中國國企模式值得西方借鑑

Economic policymaking in the west has developed in radical ways since the global financial crisis. When Lehman Brothers collapsed in 2008, the US after some hesitation allowed the Federal Reserve to intervene in the markets. Afterwards, the European Central Bank did the same in response to the sovereign debt crisis in Greece and other EU states.

全球金融危機爆發以後，西方在制定經濟政策方面趨向激進。2008年雷曼兄弟(Lehman Brothers)破產後，美國只猶豫了一陣，就允許美聯儲(Fed)干預市場。之後歐洲央行(ECB)也如法炮製，以類似手段應對希臘及其他歐盟(EU)國家的主權債務危機。

Since then, quantitative easing has had a real impact on western markets. So-called helicopter drops are now in vogue, and negative interest rates have gained acceptance in spite of widespread anxiety about their unknown effects. The fashion for unconventional monetary policy was highlighted yesterday with the ECB’s decision to cut interest rates in the eurozone to a record low and to expand its quantitative easing package.

從那以來，量化寬鬆對西方市場產生了切實的影響。所謂的“直升機撒錢”大行其道。負利率的未知影響儘管引起廣泛焦慮，也還是爲人們所接受。上週四歐洲央行將歐元區利率降到歷史新低，並擴大一攬子量化寬鬆措施，凸顯了非常規貨幣政策的盛行。

But there are other ways of stimulating demand. Why, for instance, do western governments refuse to set up state-owned enterprises that will create jobs? Are they really so much worse than QE and low or negative interest rates?

但是，要刺激需求還有其他方式。比如說，西方國家政府爲何不願設立能夠創造就業的國有企業？國有企業真的比量化寬鬆或者低利率乃至負利率糟糕得多嗎？

A number of concerns surround the state sector. First, it is less efficient than private businesses. But when private investment falls well below a desired level, the state should step in to fill the gap. In any case, it is debatable whether state-run enterprises are less efficient than welfare spending, direct subsidies, QE or negative interest rates.

人們對國有企業抱着各種擔憂。首先，國有企業的效率比不上私營企業。但當私人投資遠低於所希望的水平時，國家應該介入以填補缺口。無論如何，國有企業是否真的比福利支出、直接補貼、量化寬鬆或者負利率這些政策更低效還值得商榷。

Second, will investment by the state sector necessarily displace (or “crowd out”, as economists like to say) the private sector? Evidence is mixed. In some cases, this may happen if the state competes with private companies for financing, pushing up borrowing costs. But the west today does not have to worry about that, since it is sliding into a zero-interest rate environment.

第二，國有部門的投資是否一定會替代（或者經濟學家們喜歡用“擠出”這個詞）私有部門的投資？正反面的證據都有。在某些情況下，如果國有企業和私營企業競爭融資，推高了借貸成本，這種情況的確可能發生。但眼下西方無需擔憂這個問題，因爲西方正滑向零利率環境。

Moreover, evidence from around the world suggests that the state sector supports the operation of the private sector. It can even help to incubate new private industries by providing “patient capital” and basic infrastructure, as well as physical facilities.

此外，來自世界各地的證據表明，國有部門爲私營部門的運行提供支持。況且，通過提供“有耐心的資本”(patient capital)、基本的基礎設施以及實物設備，國有部門甚至會幫助孵化新的私營產業。

There is not much that China can teach the rest of the world about economic policy. Nevertheless, its experience in the past century or so can be a useful reference point for policymakers.

在經濟政策方面，中國可教給世界其他地區的不多。然而，中國一個多世紀以來積累的經驗可以爲政策制定者提供有用的參考。

In 1911, at the end of the empire, China adopted capitalism but the experiment failed. The Nationalist government was pushed out to Taiwan 38 years later and China embarked on a disastrous communist path.

1911年，在帝制瓦解後，中國採取了資本主義，但這場實驗失敗了。38年後，國民黨政府被趕到了臺灣，中國大陸走上了多災多難的共產主義道路。

Following the death of Mao Zedong in 1976, the ideological pendulum swung back towards capitalism and the country settled on a mixed economy.

1976年毛澤東去世以後，意識形態鐘擺再度擺向了資本主義，中國選擇了混合制經濟。

Today about two-thirds of China’s economy is still state-controlled. And, while it is debatable whether a smaller state sector would be more desirable, the chances are that the dominance of state-run enterprises will continue for the foreseeable future.

今天，國有經濟在中國經濟中依然佔三分之二左右。儘管人們還在爭論，是否收縮國有部門更可取，但在可預見的未來，國有企業仍將繼續占主導地位。

If a referendum were to take place in China today on the relative merits of both sectors, I suspect a vast majority would favour the state, despite widespread public dissatisfaction with state-owned companies.

如果今天在中國就國有部門和私有部門的各自優點舉行一場全民公投，我估計，儘管公衆對國有企業普遍感到不滿，絕大多數人還是會支持國有企業。

There is a social dimension here, too. Welfare spending and helicopter drops do not offer the satisfaction that flows to a workforce gainfully employed in the state sector.

這裏面也存在一個社會層面的因素。像國有部門職工所獲得的那種滿意度，福利支出和直升機撒錢這些方式是無法提供的。

Staunch defenders of the free market are suspicious of SOEs on the grounds that they entrench corruption. This is a legitimate concern but one that can be mitigated by controlling the size of the state sector in a climate of public scrutiny.

自由市場之擁躉對國有企業抱着懷疑態度，理由是國有企業會滋生腐敗。這種擔憂是合理的，但是，通過實行公共監督、控制國有部門的規模，是可以緩解這種擔憂的。

It remains true, too, that state-owned enterprises can supplement a dominant private sector and, arguably, correct market failures at least as efficiently as the policy instruments that at present are favoured by western governments.

有一點依然毋庸置疑：在私有部門佔主導的情況下，國有企業能夠對私有部門起到補充作用；也可以認爲，對於糾正市場失靈，國有企業至少和當前西方國家政府所好的那些政策工具一樣有效。