外媒：没有中国的世界经济 [美国媒体]

The World Economy Without China

没有中国的世界经济



2016-10-27

October 27 , 2016

史蒂芬 罗奇
STEPHEN S. ROACH

摩根士丹利亚洲公司前主席，首席经济学家Stephen S. Roach是耶鲁大学杰克逊全球事务研究所的高级研究员，也是耶鲁大学管理学院的高级讲师。

Stephen S. Roach, former Chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia and the firm's chief economist, is a senior fellow at Yale University's Jackson Institute of Global Affairs and a senior lecturer at Yale's School of Management. He is the author of Unbalanced: The Codependency of America and China.

中国经济快完蛋了吗？随着债务堆积和房地产出现泡沫、国企僵化和银行苦苦挣扎，在这个危机四伏的世界里，中国越来越被看成是下一场灾难。

Is the Chinese economy about to implode? With its debt overhangs and property bubbles, its zombie state-owned enterprises and struggling banks, China is increasingly portrayed as the next disaster in a crisis-prone world.

我仍然相信，这种担心是多余的。中国有战略、资金和决心实现大规模结构转型，成为以服务业为基础的消费社会，同时成功规避令人生畏的周期性阻力。我当然知道眼下这是少数派观点。

I remain convinced that such fears are overblown, and that China has the strategy, wherewithal, and commitment to achieve a dramatic structural transformation into a services-based consumer society while successfully dodging daunting cyclical headwinds. But I certainly recognize that this is now a minority opinion.

例如，美国财长雅各布·卢仍在表达令人费解的观点，认为美国“不能是世界经济唯一发动机”。事实上美国也不是，今年中国经济对全球增长的贡献会是美国的4倍多。但也可能卢已经在他对世界经济的评估中为中国作了最糟的假设。

For example, U.S. Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew continues to express the rather puzzling view that the United States “can't be the only engine in the world economy.” Actually, it's not: The Chinese economy is on track to contribute well over four times as much to global growth as the U.S. this year. But maybe Lew is already assuming the worst for China in his assessment of the world economy.

如果中国怀疑者是对的呢？倘若中国经济真的崩溃，像多数危机国家一样增长率降到低的个位数甚至负数呢？中国当然是倒霉了，但摇摇欲坠的全球经济也在所难免。在对中国经济绝望之际，很值得从细处考虑这个思想实验。

So what if the China doubters are right? What if China's economy does indeed come crashing down, with its growth rate plunging into low single digits, or even negative territory, as would be the case in most crisis economies? China would suffer, of course, but so would an already-shaky global economy. With all the handwringing over the Chinese economy, it's worth considering this thought experiment in detail.

首先，没有中国，世界经济早已陷入衰退。今年中国经济增长率看来会达到6.7%，比大部分预测人士的预期要高得多。据全球经济指标官方裁定机构IMF的数据，中国经济占全球GDP的17.3%（按购买力平价计算）。中国实际GDP增长6.7%，相当于全球经济增长1.2%个百分点。没有中国，这一贡献就要从IMF下调到3.1%的2016年全球GDP增长预测中剔除，全球增长就会减为1.9%，大大低于通常预示全球性衰退的2.5%临界值。

For starters, without China, the world economy would already be in recession. China's growth rate this year appears set to hit 6.7% – considerably higher than most forecasters have been expecting. According to the International Monetary Fund – the official arbiter of global economic metrics – the Chinese economy accounts for 17.3% of world GDP (measured on a purchasing-power-parity basis). A 6.7% increase in Chinese real GDP thus translates into about 1.2 percentage points of world growth. Absent China, that contribution would need to be subtracted from the IMF's downwardly revised 3.1% estimate for world GDP growth in 2016, dragging it down to 1.9% – well below the 2.5% threshold commonly associated with global recessions.

