Economist - 中印两国经济模式不同 印度超越中国迟早的事

中印两国经济模式不同 印度超越中国迟早的事 文章来源: 薛涌 于 2010-10-27 08:58:44 中印两国经济模式不同 印度超越中国迟早的事 薛涌 　中国和印度两国的经济模式不同，本来可以是"你走你的阳关道，我走我的独木桥"，大家互不相扰。问题是，这样的局面究竟能够维持多久？ 　　2010年10月第一期的《经济学人》杂志，以《印度的增长将怎样超越中国》作为封面故事。《经济学人》一向以新古典主义经济学为指针，坚持市场经济原则，并以精英阅读包装自己，在中国经济学界和媒体中很受青睐。即使在英语世界，各种报刊在互联网的冲击下几乎溃不成军，销量大减，甚至不得不转向或关门，《经济学人》则一枝独秀，行情看涨。其言论的世界影响力也越来越大。只可惜《经济学人》如此隆重的封面故事，居然在"当事者"的中国引不起一点舆论的涟漪。 　　《经济学人》并没有故作耸人听闻之论。相反，它指出了印度相对于中国的种种劣势：印度的市场改革起步晚、底子薄，GDP不过是中国的四分之一，识字率仅为66%，大大低于中国的93%，更不用说基础设施破败，腐败横行，政府远不如中国政府有效率，等等，等等。但是，印度如今的经济增长已经达到 8.5%，而且可能将加速。摩根斯坦利的专家预测，在未来三到五年内，印度的增长速度将超过中国。具体地说，中国的增长速度将维持在8%左右，印度则会达到9-10%。在接下来的20-25年中，印度将成为世界主要经济体中增长最快的国家。其他专家的预测，也都大同小异。 　　印度赶超中国的本钱在哪里?第一在人口，第二在制度。当然，这两者有是紧密相连的。在上个世纪七十年代，印度总理英迪拉-甘地宣布国家进入人口的紧急状态，大力推行节育措施，结果引起普遍的抗议，最终不得不放弃强制的人口控制政策，导致人口继续猛涨。中国政府则显示了无与伦比的效率，大力推行计划生育政策，人口增长速度迅速被控制。难怪许多人把中国的经济奇迹归结于计划生育所带来的"人口红利"。 　　但是，中印政府在人口政策上的这场效率竞争，正越来越变得象是场龟兔赛跑。如今我们正站在逆转的关口上。计划生育的高效率，使中国迅速进入了老龄化。以15岁以下和64以上的被扶养人口在总人口中的比例计，中国和印度在1960年前后都达到甚至超过了80%，日后急剧下降。到2010年，中国的这个比例跌破了40%，充分兑现了"人口红利"，印度则仍然在56%的水平上，负担比中国重得多。但是，大家"负重"虽然非常不同，经济增长率却已经相当接近了。 　　接下来的两三年，中国的被扶养人口开始急剧回升，印度则继续走低。大约15后，两国被扶养人口的比例大致相等。到了2030年，中国的被扶养人口比例将达到50%，印度则为45%左右。到了2050年，中国的被扶养人口比例高居62-63%左右，印度则在48%上下，双方的差距可达15个百分点。用另一个更为近期的指标来衡量，到2020年印度的中等年龄仅为28岁，美国为38岁，西欧为45岁，日本为49岁，中国则为37岁。日后中国人越来越老，中等年龄超过美国，印度人则还会更年轻一些。结果是，2020年印度将添加1.36亿劳动人口，中国则只能添加230万。 　　社会学家孔德有句名言："人口就是命运"。干活的人少了，被扶养的人多了，经济发展速度就会降下来。这就象现在的奥林匹克运动，虽然发达的医疗、营养、和科学训练可以使某些老运动员成为常青树，但37岁的要和28岁的竞争，毕竟有着无可否认的天然劣势。美国、日本战后的高度经济增长，中国今天的经济奇迹，无不和人口的增长和结构息息相关。比人手的多少也许更为重要的是，年轻人更具创新倾向，这在高科技的知识经济时代特别突出。看看近几十年的关键性突破，从微软、雅虎，到谷歌、FACEBOOK,创立者都是年轻人。这在印度已经体现得非常清楚。比如，印度的世界级企业Infosys的创立者，有七位当时是二十几岁的年轻人。2000年创立的IT企业Globals，其CEO年仅24岁。乃至西方人惊叹，印度的经济是被4 50万企业家所驱动。 　　这种创新精神，不仅被年轻人的旺盛精力所驱动，而且得到了充分的制度保证 。这又是印度比之中国的另一大优势。中国政府在基础设施建设等等方面雷厉风行。印度的民主制度相比之下则缺乏基本的效率。但是，印度在保护知识产权上，则比中国有效率得多。这也难怪，印度在高科技领域的创意如同井喷一样地爆发，产生了一批世界级企业。中国的企业，则越来越依靠政府支持的垄断来扩张。印度企业式的创新，在中国实在难得一见。 　　中印经济模式不同，本来可以是"你走你的阳关道，我走我的独木桥"，大家互不相扰。问题是，这样的局面究竟能够维持多久?要知道，印度的教育水准非常低，大部分人口不可能投身于高科技产业。这一印度经济的致命弱点，其实也是对中国经济的巨大威胁。目前印度的制造业寸步难行，一大原因是基础设施过于落后。但是，这一局面正在缓慢地改善。当印度的高科技带来了相当的财富，大部分人口又因为教育程度过低而被锁住经济繁荣之外时，就有可能激发新的社会共识，以新积累的财富投资于基础设施建设，让教育水平低的人从制造业中求发展。一旦印度在这方面达到了及格线，其年轻得多也便宜得多的人口，就会在制造业上建立对中国的优势。二十年后，国际制造业向印度转移恐怕不会是什么天方 夜谭。到那时，印度之得就是中国之失，要"双赢"恐怕并不容易。 　　印度超越中国，当然不会一夜之间发生。但是，在"八十年代后"或"九十年代后"们的人生之中，这恐怕早晚要面临这样的挑战。所以，对照印度反省"中国模式"，现在并不算超前。 India's economy India's surprising economic miracle The country's state may be weak, but its private companies are strong Sep 30th 2010 HORRIBLE toilets. Stagnant puddles buzzing with dengue-spreading mosquitoes. Collapsing masonry. Lax security. A terrorist attack. India's preparations for the 72-nation Commonwealth games, which are scheduled to open in Delhi on October 3rd, have not won favourable reviews. "Commonfilth", was one of the kinder British tabloid headlines. At best—assuming that the organisers make a last-minute dash to spruce things up—the Delhi games will be remembered as a shambles. The contrast with China's practically flawless hosting of the Olympic games in 2008 could hardly be starker. Many people will draw the wrong lesson from this. A big sporting event, some people believe, tells you something important about the nation that hosts it. Efficient countries build tip-top stadiums and make the shuttle buses run on time. That India cannot seem to do any of these things suggests that it will always be a second-rate power. Or does it? Despite the headlines, India is doing rather well. Its economy is expected to expand by 8.5% this year. It has a long way to go before it is as rich as China—the Chinese economy is four times bigger—but its growth rate could overtake China's by 2013, if not before (see article). Some economists think India will grow faster than any other large country over the next 25 years. Rapid growth in a country of 1.2 billion people is exciting, to put it mildly. Related items Business in India: A bumpier but freer roadSep 30th 2010 People power There are two reasons why India will soon start to outpace China. One is demography. China's workforce will shortly start ageing; in a few years' time, it will start shrinking. That's because of its one-child policy—an oppressive measure that no Indian government would get away with. Indira Gandhi tried something similar in the 1970s, when she called a state