China's Trade-off
華爾街日?qǐng)?bào):中國(guó)加入WTO十年得失

It is almost a decade since China joined the World Trade Organization. Back then, China imported "global order": it absorbed pre-existing, mainly U.S.-designed policies, rules and institutions. It acted rather like a small or medium-sized economy that could only adapt to the international terms of trade. Now China is one of the Big Three, alongside the U.S. and European Union. It is the world's second-largest economy and its leading exporter of goods. It is also the biggest post-crisis contributor to global growth.
中國(guó)加入世界貿(mào)易組織 (WTO)差不多已經(jīng)有十年了。當(dāng)初,中國(guó)是進(jìn)口“全球秩序”:中國(guó)吸收了業(yè)已存在的、主要是由美國(guó)設(shè)計(jì)的政策、規(guī)則和制度。中國(guó)當(dāng)時(shí)表現(xiàn)得更像是一個(gè)中小型經(jīng)濟(jì)體,只能去適應(yīng)國(guó)際貿(mào)易條款。如今,中國(guó)已經(jīng)與美國(guó)和歐盟比肩,躋身世界三大巨頭之列。中國(guó)目前是世界第二大經(jīng)濟(jì)體,是世界頭號(hào)商品出口國(guó)。金融危機(jī)過(guò)后,中國(guó)還對(duì)全球經(jīng)濟(jì)的增長(zhǎng)作出了最大的貢獻(xiàn)。

In line with its growing economic size, Beijing wants to influence international prices and shape global rules. But that will require significant changes in the ways Beijing thinks about economic policy, and Beijing has resisted those changes to date. This creates uncertainty and instability for China and the rest of the world, and has implications for other leaders looking to China to play a constructive role in global economic matters.
為了與中國(guó)不斷擴(kuò)大的經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)模相匹配,北京希望對(duì)國(guó)際價(jià)格施加影響,并決定國(guó)際規(guī)則。然而,這就需要北京對(duì)其考慮經(jīng)濟(jì)政策的方式做出重大改變,而到目前為止北京抵制做出這種改變。這就為中國(guó)和世界其他國(guó)家創(chuàng)造了不確定性和不穩(wěn)定性,并對(duì)那些希望中國(guó)在全球經(jīng)濟(jì)事務(wù)中發(fā)揮建設(shè)性作用的其他國(guó)家領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人產(chǎn)生影響。

Global trade issues best reveal China's policy shift, and also its policy dilemma. China's membership of the WTO has been a resounding success. Access to the WTO's rules-based system and dispute-resolution process has defused manifold tensions and smoothed China's rapid integration into the global economy. Beijing also has negotiated bilateral or regional free-trade agreements such as the one with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
全球貿(mào)易問(wèn)題最好地揭示了中國(guó)的政策轉(zhuǎn)變,也反映出中國(guó)的政策困境。中國(guó)加入世貿(mào)組織是一個(gè)令人矚目的成就。加入世貿(mào)組織以規(guī)則為基礎(chǔ)的體系和爭(zhēng)端解決程序消除了多個(gè)方面的緊張關(guān)系,并為中國(guó)迅速融入全球經(jīng)濟(jì)鋪平了道路。北京還通過(guò)談判達(dá)成了雙邊或地區(qū)性的自由貿(mào)易協(xié)定,比如與東盟的自貿(mào)協(xié)定。

