【10.09.13 Project Syndicate】中国重商主义对穷国到底是有利还是有弊？
【原文标题】Is Chinese Mercantilism Good or Bad for Poor Countries?【中文标题】中国重商主义对穷国到底有利有弊？
【登载媒体】Project Syndicate
【来源地址】http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/rodrik47/English
【译者】 雪卉
【翻译方式】 人工
【声明】 本翻译供Anti-CNN使用，未经AC或译者许可，不得转载。
【译文】
CAMBRIDGE – China’s trade balance is on course for another bumper surplus this year.Meanwhile, concern about the health of the US recovery continues to mount. Both developments suggest that China will be under renewed pressure to nudge its currency sharply upward. The conflict with the US may well come to a head during Congressional hearings on the renminbi to be held in September, where many voices will urge the Obama administration to threaten punitive measures if China does not act.
中国今年的贸易进出口又必将迎来一个巨大的顺差，而同时，关于美国经济复苏的担心又在持续上升。中国经济的快速发展势必将重新给中国政府施加提高人民币汇率的压力。九月份中国政府将就人民币升值举行听证会，而届时美国舆论必将对奥巴马政府施压对中国采取制裁政策以促使人民币升值。
Discussion of China’s currency focuses around the need to shrink the country’s trade surplus and correct global macroeconomic imbalances. With a less competitive currency, many analysts hope, China will export less and import more, making a positive contribution to the recovery of the US and other economies.
对于人民币比值的讨论主要是为了减少中国出口量已经平衡世界宏观经济。许多经济学家期望，人民币的升值能让中国减少出口而扩大进口，从而有利于美国及世界其它国家的经济恢复。
In all this discussion, the renminbi is viewed largely as a US-China issue, and the interests of poor countries get scarcely a hearing, even in multilateral fora. Yet a noticeable rise in the renminbi’s value may have significant implications for developing countries. Whether they stand to gain or lose from a renminbi revaluation, however, is hotly contested.
关于人民币比值的讨论很大程度上是中美两国之间的事情，其它穷国几本毫无发言权，甚至是在多边讨论会议上。但是，人民币的升值却对很多发展中国家有着极其重要的意义。
On one side stands Arvind Subramanian, from the Peterson Institute and the Center for Global Development. He argues that developing countries have suffered greatly from China’s policy of undervaluing its currency, which has made it more difficult for them to compete with Chinese goods in world markets, retarded their industrialization, and set back their growth.If the renminbi were to gain in value, poor countries’ exports would become more competitive, and their economies would become better positioned to reap the benefits of globalization. Hence, Subramanian argues, poor countries must make common cause with the US and other advanced economies in pressuring China to alter its currency policies.
彼得森全球发展研究中心的Arvind Subramanian认为，中国低廉的人民币比值政策非常不利于其他发展中国家，使得他们在世界出口贸易上无法与中国竞争，从而导致了其本国工业化的滞后以及发展的缓慢。如果人民币升值，这些国家的出口将会增加，而其全球经济地位也会上升，帮助其获得全球化所带来的利益。他还表示，发展中国家应该与美国等发达国家联手给中国施加压力，促使人民币升值。
On the other side stand Helmut Reisen and his colleagues at the OECD’s Development Centre, who conclude that developing countries, and especially the poorest among them, would be hurt if the renminbi were to rise sharply. Their reasoning is that currency appreciation would almost certainly slow China’s growth, and that anything does that must be bad news for other poor countries as well.
而经济合作发展组织中心的Helmut Reisen极其同僚们则认为人民币的猛然升值会对发展中国家的经济非常不利，特别是那些极其贫困的国家。因为人民币升值必然会导致中国经济发展的放缓，而这对穷国来说并不是什么好消息。
They buttress their argument with empirical work that suggests that growth in developing countries has become progressively more dependent on China’s economic performance. They estimate that a slowdown of one percentage point in China’s annual growth rate would reduce low-income countries growth rates by 0.3 percentage points – almost a third as much.
原因是，这些国家的经济增长越来越依靠中国的经济表现。调查显示，中国每年的经济增长率每下降百分之一，这些低收入国家的经济增长率就会下降0.3%，几乎是中国的三分之一。
To make sense of these two contrasting perspectives, we need to step back and consider the fundamental drivers of growth. Strip away the technicalities, and the debate boils down to one fundamental question: what is the best, most sustainable growth model for low-income countries?
要想弄清楚这两种截然不同的观点，我们就需要退一步看看经济发展的根本因素都有哪些。抛开所有学术，我们要提出的根本问题是：对于那些低收入的贫穷国家来说，什么是最适合他们的经济发展模式？
Historically, poor regions of the world have often relied on what is called a “vent-for-surplus” model. This model entails exporting to other parts of the world primary products and natural resources such as agricultural produce or minerals.