所谓资源型经济体，即澳大利亚、新西兰、加拿大、俄罗斯和巴西，它们会格外受到重创。作为一个资源密集型增长的超大经济体，中国已经改变了这些GDP总量占全球9%的国家。虽然这些国家声称它们的经济结构多元，没有过度依赖中国对大宗商品的需求，但货币市场却告诉我们另一回事：只要中国修正增长预期，无论向上还是向下，它们的汇率就会同步波动。IMF目前预测，2016年上述5国经济将收缩0.7%，俄罗斯和巴西持续衰退，其他3国增长乏力。不用说，如果中国经济崩溃，这一预测会大幅下调。

Of course, that's just the direct effect of a world without China. Then there are cross-border linkages with other major economies.

当然，这只是在没有中国情况下世界受到的直接影响。中国与其他主要经济体还存在跨国关系。

The so-called resource economies – namely, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Russia, and Brazil – would be hit especially hard. As a resource-intensive growth juggernaut, China has transformed these economies, which collectively account for nearly 9% of world GDP. While all of them argue that they have diversified economic structures that are not overly dependent on Chinese commodity demand, currency markets say otherwise: whenever China's growth expectations are revised – upward or downward – their exchange rates move in tandem. The IMF currently projects that these five economies will contract by a combined 0.7% in 2016, reflecting ongoing recessions in Russia and Brazil and modest growth in the other three. Needless to say, in a China implosion scenario, this baseline estimate would be revised downward significantly.

中国的亚洲贸易伙伴也一样，它们大部分仍然是出口依赖型经济，中国市场是它们最大的外部需求来源。不仅较小的亚洲发展中国家印度尼西亚、菲律宾和泰国如此，这一地区较大、较发达的日本、韩国和台湾也是这样。这6个依赖中国的亚洲经济体共占全球GDP的11%。中国崩溃可以轻而易举地让它们总增长率减少一个百分点。

The same would be the case for China's Asian trading partners – most of which remain export-dependent economies, with the Chinese market their largest source of external demand. That is true not only of smaller Asian developing economies such as Indonesia, the Philippines, and Thailand, but also of the larger and more developed economies in the region, such as Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. Collectively, these six China-dependent Asian economies make up another 11% of world GDP. A China implosion could easily knock at least one percentage point off their combined growth rate.

美国也是例子。中国是美国第三大也是增长最快的出口市场。中国经济如果崩溃，出口需求全面枯竭，美国2016年已经在平均线下的1.6%左右的增长率会再减少0.2至0.3个百分点。

The United States is also a case in point. China is America's third-largest and most rapidly growing export market. In a China-implosion scenario, that export demand would all but dry up – knocking approximately 0.2-0.3 percentage points off already subpar U.S. economic growth of around 1.6% in 2016.

最后再说欧洲。长期以来德国是欧洲僵化经济的增长发动机，其增长仍严重依赖出口。这使中国进口的重要性日益增加。中国现在是德国第三大出口市场，仅次于欧盟和美国。如果中国经济崩溃，德国经济增长也将显着下滑，并拖累靠德国拉动的其他欧洲国家。

Finally, there is Europe to consider. Growth in Germany, long the engine of an otherwise sclerotic Continental economy, remains heavily dependent on exports. That is due increasingly to the importance of China – now Germany's third-largest export market, after the European Union and the United States. In a China implosion scenario, German economic growth could also be significantly lower, dragging down the rest of a German-led Europe.

有趣的是，在10月份刚刚发布的世界经济展望报告中，IMF用一章的篇幅分析了它所谓的“中国溢出效应”，在模型基础上对中国经济放缓的全球性影响进行了评估。与上述论点一样，IMF重点关注了中国与大宗商品出口国、亚洲出口国和它所谓“有系统性影响的发达经济体”（德国、日本和美国）的关系，这些国家最易受中国经济低迷的影响。据他们推算，亚洲受到的影响最大，其次是资源型经济体，三个发达国家的敏感程度估计是中国除日本以外亚洲贸易伙伴的一半左右。

Interestingly, in its just-released October update of the World Economic Outlook, the IMF devotes an entire chapter to what it calls a China spillover analysis – a model-based assessment of the global impacts of a China slowdown. Consistent with the arguments above, the IMF focuses on linkages to commodity exporters, Asian exporters, and what they call “systemic advanced economies” (Germany, Japan, and the US) that would be most exposed to a Chinese downturn. By their reckoning, the impact on Asia would be the largest, followed closely by the resource economies; the sensitivity of the three developed economies is estimated to be about half that of China's non-Japan Asian trading partners.

