|
|
提要：近来，罗奇访问了中东、澳大利亚和亚洲的许多国家。各国各地区的新动向令他大开眼界，也使其对全球化有了新的认识。“双赢”理论不能准确概括全球化大趋势的影响，衡量全球化的进展也不能仅仅着眼于国际贸易、资本与信息流动规模等数量上的标志，全球化应该是价值观的趋同。相比于全球化的共同利益，各国更加关注本国的利益，“地方化”也因此具有持久性。
（外脑精华·北京）近几周，我访问了世界许多国家和地区，包括日本、南非、中东各国、新加坡、中国大陆和香港以及澳大利亚，与企业家、投资者、决策者以及政府高官进行了广泛会晤。这些访问令人深有感触。
中东：资金转向当地
中东之行改变了我对该地区全球角色的看法。在不到35年的时间里，海湾产油国已经由资本输出国转变为资本使用国。正因为如此，这一次石油冲击的影响与过去截然不同。目前，中东的资本正在大量投入该地区的有形资产中，而不是回流到美元主导的金融资产。当地那些大规模开发项目就是例证，迪拜、多哈和巴林三个新都市的兴起尤为引人注目。据IMF估算，2006—2007年间，中东每年的经常项目盈余将达到3000亿美元左右，比2004—2005年间年均1400亿美元的盈余翻一番有余。而中东的资金转由内部吸收的新趋势表明，近年来该地区经常项目盈余所代表的过剩储蓄将对全球经济和世界金融市场产生巨大影响。
南非：惊人的反华情绪
南非之行令我大开眼界。约翰内斯堡和开普敦处处是繁华的景象，但该国的其他地区却完全不同。目前南非的失业率仍超过25%，就业问题和收入保障问题令人担忧。最令我吃惊的是南非的反华情绪。近年来，中国与非洲的关系发展迅速，双边贸易10年即增长10倍。中国已成为非洲资本和基础设施的重要来源，而非洲则提供了中国迫切需要的大量自然资源。
而在南非，对华经贸关系的负面影响集中体现在就业问题上——许多南非人指责低成本的中国竞争对手摧毁了该国一度欣欣向荣的纺织业。就此而言，非洲在就业问题上的反华情绪与世界许多国家并无不同。从南非的情况来看，无论是资源换资本的密切关系，还是盛大的中非论坛，都没有消除就业问题导致的反华情绪的暗流。
澳大利亚：关注环境问题
在澳大利亚，由于旱灾的困扰，人们非常关注环境问题。不过，对气候变化感到忧虑的不只是澳大利亚人。中国、亚洲其他国家以及非洲都存在类似的忧虑。实际上，世界各国对于气候变化的危险越来越忧虑，澳大利亚只是声调较高而已。可悲的是，美国仍然置身事外，至少目前依然如此。
亚洲：注重消费，相信美国，感觉良好
亚洲是一个非常多样化的地区，因此很难一概而论。不过，在走访了日本、中国大陆、香港和新加坡之后，我发现亚洲人的想法确实有一些共同之处。
首先，亚洲并不接受近来西方出现的一种观点，即新一代亚洲消费者正在改变这个地区（这种观点的代表如2006年10月19日《经济学家》的封面故事和社论）。在过去20年间，亚洲发展中国家的出口对GDP的比率已经由20%左右升至近40%。而在过去30年间，私人消费占GDP的份额则由70%降至50%以下。另外，提高消费比重、从而使经济恢复平衡的主张不仅在亚洲发展中国家得到支持，日本也认识到这种调整的重要性。日本经济复苏在各方面都表现得很出色，只有消费表现不佳。
第二，亚洲不承认美国经济增长存在出现意外低迷的可能性。美国经济经济增长受挫显然会沉重打击中国出口机器。由于在对美出口的供应链中，中国的地位日益突出，同处于供应链中的日本、韩国和中国台湾也会受到牵连。
第三，由于极其强大的流动性周期，低成本资本的猛增使得亚洲的股票和债券价格反映的风险大大缩小，日本之外的亚洲处于盲目乐观的状态中。对此，一名老练的香港投资者最近曾评论说，1997年之后，人们从没像现在这样感觉良好过。
感触：全球化的成与败
走访众多国家之后，我越来越感到，“双赢”理论未必能够准确概括全球化大趋势的影响。而且，衡量全球化的进展，不能仅仅着眼于国际贸易、资本与信息流动规模猛增这种数量上的标志。对于极为多样化的世界来说，归根结底，全球化应该是价值观的趋同。成功的全球化需要一种全球应对机制。换言之，世界应学会如何解决无法避免的国家间矛盾。反过来，失败的全球化意味着世界会屈服于地缘政治压力、贸易保护主义以及经济与金融动荡。
当前全球化的成功与失败之处都令人印象深刻。同样令人印象深刻的，是“地方化”的持久性——相比一体化的全球经济或世界金融市场的共同利益，世界各国仍然更加关注本国的利益。
全球化说来容易，做起来却要难得多。
英文原文：Global Lessons
In the past seven weeks, I have circled the globe so many times, my body has lost track of time zones. My recent travels have taken me to Japan, South Africa, the Middle East, Singapore, Hong Kong, China, and Australia. Extensive meetings with business executives, investors, policy makers, and senior government officials in all of these countries cast the global debate in a very different light. Several lessons from these travels strike me as most important.
