not, each government practices some type of energy policy.


Factors within an energy policy

There are a number of elements that are naturally contained in a national energy policy, regardless of which of the above measures was used to arrive at the resultant policy. The chief elements intrinsic to an energy policy are:

What is the extent of energy self-sufficiency for this nation
Where future energy sources will derive
How future energy will be consumed (e.g. among sectors)
What fraction of the population will be acceptable to endure energy poverty
What are the goals for future energy intensity, ratio of energy consumed to GDP
What is the reliability standard for distribution reliability
What environmental externalities are acceptable and are forecast
What form of "portable energy" is forecast (e.g. sources of fuel for motor vehicles)
How will energy efficient hardware (e.g. hybrid vehicles, household appliances) be encouraged
How can the national policy drive province, state and municipal functions
What specific mechanisms (e.g. taxes, incentives, manufacturing standards) are in place to implement the total policy

State, province or municipal energy policy

Even within a state it is proper to talk about energy policies in plural. Influential entities, such as municipal or regional governments and energy industries, will each exercise policy. Policy measures available to these entities are lesser in sovereignty, but may be equally important to national measures. In fact, there are certain activities vital to energy policy which realistically cannot be administered at the national level, such as monitoring energy conservation practices in the process of building construction, which is normally controlled by state-regional and municipal building codes (although can appear basic federal legislation).

United States
Main article: Energy policy of the United States

Europe

[edit] European Union
Main article: Energy policy of the European Union
Although the European Union has legislated, set targets, and negotiated internationally in the area of energy policy for many years, and evolved out of the European Coal and Steel Community, the concept of introducing a mandatory common European Union energy policy was only approved at the meeting of the European Council on October 27, 2005 in London. Following this the first policy proposals, Energy for a Changing World, were published by the European Commission, on January 10, 2007.


United Kingdom

Main article: Energy policy of the United Kingdom
The energy policy of the United Kingdom has achieved success in (a) reducing energy intensity (but still really high), (b) reducing energy poverty and (c) maintaining energy supply reliability to date. The United Kingdom has an ambitious goal to reduce carbon dioxide emissions for future years, but it is unclear whether the programs in place are sufficient to achieve this objective (the way to be so efficient as France is still hard). Regarding energy self sufficiency, the United Kingdom policy does not address this issue, other than to concede historic energy self sufficiency is currently ceasing to exist (due to the decline of the North Sea oil production). With regard to transport, the United Kingdom historically has a good policy record encouraging public transport links with cities, despite encountering problems with high speed trains, which have the potential to reduce dramatically domestic and short-haul European flights. The policy does not, however, significantly encourage hybrid vehicle use or ethanol fuel use, options which represent viable short term means to moderate rising transport fuel consumption. Regarding renewable energy, the United Kingdom has goals for wind and tidal energy. The White Paper on Energy, 2007, set the target that 20% of the UK's energy must come from renewable sources by 2020.


Russia

Main article: Energy policy of Russia
Russia, one of the world's energy superpowers, is rich in natural energy resources, the world’s leading net energy exporter, and a major supplier to the European Union. The main document defining the energy policy of Russia is the Energy Strategy, which sets out policy for the period up to 2020. Russia has also signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol.


Asia

Thailand
Main article: Energy Industry Liberalization and Privatization (Thailand)
The energy policy of Thailand is characterized by 1) increasing energy consumption efficiency, 2) increasing domestic energy production, 3) increasing the private sector's role in the energy sector, 4) increasing the role of market mechanisms in setting energy prices. These policies have been consistent since the 1990s, despite various changes in governments. The pace and form of industry liberalization and privatization has been highly controversial.


India
Main article: Energy policy of India
The energy policy of India is characterized by trades between four major drivers:

Rapidly growing economy, with a need for dependable and reliable supply of electricity, gas, and petroleum products;
Increasing household incomes, with a need for affordable and adequate supply of electricity, and clean cooking fuels;
Limited domestic reserves of fossil fuels, and the need to import a vast fraction of the gas, crude oil, and petroleum product requirements, and recently the need to import coal as well; and
Indoor, urban and regional environmental impacts, necessitating the need for the adoption of cleaner fuels and cleaner technologies.
In recent years, these challenges have led to a major set of continuing reforms, restructuring and a focus on energy conservation.

See also: Jatropha incentives in India and United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act


China

Main article: Energy policy of China

Oceania

Australia
Main article: Energy policy of Australia
Australia's energy policy features a combination of coal power stations, and hydro electricity plants. The Australian Government has decided not to build nuclear power, although it is one of the world's largest producers of uranium..



Quotes
"Communism is the rule of soviets plus the electrification of the whole country." Vladimir Ilich Lenin

"Our decision about energy will test the character of the American people and the ability of the President and the Congress to govern this Nation. This difficult effort will be the “moral equivalent of war,” except that we will be uniting our efforts to build and not to destroy". President of the United States Jimmy Carter, address to the nation on the energy problem, April 18, 1977.

"What we have now is a global economy that needs oil to grow. What we need are options to achieve that growth while, at the same time lessening, our dependence on fossil fuels and increasing our use of cleaner, more secure sources of energy. In short, we need to diversify. Doing so will not be cheap and will not be easy. But it is, most certainly, necessary. In fact, everything depends on it. So let’s get to it." U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, speech at Harvard Business School Global Leadership Forum, June 22, 2006.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_policy"
Categories: Industry | Energy development | Energy policy | Energy economicsViews
Article Discussion Edit this page History Personal tools
Log in / create account Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article

World economy

For the company, see World Market.
This article may need to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information, and remove this template when finished. Please see the talk page for more information.
It has been suggested that The Global Economy be merged into this article or section. (Discuss)
Economy of the World
During 2003 unless otherwise stated Population (November 24, 2008): 6,739,067,924 ([1])
GDP (PPP): US$70.65 trillion (2008 est.) ([2])
GDP (Currency): $54.62 trillion (2008 est.)
GDP/capita (PPP): $9,774
GDP/capita (Currency): $7,178
Annual growth of
per capita GDP (PPP): 5.1% (tty*), 2.1% (1950-2003)
People Paid Below $2 per day: 3.25 billion (~50%)
Millionaires (US$): ~9 million i.e. ~0.15% (2006)
Billionaires (US$): 1125 (2008)
Unemployment: 30% combined unemployment and underemployment in many non-industrialized countries. Developed countries typically 4-12% unemployment.
*Trailing-ten-years. Most numbers are from the UNDP from 2002, some numbers exclude certain countries for lack of information.
See also: Economy of the world - Economy of Africa - Economy of Asia - Economy of Europe - Economy of North America - Economy of Oceania - Economy of South America
edit

The world economy can be evaluated in various ways, depending on the model used, and this valuation can then be represented in various ways (for example, in 2006 US dollars). It is inseparable from the geography and ecology of Earth, and is therefore somewhat of a misnomer, since, while definitions and representations of the "world economy" vary widely, they must at a minimum exclude any consideration of resources or value based outside of the Earth. For example, while attempts could be made to calculate the value of currently unexploited mining opportunities in unclaimed territory in Antarctica, the same opportunities on Mars would not be considered a part of the world economy – even if currently exploited in some way – and could be considered of latent value only in the same way as uncreated intellectual property, such as a previously unconceived invention.

Beyond the minimum standard of concerning value in production, use, and exchange on the planet Earth, definitions, representations, models, and valuations of the world economy vary widely.

It is common to limit questions of the world economy exclusively to human economic activity, and the world economy is typically judged in monetary terms, even in cases in which there is no efficient market to help valuate certain goods or services, or in cases in which a lack of independent research or government cooperation makes establishing figures difficult. Typical examples are illegal drugs and other black market goods, which by any standard are a part of the world economy, but for which there is by definition no legal market of any kind.

However, even in cases in which there is a clear and efficient market to establish a monetary value, economists do not typically use the current or official exchange rate to translate the monetary units of this market into a single unit for the world economy, since exchange rates typically do not closely reflect worldwide value, for example in cases where the volume or price of transactions is closely regulated by the government. Rather, market valuations in a local currency are typically translated to a single monetary unit using the idea of purchasing power. This is the method used below, which is used for estimating worldwide economic activity in terms of real US dollars. However, the world economy can be evaluated and expressed in many more ways. It is unclear, for example, how many of the world's 6.6 billion people have most of their economic activity reflected in these valuations.

