កម្ពុជាក្នុងឋានៈជាប្រទេសមានប្រាក់ចំណូលមធ្យម – អន្ទាក់ ឬកាលានុវត្តភាព៖ ការជំរុញផលិតភាពនៅកម្រិតសហគ្រាស ភាគ ១ (នៅក្នុងសហគ្រាស)

សារគន្លឹះ

• ដើម្បីផ្លាស់ប្តូរពីឋានៈជាប្រទេសមានចំណូលមធ្យមកម្រិតទាប ទៅជាប្រទេសមានចំណូលមធ្យមកម្រិតខ្ពស់ កម្ពុជាត្រូវផ្លាស់ប្តូរយុទ្ធសាស្ត្រពីការកៀរគរធនធាន ទៅជាការប្រើប្រាស់ធនធានឱ្យកាន់តែមានប្រសិទ្ធភាពជាងមុន ពោលគឺការបង្កើនផលិតភាព។

• កំណើនផលិតភាពនៅកម្ពុជាមានសភាពគួរឱ្យខកចិត្ត ចាប់តាំងពីមានវិបត្តិហិរញ្ញវត្ថុសកលក្នុងអំឡុងឆ្នាំ២០០៧–២០០៨ មក។

• ការស្រាវជ្រាវបង្ហាញថា មានកត្តាជំរុញសំខាន់ៗចំនួនបីនៃផលិតភាព រួមមាន៖ ផលិតភាពនៅក្នុងសហគ្រាស (within-firm) ការបែងចែកធនធានឡើងវិញ (reallocation) និងការជ្រើសរើសសហគ្រាស (selection)។ អត្ថបទប្លុកនេះពិនិត្យមើលលើកត្តាជំរុញទីមួយក្នុងចំណោមកត្តាទាំងបីនេះ គឺកំណើនផលិតភាពផ្ទៃក្នុងសហគ្រាស។

• ទោះបីជាមានបញ្ហាមួយចំនួនទាក់ទងនឹងការអប់រំនៅកម្ពុជាក៏ដោយ ប៉ុន្តែបណ្តាសហគ្រាសនានាហាក់ដូចជាកំពុងសម្រាលបញ្ហាកង្វះជំនាញបានយ៉ាងជោគជ័យ តាមរយៈការបណ្តុះបណ្តាលបុគ្គលិកដោយសហគ្រាសខ្លួនឯង។

• គុណភាពនៃការគ្រប់គ្រងគឺមានសារៈសំខាន់ណាស់ ក្នុងការជួយសម្រួលដល់កំណើនផលិតភាពនៅក្នុងសហគ្រាស ប៉ុន្តែយើងនៅដឹងតិចតួចណាស់អំពីគុណភាព និងការអនុវត្តនៃការគ្រប់គ្រងសហគ្រាសនៅប្រទេសកម្ពុជា។

• ប្រភពចំណេះដឹង និងបច្ចេកវិទ្យាដ៏សំខាន់មួយ ដើម្បីជំរុញផលិតភាពរបស់សហគ្រាស គឺភាពបើកចំហទៅកាន់សេដ្ឋកិច្ចសកល ហើយក្នុងចំណុចនេះ កម្ពុជាគឺជាករណីសិក្សាដ៏ជោគជ័យមួយនៅលើឆាកអន្តរជាតិ។

• ការធ្វើអង្កេតកម្រិតសហគ្រាសនៅក្នុងប្រទេសដទៃបានបង្ហាញឱ្យឃើញពីឧបសគ្គកម្រិតសហគ្រាសចំពោះផលិតភាព ប៉ុន្តែយើងដឹងតិចតួចណាស់អំពីឧបសគ្គទាំងនេះនៅប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ដូច្នេះយើងត្រូវធ្វើការស្រាវជ្រាវបន្ថែមទៀត។

Key Messages

• To transition from low- to upper-middle-income status, Cambodia needs to shift from a strategy of mobilising resources to using resources more efficiently – productivity.
• Productivity growth in Cambodia has been disappointing since the Global Financial Crisis in 2007–2008.
• Research shows that there are three key drivers of productivity: within-firm, reallocation, and selection. This blog reviews the first of these three drivers – within-firm productivity growth.
• There are problems with schooling in Cambodia, but firms appear to be successfully alleviating skill shortages through in-house training.
• The quality of management is crucial to facilitate within-firm productivity growth, but we know little about the quality and practice of management in Cambodia.
• An important source of knowledge and technology to enable within-firm productivity is openness to the global economy – here, Cambodia is a globally successful case study.
• Firm-level surveys in other countries have highlighted firm-level constraints to productivity – we know little about these constraints in Cambodia, and we need to undertake more research.

Introduction

Productivity is defined as “the efficiency with which societies combine their people, resources, and tools.” Productivity can be measured as the amount of output produced per worker, per machine, or per unit of land. A more encompassing measure is Total Factor Productivity (TFP), which measures the efficiency with which all factors of production are being used in production.

Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman famously argued, “Productivity isn't everything, but, in the long run, it is almost everything. A country’s ability to improve its standard of living over time depends almost entirely on its ability to raise its output per worker.” Higher productivity can benefit firms (higher profits), workers (higher wages), consumers (lower costs of goods and services), and governments (higher tax revenue). In the first blog in this series, we noted that very few countries have graduated into high-income status over the last 150 years — this is a productivity problem. Estimates show that around half of the income differences between the richest and poorest countries is due to TFP.

In the first blog in this series, we noted that Cambodia has successfully mobilised resources for development — moving workers from fields and households to the factory, providing the young with basic literacy, and boosting savings and investment to very high levels. The strategy that helped drive Cambodia from low- to middle-income status is running out of steam. This blog is the first in a three-part series that explores, at the firm level, what is needed for Cambodia to shift towards a growth strategy based on productivity.

To think about policy implications to boost productivity, we need to start with research on what drives productivity. Research shows that there are three key drivers of productivity: reallocation, within-firm, and selection. This blog reviews the first of these three drivers – within-firm productivity, discusses what we know for the Cambodian case, and derives some policy conclusions.

Productivity in Cambodia: A Recent History

As part of the Cambodia 2030 research, CDRI calculated that since 2001, economic growth in Cambodia has been driven primarily by public and private investment, rather than gains in productivity. TFP growth contributed 2.7 percentage points to the growth rate (of around 7–8 percent p.a.) between 2001 and 2007. TFP growth collapsed during the Global Financial Crisis in 2008, recovered modestly through 2019, then turned sharply negative during 2020–2023, dragging growth down by 2.8 percentage points.

This weak productivity performance is also visible at the firm level. In the December 2024 Economic Update, the World Bank, using a survey of 519 firms, noted that “Median labor productivity among all Cambodian firms is estimated to be US$6,899 per worker,” which is “significantly lower than firms in peer countries overall (41 percent lower) as well as across both the manufacturing and service sector.” Indeed, productivity among the top ten percent of firms in Cambodia, at around USD25,000 per worker per year, is approximately the same as that of an average firm in Vietnam.

Given this gap, the key question is how productivity policy should be framed. In the same December 2024 Economic Update, the World Bank used the 2023 Enterprise Survey to think about productivity policy and generate a long list of policy recommendations. The focus of the Enterprise Survey was on ‘obstacles’ to doing business faced by firms, not constraints to productivity. This blog recommends starting instead with research that seeks to explain the drivers of productivity.

Three Drivers of Productivity

Research shows that there are three key drivers of productivity: within-firm, reallocation, and selection. This section reviews the first of these three drivers — within-firm productivity growth.

Within-firm productivity growth occurs when productivity inside firms grows over time. Empirical evidence shows that within-firm productivity growth accounted for at least 50 percent of all TFP growth in China, India, and Ethiopia. Research has highlighted the importance of worker education and skills, management, and openness.

a)      Worker Education and Skills

As the second blog in this series showed, the secondary school completion rate in Cambodia was only 61.6 percent in 2024, much lower than in Thailand (95.7 percent), Malaysia (81.5 percent), Vietnam (95.2 percent), and Indonesia (99.7 percent). Many authors see school education as a priority task for government intervention, in particular in promoting Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education.

There are many good reasons to improve school education in Cambodia, but will this policy boost within-firm productivity? In 2001, Lant Pritchett asked, where has all the education gone?, his research noted that many developing countries had invested huge resources into education without generating much impact on economic growth. Mechanically increasing the supply of educated workers will not automatically increase the demand for and productive use of those workers inside firms. In Pakistan, for example, only 23 percent of female graduates from medical school work in the medical profession after graduating.

A 2024 survey by the European Chambers of Commerce (EuroCham) found that 74 percent of firms reported facing challenges in hiring qualified workers in Cambodia. We need to think carefully about how to meet this demand for qualified workers. In their 2017 book , Justin Lin and Celestin Monga sought to address the policy challenge of how to ‘jump-start’ growth in developing countries. Lin and Monga argued that technological change has made “knowledge transfers and training much less costly than in previous times,” meaning developing countries can rely much more on flexible training within the workplace than on the general school system. There is good evidence that this is what happens in Cambodia. The 2023 World Bank Enterprise Survey showed that 71.1 percent of firms offered workers formal training over the last year, higher than the average in low-income countries (43.6 percent), middle-income countries (51.4 percent), or upper middle-income countries (56.6 percent). The same survey by Eurocham found that the skills most in demand by firms were not formal academic skills taught in schools, but practical workplace skills including leadership, project management and quality control. The Eurocham survey found that overall, 94 percent of respondents who sent their employees for training last year found the training outcomes to be valuable. There is suggestive evidence that such in-house training has alleviated skill shortages in the workplace in Cambodia. The World Bank Enterprise Survey 2023 found that only 0.1 percent of firms chose an inadequately educated workforce as their biggest obstacle. There is also evidence that there are significant benefits from in-house training. The 2024 World Bank Outlook report noted that firms that offer formal employee training programmes are 29 percent more productive.

