亚洲领导人面临通胀快速上升、本币坚挺以及不请自来的资本流入等问题。但在这些问题背后，他们面临着一个更加深刻的选择：要么奉行近几十年来推动世界发展的消费驱动型资本主义，要么深吸一口气，改弦易辙，寻找到一条可持续的新路。
以往，受制于金融危机前大行其道的正统理论，亚洲别无选择。在思想上对西方亦步亦趋的亚洲，遵循着有关建立“自由市场”和“小政府”的共识路线。然而，如果继续沿这条路走下去，该地区的前景将一片黯淡，面临不均衡的出口主导型增长、粮食和水资源短缺以及环境严重退化。
从表面上看，大多数亚洲国家似乎仍在仿效这一西方模式。但实际情况要复杂得多。各国政府开始觉察到发展给社会和环境带来的后果。当前各国——不论是民主制的印度，还是一党制的中国——面临的两难困境在于，如何在保持实力的同时，着手解决这个问题。
事实上，目前正在发生一些变化。譬如，中国正在探索碳税和资源税，印度环境部长在挑战处置开发与合理利用资源之间关系的陈规陋俗。老挝已延后决定是否在湄公河下游修建一座大坝——但在此之前，人们就已逐渐认识到，近几十年的发展是建立在许多资源（尤其是水资源）定价过低基础上的，早该出台新的污染定价机制了。
此外，一些探索不同资本主义模式的试验已经拉开了序幕。依然是在中国，有关方面正在拟定计划，建设有优良公路、铁路、学校和水利系统的新型中小城镇。这些计划旨在遏止农民工涌入大城市的潮流，同时化解公众对食品安全和治安方面日益加重的担忧。倘若事实证明中国能够建成更加繁荣昌盛的农村，越南和印尼等其它人口密集国家可能会跟风效仿。
但是，这些举措虽然可取，却不足以把亚洲推上一条新路。中国和印度尤其需要提高能源税和金融交易税，同时大幅降低工资税、特别是穷人的工资税。北京市政府近期对私人购车施加了限制；其它地方也有必要出台类似措施。香港和新加坡等富裕城市则需出台提高能效的法规。
在农业方面，当务之急是减轻农业产业化对水资源和土地使用的影响，为降低粮食生产对化学品及石油的依赖铺平道路。科技也能发挥一定作用，前提是必须把着重点从生产更多消费性电子产品，转回到研制智能公共交通网络和高效水资源管理上面。此外应鼓励资源保护和循环利用措施。
当然，这种把“资源合理定价”当作政策制定核心要素的创举，在政治上势必带来巨大挑战。这类措施将增加汽车保有、航空旅行和肉类消费的成本，因为它们会揭示这些行为真实的经济和社会成本。但是，这类措施将切实造福贫困人群的主体，即目前基本上享受不到公民权的几十亿农民和农村居民。因此，这类措施从长远来看将提高政府的合法性。
不过，在过渡时期，这类措施将引起许多人的不安——不仅仅是在现行模式中拥有既得利益的企业和国家，也包括几十亿曾被告知他们也可以向往过上西方式生活的亚洲人民。但是，另辟蹊径是不可避免的。如果从现在起就行动起来，正视当前面临的资源约束，那么亚洲的前景将是光明的。而如果到2030年仍未另辟蹊径，那么亚洲不仅实现不了全民繁荣，也将无缘于任何一种形式的繁荣。
本文作者为全球未来研究所(Global Institute For Tomorrow)总裁，著有《消费经济学：亚洲在重塑资本主义和拯救地球中的作用》(Consumptionomics: Asia’s Role in Reshaping Capitalism and Saving the Planet)一书
译者/何黎
http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001038231
Asian leaders face fast-rising inflation, strong currencies and unwanted influxes of capital. But behind these they face a more profound choice. Either they pursue the consumption-fuelled capitalism that has driven world growth in recent decades. Or they can take a deep breath, change direction and find a sustainable new path.
Under the orthodoxy that held sway until the financial crisis, Asia had no options. Intellectually subservient to the west, it followed the consensus of freer markets and smaller states. But if this continues, the region will face a bleak future of unbalanced export-dominated growth, food and water shortages, and major environmental degradation.
On the face of it, it seems as if most Asian nations are still emulating this western model. But the truth is more complex. Governments are waking up to the social and environmental consequences of their growth. The dilemma now is what to do about it, while retaining power – be that in democratic India, or one-party China.
Indeed, changes are happening. For instance, China is exploring carbon and resource taxes, while India’s environment minister is challenging conventions about the links between development and the fair use of resources. Even before Laos deferred a decision to build a dam on the lower Mekong River, there was also a growing recognition that recent decades of growth had been based on underpricing many resources and especially water – and new pollution pricing mechanisms are overdue.
Some experiments in different models of capitalism are also beginning. Again in China, plans are developing to build a new network of smaller cities and towns, served by improved roads, railways, schools and irrigation. These aim to stop the flow of rural workers into large cities, while addressing growing concerns about food security and safety. If China shows it can create more prosperous rural communities, other densely populated countries, such as Vietnam and Indonesia, may follow.
However, these worthy actions will not be enough to put Asia on a new path. Instead, China and India in particular need to raise taxes on energy and financial transactions, while slashing taxes on salaries, particularly for the poor. Beijing’s city government recently imposed restrictions on private car ownership; similar measures are needed elsewhere, along with rules to improve energy efficiency in rich cities such as Hong Kong and Singapore.
In agriculture the priority is to mitigate the effect of industrial agriculture on water and land use, paving the way for a less chemical- and petroleum-dependent food production. Technology can play a part too, but only if effort is redirected away from producing more iToys and back towards smart public transport networks and efficient water management. Resource conservation and recycling measures must also be encouraged.
Of course, a radical plan to put the accurate pricing of resources at the centre of policymaking will present considerable political challenges. These measures would make car ownership, air travel and meat consumption more expensive, by revealing their true economic and social cost. But actions of this type will actually benefit the majority of poorer citizens; those billions of farmers and countryside dwellers who are now largely disenfranchised. Thus they will, in the long run, make governments more legitimate.
In the interim, however, such actions will upset many people – not just the companies and countries with vested interests in today’s model, but also the billions of Asians who have been told that they too can aspire to a western way of life. But the choice remains stark. If Asia acts now, and accepts the resource constraints that confront it today, it has a bright future. But if by 2030 no alternative is adopted, Asia will say goodbye not just to the goal of achieving prosperity for all, but also to achieving any form of prosperity.
The writer is chief executive of the Global Institute For Tomorrow, and author of Consumptionomics: Asia’s Role in Reshaping Capitalism and Saving the Planet
没有评论:
发表评论