Contents [hide]
1 Economy – overview
1.1 2007–2008
2 Statistical indicators
2.1 Economy
2.2 Employment
2.3 Industries
2.4 Energy
2.5 Cross-border
2.6 Gift economy
2.7 Communications
2.8 Transport
2.9 Military
3 References
4 See also
5 External links


Economy – overview

2007–2008

Current account balance 2006[1]Global output (gross world product) (GWP) rose by 3.2% in 2008, led by China (9%, equal to 21% of global growth), the US (1.1%, or 12% of growth), the European Union (0.9%, for a 10.5% share of growth) and India (7.3%, equal to 5.6% of the total rise). The 12 largest economies (the US, Japan, China, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Russia, Spain, Brazil, Canada and India) contributed just over half of all economic growth in 2008.[2]

Growth results in the wealthy, or “advanced” economies, slowed by two-thirds, from 2.7% in 2007 to just 0.9% in 2008. Emerging Asia slowed from 9.8% to 6.8%; Emerging Europe from 5.4% to 2.9%; the Commonwealth of Independent States from 8.6% to 5.5%; the (non-OECD) Western Hemisphere from 5.7% to 4.2%; the Middle East from 6.3% to 5.9%; and Africa from 6.2% to 5.2%. [3]

Externally, the nation-state, as a bedrock economic-political institution, is steadily losing control over international flows of people, goods, funds, and technology. Central governments are losing decision making powers and enhancing their international collective power thanks to strong economic bodies of which they democratically chose to become part, notably the EU. The introduction of the euro as the common currency of much of Western Europe in January 1999, while paving the way for an integrated economic powerhouse, poses economic risks because of varying levels of income and cultural and political differences among the participating nations.

Internally, the central government often finds its control over resources slipping as separatist regional movements - typically based on ethnicity - gain momentum, e.g., in many of the successor states of the former Soviet Union, in the former Yugoslavia, in India, in Iraq, in Indonesia, and in Canada.

Statistical indicators

Economy
GDP (GWP) (gross world product): (purchasing power parity exchange rates) - $59.38 trillion (2005 est.), $51.48 trillion (2004), $49 trillion (2002)

GDP (GWP) (gross world product):’’’[4] (market exchange rates) - $60.69 trillion (2008)

GDP - real growth rate: 3.2% (2008), 3.1% p.a. (2000-07), 2.4% p.a. (1990-99), 3.1% p.a. (1980-89)

GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $9,300 (2005 est.), $8,200 (92) (2003), $7,900 (2002)

GDP - composition by sector: agriculture: 4% industry: 32% services: 64% (2004 est.)

Inflation rate (consumer prices): developed countries 1% to 4% typically; developing countries 5% to 60% typically; national inflation rates vary widely in individual cases, from declining prices in Japan to hyperinflation in several Third World countries (2003)

Derivatives outstanding notional amount: $273 trillion (end of June 2004), $84 trillion (end-June 1998) ([3])

Global debt issuance: $5.187 trillion (2004), $4.938 trillion (2003), $3.938 trillion (2002) (Thomson Financial League Tables)

Global equity issuance: $505 billion (2004), $388 billion (2003), $319 billion (2002) (Thomson Financial League Tables)

Employment

Unemployment rate: 30% combined unemployment and underemployment in many non-industrialized countries; developed countries typically 4%-12% unemployment[citation needed]

Industries

Industrial production growth rate: 3% (2002 est.)

Energy
Yearly electricity - production: 15,850,000 GWh (2003 est.), 14,850,000 GWh (2001 est.)

Yearly electricity - consumption: 14,280,000 GWh (2003 est.), 13,930,000 GWh (2001 est.)

Oil - production: 79.65 million bbl/day (2003 est.), 75.46 million barrel/day (12,000,000 m³/d) (2001)

Oil - consumption: 80.1 million bbl/day (2003 est.), 76.21 million barrel/day (12,120,000 m³/d) (2001)

Oil - proved reserves: 1.025 trillion barrel (163 km³) (2001 est.)

Natural gas - production: 2,569 km³ (2001 est.)

Natural gas - consumption: 2,556 km³ (2001 est.)

Natural gas - proved reserves: 161,200 km³ (1 January 2002)


Cross-border

Yearly exports: $6.6 trillion (f.o.b., 2002 est.)

Exports - commodities: the whole range of industrial and agricultural goods and services

Exports - partners: US 17.4%, Germany 7.6%, UK 5.4%, France 5.1%, Japan 4.8%, China 4% (2002)

Yearly imports: $6.6 trillion (f.o.b., 2002 est.)

Imports - commodities: the whole range of industrial and agricultural goods and services

Imports - partners: US 11.2%, Germany 9.2%, China 7%, Japan 6.8%, France 4.7%, UK 4% (2002)

Debt - external: $2 trillion for less developed countries (2002 est.)


Gift economy

Yearly economic aid - recipient: Official Development Assistance (ODA) $50 billion...


Communications

Telephones - main lines in use: 843,923,500 (2007)
4,263,367,600 (2008)

Telephones - mobile cellular: 3,300,000,000 (Nov. 2007)[5]

Internet Service Providers (ISPs): 10,350 (2000 est.)

Internet users: 1,311,050,595 (January 18, 2008 [4] est.), 1,091,730,861 (December 30, 2006 [5] est.), 604,111,719 (2002 est.)


Transport

Transportation infrastructure worldwide includes:

Airports
Total: 49,973 (2004)
Roadways (in kilometers)
Total: 32,345,165 km
Paved: 19,403,061 km
Unpaved: 12,942,104 km (2002)
Railways
Total: 1,122,650 km includes about 190,000 to 195,000 km of electrified routes of which 147,760 km are in Europe, 24,509 km in the Far East, 11,050 km in Africa, 4,223 km in South America, and 4,160 km in North America.

Military
Military expenditures - dollar figure: aggregate real expenditure on arms worldwide in 1999 remained at approximately the 1998 level, about $750 billion, about 1/2

FOREX - the foreign exchange market or currency market or Forex is the market where one currency is traded for another. It is one of the largest markets in the world.
Some of the participants in this market are simply seeking to exchange a foreign currency for their own, like multinational corporations which must pay wages and other expenses in different nations than they sell products in. However, a large part of the market is made up of currency traders, who speculate on movements in exchange rates, much like others would speculate on movements of stock prices. Currency traders try to take advantage of even small fluctuations in exchange rates.
In the foreign exchange market there is little or no 'inside information'. Exchange rate fluctuations are usually caused by actual monetary flows as well as anticipations on global macroeconomic conditions. Significant news is released publicly so, at least in theory, everyone in the world receives the same news at the same time.
Currencies are traded against one another. Each pair of currencies thus constitutes an individual product and is traditionally noted XXX/YYY, where YYY is the ISO 4217 international three-letter code of the currency into which the price of one unit of XXX currency is expressed. For instance, EUR/USD is the price of the euro expressed in US dollars, as in 1 euro = 1.2045 dollar.
Unlike stocks and futures exchange, foreign exchange is indeed an interbank, over-the-counter (OTC) market which means there is no single universal exchange for specific currency pair. The foreign exchange market operates 24 hours per day throughout the week between individuals with forex brokers, brokers with banks, and banks with banks. If the European session is ended the Asian session or US session will start, so all world currencies can be continually in trade. Traders can react to news when it breaks, rather than waiting for the market to open, as is the case with most other markets.
Average daily international foreign exchange trading volume was $1.9 trillion in April 2004 according to the BIS study.
Like any market there is a bid/offer spread (difference between buying price and selling price). On major currency crosses, the difference between the price at which a market maker will sell ("ask", or "offer") to a wholesale customer and the price at which the same market-maker will buy ("bid") from the same wholesale customer is minimal, usually only 1 or 2 pips. In the EUR/USD price of 1.4238 a pip would be the '8' at the end. So the bid/ask quote of EUR/USD might be 1.4238/1.4239.
This, of course, does not apply to retail customers. Most individual currency speculators will trade using a broker which will typically have a spread marked up to say 3-20 pips (so in our example 1.4237/1.4239 or 1.423/1.425). The broker will give their clients often huge amounts of margin, thereby facilitating clients spending more money on the bid/ask spread. The brokers are not regulated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (since they do not sell securities), so they are not bound by the same margin limits as stock brokerages. They do not typically charge margin interest, however since currency trades must be settled in 2 days, they will "resettle" open positions (again collecting the bid/ask spread).
Individual currency speculators can work during the day and trade in the evenings, taking advantage of the market's 24 hours long trading day

