Although I did not comment on it at the time, the World Economic Forum made a bit of splash last week with the release of its 2006-2007 Global Competitiveness Report, in which the United States fell from first to sixth place.  I'm not entirely sure how to think about that fact.  By the Forum's calculations the U.S. economy is still number one in terms of those factors related to microeconomic efficiency.  From the executive summary:

The United States remains in the leading position in competitiveness, ahead of Germany and Finland.The United States’ strength is greatest in the business environment, including domestic rivalry (rank 1 on “intensity of local competition” and “effectiveness of antitrust policy”), financial markets (rank 1 on “venture capital availability,” “local equity market access,” and “financial market sophistication”), and innovative capacity (rank 1 on “university/industry research collaboration,”“company R&D spending,”“local availability of specialized research and training services,” and “quality of scientific research institutions”).

In terms of the overall competitiveness index, the U.S. was dinged for questionable macroeconomic conditions -- the current account deficit, the federal budget deficit, and so on.  Well, OK, but those things are notoriously difficult to interpret, and my instincts tell me that microeconomics trumps macroeconomics, at least in the long-run.

But that's not really what I wanted to talk about this morning.  Here's part of the Forum's executive summary highlighted by Arnold Kling:

Switzerland takes the leading position as the world’s most competitive economy in 2006–2007, overtaking Finland and Sweden, and replacing the United States, which dropped to sixth position. Switzerland’s top ranking reflects a combination of a world class capacity for innovation and the presence of a highly sophisticated business culture... Business activity in the country benefits from a well-developed institutional framework, characterized by respect for the rule of law, an efficiently working judicial system, and high levels of transparency and accountability within public institutions...

I added the emphasis there because I was reminded of it by this report in today's Financial Times (emphasis added again):

The growing international clout of companies from big emerging economies will increase corruption around the world, according to Transparency International, the campaign group.

The TI 2006 Bribe Payers Index (BPI), released on Wednesday, shows businesses from India, China and Russia, who are at the bottom of the index, have the most propensity to pay bribes.

The BPI looks at the propensity of companies from 30 leading exporting countries to bribe abroad. Companies from the wealthiest countries generally rank in the top half of the Index, but still routinely pay bribes, particularly in developing economies....

Respondents from lower income countries in Africa, for example, identified French and Italian companies as among the worst perpetrators...

The United States, which passed a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in 1977, lay only seventh in the table, which was topped by Switzerland.

It measured the perception among 11,000 business leaders in 125 countries about who paid bribes. In the ranking of 30 OECD countries, Turkey, a candidate to join the EU, came 27th. India was bottom with China then Russia just above it.

Actually, the TI report indicates that the U.S. tied for 9th, with Belgium. But you get the point.