But China also has been a conspicuously passive and marginal player in the Doha Round of talks to further liberalize global trade. Its default position is still to react, leaving other big players to take initiatives. And its FTAs tend to be fairly weak. Whereas, for instance, South Korea's FTAs with the U.S. and EU represent comprehensive liberalization in trade between major partners, Beijing's pact with Asean only eliminates tariffs; it hardly, if at all, tackles regulatory barriers to trade in goods and services, investment and public procurement. Other Chinese FTAs, such as its agreement with Pakistan, don't even eliminate most tariffs.
中國(guó)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人對(duì)自由化問(wèn)題一直持更加謹(jǐn)慎的態(tài)度。在旨在進(jìn)一步推動(dòng)全球貿(mào)易自由化的多哈回合談判上,中國(guó)也一直是一個(gè)超級(jí)被動(dòng)并且不起眼的參與者。被動(dòng)等待是中國(guó)的默認(rèn)立場(chǎng),等著其他重要的參與者提出建議。此外,中國(guó)對(duì)自由貿(mào)易協(xié)定的政策力度往往也相當(dāng)不夠。比如,韓國(guó)與美國(guó)和歐盟的白貿(mào)協(xié)定包括主要貿(mào)易伙伴之間的貿(mào)易完全自由化,而北京與東盟的協(xié)定只取消了關(guān)稅;這種程度的協(xié)定很難解決貨物和服務(wù)貿(mào)易、投資以及公共采購(gòu)過(guò)程中存在的壁壘。中國(guó)其他的自貿(mào)協(xié)定,比如與巴基斯坦簽署的協(xié)定,甚至沒(méi)有取消絕大部分關(guān)稅。

Meanwhile, China's historic opening to the world economy has stalled since about 2006. There has been paltry unilateral liberalization beyond China's WTO commitments. Anti-liberalization interests—some ministries, regulatory agencies and resurgent state-owned enterprises (SOEs)—have grown more powerful. Despite, or perhaps because of, China's growing clout, it is unwilling to open markets unilaterally and haggles hard over reciprocal concessions.
與此同時(shí),大約從2006年開(kāi)始,中國(guó)具有歷史意義的向世界經(jīng)濟(jì)開(kāi)放的步伐一直停滯不前。除了中國(guó)加入世貿(mào)組織所作的承諾之外,中國(guó)幾乎沒(méi)有采取什么單邊的自由化措施。反對(duì)自由化的利益集團(tuán)——某些部委、監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)和復(fù)蘇的國(guó)有企業(yè)——已經(jīng)變得更加強(qiáng)大。盡管可能是由于中國(guó)的影響力不斷增強(qiáng),中國(guó)并不愿單邊開(kāi)放市場(chǎng),一直在努力爭(zhēng)取到相互的讓步。

Beijing's stalled liberalization is also of a piece with greater industrial-policy intervention, aimed to promote a core of about 50 SOEs, mainly in "strategic" manufacturing and resource-based sectors, and a handful of state-owned banks that dominate the financial system. China's response to the global financial crisis—a supercharged fiscal and monetary stimulus—bolstered the public sector and state power at the expense of the far-less-subsidized private sector. Beijing's frequent recourse to command-and-control mechanisms such as price controls to fight inflation makes market reform harder.
北京自由化進(jìn)程的停滯不前也與更大力度的工業(yè)政策干預(yù)有關(guān)系,這種干預(yù)旨在推動(dòng)大約由50家國(guó)有企業(yè)組成的“核心”的發(fā)展。這些企業(yè)主要屬于“戰(zhàn)略性”制造業(yè)和以資源為基礎(chǔ)的部門(mén),此外還有幾家主導(dǎo)著金融體系的國(guó)有銀行。中國(guó)應(yīng)對(duì)全球金融危機(jī)的方式——?jiǎng)恿Τ瑥?qiáng)的財(cái)政和貨幣刺激計(jì)劃——扶持了公共部門(mén)和政府的實(shí)力,卻讓私人部門(mén)為此付出代價(jià),后者得到的補(bǔ)貼要少得多。北京時(shí)常求助于“指令加控制”機(jī)制的這種做法,比如利用限價(jià)措施來(lái)抗擊通貨膨脹,增加了市場(chǎng)改革的難度。

