世界经济仍在恶性循环

If the global economy was in trouble before the annual World Bank and IMF meetings in Tokyo last week, it is hard to believe that it is now smooth sailing. Indeed, apart from the modest stimulus provided to the Japanese economy by all the official visitors and the wealthy financial sector hangers on, it is difficult to see what of immediate value was accomplished.

世界银行(World Bank)和国际货币基金组织(IMF)年会上周在东京召开。如果说在这次会议之前，全球经济正处于困境中，那么如今我们很难相信全球经济已经一切顺利。事实上，除受到官方邀请的与会者以及希望巴结官员的金融界有钱人来到日本、对日本经济多少有些刺激之外，我们很难看出会议能带来什么立竿见影的好处。

The US still peers over a fiscal cliff, Europe staggers forward preventing crises King Canute-style with fingers in the dyke but no compelling growth strategy, and Japan remains stagnant and content if it can grow at all.

美国仍然面临跌落财政悬崖的危险；欧洲仍在蹒跚前行，试图用徒劳的方式阻止危机，根本拿不出令人信服的增长战略；而日本仍未摆脱停滞，要是经济增长率能由负转正，日本人就谢天谢地了。

The Bric countries, meanwhile, are each unhappy stories in their own way. On the one hand, they are constrained by deep problems of corruption and financial imbalances that are impeding growth, while at the same time demographic trends cast doubt on their long-term prospects.

与此同时，几个金砖国家各有各的苦恼。一方面，这些国家受到腐败、金融失衡等一些深层次问题的困扰，经济增长也受到连累。与此同时，人口条件的变化趋势也令人们对这些国家的长期前景产生质疑。

In much of the industrial world, what started as a financial problem is becoming a structural one. If growth in the US and Europe had been maintained at its average rate from 1990 to 2007, gross domestic product would have been between 10 and 15 per cent higher today and more than 15 per cent higher by 2015 on credible projections. Of course, this calculation may be misleading because global GDP in 2007 was inflated by the same factors that created financial bubbles. However, even if GDP was artificially inflated by 5 percentage points in 2007, output is still about $1tn short of what could have been expected in the US and EU. This works out to more than $12,000 for the average family.

在大多数工业化经济体中，最初的金融问题正在转变为结构性问题。据可靠估算，如果美国和欧盟一直保持1990至2007年之间的平均经济增长率，其国内生产总值(GDP)将比目前的水平高10%至15%，到2015年，其GDP将高出15%以上。当然，这个计算可能带有误导性，因为正是导致金融泡沫产生的那些因素推高了2007年全球GDP。然而，即便2007年的GDP被人为推高了5%，如今美国和欧盟的产出仍然比应有的水平低1万亿美元左右，分摊下来相当于每个家庭逾1.2万美元。

It will be argued that the process of international economic cooperation is failing. It will be suggested that there have been failures of leadership on the part of the major actors. There will be calls for changes in the international economic architecture.

有人会主张，国际经济合作进程正趋于失灵。有人会提出，大国和主要国际机构未能承担起领导的责任。有人会呼吁，国际经济架构需要改革。

There is some validity to this view. Domestic political constraints and imperatives do interfere with necessary actions in much of the world. US politics have been dysfunctional in the run up to the 2012 election. The EU sometimes makes the US Congress look like a model of crisp efficiency in making decisions. In Russia and China, authoritarian leaders who lack legitimacy struggle to drive economic reform, but so do those with democratic mandates in India and Brazil.

这种观点有一定道理。在世界大部分地方，国内政治的制约因素和当务之急确实会妨碍我们采取必要的行动。美国忙于2012年总统选举，政治陷入失灵。但与欧盟相比，美国国会有时候简直可算是高效决策的典型。在俄罗斯和中国，缺乏执政合法性的专制领导人在推动经济改革方面举步维艰，但在印度和巴西，民主选出的政府也面临同样的问题。

Concern about politics and the processes of international cooperation is warranted but the best one can hope for from politics in any country is that it will drive rational responses to serious problems. If there is no consensus on the causes or solutions to serious problems, it is unreasonable to ask a political system to implement forceful actions in a sustained way. Unfortunately, this is to an important extent the case with respect to current economic difficulties, especially in the industrial world.