My recent trips to the Middle East have completely changed my perceptions of this region's global role. In less than 35 years, the oil-producing states in the Gulf have gone from being exporters to users of capital. As a consequence, the ramifications of the current oil shock are very different from those of the past. Massive internal development programs -- highlighted by spectacular new urban centers in Dubai, Doha, and Bahrain -- are examples of how capital is now being put to work at home investing in tangible assets rather than recycled back into dollar-based financial assets. IMF estimates put current account surpluses of the Middle East at around $300 billion per year in 2006-07 -- more than double the average $140 billion external balances of 2004-05. The region's newfound penchant for internal absorption suggests this surge in surplus saving could well have profound consequences for the global economy and world financial markets.
My first trip to South Africa was a real eye-opener. Johannesburg and Cape Town had prosperity written all over them, but, sadly, the rest of this country did not. With the national unemployment rate still in excess of 25%, matters of job and income security entered into most of the discussions I had on this leg of my travels. What surprised me the most was the anti-China sentiment I encountered in South Africa. China, of course, has been nurturing a rapidly expanding relationship with Africa in recent years -- resulting in a ten-fold increase in cross-border trade over the past decade. China has become an important source of capital and infrastructure for the region, while Africa offers much in the way of natural resources that China so desperately needs. Yet the backlash was focused on the job front -- with many South Africans quick to blame low-cost Chinese competition for the decimation of its once thriving textile industry. In this key respect, the anti-China backlash I encountered in Africa was no different from that which is evident elsewhere in the world these days. What surprised me was that I had thought the resource-for-capital compact between Africa and China might temper that friction. A similar conclusion could be drawn from all the fanfare over the China-Africa summit held last month in Beijing -- an unprecedented gathering that included leaders from over 40 African countries. Beneath the surface, however, there can be no mistaking the undercurrent of anti-China sentiment evident in job-short South Africa.
In Australia, environmental issues came up at literally every meeting. Most concede that their unique drought-affected circumstances -- the culmination of 5-6 of the driest years on record -- have undoubtedly played a key role in bringing this issue to a head. But maybe that's precisely the point for the rest of us -- with concerns over a fragile environment mounting, it doesn't take much for national sentiment to swing. One of the more savvy Australians I met with forcefully argued, \"A year ago, post-Katrina America was just one storm away from a similar tipping point.\" Meanwhile, former US Vice President Al Gore was well received in Australia this past September, and his movie on global warming, \"An Inconvenient Truth,\" apparently struck a very receptive chord. At the same time, there was much debate over the UK's recent contribution to this debate -- the \"Stern Review,\" which dangled the tantalizing, yet highly-contentious possibility that if the world moved now, it could avoid a looming environmental catastrophe by investing a “mere” 1% of global GDP annually in measures aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions （see the pre-publication version of the “Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change,” which can be found at www.hm-treasury.gov.uk）. As I look back on my discussions with global leaders over the past seven weeks, Australia was hardly alone in voicing concerns over climate change. Similar worries were evident in China, elsewhere in Asia, and in Africa. Because of extreme circumstances, the Aussie voices may have been louder, but they are very much in line with a rising tide of global concern over the perils of climate change. Sadly, America remains on the outside looking in -- at least for now.
I have written elsewhere of the lessons I gleaned from my latest spins through Asia. It is always risky to paint such a diverse region with one brush, but there are some common threads that emerge from extensive visits to Japan, China, Singapore, and Hong Kong. First, Asia doesn’t buy the myth perpetrated in the West that a new generation of consumers is taking the region by storm （see, for example, the cover story and leader in the October 19, 2006 issue of The Economist, “America drops, Asia shops”）. Developing Asia knows full well that its export share has risen from around 20% to nearly 40% of pan-regional GDP over the past 20 years while its private consumption share has fallen from 70% to less than 50% over the past 30 years. The need for a pro-consumption rebalancing does not just find support in developing Asia but is also recognized to be of great importance in Japan, where the consumer has largely been missing in action from an otherwise impressive recovery. Second, Asia is in denial over the possibility of a growth accident in the United States. That would obviously deal a serious blow to the Chinese export machine -- as well as to the Japans, Koreas, and Taiwans that drive Asia's increasingly China-centric supply chain, which provides many of the components that go into goods that eventually get shipped to America. Finally, Asia ex Japan is blinded by a very powerful liquidity cycle -- the surging flows of low-cost capital that have priced most of the risk out of its stock and bond markets. I remember well the haunting words I heard from a seasoned investor in Hong Kong a few weeks ago, \"It hasn't felt this good since 1997.\"
Notwithstanding the jet-lag and sleep deprivation, there's nothing like the sheer exhilaration of peering into the inner sanctum of globalization. The more I travel the world, the less convinced I am that our \"win-win\" theories do this mega-trend justice. Nor do I believe that we should measure progress on the road to globalization by fixating on the quantitative metrics of surging cross-border flows of trade, capital, and information. In the end, globalization is more about the assimilation of shared values of a still very diverse world. A successful globalization requires a global coping mechanism -- a world that learns how to resolve the tensions that invariably arise between nations. A failed globalization -- as Niall Ferguson reminds us all too well of what happened in the early 20th century -- is all about a world that succumbs to geopolitical tensions, trade protectionism, and economic and financial instability.
In my multiple spins around the world this fall, I was struck by both the successes and failures of the current strain of globalization. But I was also struck by the persistence of \"localization\" -- nations that remain more caught up in self-interest rather than in the collective benefits of an integrated global economy and world financial markets. It's easy to talk the talk of globalization. It's much harder to walk the walk. That's the lesson that hit me the hardest.
来源：摩根斯坦利，2006.12.8，作者：Stephen S. Roach |
|
发表于 2006-12-31 12:35:06