Protectionist trade policy and dirigiste industrial policy meet at several junctions. Export restrictions—most conspicuously on rare-earth metals—have increased. Tax incentives, subsidies and price controls, as well as administrative "guidance" on investment decisions, are used to favor domestic goods over imports. China-specific standards, such as on third-generation mobile phones, can create high compliance costs for foreign enterprises. Services barriers, notably in financial and telecommunication services, have come down very slowly, if at all.
保護(hù)主義的貿(mào)易政策和計(jì)劃經(jīng)濟(jì)式的工業(yè)政策在幾個(gè)點(diǎn)上匯合到了一起。出口限制——最突出的就是對(duì)稀土的出口限制——有所增強(qiáng)。稅收獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)、補(bǔ)貼和限價(jià)措施以及對(duì)投資決定的行政“引導(dǎo)”,都被用于幫助國(guó)內(nèi)產(chǎn)品抵御進(jìn)口產(chǎn)品。中國(guó)特有的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),比如有關(guān)第三代手機(jī)的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),為外國(guó)企業(yè)創(chuàng)造出高昂的成本。中國(guó)消除服務(wù)業(yè)壁壘的速度假如不是零的話,也是非常緩慢的,特別是在金融業(yè)和電信服務(wù)業(yè)。

Foreign-investment restrictions have been tightened in a range of sectors where SOEs operate, such as iron and steel, petrochemicals, coal, biofuels, news websites, audiovisual and Internet services. Discriminatory government procurement, in the guise of promoting "indigenous innovation," favors domestic companies. Joint-venture and technology-transfer requirements on foreign companies promote national champions in high-speed rail, electric cars and renewable-energy sectors. Finally, "investment nationalism" extends to China's Go Out policy: Resource-based SOEs in particular are buying up foreign assets with cheap capital provided by state-owned banks.
在有國(guó)有企業(yè)經(jīng)營(yíng)的一系列部門(mén),比如鋼鐵、石化、煤炭、生物燃料、新聞網(wǎng)站、視聽(tīng)和互聯(lián)網(wǎng)服務(wù)部門(mén),針對(duì)外國(guó)投資的限制有所收緊。差別性的政府采購(gòu)打著推動(dòng)“自主創(chuàng)新”的旗號(hào)偏袒國(guó)內(nèi)公司。外國(guó)企業(yè)受到的合資和技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)讓的要求導(dǎo)致本土企業(yè)在高速鐵路、電力汽車(chē)和可再生能源部門(mén)拔得頭籌。最終, “投資民族主義”延伸到中國(guó)的“走出去”戰(zhàn)略中:尤其是以資源為基礎(chǔ)的國(guó)有企業(yè),它們正在利用國(guó)有銀行提供的廉價(jià)資本大量買(mǎi)入外國(guó)資產(chǎn)。

The problem is that this policy mix is incompatible with global economic leadership at a time when China has little choice but to become a global leader. Beijing can't expect its trading partners to accept indefinitely a flood of Chinese exports without opening its own market to their goods. Hence it is in China's own interests to restrain industrial-policy activism and its protectionist spillover. And it should proceed with "WTO-plus" reforms that move beyond the letter of its accession commitments. It could further reduce applied import tariffs, especially on industrial goods. It should reverse export controls on raw materials and agricultural commodities.
問(wèn)題在于,中國(guó)的這種政策組合與其全球經(jīng)濟(jì)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)地位是不協(xié)調(diào)的,中國(guó)目前幾乎別無(wú)選擇,只能成為全球領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者。北京不能指望其貿(mào)易伙伴無(wú)止境地接受中國(guó)出口商品的大量涌入,而中國(guó)并不向它們的商品開(kāi)放市場(chǎng)。因此,遏制工業(yè)政策中存在的激進(jìn)主義和貿(mào)易保護(hù)主義所帶來(lái)的副作用是符合中國(guó)自身利益的。而且,中國(guó)應(yīng)當(dāng)繼續(xù)推進(jìn) “超WTO”改革,不僅僅局限于當(dāng)初加入世貿(mào)時(shí)所做的承諾。中國(guó)可以進(jìn)一步降低已經(jīng)實(shí)施的進(jìn)口稅,尤其是對(duì)工業(yè)產(chǎn)品所征收的進(jìn)口稅。中國(guó)應(yīng)當(dāng)取消對(duì)原材料和農(nóng)業(yè)初級(jí)產(chǎn)品的出口控制。