Economics is the social science that studies the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services. The term economics comes from the Ancient Greek οἰκονομία (oikonomia, "management of a household, administration") from οἶκος (oikos, "house") + νόμος (nomos, "custom" or "law"), hence "rules of the house(hold)".[1] Current economic models developed out of the broader field of political economy in the late 19th century, owing to a desire to use an empirical approach more akin to the physical sciences.[2] A definition that captures much of modern economics is that of Lionel Robbins in a 1932 essay: "the science which studies human behaviour as a relationship between ends and scarce means which have alternative uses."[3] Scarcity means that available resources are insufficient to satisfy all wants and needs. Absent scarcity and alternative uses of available resources, there is no economic problem. The subject thus defined involves the study of choices as they are affected by incentives and resources.

Economics aims to explain how economies work and how economic agents interact. Economic analysis is applied throughout society, in business, finance and government, but also in crime,[4] education,[5] the family, health, law, politics, religion,[6] social institutions, war,[7] and science.[8] The expanding domain of economics in the social sciences has been described as economic imperialism.[9][10] Common distinctions are drawn between various dimensions of economics: between positive economics (describing "what is") and normative economics (advocating "what ought to be") or between economic theory and applied economics or between mainstream economics (more "orthodox" dealing with the "rationality-individualism-equilibrium nexus") and heterodox economics (more "radical" dealing with the "institutions-history-social structure nexus"[11]). However the primary textbook distinction is between microeconomics ("small" economics), which examines the economic behavior of agents (including individuals and firms) and macroeconomics ("big" economics), addressing issues of unemployment, inflation, monetary and fiscal policy for an entire economy.

Economics


Economies by region Africa · North America
South America · Asia
Europe · Oceania


Outline
General classifications
Microeconomics · Macroeconomics
History of economic thought
Methodology · Heterodox approaches

Techniques
Mathematical · Econometrics
Experimental · National accounting

Fields and subfields
Behavioral · Cultural · Evolutionary
Growth · Development · History
International · Economic systems
Monetary and Financial economics
Public and Welfare economics
Health · Labour · Managerial
Business · Information · Game theory
Industrial organization · Law
Agricultural · Natural resource
Environmental · Ecological
Urban · Rural · Regional

Lists
Journals · Publications
Categories · Topics · Economists


Economic ideologies [show]Anarchism · Capitalism
Communism · Corporatism
Fascism · Georgism
Islamic · Laissez-faire
Market socialism · Mercantilism
Protectionism · Socialism
Syndicalism · Third Way


Other economies [show]Anglo-Saxon · Feudalism
International · Hunter-gatherer
Newly industrialized country
Palace · Plantation
Post-capitalism · Post-industrial
Social market · Socialist market
Token · Traditional
Information · Transition

Business and Economics Portal
This box: view • talk • edit
Contents [hide]
1 History of economic thought
1.1 Classical political economy
1.2 Marxism
1.3 Neoclassical economics
1.4 Keynesian economics
1.5 Chicago School of economics
1.6 Other schools and approaches
2 Microeconomics
2.1 Markets
2.2 Specialization
2.3 Supply and demand
2.4 Market failure
2.5 Firms
2.6 Public sector
3 Macroeconomics
3.1 Growth
3.2 Depression and unemployment
3.3 Inflation and monetary policy
3.4 Fiscal policy and regulation
4 International economics
5 Economics in practice
5.1 Theory
5.2 Empirical investigation
5.3 Game theory
5.4 Profession
6 Economics and other subjects
7 Criticisms of economics
7.1 Criticism of assumptions
8 See also
9 Notes
10 References
11 External links



History of economic thought

The upper part of the stele of Hammurabi's code of lawsMain articles: History of economic thought and Schools of economics
The city states of Sumer developed a trade and market economy based originally on the commodity money of the Shekel which was a certain weight measure of barley, while the Babylonians and their city state neighbors later developed the earliest system of economics using a metric of various commodities, that was fixed in a legal code.[12] The early law codes from Sumer could be considered the first (written) economic formula, and had many attributes still in use in the current price system today... such as codified amounts of money for business deals (interest rates), fines in money for 'wrong doing', inheritance rules, laws concerning how private property is to be taxed or divided, etc.[13][14] For a summary of the laws, see Babylonian law and Ancient economic thought.

Economic thought dates from earlier Mesopotamian, Greek, Roman, Indian, Chinese, Persian and Arab civilizations. Notable writers include Aristotle, Chanakya (also known as Kautilya), Qin Shi Huang, Thomas Aquinas and Ibn Khaldun through to the 14th century. Joseph Schumpeter initially considered the late scholastics of the 14th to 17th centuries as "coming nearer than any other group to being the 'founders' of scientific economics" as to monetary, interest, and value theory within a natural-law perspective.[15] After discovering Ibn Khaldun's Muqaddimah, however, Schumpeter later viewed Ibn Khaldun as being the closest forerunner of modern economics,[16] as many of his economic theories were not known in Europe until relatively modern times.[17] Nonetheless, recent research indicates that the Indian scholar-philosopher Chanakya (c. 340-293 BCE) predates Ibn Khaldun by a millennium and a half as the forerunner of modern economics,[18][19][20][21] and has written more expansively on this subject, particularly on political economy. His magnus opus, the Arthashastra (The Science of Wealth and Welfare),[22] is the genesis of economic concepts that include the opportunity cost, the demand-supply framework, diminishing returns, marginal analysis, public goods, the distinction between the short run and the long run, asymmetric information and the producer surplus.[23] In his capacity as an advisor to the throne of the Maurya Empire of ancient India, he has also advised on the sources and prerequisites of economic growth, obstacles to it and on tax incentives to encourage economic growth.[24]


1638 painting of a French seaport during the heyday of mercantilismTwo other groups, later called 'mercantilists' and 'physiocrats', more directly influenced the subsequent development of the subject. Both groups were associated with the rise of economic nationalism and modern capitalism in Europe. Mercantilism was an economic doctrine that flourished from the 16th to 18th century in a prolific pamphlet literature, whether of merchants or statesmen. It held that a nation's wealth depended on its accumulation of gold and silver. Nations without access to mines could obtain gold and silver from trade only by selling goods abroad and restricting imports other than of gold and silver. The doctrine called for importing cheap raw materials to be used in manufacturing goods, which could be exported, and for state regulation to impose protective tariffs on foreign manufactured goods and prohibit manufacturing in the colonies.[25][26]

Physiocrats, a group of 18th century French thinkers and writers, developed the idea of the economy as a circular flow of income and output. Adam Smith described their system "with all its imperfections" as "perhaps the purest approximation to the truth that has yet been published" on the subject. Physiocrats believed that only agricultural production generated a clear surplus over cost, so that agriculture was the basis of all wealth. Thus, they opposed the mercantilist policy of promoting manufacturing and trade at the expense of agriculture, including import tariffs. Physiocrats advocated replacing administratively costly tax collections with a single tax on income of land owners. Variations on such a land tax were taken up by subsequent economists (including Henry George a century later) as a relatively non-distortionary source of tax revenue. In reaction against copious mercantilist trade regulations, the physiocrats advocated a policy of laissez-faire, which called for minimal government intervention in the economy.[27][28]


Classical political economy
Main article: Classical economics
Publication of Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations in 1776, has been described as "the effective birth of economics as a separate discipline."[29] The book identified land, labor, and capital as the three factors of production and the major contributors to a nation's wealth.


Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of NationsIn Smith's view, the ideal economy is a self-regulating market system that automatically satisfies the economic needs of the populace. He described the market mechanism as an "invisible hand" that leads all individuals, in pursuit of their own self-interests, to produce the greatest benefit for society as a whole. Smith incorporated some of the Physiocrats' ideas, including laissez-faire, into his own economic theories, but rejected the idea that only agriculture was productive.

In his famous invisible-hand analogy, Smith argued for the seemingly paradoxical notion that competitive markets tended to advance broader social interests, although driven by narrower self-interest. The general approach that Smith helped initiate was called political economy and later classical economics. It included such notables as Thomas Malthus, David Ricardo, and John Stuart Mill writing from about 1770 to 1870.[30]

While Adam Smith emphasized the production of income, David Ricardo focused on the distribution of income among landowners, workers, and capitalists. Ricardo saw an inherent conflict between landowners on the one hand and labor and capital on the other. He posited that the growth of population and capital, pressing against a fixed supply of land, pushes up rents and holds down wages and profits.


Malthus cautioned law makers on the effects of poverty reduction policiesThomas Robert Malthus used the idea of diminishing returns to explain low living standards. Population, he argued, tended to increase geometrically, outstripping the production of food, which increased arithmetically. The force of a rapidly growing population against a limited amount of land meant diminishing returns to labor. The result, he claimed, was chronically low wages, which prevented the standard of living for most of the population from rising above the subsistence level.

Malthus also questioned the automatic tendency of a market economy to produce full employment. He blamed unemployment upon the economy's tendency to limit its spending by saving too much, a theme that lay forgotten until John Maynard Keynes revived it in the 1930s.

Coming at the end of the Classical tradition, John Stuart Mill parted company with the earlier classical economists on the inevitability of the distribution of income produced by the market system. Mill pointed to a distinct difference between the market's two roles: allocation of resources and distribution of income. The market might be efficient in allocating resources but not in distributing income, he wrote, making it necessary for society to intervene.

Value theory was important in classical theory. Smith wrote that the "real price of every thing ... is the toil and trouble of acquiring it" as influenced by its scarcity. Smith maintained that, with rent and profit, other costs besides wages also enter the price of a commodity.[31] Other classical economists presented variations on Smith, termed the 'labour theory of value'. Classical economics focused on the tendency of markets to move to long-run equilibrium.


Marxism
Main article: Marxian economics

The Marxist school of economic thought comes from the work of German economist Karl Marx.Marxist (later, Marxian) economics descends from classical economics. It derives from the work of Karl Marx. The first volume of Marx's major work, Das Kapital, was published in German in 1867. In it, Marx focused on the labour theory of value and what he considered to be the exploitation of labour by capital.[32][33] The labour theory of value held that the value of a thing was determined by the labor that went into its production. This contrasts with the modern understanding that the value of a thing is determined by what one is willing to give up to obtain the thing.


Neoclassical economics
Main article: Neoclassical economics
A body of theory later termed 'neoclassical economics' or 'marginalism' formed from about 1870 to 1910. The term 'economics' was popularized by such neoclassical economists as Alfred Marshall as a concise synonym for 'economic science' and a substitute for the earlier, broader term 'political economy'.[34][35] This corresponded to the influence on the subject of mathematical methods used in the natural sciences.[2] Neoclassical economics systematized supply and demand as joint determinants of price and quantity in market equilibrium, affecting both the allocation of output and the distribution of income. It dispensed with the labour theory of value inherited from classical economics in favor of a marginal utility theory of value on the demand side and a more general theory of costs on the supply side.[36]

In microeconomics, neoclassical economics represents incentives and costs as playing a pervasive role in shaping decision making. An immediate example of this is the consumer theory of individual demand, which isolates how prices (as costs) and income affect quantity demanded. In macroeconomics it is reflected in an early and lasting neoclassical synthesis with Keynesian macroeconomics.[37][38]

Neoclassical economics is occasionally referred as orthodox economics whether by its critics or sympathizers. Modern mainstream economics builds on neoclassical economics but with many refinements that either supplement or generalize earlier analysis, such as econometrics, game theory, analysis of market failure and imperfect competition, and the neoclassical model of economic growth for analyzing long-run variables affecting national income.


Keynesian economics
Main articles: Keynesian economics and Post-Keynesian economics

John Maynard Keynes (above, right), widely considered a towering figure in economics.Keynesian economics derives from John Maynard Keynes, in particular his book The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money (1936), which ushered in contemporary macroeconomics as a distinct field.[39][40] The book focused on determinants of national income in the short run when prices are relatively inflexible. Keynes attempted to explain in broad theoretical detail why high labour-market unemployment might not be self-correcting due to low "effective demand" and why even price flexibility and monetary policy might be unavailing. Such terms as "revolutionary" have been applied to the book in its impact on economic analysis.[41][42][43]

Keynesian economics has two successors. Post-Keynesian economics also concentrates on macroeconomic rigidities and adjustment processes. Research on micro foundations for their models is represented as based on real-life practices rather than simple optimizing models. It is generally associated with the University of Cambridge and the work of Joan Robinson.[44] New-Keynesian economics is also associated with developments in the Keynesian fashion. Within this group researchers tend to share with other economists the emphasis on models employing micro foundations and optimizing behavior but with a narrower focus on standard Keynesian themes such as price and wage rigidity. These are usually made to be endogenous features of the models, rather than simply assumed as in older Keynesian-style ones.


Chicago School of economics
Main article: Chicago school (economics)
The Chicago School of economics is best known for its free market advocacy and monetarist ideas. According to Milton Friedman and monetarists, market economies are inherently stable if left to themselves and depressions result only from government intervention.[45] Friedman, for example, argued that the Great Depression was result of a contraction of the money supply, controlled by the Federal Reserve, and not by the lack of investment as Keynes had argued. Ben Bernanke, current Chairman of the Federal Reserve, is among the economists today generally accepting Friedman's analysis of the causes of the Great Depression.[46] Milton Friedman effectively took many of the basic principles set forth by Adam Smith and the classical economists and modernized them, in a way. One example of this is his article in the September 1970 issue of The New York Times Magazine, where he claims that the social responsibility of business is “to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits…(through) open and free competition without deception or fraud.” This is tantamount to Smith’s argument that self interest in turn benefits the whole of society.[47]


Other schools and approaches
Main article: Schools of economics
Other well-known schools or trends of thought referring to a particular style of economics practiced at and disseminated from well-defined groups of academicians that have become known worldwide, include the Austrian School, the Freiburg School, the School of Lausanne and the Stockholm school. Contemporary mainstream economics is sometimes separated into the MIT, or Saltwater, approach, and the Chicago, or Freshwater, approach.

Within macroeconomics there is, in general order of their appearance in the literature; classical economics, Keynesian economics, the neoclassical synthesis, post-Keynesian economics, monetarism, new classical economics, and supply-side economics. Alternative developments include ecological economics, institutional economics, evolutionary economics, dependency theory, structuralist economics, world systems theory, thermoeconomics, econophysics and technocracy.


Microeconomics
Main article: Microeconomics
Microeconomics looks at interactions through individual markets, given scarcity and government regulation. A given market might be for a product, say fresh corn, or the services of a factor of production, say bricklaying. The theory considers aggregates of quantity demanded by buyers and quantity supplied by sellers at each possible price per unit. It weaves these together to describe how the market may reach equilibrium as to price and quantity or respond to market changes over time. This is broadly termed supply and demand analysis. Market structures, such as perfect competition and monopoly, are examined as to implications for behavior and economic efficiency. Analysis of change in a single market often proceeds from the simplifying assumption that behavioral relations in other markets remain unchanged, that is, partial-equilibrium analysis. General-equilibrium theory allows for changes in different markets and aggregates across all markets, including their movements and interactions toward equilibrium.[48][49]


Markets
Main articles: Production-possibility frontier, Opportunity cost, and Production theory basics
In microeconomics, production is the conversion of inputs into outputs. It is an economic process that uses resources to create a commodity that is suitable for exchange. This can include manufacturing, warehousing, shipping, and packaging. Some economists define production broadly as all economic activity other than consumption. They see every commercial activity other than the final purchase as some form of production. Production is a process, and as such it occurs through time and space. Because it is a flow concept, production is measured as a "rate of output per period of time". There are three aspects to production processes, including the quantity of the commodity produced, the form of the good created and the temporal and spatial distribution of the commodity produced. Opportunity cost expresses the idea that for every choice, the true economic cost is the next best opportunity. Choices must be made between desirable yet mutually exclusive actions. It has been described as expressing "the basic relationship between scarcity and choice.".[50] The notion of opportunity cost plays a crucial part in ensuring that scarce resources are used efficiently.[51] Thus, opportunity costs are not restricted to monetary or financial costs: the real cost of output forgone, lost time, pleasure or any other benefit that provides utility should also be considered.

