【2008.09.23 澳大利亚 时代报】中国龙如何智取印度象
【原文出处】http://business.theage.com.au/business/how-the-dragon-outmanoeuvred-the-elephant-20080922-4ltu.html【发表媒体】澳大利亚《时代报》（The Age）
【翻译方式】“中文普通话”原创翻译
【翻译声明】欢迎转载注明出处
【原文标题】How the dragon outmanoeuvred the elephant
【中文翻译】中国龙如何智取印度象
Mark Crosby ｜ September 23, 2008
马克·克劳斯比
｜ 2008年9月23日
India's democracy and rule of law are no substitute for the orderliness and leadership of which China is capable.
印度的民主和法律体系不是中国拥有的秩序和领导能力的替代品。
WHEN China began economic reforms in 1979, per capita purchasing power was about two-thirds the level of India. At that time both economies were dominated by a labour-intensive agricultural sector and, despite the two countries having about two-fifths of the world's population at that time, together they accounted for less than 2% of global trade. Today per capita purchasing power in China is more than double the level in India. Despite India's very strong recent economic growth, the slightly faster gross domestic product (GDP) growth in China and slower population growth there mean the income gap is widening rather than narrowing.
当中国1979年开始经济改革时，它的平均每人购买力只有印度三分之二的水平。那时候两国的经济都是以劳动密集型的农业部门占主导，尽管那时候两国人口占到世界人口的五分之二，但是两者经济加起来还不到世界贸易的2％。今天中国的平均每人购买力已经是印度的两倍还要多了。虽然印度近来经济增长十分强劲，但是中国稍微更快的国内生产总值增长和更低的人口增长，意味着（两国）收入的差距不是变小而是变大。
A common claim is that India's advantage in having English commonly spoken, and having a stronger legal system and democratic institutions will soon lead to India catching up and eventually overtaking China's income levels. In my view, India will struggle to close the income gap with China, let alone catch up. There are several reasons to be pessimistic about India's prospects relative to China's. First, China has always had basic education for more of the population than is the case for India. Still today India's adult female literacy rate is below 50%, while in China it is closer to 90%. It is hard to participate in a modern economy and lead a productive work life without being able to read or write.
一种普遍的观点认为，印度的优势在于通用英语，拥有更强大的司法体系和民主体制，这些使得印度不久就会赶上并最终超越中国的收入水平。在我看来，印度将竭力去缩小和中国的收入差距，更别说赶上了。相对中国的情况，对印度的这种悲观观点有以下一些原因。第一，中国有比印度更多的人口接受了基础教育。直到今天印度成年女性的识字率仍低于50％，而中国却接近90％了。不能读写就难以参与现代经济生活和创造性的生产工作。
A second and widely remarked difference between China and India is the quality of infrastructure. In China, public infrastructure is world class, while in India it is very poor. For example, China has built 35,000 kilometres of national highways in the past 10 years, while India is planning to build 15,000 kilometres of highways. China's public transport, ports, airports and roads are far superior to India's. The only part of India's economy with decent infrastructure is telecommunications - India's outsourcing and information technology businesses are built around high-quality IT and internet access. This shows how India can do well, but at the same time highlights how poor infrastructure reduces business productivity in other sectors of the economy.
中印之间第二个更为显著的不同是基础设施的质量。在中国，公共基础设施是世界一流的，而印度则是非常糟糕。例如，在过去的10年中，中国已经建设了3万5千公里长的国家干线公路。中国的公共交通运输、港口、机场和公路远比印度的好。印度经济中唯一的出色的基础设施是它的通讯系统，印度的外包产业和信息技术企业造就了高质量的IT和互联网接入服务。这显示出印度可以如何做得更好，但是与此同时也显著地表明落后的基础设施会降低其他经济部门的商务生产能力。
One factor that has forced China to have high productivity is openness to trade. Since 1979 China's share of world trade has grown from about 1% to more than 6%. China's trade-exposed industries must continue to raise productivity in order to survive in a global market. In contrast, India's share of world trade remains below 1%. India's historic reliance on self-sufficiency has protected her industries, leading to a lack of incentive to innovate and raise productivity. This has changed since India began its economic reforms in the early 1990s but its share of trade is still only a 20th of the level of China.
使得中国获得高生产率的一个因素是对贸易的开放。1979以来中国在世界贸易中所在比例，从大概1％增长到6％还要多。中国的外向型企业必须持续提高生产率以在全球市场中获得生存发展。与之相对，印度在世界贸易中的比例仍然低于1％。印度长期以来的自给自足保护了它的工业，导致缺乏革新和提高生产率的激励。这种现象自印度于1990年代早起开始经济改革以后有所转变，不过它的贸易份额还只有中国二十分之一的水平。
A final factor that limits growth in India is the difficulty in making necessary policy changes and further reforms. India is democratic, but this makes decision-making time consuming. In respect to infrastructure in particular, decision-making is very slow, and complicated by difficulties in acquiring land. China, of course, is not democratic, but it does have leaders with vision. Infrastructure plans for the next 20 years and more are mapped out and implemented. There are problems with the process for land acquisitions, but these problems are being tackled and in general the end result is a net benefit for society as a whole. In comparing India and China, it is not at all clear that law and democracy will lead to better outcomes than order and leadership.
最后一个限制印度增长的因素是，难以进行必要的政策调整和进一步改革。印度是民主的，但这使得不断消耗决策制定时间。在基础设施建设方面尤其突出，制定决策因难以获得土地而变得非常缓慢和复杂。当然中国不是民主的，但是它拥有有眼光的领导，基础设施按照未来20年的计划进行，许多得以详细计划和实施。在土地获取的过程中存在许多问题，不过这些问题正在得到处理，最终结果是整个社会都得到净收益。比较中国和印度，法律和民主相比秩序和领导的能力，哪个可以带来更好的效果难以得出肯定的结论。
Mark Crosby is an associate professor at Melbourne Business School and director of business research at Melbourne University's Confucius Institute.
马克·克劳斯比是墨尔本商学院的副教授，和墨尔本大学孔子学院的商业研究主任。 现在难以得出结论，我们到未来去寻找答案吧 最后还加一个反问
搞笑~~~ 副教授？？
和我国的部分副教授水平差不多。 我认为写的很客观。
页:
[1]