of emergency and introduced a forced-sterilisation programme. There was an uproar of protest. Democracy was restored and coercive population policies were abandoned. India is now blessed with a young and growing workforce. Its dependency ratio—the proportion of children and old people to working-age adults—is one of the best in the world and will remain so for a generation. India's economy will benefit from this "demographic dividend", which has powered many of Asia's economic miracles. The second reason for optimism is India's much-derided democracy. The notion that democracy retards development in poor countries has gained currency in recent years. Certainly, it has its disadvantages. Elected governments bow to the demands of selfish factions and interest groups. Even the most urgent decisions are endlessly debated and delayed. China does not have this problem. When its technocrats decide to dam a river, build a road or move a village, the dam goes up, the road goes down and the village disappears. The displaced villagers may be compensated, but they are not allowed to stand in the way of progress. China's leaders make rational decisions that balance the needs of all citizens over the long term. This has led to rapid, sustained growth that has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. Small wonder that authoritarians everywhere cite China as their best excuse not to allow democracy just yet. No doubt a strong central government would have given India a less chaotic Commonwealth games, but there is more to life than badminton and rhythmic gymnastics. India's state may be weak, but its private companies are strong. Indian capitalism is driven by millions of entrepreneurs all furiously doing their own thing. Since the early 1990s, when India dismantled the "licence raj" and opened up to foreign trade, Indian business has boomed. The country now boasts legions of thriving small businesses and a fair number of world-class ones whose English-speaking bosses network confidently with the global elite. They are less dependent on state patronage than Chinese firms, and often more innovative: they have pioneered the $2,000 car, the ultra-cheap heart operation and some novel ways to make management more responsive to customers. Ideas flow easily around India, since it lacks China's culture of secrecy and censorship. That, plus China's rampant piracy, is why knowledge-based industries such as software love India but shun the Middle Kingdom. India's individualistic brand of capitalism may also be more robust than China's state-directed sort. Chinese firms prosper under wise government, but bad rulers can cause far more damage in China than in India, because their powers are so much greater. If, God forbid, another Mao were to seize the reins, there would be no mechanism for getting rid of him. That is a problem for the future. For now, India's problems are painfully visible. The roads are atrocious. Public transport is a disgrace. Many of the country's dynamic entrepreneurs waste hours each day stuck in traffic. Their firms are hobbled by the costs of building their own infrastructure: backup generators, water-treatment plants and fleets of buses to ferry staff to work. And India's demographic dividend will not count for much if those new workers are unemployable. India's literacy rate is rising, thanks in part to a surge in cheap private schools for the poor, but it is still far behind China's. Advantage India The Indian government recognises the need to tackle the infrastructure crisis, and is getting better at persuading private firms to stump up the capital. But the process is slow and infected with corruption. It is hard to measure these things, but many observers think China has done a better job than India of curbing corruption, with its usual brutal methods, such as shooting people. Given the choice between doing business in China or India, most foreign investors would probably pick China. The market is bigger, the government easier to deal with, and if your supply chain for manufactured goods does not pass through China your shareholders will demand to know why. But as the global economy becomes more knowledge-intensive, India's advantage will grow. That is something to ponder while stuck in the Delhi traffic. Leaders