The inputs or resources used in the production process are called factors of production. Possible inputs are typically grouped into six categories. These factors are raw materials, machinery, labour services, capital goods, land, and enterprise. In the short-run, as opposed to the long-run, at least one of these factors of production is fixed. Examples include major pieces of equipment, suitable factory space, and key personnel. A variable factor of production is one whose usage rate can be changed easily. Examples include electrical power consumption, transportation services, and most raw material inputs. In the "long-run", all of these factors of production can be adjusted by management. In the short run, a firm's "scale of operations" determines the maximum number of outputs that can be produced, but in the long run, there are no scale limitations. Long-run and short-run changes play an important part in economic models.

Economic efficiency describes how well a system generates the maximum desired output a with a given set of inputs and available technology. Efficiency is improved if more output is generated without changing inputs, or in other words, the amount of "friction" or "waste" is reduced. Economists look for Pareto efficiency, which is reached when a change cannot make someone better off without making someone else worse off. Economic efficiency is used to refer to a number of related concepts. A system can be called economically efficient if: No one can be made better off without making someone else worse off, more output cannot be obtained without increasing the amount of inputs, and production ensures the lowest possible per unit cost. These definitions of efficiency are not exactly equivalent. However, they are all encompassed by the idea that nothing more can be achieved given the resources available.


Specialization
Main articles: Division of labour, Comparative advantage, and Gains from trade
Specialization is considered key to economic efficiency because different individuals or countries have different comparative advantages. While one country may have an absolute advantage in every area over other countries, it could nonetheless specialize in the area which it has a relative comparative advantage, and thereby gain from trading with countries which have no absolute advantages. For example, a country may specialize in the production of high-tech knowledge products, as developed countries do, and trade with developing nations for goods produced in factories, where labor is cheap and plentiful. According to theory, in this way more total products and utility can be achieved than if countries produced their own high-tech and low-tech products. The theory of comparative advantage is largely the basis for the typical economist's belief in the benefits of free trade. This concept applies to individuals, farms, manufacturers, service providers, and economies. Among each of these production systems, there may be a corresponding division of labour with each worker having a distinct occupation or doing a specialized task as part of the production effort, or correspondingly different types of capital equipment and differentiated land uses.[52][53][54]

Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations (1776) discusses the benefits of the division of labour. Smith noted that an individual should invest a resource, for example, land or labour, so as to earn the highest possible return on it. Consequently, all uses of the resource should yield an equal rate of return (adjusted for the relative riskiness of each enterprise). Otherwise reallocation would result. This idea, wrote George Stigler, is the central proposition of economic theory, and is today called the marginal productivity theory of income distribution. French economist Turgot had made the same point in 1766.[55]

In more general terms, it is theorized that market incentives, including prices of outputs and productive inputs, select the allocation of factors of production by comparative advantage, that is, so that (relatively) low-cost inputs are employed to keep down the opportunity cost of a given type of output. In the process, aggregate output increases as a by product or by design.[56] Such specialization of production creates opportunities for gains from trade whereby resource owners benefit from trade in the sale of one type of output for other, more highly-valued goods. A measure of gains from trade is the increased output (formally, the sum of increased consumer surplus and producer profits) from specialization in production and resulting trade.[57][58][59]


Supply and demand
Main article: Supply and demand

The supply and demand model describes how prices vary as a result of a balance between product availability and demand. The graph depicts an increase (that is, right-shift) in demand from D1 to D2 along with the consequent increase in price and quantity required to reach a new equilibrium point on the supply curve (S).The theory of demand and supply is an organizing principle to explain prices and quantities of goods sold and changes thereof in a market economy. In microeconomic theory, it refers to price and output determination in a perfectly competitive market. This has served as a building block for modeling other market structures and for other theoretical approaches.

For a given market of a commodity, demand shows the quantity that all prospective buyers would be prepared to purchase at each unit price of the good. Demand is often represented using a table or a graph relating price and quantity demanded (see boxed figure). Demand theory describes individual consumers as rationally choosing the most preferred quantity of each good, given income, prices, tastes, etc. A term for this is 'constrained utility maximization' (with income as the constraint on demand). Here, utility refers to the (hypothesized) preference relation for individual consumers. Utility and income are then used to model hypothesized properties about the effect of a price change on the quantity demanded. The law of demand states that, in general, price and quantity demanded in a given market are inversely related. In other words, the higher the price of a product, the less of it people would be able and willing to buy of it (other things unchanged). As the price of a commodity rises, overall purchasing power decreases (the income effect) and consumers move toward relatively less expensive goods (the substitution effect). Other factors can also affect demand; for example an increase in income will shift the demand curve outward relative to the origin, as in the figure.

Supply is the relation between the price of a good and the quantity available for sale from suppliers (such as producers) at that price. Supply is often represented using a table or graph relating price and quantity supplied. Producers are hypothesized to be profit-maximizers, meaning that they attempt to produce the amount of goods that will bring them the highest profit. Supply is typically represented as a directly proportional relation between price and quantity supplied (other things unchanged). In other words, the higher the price at which the good can be sold, the more of it producers will supply. The higher price makes it profitable to increase production. At a price below equilibrium, there is a shortage of quantity supplied compared to quantity demanded. This pulls the price up. At a price above equilibrium, there is a surplus of quantity supplied compared to quantity demanded. This pushes the price down. The model of supply and demand predicts that for given supply and demand curves, price and quantity will stabilize at the price that makes quantity supplied equal to quantity demanded. This is at the intersection of the two curves in the graph above, market equilibrium.

For a given quantity of a good, the price point on the demand curve indicates the value, or marginal utility[60] to consumers for that unit of output. It measures what the consumer would be prepared to pay for the corresponding unit of the good. The price point on the supply curve measures marginal cost, the increase in total cost to the supplier for the corresponding unit of the good. The price in equilibrium is determined by supply and demand. In a perfectly competitive market, supply and demand equate cost and value at equilibrium.[61]

Demand and supply can also be used to model the distribution of income to the factors of production, including labour and capital, through factor markets. In a labour market for example, the quantity of labour employed and the price of labour (the wage rate) are modeled as set by the demand for labour (from business firms etc. for production) and supply of labour (from workers).

Demand and supply are used to explain the behavior of perfectly competitive markets, but their usefulness as a standard of performance extends to any type of market. Demand and supply can also be generalized to explain variables applying to the whole economy, for example, quantity of total output and the general price level, studied in macroeconomics.


Diminishing marginal utility, given quantificationIn supply-and-demand analysis, the price of a good coordinates production and consumption quantities. Price and quantity have been described as the most directly observable characteristics of a good produced for the market.[62] Supply, demand, and market equilibrium are theoretical constructs linking price and quantity. But tracing the effects of factors predicted to change supply and demand—and through them, price and quantity—is a standard exercise in applied microeconomics and macroeconomics. Economic theory can specify under what circumstances price serves as an efficient communication device to regulate quantity.[63] A real-world application might attempt to measure how much variables that increase supply or demand change price and quantity.

Marginalism is the use of marginal concepts within economics. Marginal concepts are associated with a specific change in the quantity used of a good or of a service, as opposed to some notion of the over-all significance of that class of good or service, or of some total quantity thereof. The central concept of marginalism proper is that of marginal utility, but marginalists following the lead of Alfred Marshall were further heavily dependent upon the concept of marginal physical productivity in their explanation of cost; and the neoclassical tradition that emerged from British marginalism generally abandoned the concept of utility and gave marginal rates of substitution a more fundamental rôle in analysis.


