《解读中国经济（增订版）》书评

从衰败到崛起：工业革命以后的中国经济

前几天，应北京大学出版社编辑的邀请，答应写一篇林毅夫《解读中国经济》一书的书评，因为拖延症的缘故，一直没有动笔，恰逢周末，从北京溜达一圈回来，再次翻起这本书，趁着阅读的快感，写完这本书的书评。　　关于中国经济的问题，这个简单而沉重的话题在任何时候都显得无奇纠结。任何试图以西方经济学理论推导中国经济问题最终走向死胡同，但是单纯从中国国情出发的话，也难以勾勒出中国经济的未来。那么，该从何种角度来解读中国经济呢？　　《解读中国经济》一书是著名经济学家林毅夫卸任世行副行长，重新回归北大课堂的第一本书，该书是林毅夫教授历时多年对开设《解读中国经济》课程的讲义，以通俗易懂，深入浅出地将经济学理论与中国实践结合在一起，全书“主要探讨了中国在近代由盛转衰的原因，以及此后几代中国知识分子为复兴民族大业所作的努力、所遭遇的挫折和取得的成就，并分析了中国未来发展的潜力和可能。”　　首先，从最著名的李约瑟问题为入点，分析为什么近代工业革命没有在中国诞生？林毅夫从现有理论和对技术、技术文明和技术变迁的理解，分析得出由于科举制度所产生的激励机制妨碍中国人对数学和可控制实验这种后天生能力的学习，因此也无法实现以经验为主的技术变迁方式向科学为指导的实验方式进行转变。　　这就决定中国经济走向没落的深渊，尽快后来有先进人士推崇洋务运动、君主立宪制，但此时已回力无天，众多的丧权辱国的条约最终导致清王朝的灭亡，不久之后十月革命的号角在中国大地唱响，社会主义在中国生根发芽。毛泽东的重农政策与蒋介石的精英政治的斗争取得胜利。但随后的苏联社会主义政策并没有让中国经济腾飞，这与社会主义本身的政治意识有很大的关联。事实证明计划经济对市场没有积极性，对生产率和创新都有很大的约束力。林毅夫在本书中详细分析了建国以来至改革开放的那段农业经济史，对于非历史专业的读者，相信对这段历史的认识的人不多，从某种角度来说，可以说是宣传的禁区。关于这一点，本书可以说是了解中国近现代史的课外补充教材。在本书中，林毅夫并没有深究这段历史背后的原因，但其思路展开了从互助组、小合作社、高级合作社和人民公社到家庭责任承包制的农业组织结构对农业政策的改革提供新思维，实践表明，农业是一切产业的基础和核心，林毅夫还专门就农业问题展开对三农问题的讨论。邓小平的改革开始实际上也是从农业政策为切入点，承包制和个体户的诞生对商品的自由流动起到了很大作用。　　当中国正在改革开放的浪潮时，亚洲四小龙却抢先一步成为全球经济的新兴力量。依据林毅夫的分析，东亚国家的崛起表明，缩小与发达国家的产业、技术差距和要素禀赋结构的差价，在市场经济的基础上按照比较优势发展，同时政府在政策上创造好外部环境，利用后发优势，发展中国家可以赶上发达国家。　　中国经济问题实质上就是三农问题、城镇改革、金融改革、分配机制等问题的综合，弄清这些问题的本源才可以对中国过去经济变迁的基本认识。在本书中，绝大多篇幅都是谈论这方面的问题。最后，也是绝大多数读者关注的焦点，中国经济的未来趋势？对这方面的问题，实际上很少有经济学家直面回答（关于房市的谈论，近年来许多经济学家变得谨慎）、甚至不愿回答（尤其是金融危机之后，包括欧美著名经济学家）。笔者认为，一方面是网络舆论导向，另一方面源缘于经济学理论本身的缺陷（因此有人怀疑现代经济学理论的失灵)。林毅夫给出的答案是，依据东亚经济体的经验，中国还有20年的高速增长期。笔者个人认为，依据当前经济形势，中国保8%的增长率不可能达到20年。　　