IMF的研究表明，中国的全球溢出效应会使中国增长放缓的直接影响再增大25%。这意味着如果中国经济增长停滞，按我们所做的思想实验，总的直接影响（全球增长减少1.2个百分点）和间接溢出效应（大约再减少0.3个百分点）将使当前的2016年全球增长底线预估值下降一半，从3.1%降到1.6%。虽然这远不及2009年创纪录的全球经济收缩0.1%，但与1975年（增长1%）和1982年（增长0.7%）两次全球性严重衰退相差无几。

The IMF research suggests that China's global spillovers would add about another 25% to the direct effects of China's growth shortfall. That means that if Chinese economic growth vanished into thin air, in accordance with our thought experiment, the sum of the direct effects (1.2 percentage points of global growth) and indirect spillovers (roughly another 0.3 percentage points) would essentially halve the current baseline estimate of 2016 global growth, from 3.1% to 1.6%. While that would be far short of the record 0.1% global contraction in 2009, it wouldn't be much different than two earlier deep world recessions, in 1975 (1% growth) and 1982 (0.7%).

我大概属于为数不多对中国感到乐观的人。而我对全球经济前景并不乐观，我认为世界面临的问题比中国经济大崩溃严重得多。我也许是第一人出来承认，没有中国的经济增长，危机后的世界经济会陷入巨大困境。看衰中国的人对他们所希望的事情必须小心了。
I may be one of the only China optimists left. While I am hardly upbeat about prospects for the global economy, I think the world faces far bigger problems than a major meltdown in China. Yet I would be the first to concede that a post-crisis world economy without Chinese growth would be in grave difficulty. China bears need to be careful what they wish for.

全文翻译自：《报业辛迪加》（Project Syndicate）。原文标题 The World Economy Without China（2016-10-24）。

Copyright: Project Syndicate, https://www.project-syndicate.or ... en-s--roach-2016-10


原创评论：

Christopher williams OCT 24, 2016
It is refreshing to read such a realistic commentary; one should also look at the growing Chinese investment in many parts of the developing world to see further evidence of its importance in overall fiscal support. 
Hopefully we are close to escaping the Trump version of anti-Chinese rhetoric but, as noted, there is a lack of appreciation in the current administration of the dangers of a trade dispute with China for the west.

阅读这样一个现实的评论是令人耳目一新的; 还应该看看中国在世界发展中许多地区的投资增长，以进一步证明其在总体财政支持中的重要性。
希望我们接近逃离特朗普版本的反华言论，但正如上所诉，目前对西方来说实施与中国贸易纠纷的风险是不被看好的。

peter lerner OCT 24, 2016
You may be in the minority, but you have some very distinguished and convincing company in the person of John Anderson of emadvisorsgroup, who thinks that it will be a few years at least before the China keg blows, and that the government is capable of correcting course before then. Cheers.