b)     Management

The second key driver of within-firm productivity is management – a subject often neglected by economists. The World Bank Outlook report for 2023 notes some suggestive evidence that management matters in Cambodia; firms with an independent chief executive officer (CEO) are 20 percent more productive than firms managed by their owner; also, there is a significant positive relationship between better management practices and labour productivity. We need to know more about whether management skills are constraints on within-firm productivity in Cambodia. To do so, CDRI should turn to Nicholas Bloom and various colleagues who have pioneered the economic study of management. Bloom and colleagues developed a methodology covering 18 basic management practices and have conducted surveys in a number of developed countries, as well as Brazil, China, and India, such a survey needs to be done in Cambodia.

Bloom and colleagues find that management matters – specifically that good management boosts productivity, profitability, growth rates, survival rates, and market value. Good management was also related to a better work environment, including child-care facilities, job flexibility, self-assessed employee satisfaction, and even energy efficiency.

Management matters but it is less clear how to improve management. A survey of the results of business training programmes to improve within-firm performance finds little impact on profits or sales. Perhaps it would be better to target larger firms with more capacity to implement good management? An intervention that gave free high-quality management consulting advice to 28 textile plants in India found a very large (17 percent) increase in firm-level productivity in the first year.

c)      Openness to Trade and FDI

One important aspect of the policy regime is external openness. A domestic Cambodian firm can learn about new technology or good management practice by trading with a foreign multinational; likewise, trade openness can increase exposure to international value chains, technology and know-how. Openness in Cambodia creates striking opportunities for learning. The trade ratio is measured as the total of imports and exports as a share of GDP and provides a measure of how open Cambodia is to the global economy. The trade ratio (2024) was much higher in Cambodia (143 percent), than the average of either low-income (56 percent), middle-income (55 percent) or upper middle-income (47 percent) countries. In 2025, Cambodia received around USD5 billion in foreign direct investment (FDI), representing almost 10 percent of GDP – a huge number. According to an index produced by fDi Intelligence, Cambodia was one of the best hosts for FDI in the world.

There is some positive effect; openness to trade and FDI were together partly responsible for helping domestic firms in Cambodia access technology. The World Bank Enterprise Survey 2023 found that 33.5 percent of Cambodian firms used technology licensed from foreign companies, much higher than the average of low-income countries (7.6 percent), middle-income countries (12.9 percent) or upper middle-income countries (17.5 percent).

There are also clear limitations on the ability of Cambodian firms to learn from FDI firms. The Cambodia Enterprise Linkage Survey 2025 (of 402 firms), conducted by CAPRED in collaboration with the Royal Government of Cambodia, found that foreign-owned firms only sourced 7 percent of their inputs from locally owned firms. And even if they did source more from local firms — research from CDRI shows that foreign-owned firms exhibit lower labour productivity than Cambodian firms – implying limits to the amount of useful learning possible.

Conclusion

In the first blog in this series, we noted that Cambodia has successfully mobilised resources for development. The policy space to sustain economic growth is now rapidly running out. This blog is the first in a three-part series that explores what is needed at the firm level for Cambodia to shift towards a growth strategy based on productivity.

In its December 2024 Economic Update, the World Bank used data from the 2023 Enterprise Survey to develop a broad set of policy recommendations aimed at improving productivity. However, the Enterprise Survey was designed primarily to identify firms’ perceptions of business obstacles rather than the underlying constraints to productivity. Therefore, this blog recommends that productivity policy should be grounded first in research that identifies and explains the key drivers of productivity growth.

This blog reviews the first of these three drivers — within-firm productivity. The blog finds that while there are problems with schooling in Cambodia firms appear to be successfully alleviating skill shortages through in-house training; recent research has shown that the quality of management is crucial to facilitate within-firm productivity growth but we know little about the quality and practice of management in Cambodia; an important source of knowledge and technology to enable within-firm productivity is openness to the global economy — here Cambodia is a globally successful case study but there are limits to learning opportunities for local firms; finally firm-level surveys in other countries have highlighted firm level constraints to productivity (such as family ownership and management) — we know little about these constraints in Cambodia and we need to undertake more research.

Look out for our fourth blog, Middle-Income Cambodia – Trap or Opportunity: Productivity and Creative Destruction at Firm-Level.

Authors:

Prof Dr MatthewMcCartney, Chief Economist, CDRI
Dr Chhorn Dina, Director, CDRI’s Centre for Development Economics and Trade