Russia's Economy Is Catching the U.S.'s, but It Has a Long Way to Go

Monday, February 15, 2016
russian economy
Thinkstock/serji074

Russia is catching up with the U.S. in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, according to a recent article in The Regional Economist. However, it still has a long way to go.

Research Officer and Economist Guillaume Vandenbroucke examined a few statistics to see where Russia’s economy stands relative to the U.S.’s economy.

GDP Per Capita

Vandenbroucke looked at three periods regarding real GDP per capita: 1989 to 1998, 1998 to about 2008 and 2008 to the present. For the first period, Russia’s economy declined considerably, with GDP per capita in 1998 at 56 percent of its 1989 value. For comparison’s sake, U.S. and world GDP per capita rose 17 percent and 10 percent, respectively, over the same period.

In the second period, Russia’s GDP per capita rose to eventually overtake its 1989 level, growing to 7 percent above this mark in 2007. By comparison, U.S. GDP per capita in 2007 was 39 percent above its 1989 level.

In the third period, growth in Russia’s GDP has slowed considerably. However, as Vandenbroucke wrote: “It is too early to assess whether this pause is going to last a long or short time.”

Productivity

Vandenbroucke discussed a study by economists Revold Entov and Oleg Lugovoy that decomposed GDP growth into three factors: capital, labor and productivity.1 This study showed that Russia’s negative growth during the 1989-98 period resulted equally from lower productivity, employment growth and capital utilization. However, Russia’s growth rate was stronger than the U.S.’s over the next 10 years. Referencing the study, Vandenbroucke wrote: “Productivity growth was the main reason, accounting for 59 percent of the GDP growth. The contributions of capital and labor were smaller, 28 and 13 percent, respectively.”

Population

Vandenbroucke noted that an increase in GDP per capita doesn’t necessarily mean an increase in the well-being of the population. To explore Russia’s well-being, he examined the evolution of its population since 1998 and compared it with Venezuela.2 (Venezuela was chosen because these two countries had similar levels of GDP per capita relative to the U.S. for most of the period.)

He found that Russia was adversely affected by factors other than GDP per capita that resulted in a 3 percent decline of its population between 1998 and 2014. Venezuela’s population grew 30 percent during the same period.

Conclusion

Vandenbroucke concluded that Russia has a long way to go to catch up with the U.S. in terms of GDP per capita, but the gap is closing, thanks to productivity growth. He wrote: “But a deeper problem faces Russia: Why is its population shrinking? Will this phenomenon last, or will population rise again?”

Notes and References

1 Entov, Revold M.; and Lugovoy, Oleg V. “Growth Trends in Russia after 1998,” Chap. 6 in Michael V. Alexeev and Shlomo Weber, eds., The Oxford Handbook of the Russian Economy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2013.

2 Vandenbroucke noted that population is not a direct measure of well-being. He wrote: “The assumption behind the analysis is rather that the two are positively correlated: When a population’s well-being increases, life expectancy may increase as well (because of improvements in health, for example). In addition people are more willing to enter the country and less willing to leave it. All these factors contribute to increasing the country’s population.”

Additional Resources

Posted In Output  |  Tagged guillaume vandenbrouckerussiagdpgdp per capitaproductivity
Commenting Policy: We encourage comments and discussions on our posts, even those that disagree with conclusions, if they are done in a respectful and courteous manner. All comments posted to our blog go through a moderator, so they won't appear immediately after being submitted. We reserve the right to remove or not publish inappropriate comments. This includes, but is not limited to, comments that are:
  • Vulgar, obscene, profane or otherwise disrespectful or discourteous
  • For commercial use, including spam
  • Threatening, harassing or constituting personal attacks
  • Violating copyright or otherwise infringing on third-party rights
  • Off-topic or significantly political
The St. Louis Fed will only respond to comments if we are clarifying a point. Comments are limited to 1,500 characters, so please edit your thinking before posting. While you will retain all of your ownership rights in any comment you submit, posting comments means you grant the St. Louis Fed the royalty-free right, in perpetuity, to use, reproduce, distribute, alter and/or display them, and the St. Louis Fed will be free to use any ideas, concepts, artwork, inventions, developments, suggestions or techniques embodied in your comments for any purpose whatsoever, with or without attribution, and without compensation to you. You will also waive all moral rights you may have in any comment you submit.
comments powered by Disqus

The St. Louis Fed uses Disqus software for the comment functionality on this blog. You can read the Disqus privacy policy. Disqus uses cookies and third party cookies. To learn more about these cookies and how to disable them, please see this article.

Subscribe to
On the Economy

Get notified when new content is available on our On the Economy blog.

Email Alerts  |  RSS

About the Blog

The St. Louis Fed On the Economy blog features relevant commentary, analysis, research and data from our economists and other St. Louis Fed experts.


Views expressed are not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis or of the Federal Reserve System.

Contact Us

For media-related questions, email mediainquiries@stls.frb.org. For all other blog-related questions or comments, email on-the-economy@stls.frb.org.

Categories