对政治和国际合作进程的担忧是合理的，但在任何国家，我们对政治的最好期待就是，它能够推动重大问题得到理性回应。如果无法在一些重大问题的原因或解决方案上达成共识，那么，要求一个政治体系持续采取强有力的行动就是没有道理的。糟糕的是，就目前的经济难题（特别是在各工业化经济体中）而言，情况相当大程度上就是如此。

While there is agreement on the need for more growth and job creation in the short run and on containing the accumulation of debt in the long run, there are deep differences of opinion both within and across countries as to how this can be accomplished. What might be labelled the “orthodox view attributes much of our current difficulty to excess borrowing by the public and private sectors, emphasises the need to contain debt, puts a premium on credibly austere fiscal and monetary policies, and stresses the need for long-term structural measures rather than short-term demand-oriented steps to promote growth.

尽管人们都同意，就短期而言，必须加快经济增长，必须创造更多工作岗位，就长期而言，必须控制债务增长，然而，各国内部和各国之间就如何实现这些目标存在深刻分歧。所谓的“正统观点认为，目前我们面临的大部分困难，都是公共和私人部门过度借贷造成的。这个观点强调控制债务的必要，看重实施可靠的紧缩性财政和货币政策，同时强调必须采取调整结构的长远举措，而非着眼于需求的短期举措，来促进经济增长。

The alternative “demand support view also recognises the need to contain debt accumulation and avoid high inflation, but it pushes for steps to increase demand in the short run as a means of jump-starting economic growth and setting off a virtuous circle in which income growth, job creation and financial strengthening are mutually reinforcing.

另一种“需求支撑观点也认识到，控制债务增长和避免高通胀是必要的，但这个观点认为，应采取措施增加短期需求，从而快速启动经济增长，带动收入增长、就业岗位增加、财政改善三者互相促进的良性循环。

International economic dialogue has vacillated between these two viewpoints in recent years. At moments of particularly acute concern about growth, such as in spring 2010 and now, the IMF and many but not all monetary and fiscal authorities tend to emphasise demand-support views. But the moment clouds start to lift, orthodoxy reasserts itself and attention shifts to fiscal contraction and long-run financial hygiene.

在近年来的国际经济讨论中，这两种观点轮流占据上风。在增长问题格外尖锐的时候，比如2010年春和现在，IMF和其他许多（但不是全部）货币与财政权威机构倾向于“需求支撑观点。而一旦乌云开始消散，正统观点就会重新得势，人们又把注意力转移到财政收缩和金融体系的长期健康上面。

This is a dangerous cycle whatever your economic beliefs. Doctors who prescribe antibiotics warn their patients that they must complete the full course even if they feel much better quickly. Otherwise they risk a recurrence of illness and worse yet the development of more antibiotic resistance. So too with economic policy. Advocates of orthodoxy prize consistency. Those like me whose economic thinking emphasises promoting demand worry that expansionary policies carried out for too short a time will prove insufficient to kick-start growth while at the same time discrediting their own efficacy and reducing confidence.

无论你秉持哪种经济观点，这都是一种危险的循环。医生开抗生素时会告诫病人，即便病情很快好转，也一定要吃完整个疗程。否则不仅病情可能复发，更糟的是，还会导致更多病菌产生抗药性。经济政策也是一样。正统观点的支持者看重连贯性。经济观点偏重促进需求的人（比如我）担心的是，扩张性政策如果维持的时间过短，可能不仅不能快速启动增长，反而会损害政策本身的可信度，降低人们对政策的信心。

The Tokyo meetings may not have had immediate impact. But the IMF’s emphasis on the need to sustain demand and its recognition of the importance of avoiding lurches to austerity can be very important for the medium term only if it is sustained through the next round of economic fluctuations.

本次东京年会可能没有达到立竿见影的效果。但从中期来看，IMF在会上提出的两点：维持需求的必要性、以及避免政策突然转向紧缩的重要性，可能是非常重要的——如果IMF在下一轮经济波动中能够维持它的观点不变的话。

The writer is Charles W. Eliot university professor at Harvard and a former US Treasury secretary

本文作者是美国哈佛大学(Harvard University)查尔斯·W·艾略特大学教授(Charles W. Eliot University Professor)、前美国财长