林毅夫：西方分析人士搞错了 中国经济正走强

2月10日，美国《赫芬顿邮报》新闻评论网站《世界邮报》（World Post）发表世界银行前副行长兼首席经济学家林毅夫文章《未来二十年中国经济的大方向》（观察者网供稿）。这是该网站继创刊号刊登国家主席习近平专访（专访作者合著《智慧治理》已由观察者网翻译出版）；1月28日刊载观察者网供稿《阎学通：中国新外交政策——区别对待敌友》，分析中国外交政策；以及10日发表观察者网专栏作家张维为文章《中国的底线必须得到尊重》，讨论中国国家安全政策之后，刊文对中国的经济形势和发展方向作出评估。以下为林毅夫文章：

《赫芬顿邮报》刊载观察者网供文

2013年11月，在对重大经济改革的一片呼声中，中共召开了十八届三中全会。此前，许多分析者和评论家们宣称，由于体制问题，中国经济正在走向停滞，中国经济如果不进行根本性的结构调整，增长必将急剧滑坡。此外，增长速度的减缓将使贫富差距等社会问题更加突出，进而危及中国的政治稳定。他们错误判断了中国经济的现状和轨迹。其实，中国经济步履稳健，在未来十到十五年甚至更久的时期内，中国的国内生产总值（GDP）将保持8%的年增长率。本届三中全会启动了大规模经济改革的计划，其实质是进一步推动中国经济的增长，避免下行风险；而不是拯救处在大灾难边缘的中国经济。

毋庸讳言，中国经济增长近期确实出现明显减缓。从2010年第一季度到2013年第二季度，中国经济连续13个季度出现减速，增长率从接近11%直降到7.5%。这是中国自1979年改革开放以来持续时间最长的增长减速。但是，造成中国经济增长放缓的根本原因不在中国内部，而来自国际金融经济危机带来的全球性冲击。只需将中国与其他新兴经济体作比较分析，即可得出更全面的结论。巴西经济增长速度从2010年的7.5%一路下滑，到2011年跌到2.7%，2012年仅为0.9%；同期内，韩国经济增长从6.3%跌到3.7%，再降至2.0%；台湾经济增长从10.7%跌到4.1%，再降至1.3%；新加坡经济增长也从10.8%跌倒5.0%，再降至1.3%。在全球经济下行的巨大压力之下，中国经济的表现差强人意——中国2010年的经济增长率为10.4%，到2011年下滑为9.3%，2012年降到7.8%。

没有任何国家能永远保持两位数的经济增长率。中国以这个速度持续增长了二十年，不管按什么标准来看都堪称经济奇迹。我们有充分的理由相信，只要保持当前方向不变，中国经济还能将10%以下的高位增长再保持一代人的时间。

在可预见的未来，中国仍有足够的空间继续利用其作为发展中国家与发达国家的差距，来推动经济增长。一般来说，发展中经济体的后发优势在于，能够引进发达国家成熟技术与先进的工业实践，以较小的成本与风险取得高速的经济增长。第二次世界大战以后至今，有13个经济体利用后发优势，将年均7%或更高的经济增速维持了25年或更长的时间。中国便是这13个经济体中规模最大的一个。有人说，在当前的发展模式下，中国的潜力已经告罄——这显然是对中国经济的误判。

一个国家的人均收入水平很好地反映出该国的平均劳动生产力，其背后反映的是该国平均技术水平与产业水平。根据著名经济历史学家安格斯•麦迪森的估算，2008年时中国人均收入水平（按购买力平价计算），仅相当于美国当年水平的21%。中美两国人均收入的差距，相当于日本与美国在1951年时；新加坡与美国在1967年时；台湾与美国在1975年时；以及韩国与美国在1977年时的差距水平。利用技术差距带来的巨大潜力，这些经济体都将7.6%至9.2%的高速年增长维持了二十年。

1978年，中国经济刚起步时，人均收入只有154美元，连普通非洲国家人均收入水平的三分之一都不到。到2012年，中国人均收入达6100美元，已步入上中等收入国家行列。但中国目前的人均收入水平与发达国家间的差距，仍然只相当于日本、韩国几十年前的水平。未来中国可以进一步利用后发优势，继续缩小差距，将8%左右的增长速度再保持一二十年。

中国健康的财政状况进一步为经济增长提供了保证。近期，许多媒体对中国地方政府过高的债务杠杆提出了严重警告。毋庸讳言，问题确实是存在的，但这些警告往往过于危言耸听。中国中央政府债务占GDP的14.9%，地方政府债务总额为17.9万亿人民币，中央与地方债务之和仍低于GDP的50%。相比之下，日本的政府债务为GDP的240%，多数发达国家的政府债务也都超过了GDP的100%。另外，多数国家举债主要是为了支持消费，这部分负债是真正的负债。中国的政府债务绝大部分用于基础设施投资。这两种债务的本质完全不同，何况中国政府还有3.8万亿美元的外汇储备。除政府财政状况良好外，中国的个人储蓄率超过GDP的50%，排在世界前列。有如此稳健资产负债表，中国利用财政政策做反周期性刺激的能力，可以说非常强大。