Market failure
Main articles: Market failure, Government failure, Information economics, Environmental economics, and Agricultural economics

Pollution can be a simple example of market failure. If costs of production are not borne by producers but are by the environment, accident victims or others, then prices are distorted.The term "market failure" encompasses several problems which may undermine standard economic assumptions. Although economists categorise market failures differently,[64] the following categories emerge in the main texts.[65]

Natural monopoly, or the overlapping concepts of "practical" and "technical" monopoly, involves a failure of competition as a restraint on producers. The problem is described as one where the more of a product is made, the greater the returns are. This means it only makes economic sense to have one producer.

Information asymmetries arise where one party has more or better information than the other. The existence of information asymmetry gives rise to problems such as moral hazard, and adverse selection, studied in contract theory. The economics of information has relevance in many fields, including finance, insurance, contract law, and decision-making under risk and uncertainty.[66]

Incomplete markets is a term used for a situation where buyers and sellers do not know enough about each other's positions to price goods and services properly. Based on George Akerlof's Market for Lemons article, the paradigm example is of a dodgy second hand car market. Customers without the possibility to know for certain whether they are buying a "lemon" will push the average price down below what a good quality second hand car would be. In this way, prices may not reflect true values.

Public goods are goods which are undersupplied in a typical market. The defining features are that people can consume public goods without having to pay for them and that more than one person can consume the good at the same time.

Externalities occur where there are significant social costs or benefits from production or consumption that are not reflected in market prices. For example, air pollution may generate a negative externality, and education may generate a positive externality (less crime, etc.). Governments often tax and otherwise restrict the sale of goods that have negative externalities and subsidize or otherwise promote the purchase of goods that have positive externalities in an effort to correct the price distortions caused by these externalities.[67] Elementary demand-and-supply theory predicts equilibrium but not the speed of adjustment for changes of equilibrium due to a shift in demand or supply.[68] In many areas, some form of price stickiness is postulated to account for quantities, rather than prices, adjusting in the short run to changes on the demand side or the supply side. This includes standard analysis of the business cycle in macroeconomics. Analysis often revolves around causes of such price stickiness and their implications for reaching a hypothesized long-run equilibrium. Examples of such price stickiness in particular markets include wage rates in labour markets and posted prices in markets deviating from perfect competition.

Macroeconomic instability, addressed below, is a prime source of market failure, whereby a general loss of business confidence or external shock can grind production and distribution to a halt, undermining ordinary markets that are otherwise sound.


Environmental Scientist sampling waterSome specialised fields of economics deal in market failure more than others. The economics of the public sector is one example, since where markets fail, some kind of regulatory or government programme is the remedy. Much environmental economics concerns externalities or "public bads". Policy options include regulations that reflect cost-benefit analysis or market solutions that change incentives, such as emission fees or redefinition of property rights.[69][70] Environmental economics is related to ecological economics but there are differences.[71]

Sustainable development portal

Firms
Main articles: Theory of the firm, Industrial organization, Labour economics, Financial economics, Business economics, and Managerial economics

In Virtual Markets, buyer and seller are not present and trade via intermediates and electronic information. Pictured: São Paulo Stock Exchange.One of the assumptions of perfectly competitive markets is that there are many producers, none of whom can influence prices or act independently of market forces. In reality, however, people do not simply trade on markets, they work and produce through firms. The most obvious kinds of firms are corporations, partnerships and trusts. According to Ronald Coase people begin to organise their production in firms when the costs of doing business becomes lower than doing it on the market.[72] Firms combine labour and capital, and can achieve far greater economies of scale (when producing two or more things is cheaper than one thing) than individual market trading.

Labour economics seeks to understand the functioning of the market and dynamics for labour. Labour markets function through the interaction of workers and employers. Labour economics looks at the suppliers of labour services (workers), the demanders of labour services (employers), and attempts to understand the resulting patterns of wages and other labour income and of employment and unemployment, Practical uses include assisting the formulation of full employment of policies.[73]

Industrial organization studies the strategic behavior of firms, the structure of markets and their interactions. The common market structures studied include perfect competition, monopolistic competition, various forms of oligopoly, and monopoly.[74]

Financial economics, often simply referred to as finance, is concerned with the allocation of financial resources in an uncertain (or risky) environment. Thus, its focus is on the operation of financial markets, the pricing of financial instruments, and the financial structure of companies.[75]

Managerial economics applies microeconomic analysis to specific decisions in business firms or other management units. It draws heavily from quantitative methods such as operations research and programming and from statistical methods such as regression analysis in the absence of certainty and perfect knowledge. A unifying theme is the attempt to optimize business decisions, including unit-cost minimization and profit maximization, given the firm's objectives and constraints imposed by technology and market conditions.[76][77]


Public sector
Main articles: Economics of the public sector and Public finance
See also: Welfare economics
Public finance is the field of economics that deals with budgeting the revenues and expenditures of a public sector entity, usually government. The subject addresses such matters as tax incidence (who really pays a particular tax), cost-benefit analysis of government programs, effects on economic efficiency and income distribution of different kinds of spending and taxes, and fiscal politics. The latter, an aspect of public choice theory, models public-sector behavior analogously to microeconomics, involving interactions of self-interested voters, politicians, and bureaucrats.[78]

Much of economics is positive, seeking to describe and predict economic phenomena. Normative economics seeks to identify what is economically good and bad.

Welfare economics is a normative branch of economics that uses microeconomic techniques to simultaneously determine the allocative efficiency within an economy and the income distribution associated with it. It attempts to measure social welfare by examining the economic activities of the individuals that comprise society.[79]


Macroeconomics

A depiction of the circular flow of incomeMain article: Macroeconomics
Macroeconomics examines the economy as a whole to explain broad aggregates and their interactions "top down," that is, using a simplified form of general-equilibrium theory.[80] Such aggregates include national income and output, the unemployment rate, and price inflation and subaggregates like total consumption and investment spending and their components. It also studies effects of monetary policy and fiscal policy. Since at least the 1960s, macroeconomics has been characterized by further integration as to micro-based modeling of sectors, including rationality of players, efficient use of market information, and imperfect competition.[81] This has addressed a long-standing concern about inconsistent developments of the same subject.[82] Macroeconomic analysis also considers factors affecting the long-term level and growth of national income. Such factors include capital accumulation, technological change and labor force growth.[83][84]


Growth

World map showing GDP real growth rates for 2008Main articles: Economic growth and General equilibrium
Growth economics studies factors that explain economic growth – the increase in output per capita of a country over a long period of time. The same factors are used to explain differences in the level of output per capita between countries. Much-studied factors include the rate of investment, population growth, and technological change. These are represented in theoretical and empirical forms (as in the neoclassical growth model) and in growth accounting.[85][86]


Depression and unemployment
See also: Circular flow of income, Aggregate supply, Aggregate demand, Great Depression, and Unemployment
The economics of a depression were the spur for the creation of "macroeconomics" as a separate discipline field of study. During the Great Depression of the 1930s, John Maynard Keynes produced a book entitled The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. In it he argued that markets were not self correcting and that if the economy was in a crisis of confidence and downward spiral, it was necessary for government to use spending to stimulate the economy (and the animal spirits of the people to regain confidence) back to good health. It would pay the money back later. Otherwise a general deficit of effective demand would lead to a very long slump. A crisis in confidence could send stock markets plummeting, meaning companies go out of business, meaning more redundancies and fewer people with jobs, meaning people have less money to spend, meaning businesses have fewer customers, meaning more companies go out of business, and so on. The circular flow of income needed an external boost by the state.