你属于少数派的，但是你有一些非常着名和令人信服的同伴以 emadvisorsgroup（金融顾问公司）约翰安德森为代表。他认为在中国崩溃前至少还需要一些年，而且政府有能力在这之前纠正其进程。干杯。

Fung Fui OCT 25, 2016
It's pretty amazing that China can grow its annual "earnings" at 6-7% rate in the past several years. Even many corporations can't achieve that feat.
I'm not skeptical with the country's potential but more on the authenticity of the numbers. My brother, who is a hospitality-related businessman based in Shanghai, thinks that China's growth rates have been over exaggerated for years. Based on his observations (a very intuitive one, though), 5% should be the max during good times

令人惊讶的是，中国在过去几年里可以以每年6-7％的速度增长。 即使许多企业也不能实现这个壮举。
我不怀疑该国的潜力，但更多的是数字的真实性。我的兄弟，是一个在上海与之相关的商人，他认为中国的经济增长率被夸大了许多年。根据他的观察(非常直观,不过),在形势好的时候最大值应该是5%。

yw yap OCT 25, 2016
Guess the hypocrites have found a new High (or Low) as demonstrated by their anxieties of what's happening "next door". I ponder if the so-called leaders could just work on the real problem(s) instead of investing so much in distractions and shadow play. Or are the so-called leaders just the pawns of the masters behind the curtain?

推测伪君子们发现了一个新高峰（或低）来证明他们对自己“隔壁”所发生了的事情的焦虑。我想所谓的领导应该是为真正的问题操心，而不是在一些干扰和影子戏上投入太多。还是所谓的领导只是幕后黑手的棋子？

prashanth kamath OCT 25, 2016
the Chinese economy accounts for 17.3% of world GDP (measured on a purchasing-power-parity basis). A 6.7% increase in Chinese real GDP thus translates into about 1.2 percentage points of world growth. Absent China, that contribution would need to be subtracted from the IMF’s downwardly revised 3.1% estimate for world GDP growth in 2016, dragging it down to 1.9% – well below the 2.5% threshold commonly associated with global recessions.
Isn't that a bit sloppy or twisting data to suit your argument?
PPP can be used only when comparing living standards of citizens of two different states.
Using that to say that 1.2% of world growth comes from China is perfectly inline with present day voodoo economics that is being touted by the mainstream.

中国经济占世界GDP的17.3％（以购买力平价为基础）。 中国实际GDP增长6.7％，从而转化为世界经济增长的1.2个百分点。如果没有中国，这一贡献需要从IMF向下修正的2016年世界GDP增长预测（3.1%）中剔除，将世界GDP增长率拉低至1.9%——大大低于通常伴随全球衰退出现的阈值2.5%。（引用原文内容）
这是不是有点草率或扭曲数据来满足您的论点?
购买力平价只能在比较两个不同国家的公民的生活水平时使用。
用那个来说明世界增长的1.2％来自中国，与当今被主流吹捧的巫毒经济是完全一致的。

Florian Pantazi OCT 25, 2016
"such fears are overblown" 
"China bears need to be careful what they wish for" 
I subscribe.

“这种担心是多余的”
“看衰中国的人对他们所希望的事情必须小心了。”
我赞成。

Robbie Jena OCT 30, 2016
Why we can not do the same strategy that China used since 1983...the Basic Industrial Ecosystems for the whole Planet? Just a thought.

为什么我们不能使用同样的中国自1983年以来的策略。。。。整个地球的基本工业生态系统? 只是一个想法。

Robbie Jena OCT 31, 2016
.After my China design in Basic Industrial Ecosystems (they asked for it)...I tried to do that with India and Africa...but did not have political backing neither in the USA nor in the recipient Country...so NOTHING happened since 1983. Just think...

在我的中国基础工业生态系统设计（他们要求的）之后。。我尝试着与印度和非洲这样做。。。但无论是在美国还是在接受国都没有政策支持。。。所以自1983年来啥都没发生。只是在想。。。

Peter Jarrett NOV 1, 2016
Stephen, I am surprised that you classified Indonesia as a smaller Asian economy. It is nearly twice as large as Taiwan, which you described as larger. Of course, you are correct in your assessment of its level of development, as its per capita GDP is much lower.

斯蒂芬，我很惊讶你把印度尼西亚划分为较小的亚洲经济。 它几乎是台湾的两倍，比你说的更大。当然，在对发展水平的评估中你是正确的，因为它的人均GDP要低得多。