三中全会发布了一系列积极的经济改革规划：市场将在资源配置上继续扮演重要角色；私有经济将获得更多发展和竞争的空间；金融业也将逐步自由化。受这些改革措施的推动，我相信中国经济还有巨大的潜力，能将8%的年增长率至少再保持一二十年。中国经济只需将年增长率保持在7.3%，即可在2020年实现人均收入翻番的目标，并成为高收入国家。未来中国经济的实际增长速度将大大超过这个水平。第二次世界大战以后，只有韩国和台湾两个经济体实现了由低收入国家变为高收入国家的飞跃。中国经济庞大的规模，意味着中国的飞跃将是一项更加伟大的成就。 林毅夫是世界银行前任首席经济学家及高级副行长。

（观察者网杨晗轶/译。翻页请看英文原文）

Western Analysts Are Wrong: China’s Economy is Going Strong

BEIJING -- The Third Plenum of the Chinese Communist Party’s 18th Congress took place in November 2013 amid widespread calls for drastic economic reforms. Many analysts and commentators claim that the Chinese economy is stalling because of systemic problems and, therefore, nothing short of fundamental structural changes can save it from a precipitous downward spiral in growth rate.

Furthermore, many have suggested, slowing growth will exacerbate social problems such as the wealth gap and lead to political instability.

They are misjudging the state of the Chinese economy and its trajectory. China is actually on course to achieving 8 percent annual GDP growth for the next 10 to 15 years or longer. The sweeping economic reform agenda announced at the recent plenum was designed to further propel this growth and cover potential downside risks, not to save the economy from impending catastrophe.

To be sure, the growth rate has been slowing significantly in recent months. Since the first quarter of 2010, growth has been decelerating for 13 straight quarters from near double digits to 7.5 percent in the second quarter 2013. This has been the most sustained period of deceleration in growth since the start of economic reforms in 1979. However, the underlying causes for this slowdown are global, not China specific.

A survey of emerging economies around the world could help clarify the picture. Brazil saw its growth rate drop from 7.5 percent in 2010 to 2.7 percent in 2011 and 0.9 percent in 2012. During the same period, India’s growth rate went from 10.5 percent to 6.3 percent and 2.2 percent; South Korea from 6.3 percent to 3.7 percent and 2.0 percent; Taiwan from 10.7 percent to 4.1 percent and 1.3 percent; and Singapore from 10.8 percent to 5.0 percent and 1.3 percent. Pressured by the same global downward forces, China actually did not fare as badly, its growth rate dropping from 10.4 percent to 9.3 percent and 7.8 percent.

No country can sustain a double-digit growth rate indefinitely. China has done so for the past two decades -- a very long stretch by any standard. There are strong reasons to believe the Chinese economy, on its current course, can still deliver a high single-digit growth rate for another generation.

As a developing country, China has sufficient room to continue to use its gap with developed countries to drive its economic growth in the foreseeable future.

As a general rule, developing economies can take advantage of mature technologies and industrial practices in rich nations to generate high growth at lower costs and risks compared to developed economies. Post World War II, 13 such economies achieved higher than a 7 percent annual growth rate for longer than 25 years, of which China is no doubt the largest. Some say that China has already exhausted the potential of this model of development. But such an assessment is incorrect.

The gap in technology and industrial value-add can be measured by average labor productivity, which is in turn best reflected in average income per capita. According to data compiled by economist Angus Maddison, in 2008, China’s per capita income measured by purchasing power parity (PPT) was only 21 percent that of the United States’. This gap was equivalent to that between the U.S. and Japan in 1951, Singapore in 1967, Taiwan in 1975, and South Korea in 1977. Driven by this gap, all of these countries grew by high single-digit growth for more than two decades.

The first phase of China’s catch-up game took the country from income per capita of U.S. $154 in 1978, only one third of an average African country at that time, to U.S. $6,100 in 2012 -- a higher middle-income country. But it is still at the level of the likes of Japan and South Korea decades ago. China can continue to take advantage of this gap to grow at an approximately 8 percent annual rate for one to two decades.

China’s healthy fiscal conditions provide further assurances. Many media reports of late have sounded dire warnings about overleverage, particularly by local governments. No doubt, problems exist. But such concerns are often overstated.

Chinese central government’s debt is at 14.9 percent of GDP. Local government debts total 10 trillion RMB -- 19.2 percent of GDP. Even the most pessimistic estimates put local government debts at total of 17 trillion RMB. So, combined government debts are at 34.7 percent to 47.6 percent of GDP.

In comparison, Japan is at 240 percent. Most developed countries debts are above 100 percent of GDP. Furthermore, most nations’ debts is used largely to finance consumption and is, in other words, real borrowings. A vast majority of China’s government debts are used to finance investments in infrastructure. The two are qualitatively different.

On top of that, the government also has 3.7 trillion U.S. dollars in its foreign reserve coffer. In addition to the government’s strong fiscal position, China’s personal savings rate is over 50 percent of GDP, among the highest in the world. With this balance sheet, China’s ability to implement counter cyclical measures in times of need is exceptionally strong.

The Third Plenum announced aggressive economic reform initiatives. The market will continue to increase its role in resource allocations. The private sector will be given more room to grow and compete. The financial sector will be liberalized.

This growth enabled by these reforms will be substantially higher than the 6.8 percent required to reach the government’s goal of doubling income per capita by 2020, leading China to join the ranks of high-income nations.

Post World War II, only two economies, South Korea and Taiwan, have managed to leap from low-income to high-income status. Since China is many times bigger, that would be an extraordinary accomplishment indeed.