Inflation and monetary policy
Main articles: Inflation and Monetary policy
See also: Money, Quantity theory of money, Monetary policy, History of money, and Milton Friedman

A 640 BCE one-third stater electrum coin from Lydia, shown larger. One of the first standardized coins.Money is a means of final payment for goods in most price system economies and the unit of account in which prices are typically stated. It includes currency held by the nonbank public and checkable deposits. It has been described as a social convention, like language, useful to one largely because it is useful to others. As a medium of exchange, money facilitates trade. Its economic function can be contrasted with barter (non-monetary exchange). Given a diverse array of produced goods and specialized producers, barter may entail a hard-to-locate double coincidence of wants as to what is exchanged, say apples and a book. Money can reduce the transaction cost of exchange because of its ready acceptability. Then it is less costly for the seller to accept money in exchange, rather than what the buyer produces.[87]

At the level of an economy, theory and evidence are consistent with a positive relationship running from the total money supply to the nominal value of total output and to the general price level. For this reason, management of the money supply is a key aspect of monetary policy.[88][89]


Fiscal policy and regulation
Main articles: Fiscal policy, Government spending, Regulation, and National accounts
National accounting is a method for summarizing aggregate economic activity of a nation. The national accounts are double-entry accounting systems that provide detailed underlying measures of such information. These include the national income and product accounts (NIPA), which provide estimates for the money value of output and income per year or quarter. NIPA allows for tracking the performance of an economy and its components through business cycles or over longer periods. Price data may permit distinguishing nominal from real amounts, that is, correcting money totals for price changes over time.[90][91] The national accounts also include measurement of the capital stock, wealth of a nation, and international capital flows.[92]


International economics
Main articles: International economics and Economic system
International trade studies determinants of goods-and-services flows across international boundaries. It also concerns the size and distribution of gains from trade. Policy applications include estimating the effects of changing tariff rates and trade quotas. International finance is a macroeconomic field which examines the flow of capital across international borders, and the effects of these movements on exchange rates. Increased trade in goods, services and capital between countries is a major effect of contemporary globalization.[93][94][95]


World map showing GDP (PPP) per capita.The distinct field of development economics examines economic aspects of the development process in relatively low-income countries focussing on structural change, poverty, and economic growth. Approaches in development economics frequently incorporate social and political factors.[96][97]

Economic systems is the branch of economics that studies the methods and institutions by which societies determine the ownership, direction, and allocaton of economic resources. An economic system of a society is the unit of analysis. Among contemporary systems at different ends of the organizational spectrum are socialist systems and capitalist systems, in which most production occurs in respectively state-run and private enterprises. In between are mixed economies. A common element is the interaction of economic and political influences, broadly described as political economy. Comparative economic systems studies the relative performance and behavior of different economies or systems.[98][99]


Economics in practice
Main articles: Mathematical economics, Economic methodology, and Schools of economics
Contemporary mainstream economics, as a formal mathematical modeling field, could also be called mathematical economics.[100] It draws on the tools of calculus, linear algebra, statistics, game theory, and computer science.[101] Professional economists are expected to be familiar with these tools, although all economists specialize, and some specialize in econometrics and mathematical methods while others specialize in less quantitative areas. Heterodox economists place less emphasis upon mathematics, and several important historical economists, including Adam Smith and Joseph Schumpeter, have not been mathematicians. Economic reasoning involves intuition regarding economic concepts, and economists attempt to analyze to the point of discovering unintended consequences.


Theory
Mainstream economic theory relies upon a priori quantitative economic models, which employ a variety of concepts. Theory typically proceeds with an assumption of ceteris paribus, which means holding constant explanatory variables other than the one under consideration. When creating theories, the objective is to find ones which are at least as simple in information requirements, more precise in predictions, and more fruitful in generating additional research than prior theories.[102]

In microeconomics, principal concepts include supply and demand, marginalism, rational choice theory, opportunity cost, budget constraints, utility, and the theory of the firm.[103][104] Early macroeconomic models focused on modeling the relationships between aggregate variables, but as the relationships appeared to change over time macroeconomists were pressured to base their models in microfoundations. The aforementioned microeconomic concepts play a major part in macroeconomic models – for instance, in monetary theory, the quantity theory of money predicts that increases in the money supply increase inflation, and inflation is assumed to be influenced by rational expectations. In development economics, slower growth in developed nations has been sometimes predicted because of the declining marginal returns of investment and capital, and this has been observed in the Four Asian Tigers. Sometimes an economic hypothesis is only qualitative, not quantitative.[105]

Expositions of economic reasoning often use two-dimensional graphs to illustrate theoretical relationships. At a higher level of generality, Paul Samuelson's treatise Foundations of Economic Analysis (1947) used mathematical methods to represent the theory, particularly as to maximizing behavioral relations of agents reaching equilibrium. The book focused on examining the class of statements called operationally meaningful theorems in economics, which are theorems that can conceivably be refuted by empirical data.[106]


Empirical investigation
Main article: Econometrics
Economic theories are sometimes tested empirically, largely through the use of econometrics using economic data.[107] The controlled experiments common to the physical sciences are difficult and uncommon in economics, and instead broad data is observationally studied; this type of testing is typically regarded as less rigorous than controlled experimentation, and the conclusions typically more tentative. Statistical methods such as regression analysis are common. Practitioners use such methods to estimate the size, economic significance, and statistical significance ("signal strength") of the hypothesized relation(s) and to adjust for noise from other variables. By such means, a hypothesis may gain acceptance, although in a probabilistic, rather than certain, sense. Acceptance is dependent upon the falsifiable hypothesis surviving tests. Use of commonly accepted methods need not produce a final conclusion or even a consensus on a particular question, given different tests, data sets, and prior beliefs.

Criticism based on professional standards and non-replicability of results serve as further checks against bias, errors, and over-generalization,[108][104] although much economic research has been accused of being non-replicable, and prestigious journals have been accused of not facilitating replication through the provision of the code and data.[109] Like theories, uses of test statistics are themselves open to critical analysis,[110][111][112] although critical commentary on papers in economics in prestigious journals such as the American Economic Review has declined precipitously in the past 40 years.[113] This has been attributed to journals' incentives to maximize citations in order to rank higher on the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI).[114]

In applied economics, input-output models employing linear programming methods are quite common. Large amounts of data are run through computer programs to analyze the impact of certain policies; IMPLAN is one well-known example.

Experimental economics has promoted the use of scientifically controlled experiments. This has reduced long-noted distinction of economics from natural sciences allowed direct tests of what were previously taken as axioms.[115][116] In some cases these have found that the axioms are not entirely correct; for example, the ultimatum game has revealed that people reject unequal offers. In behavioral economics, psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky have won Nobel Prizes in economics for their empirical discovery of several cognitive biases and heuristics. Similar empirical testing occurs in neuroeconomics. Another example is the assumption of narrowly selfish preferences versus a model that tests for selfish, altruistic, and cooperative preferences.[117][118] These techniques have led some to argue that economics is a "genuine science.".[9]


Game theory
Main article: Game theory
Game theory is a branch of applied mathematics that studies strategic interactions between agents. In strategic games, agents choose strategies that will maximize their payoff, given the strategies the other agents choose. It provides a formal modeling approach to social situations in which decision makers interact with other agents. Game theory generalizes maximization approaches developed to analyze markets such as the supply and demand model. The field dates from the 1944 classic Theory of Games and Economic Behavior by John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern. It has found significant applications in many areas outside economics as usually construed, including formulation of nuclear strategies, ethics, political science, and evolutionary theory.[119]


Profession
Main article: Economist
The professionalization of economics, reflected in the growth of graduate programs on the subject, has been described as "the main change in economics since around 1900".[120] Most major universities and many colleges have a major, school, or department in which academic degrees are awarded in the subject, whether in the liberal arts, business, or for professional study. The Bank of Sweden Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel (colloquially, the Nobel Prize in Economics) is a prize awarded to economists each year for outstanding intellectual contributions in the field. In the private sector, professional economists are employed as consultants and in industry, including banking and finance. Economists also work for various government departments and agencies, for example, the national Treasury, Central Bank or Bureau of Statistics.


Economics and other subjects
Main articles: Law and Economics, Philosophy of economics, Natural resource economics, and Thermoeconomics
Economics is one social science among several and has fields bordering on other areas, including economic geography, economic history, public choice, energy economics, cultural economics, and institutional economics.

Law and economics, or economic analysis of law, is an approach to legal theory that applies methods of economics to law. It includes the use of economic concepts to explain the effects of legal rules, to assess which legal rules are economically efficient, and to predict what the legal rules will be.[121][122] A seminal article by Ronald Coase published in 1961 suggested that well-defined property rights could overcome the problems of externalities.[123]

The relationship between economics and ethics is complex. Many economists consider normative choices and value judgments, like what needs or wants, or what is good for society, to be political or personal questions outside the scope of economics. Once a person or government has established a set of goals, however, economics can provide insight as to how they might best be achieved.