从历史上来讲，世界上贫困地区往往通过大量出口来获得贸易顺差，往世界上其他地区出口诸如能源或农业产品。
This is how Argentina grew rich in the nineteenth century, and how oil states have become wealthy during the last 40 years. The rapid growth that many developing countries experienced prior to the crisis was largely the result of the same model.Countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, in particular, were propelled forward by the growing demand for their natural resources from other countries – China chief among them.
阿根廷就是这样在19世纪富裕起来的，而很多国家依靠石油也在过去的四十年中慢慢富裕起来了。在此次经济危机之前许国发展中国家所经历过的经济大跃进就是得益于这种发展模式。撒哈拉以南的非洲国家尤其因为出口其天然资源而得到了经济的快速发展，其中主要的出口对象便是中国。
But this model suffers from two fatal weaknesses. First, it depends heavily on rapid growth in foreign demand. When such demand falters, developing countries find themselves with collapsing export prices, and, too often, a protracted domestic crisis. Second, it does not stimulate economic diversification. Economies hooked on this model find themselves excessively specialized in primary products that promise little productivity growth.
但是这种发展模式有两个致命缺点。首先，它很大程度上依靠的是其他国家的进口需求。当外国需求有波动时，发展中国家的出口价格会大幅下降，而且通常会引起国内的经济危机。其次，这种模式会限制发展中国家的经济多样性。这些国家会特别发展期初级产品生产，而其生产力不会得到提升。
Indeed, the central challenge of economic development is not foreign demand, but domestic structural change. The problem for poor countries is that they are not producing the right kinds of goods. They need to restructure away from traditional primary products to higher-productivity activities, mainly manufactures and modern services.
经济发展的核心挑战的确不在于国外的需求，而在于国内经济结构是否合理。贫穷国家的问题在于他们没有生产对路的产品。他们应该调整生产结构，从单一生产初级产品过渡到生产效率高的经济活动，主要是制造业以及服务业。
The real exchange rate is of paramount importance here, as it determines the competitiveness and profitability of modern tradable activities. When developing nations are forced into overvalued currencies, entrepreneurship and investment in those activities are depressed.
货币汇率能决定一个国家贸易活动的竞争力和收益性，因此十分重要。发达国家的货币汇率太高，从而导致投资者对其望而却步。
From this perspective, China’s currency policies not only undercut the competitiveness of African and other poor regions’ industries; they also undermine those regions’ fundamental growth engines. What poor nations get out of Chinese mercantilism is, at best, temporary growth of the wrong kind.
从这个观点来讲，人民币升值不仅会降低这些发展中国家的工业竞争力，而且会破坏其经济发展的根本动力。这些穷困国家从中国重商主义中解脱出来的结果只是暂时性地增加不适合其经济发展的产品生产罢了。
Lest we blame China too much, though, we should remember that there is little that prevents developing countries from replicating the essentials of the Chinese model. They, too, could have used their exchange rates more actively in order to stimulate industrialization and growth. True, all countries in the world cannot simultaneously undervalue their currencies. But poor nations could have shifted the “burden” onto rich countries, where, economic logic suggests, it ought to be placed.
我们难免过度责怪中国了。要知道，什么都不能阻止发展中国家沿用中国经济发展的套路。他们也可以利用货币政策来刺激其本国的工业生产。的确，世界上所有国家不可能同时降低其货币汇率，但是发展中国家本可以将经济发展的“包袱”丢给发达国家，而发达国家已经是注定要被取代的。
Instead, too many developing countries have allowed their currencies to become overvalued, relying on booming commodity demand or financial inflows. And they have made little systematic use of explicit industrial policies that could act as a substitute for undervaluation.
另一方面，很多发达国家依靠着其庞大的商品量需求和资金流入任凭其货币汇率疯长。而他们并没有任何明确、系统性的工业政策来防止货币汇率下跌。
Given this, perhaps we should not hold China responsible for taking care of its own economic interests, even if it has aggravated in the process the costs of other countries’ misguided currency policies.
综上所述，或许我们不应该因为中国考虑其自身经济利益而加之责怪，毕竟，中国的做法只是加重了其他国家错误的货币政策而已。 这个逻辑很奇怪。 中国的工资成本远低于世界平均水平，人民币小幅升值对这个根本没有帮助。由于有巨额的美元资产，每升值一个百分点，对中国的损失时巨大的。只不过是在拉帮造势。
题目有点不知所云啊，整篇都在谈汇率， 这个逻辑很奇怪、、、
非常好的帖子 这会帮助一大群人 中国也是贫困国家！虽然部分人富有了，但大多数人都是穷人！
页:
[1]