经济发展背后的逻辑

朋友从日企离职，抱怨现在在华日企里，日本人恶心，中国人狗腿，整体萧条一片，我只好安慰她，你看日本经济从90年代之后不就没好过嘛。上世纪80年代开始，日本经济高速发展到骤然衰落，其中有很多值得深思的原因，无论是内部的问题还是外来的危机，对于研究中国经济的发展都是一个很好的反面教材。了解经济发展背后的逻辑，才能避开大型致命的危机，使经济长效稳定的发展。本书内容并不艰深，相反的，非常平易近人。在前言里，林教授描述了一位给领导开车的司机，在读完这本书后也能与他们侃侃而谈，就可以看出林教授功底深厚。只有真正了解了经济背后运行的逻辑，才能将这些现象深入浅出的解释，使平常人也能无障碍的理解。李约瑟之谜，是书中占了一定篇幅的内容。所谓李约瑟之谜，是指古代中国一直处于一个经济地位较高的国家，却在短短的时间内突然落后于欧洲的原因之谜。显然工业革命为欧洲经济发展带来了一个飞跃，但工业革命为何没有发生在经济基础相对更好一些的中国呢？书中介绍了诸如文化决定论、国家竞争假说、专利保护说、高水平均衡陷阱假说等学术观点。结合这些观点，林教授有他自己的看法。“对做学问来说，指出现有理论的不足只是第一步，更重要的是能否在总结现有理论的基础之上提出一个能合理解释同样现象的新理论。”这也是我们在阅读本书时的宗旨，并非偏听偏信，而是通过信息的罗列获得新知。关于中国经济增长是否是真实的，我想这是很多人的疑问。鉴于独特的经济体制、政府在其中不可估量的作用，我们很难套用国外的例子来推演最后的结果。按照通常来说，通货紧缩一般伴随着经济的零增长或负增长，而中国在通货紧缩时期经济增长速度达到年均7.8%，这就足以证明中国经济是一场走钢丝般的探索，稳定的走下去就是成功，但未知的危险随时都会到来。探究中国通货紧缩的根本原因，就是发现并非是通常的需求突然下降，而是供给突然增加。生产能力的全面扩张，使得生产能力过剩，因而造成通货紧缩。这是鉴于我国的特殊国情所造成的不同境况。了解了这背后的原由，就能理解中国经济发展的数字，所有的不合情理都需要尝试去理解。资本账户的开放是当下非常热门的议题，林教授反对资本账户的完全开放，他认为开放的过程是一个很难逾越的门槛，“如果这个门槛逾越不好，很可能使原本发展很好的经济突然发生崩溃性危机。”通过对资本账户开放三领域的利弊分析，才能做出最合适的选择。本书对一些人们密切关注的经济问题做出深入浅出的解答，包括中国经济的增长是否真实、高速增长能否维持等、从历史发展中探究原因，通过国内外不同时期发生的经济状况进行对比，了解经济背后的逻辑，才能对中国经济做出正确的解读，而能否在现有的解读中得到自己的见解才是更重要的事。