Others see the influence of economic ideas, such as those underlying modern capitalism, to promote a certain system of values with which they may or may not agree. (See, for example, consumerism and Buy Nothing Day.) According to some thinkers, a theory of economics is also, or implies also, a theory of moral reasoning.[124]

The premise of ethical consumerism is that one should take into account ethical and environmental concerns, in addition to financial and traditional economic considerations, when making buying decisions.

On the other hand, the rational allocation of limited resources toward public welfare and safety is also an area of economics. Some have pointed out that not studying the best ways to allocate resources toward goals like health and safety, the environment, justice, or disaster assistance is a sort of willful ignorance that results in less public welfare or even increased suffering.[125] In this sense, it would be unethical not to assess the economics of such issues. In fact, state agencies all over the world, including the federal agencies in the United States, routinely conduct economic analysis studies toward that end.

Energy economics relating to thermoeconomics, is a broad scientific subject area which includes topics related to supply and use of energy in societies. Thermoeconomists argue that economic systems always involve matter, energy, entropy, and information.[126] Thermoeconomics is based on the proposition that the role of energy in biological evolution should be defined and understood through the second law of thermodynamics but in terms of such economic criteria as productivity, efficiency, and especially the costs and benefits of the various mechanisms for capturing and utilizing available energy to build biomass and do work.[127][128] As a result, thermoeconomics are often discussed in the field of ecological economics, which itself is related to the fields of sustainability and sustainable development.

Georgescu-Roegen reintroduced into economics, the concept of entropy from thermodynamics (as distinguished from the mechanistic foundation of neoclassical economics drawn from Newtonian physics) and did foundational work which later developed into evolutionary economics. His work contributed significantly to bioeconomics and to ecological economics.[129][130][131][132][133]

Exergy analysis is performed in the field of industrial ecology to use energy more efficiently.[134] The term exergy, was coined by Zoran Rant in 1956, but the concept was developed by J. Willard Gibbs. In recent decades, utilization of exergy has spread outside of physics and engineering to the fields of industrial ecology, ecological economics, systems ecology, and energetics.


Criticisms of economics
The dismal science is a derogatory alternative name for economics devised by the Victorian historian Thomas Carlyle in the 19th century. It is often stated that Carlyle gave economics the nickname "dismal science" as a response to the late 18th century writings of The Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus, who grimly predicted that starvation would result, as projected population growth exceeded the rate of increase in the food supply. The teachings of Malthus eventually became known under the umbrella phrase "Malthus' Dismal Theorem". His predictions were forestalled by unanticipated dramatic improvements in the efficiency of food production in the 20th century; yet the bleak end he proposed remains as a disputed future possibility, assuming human innovation fails to keep up with population growth.[135]

Some economists, like John Stuart Mill or Leon Walras, have maintained that the production of wealth should not be tied to its distribution. The former is in the field of "applied economics" while the latter belongs to "social economics" and is largely a matter of power and politics.[136]

In The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith addressed many issues that are currently also the subject of debate and dispute. Smith repeatedly attacks groups of politically aligned individuals who attempt to use their collective influence to manipulate a government into doing their bidding. In Smiths day, these were referred to as factions, but are now more commonly called special interests, a term which can comprise international bankers, corporate conglomerations, outright oligopolies, monopolies, trade unions and other groups.[137]

Economics per se, as a social science, does not stand on the political acts of any government or other decision-making organization, however, many policymakers or individuals holding highly ranked positions that can influence other people's lives are known for arbitrarily use a plethora of economic theory concepts and rhetoric as vehicles to legitimize agendas and value systems, and do not limit their remarks to matters relevant to their responsibilities.[138] The close relation of economic theory and practice with politics[139] is a focus of contention that may shade or distort the most unpretentious original tenets of economics, and is often confused with specific social agendas and value systems.[140]

In Steady State Economics 1977, Herman Daly points out the logical inconsistencies between the emphasis placed on economic growth and the energy and environmental realities confronting us.[141] Like Frederick Soddy, Daly argued that our preoccupation with monetary flows at the expense of thermodynamics principles misleads us into believing that technological advance is limitless, and that perpetual economic growth is not only physically possible, but morally and ethically desirable as well. In Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt, (George Allen & Unwin 1926), Frederick Soddy turned his attention to the role of energy in economic systems. He criticized the focus on monetary flows in economics, arguing that "real" wealth was derived from the use of energy to transform materials into physical goods and services. Soddy's economic writings were largely ignored in his time, but would later be applied to the development of biophysical economics and ecological economics and also bioeconomics in the late 20th century.[142]

Issues like central bank independence, central bank policies and rhetoric in central bank governors discourse or the premises of macroeconomic policies[143] (monetary and fiscal policy) of the States, are focus of contention and criticism.[144][145][146][147]

Deirdre McCloskey has argued that many empirical economic studies are poorly reported, and while her critique has been well-received, she and Stephen Ziliak argue that practice has not improved.[148] This latter contention is controversial.[149]


Criticism of assumptions
Economics has been subject to criticism that it relies on unrealistic, unverifiable, or highly simplified assumptions, in some cases because these assumptions lend themselves to elegant mathematics. Examples include perfect information, profit maximization and rational choices.[150] [151][152] Some contemporary economic theory has focused on addressing these problems through the emerging subdisciplines of information economics, behavioral economics, and complexity economics, with Geoffrey Hodgson forecasting a major shift in the mainstream approach to economics.[153] Nevertheless, prominent mainstream economists such as Keynes[154] and Joskow, along with heterodox economists, have observed that much of economics is conceptual rather than quantitative, and difficult to model and formalize quantitatively. In a discussion on oligopoly research, Paul Joskow pointed out in 1975 that in practice, serious students of actual economies tended to use "informal models" based upon qualitative factors specific to particular industries. Joskow had a strong feeling that the important work in oligopoly was done through informal observations while formal models were "trotted out ex post". He argued that formal models were largely not important in the empirical work, either, and that the fundamental factor behind the theory of the firm, behavior, was neglected.[155]

Despite these concerns, mainstream graduate programs have become increasingly technical and mathematical.[156] Although much of the most groundbreaking economic research in history involved concepts rather than math, today it is nearly impossible to publish a non-mathematical paper in top economic journals.[157] Disillusionment on the part of some students with the abstract and technical focus of economics led to the post-autistic economics movement, which began in France in 2000.

David Colander, an advocate of complexity economics, has also commented critically on the mathematical methods of economics, which he associates with the MIT approach to economics, as opposed to the Chicago approach (although he also states that the Chicago school can no longer be called intuitive). He believes that the policy recommendations following from Chicago's intuitive approach had something to do with the decline of intuitive economics. He notes that he has encountered colleagues who have outright refused to discuss interesting economics without a formal model, and he believes that the models can sometimes restrict intuition.[158] More recently, however, he has written that heterodox economics, which generally takes a more intuitive approach, needs to ally with mathematicians and become more mathematical.[100] "Mainstream economics is a formal modeling field", he writes, and what is needed is not less math but higher levels of math. He notes that some of the topics highlighted by heterodox economists, such as the importance of institutions or uncertainty, are now being studied in the mainstream through mathematical models without mention of the work done by the heterodox economists. New institutional economics, for example, examines institutions mathematically without much relation to the largely heterodox field of institutional economics.

In his 1974 Nobel Prize lecture, Friedrich Hayek, known for his close association to the heterodox school of Austrian economics, attributed policy failures in economic advising to an uncritical and unscientific propensity to imitate mathematical procedures used in the physical sciences. He argued that even much-studied economic phenomena, such as labor-market unemployment, are inherently more complex than their counterparts in the physical sciences where such methods were earlier formed. Similarly, theory and data are often very imprecise and lend themselves only to the direction of a change needed, not its size.[159] In part because of criticism, economics has undergone a thorough cumulative formalization and elaboration of concepts and methods since the 1940s, some of which have been toward application of the hypothetico-deductive method to explain real-world phenomena.[160]