China's more substantial challenge is to tackle high trade-related domestic regulatory barriers in goods, services, investment and public procurement. These measures should be hitched firmly to domestic reforms to improve the business climate and to "rebalance" the economy—to make it more consumption- and less investment-oriented, with more freedom for the private sector and less public-sector control.
中國(guó)面臨的更加重大的挑戰(zhàn)在于,中國(guó)需要解決商品、服務(wù)、投資和公共采購(gòu)領(lǐng)域存在的與貿(mào)易相關(guān)的國(guó)內(nèi)監(jiān)管的高壁壘。這些措施應(yīng)當(dāng)與改善商業(yè)氛圍、 “調(diào)整”經(jīng)濟(jì)的國(guó)內(nèi)改革密切結(jié)合起來(lái)——以使經(jīng)濟(jì)變得更加注重消費(fèi),減少對(duì)投資的依賴,同時(shí)給予私人部門(mén)更多的自由,減少對(duì)公共部門(mén)的控制。

Most of this wish list is not on Beijing's agenda. Leaders are not minded to curtail industrial policy and proceed with reforms beyond their WTO commitments. The latter would mean not merely liberalizing product markets but also reforming highly controlled markets for factors of production like land and capital and for energy inputs like oil, water and electricity. Those lie at the heart of domestic economics and politics. The reforms China most needs now cut to the core of the Communist Party-government-public sector nexus and its grip on power. It is unlikely to happen soon.
上述意愿中的絕大部分并不在北京的政治議程之上。領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人并不想調(diào)整工業(yè)政策以及繼續(xù)推進(jìn)超出WTO承諾的改革。后者不僅僅意味著放開(kāi)產(chǎn)品市場(chǎng),還意味著要改革受到高度控制的生產(chǎn)要素市場(chǎng)(比如土地和資本)和能源市場(chǎng)(比如石油、水資源和電力)。這些市場(chǎng)在國(guó)內(nèi)經(jīng)濟(jì)和政治中處于核心位置。這種改革在短期內(nèi)是不大可能發(fā)生的。

The story is not necessarily as grim as might at first appear. Earlier liberalization has left China so deeply integrated into global supply chains that it can't afford to move too far backward on reforms, and Beijing increasingly can't afford to stand still either as it endeavors to deliver steadily rising prosperity. But until it finds a way to break this impasse, China will be limited in its ability to exercise meaningful global leadership. This fact calls for some humility from Chinese leaders who otherwise appear increasingly assertive on the world stage, and for realism from foreign leaders who wish China would exercise a greater leadership role at international forums like the International Monetary Fund, the WTO and the G-20.
情況并不一定會(huì)像乍看之下的那么嚴(yán)酷。早期的自由化進(jìn)程已經(jīng)使中國(guó)深深地融入全球供給鏈,因此中國(guó)無(wú)法承受改革的大步倒退。而隨著北京力圖保持經(jīng)濟(jì)穩(wěn)步持續(xù)的繁榮,北京也越來(lái)越無(wú)法承受停滯不前所要付出的代價(jià)。然而,在找到擺脫這種僵局的方法之前,中國(guó)擔(dān)任全球領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者的能力將受到限制。這樣的事實(shí)要求中國(guó)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人表現(xiàn)出一絲謙遜,否則他們?cè)谑澜缥枧_(tái)上將被認(rèn)為越來(lái)越武斷;而希望中國(guó)在國(guó)際貨幣基金組織、世貿(mào)組織和20國(guó)集團(tuán)中發(fā)揮更重要的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)作用的外國(guó)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人也要現(xiàn)實(shí)一些。

Razeen Sally:拉津·薩利,歐洲國(guó)際政治經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)中心主任。該文發(fā)表于2011年2月13日《華爾街日?qǐng)?bào)》。