要点速记

Lin, Justin, 2014, “Demystifying the Chinese Economy”, Peking University Press1.Lin defines backward advantages as: developing countries could speed up development by importing advanced technology instead of R&D by themselves which tends to be prohibitively costly. Current Chinese GDP per capita relative to US is like those of Japan in 1950s, Taiwan in 1970s and Korea in late 1970s. Such a gap in GDP per capita implies a huge technology gap and thus a huge technology import potential. So Lin is famously optimistic about Chinese economy in the next 20 years. But Lin also notes that there are a series of social, economic and institutional problems.2.Is Chinese rapid growth realistic? Some people such as Rawski argue that the Chinese growth might be false since the growth often accompanies deflation and declining energy consumptions. Lin’s explanation: the deflation is due to supply increase and energy has been used increasingly efficiently. A related question is how to deal with industrial capacity excess: (1)reduce constrains on foreign and private investments, (2)develop consumer finance, (3)stimulate demand from people living in villages who can afford but fail to buy many things due to absence of complementary infrastructures, e.g. electricity network is a prerequisite for using refrigerators.3.The Joseph Needham puzzle: (1) why China had a world leading technology in pre-modern times, (2) but in modern times it lags far behind in technology. Lin refutes a few famous explanations in that each of them only explains (1) or (2) but not both. Lin’s explanation: pre-modern technology stands on practical experiments largely in agriculture sector and ancient China had more people and more agricultural activities both in frequency and diversity; post-modern technology stands on basic science and scientific experiments which, except the past decades, were largely absent from China because the Chinese imperial examination system and related value system divert intellectuals from curiosity of the nature.4.Why socialism were welcomed in China in early 20th century: (1) major capitalist countries, though admired by most Chinese then, also humiliated China during 19th century; (2) the Soviet Union at its beginning cancelled all unequal treaties between China and Russia; (3) in 1930s, the Soviet Union economic development was undoubtedly charming to the outsiders.5.The sin of Chinese economy between 1949 and 1979 is mainly its heavy industry oriented catch-up strategy, which also prevailed in many non-socialist countries. To support a rapid growth of the heavy industry sector in a poor agricultural country with its factor endowment incompatible to the capital intensive economy, many distortions are required. That’s why we see artificial low interest rates, the overvalued exchange rate of domestic currency, suppressed factor and resource prices as well as very low prices for necessary goods especially various agricultural goods. These distortions lead to shortage which consequently entails a planning economy to allocate. Besides, if the country let firm owners invest as their own wish, then capitals would flow into light industries where returns were high. So private ownership were cancelled. Furthermore, due to these distortions, manager with autonomy would benefit themselves at the expense of country and at the same time it was hard to evaluate management outcomes, so the autonomy was also erased. To support heavy industry development, agricultural production and goods prices were tightly controlled. Agriculture was collectivized to centralize control as well as to explore economy of scale. Heavy industries absorbed limited labors but at the same time urban life was highly subsidized, so the country carried out hukou system to limit migration from rural to urban areas.6.Lin explains the 1959-1961 agriculture crisis as following. Before 1958, agriculture productivity increased due to collectivization. After 1958 and before reform, peasants were not allowed to withdraw from collectivized production units, and then without punishment on shirk, agricultural production stayed low, even though the country took measures to increase incentives and agricultural investments.7.The center of Lin’s ideasA firm is viable if it earns normal profits in a free, open and competitive market with subsidy. Industries with viable firms must comply with the comparative advantage of a country which is defined by the country’s factor endowment. If a country develops industries consistent with its factor endowment, more surplus will be accumulated and people are more eager to invest. As the country gets wealthy, its factor endowment is endogenously changed and it’s efficiency improving for resources to move from old industries to new ones consistent with the new factor endowment. These are why Asian Tigers performed well while China and other countries (not necessary socialist countries) with heavy industry oriented catch-up strategies failed. For economic activities to be consistent with the endogenously changing factor endowment, the market mechanism is necessary. Lin also emphasizes the role played by government in information collection, public good provision, social and economic coordination and tax/subsidy externalities. According to Lin, this is especially the case for developing countries for which developed countries’ experience and technology been available to import and information collection with its external effects should be subsidized or provided as public goods.8.According to Krugman, the eastern Asian growth has been mainly due to factor investment instead of increasing TFP. According to Lin, Krugman’s regression using Solow residuals to proxy TFP is not proper to understand many developing where technology advance comes hand in hand with capital accumulated by importing foreign capitals. 9.The core of reforming Chinese agriculture is to develop industries consistent with factor endowments. If labor-intensive industries absorb many agriculture labors and at the same time supply agricultural machinery, then less peasants left would produce more efficiently with modern machinery and economy of scale, as well as sell well with increased demand due to the absorption. 10.SOE bear policy burdens: social burdens such as supporting the government with economic means and absorb labors for social stability, and strategic burdens for industries inconsistent with the factor endowment but important for national security. These burdens together with information asymmetry lead to SOE seeking subsidies and monopoly position more but substantiate their own competence less. Soft budget constraints and a series of unfair and inefficient phenomena thus result. These include the various distortions mentioned in Point 4, such as distortions in factor markets and financial institutions, etc. Thus reforming SOE is of central importance to Lin and also one of the hardest parts of future reform. Even if the country suddenly privatizes SOE, due to SOE lacking viability as defined in the above 6 and consideration for basic social stability, things would not go well. So the way out is not a simple privatization but peeling off policy burdens at first. To peel off, Lin proposes: (1) government directly supervises the firms with national strategic importance which should be less in amounts; (2) capital intensive firms with a large domestic market but hardly profitable due to inconsistency with Chinese current factor endowment could choose to cooperate with foreign enterprises and thus directly utilize foreign capital and technology; (3) those without a substantial domestic market but with sufficient human capital could transfer themselves into civil use production that is consistent with the factor endowment; (4) those without advantages in human capital or market should go bankruptcy.11.The financial reform hinges t the SOE reform. Because large national banks are conducive to supporting capital intensive heavy industries and easier to be manipulated to subsidy SOE, Chinese financial system is dominated by large banks. Besides, the Chinese stock market to some sense is a way to subsidize SOE. So to reduce distortion and develop according to the comparative advantage, small-medium local banks and financial institutions that are more helpful to small-medium and relatively labor intensive industries should be encouraged or at least not be suppressed. The rationale is small-medium local financial institutions tend to have information and cost advantage when dealing with small-medium local firms which usually do not have a huge borrow in one round as a big SOE does.12.Development according to comparative advantages helps solve equality and efficiency at one shot. Here Lin also connects to the literature on inseparability between distribution and efficiency. From above we have seen the efficiency argument, his rationale for the equality part: firstly, moving from a heavy industry oriented economy to a more labor intensive economy increases employment and wages; secondly, development according to endogenously changing factor endowment reduces subsidies, distortions and monopolies, and consequently reduces inequality.13.For many Lin’s explanations and policy advices to work well, there, I think to some degree, needs to be a benevolent, though not omnipotent, ruling house.