Paul Collier's new rules for rebuilding a broken nation

翻译人员: Sarah Wu 校对人员: Tony Yet

I'm going to talk about post-conflict recovery

我要谈的是关于冲突后的重建

and how we might do post-conflict recovery better.

以及怎样将重建做得更好。

The record on post-conflict recovery is not very impressive.

这方面的记录并不是很好。

40 percent of all post-conflict situations,

历史上，经过冲突后重建的地区，

historically, have reverted back to conflict within a decade.

有40%在十年内再次发生冲突。

In fact, they've accounted for half of all civil wars.

实际上，他们占了所有内战的一半。

Why has the record been so poor?

记录为什么这么差呢？

Well, the conventional approach

嗯，传统的

to post-conflict situations

应对冲突后情况的方法

has rested on, on kind of, three principles.

可以说，都是基于三个原则。

The first principle is: it's the politics that matters.

第一个原则是：政治才是事关重要的。

So, the first thing that is prioritized is politics.

所以，首先被给予优先的是政治，

Try and build a political settlement first.

即应该先试着从政治角度解决。

And then the second step is to say,

然后是第二步，是宣称：

"The situation is admittedly dangerous, but only for a short time."

“情况确实很危险，但只是暂时的。”

So get peacekeepers there, but get them home as soon as possible.

于是就会派维和人员过去，不过要让他们尽快撤出。

So, short-term peacekeepers.

因此，第二个原则就是短期维和。

And thirdly, what is the exit strategy for the peacekeepers?

第三个原则：维和人员撤出的策略是什么？

It's an election.

是选举，

That will produce a legitimate and accountable government.

通过选举产生一个合法负责的政府。

So that's the conventional approach.

这就是传统应对冲突后状况的方法了。

I think that approach denies reality.

我认为这种方法是在否认现实。

We see that there is no quick fix.

我们很明白根本不可能速战速决。

There's certainly no quick security fix.

根本也不可能短期就实现维和。

I've tried to look at the risks of reversion to conflict,

我试着观察，在冲突结束后的十年间，

during our post-conflict decade.

再次发生冲突的风险。

And the risks stay high throughout the decade.

结论是，整个十年间，这种风险都很高，

And they stay high regardless of the political innovations.

并且不因政治革新而减低。

Does an election produce an accountable and legitimate government?

此外，选举能产生合法可靠的政府吗？

What an election produces is a winner and a loser.

不，选举产生的是一个赢家和一个失败者。

And the loser is unreconciled.

而失败者是不会甘心的。

The reality is that we need to reverse the sequence.

实际上，我们应该调换一下顺序，

It's not the politics first;

政治不应该排第一，

it's actually the politics last.

而应该是最后。

The politics become easier as the decade progresses

冲突后十年间，政治会变得更容易，

if you're building on a foundation

如果重建是以安定和经济发展

of security and economic development --

为基础。

the rebuilding of prosperity.

重建繁荣

Why does the politics get easier?

为什么政治会变的更容易呢？

And why is it so difficult initially?

还有，为什么原来那么困难？

Because after years of stagnation and decline,

因为经过多年的发展停滞和倒退

the mentality of politics is that it's a zero-sum game.

政客会持一种“零和”心态，即一方有所得，另一方必有所失，得失相加等于零。

If the reality is stagnation,

现实既然停滞不动，

I can only go up if you go down.

那么如果有人下台，就得有人上台。

And that doesn't produce a productive politics.

以这样的心态从政，是没法有什么成果的。

And so the mentality has to shift from

因此，心态必须改变，

zero-sum to positive-sum

由“零和”变成“正和”，

before you can get a productive politics.

这样政治才可能出成果。

You can only get positive, that mental shift,

要想得到好的结果，就要转变心态，

if the reality is that prosperity is being built.

相信繁荣正在恢复。

And in order to build prosperity, we need security in place.

要重建繁荣，安全措施就要到位。

So that is what you get when you face reality.

这才是面对现实的好处。

But the objective of facing reality

不过，面对现实的目的

is to change reality.

是为了改变现实。

And so now let me suggest

因此，接下来我想提

two complimentary approaches

两条补充办法

to changing the reality of the situations.

来改变现状。

The first is to recognize the interdependence

第一条是认识到三个主要角色的相互依赖性——

of three key actors, who are different actors,

这三个因素各不相同

and at the moment are uncoordinated.

且目前还不能协调运作。

The first actor is the Security Council.

第一个角色是安全委员会，

The Security Council typically has the responsibility

它一般负责

for providing the peacekeepers

输送维和人员

who build the security.

来维持安定。

And that needs to be recognized,

这里，首先要肯定的是

first of all, that peacekeeping works.

维和是有用的，

It is a cost-effective approach.

是一种低成本高效率的方法，

It does increase security.

能切实提高社会的安全度。

But it needs to be done long-term.

不过，要强调的是，维和应该是一项长期工程，

It needs to be a decade-long approach,

持续时间应达上十年，

rather than just a couple of years.

而不是三两年就完事了。

That's one actor, the Security Council.

这是安全委员会这个角色。

The second actor, different cast of guys,

第二个来自另一个阶层的角色，

is the donors.

是捐助者，

The donors provide post-conflict aid.

他们在冲突发生后提供资助。

Typically in the past,

过去经常发生的情况是，

the donors have been interested in the first couple of years,

捐助者在头几年里很热心，

and then they got bored.

可后来就失去了兴趣，

They moved on to some other situation.

转去关注其它事件。

Post-conflict economic recovery

然而实际是，冲突后的经济复苏

is a slow process.

是一个缓慢的过程。

There are no quick processes in economics

经济学上没有什么是能很快就发生，

except decline.

除了经济衰退，

You can do that quite fast.

这个发生起来可快了。

(Laughter)

（观众笑）

So the donors have to stick with this situation

所以，捐助者要坚持下去，

for at least a decade.

至少坚持捐助一个事件十年。

And then the third key actor

然后是第三个重要角色，

is the post-conflict government.

冲突后的政府。

And there are two key things it's got to do.

有两件重要的事是它必须要做的。

One is it's got to do economic reform,

一是必须要经济改革，

not fuss about the political constitution.

而不是在政治格局方面争论不休。

It's got to reform economic policy.

它要做的是革新经济政策。

Why? Because during conflict

为什么？因为冲突发生时，

economic policy typically deteriorates.

经济政策一般都会恶化。

Governments snatch short-term opportunities

政府只顾攫取短期利益，

and, by the end of the conflict, the chickens have come home to roost.

到冲突结束时，就会发现害人终害己。

So this legacy of conflict is really bad economic policy.

所以冲突的一个产物就是恶性经济政策。

So there is a reform agenda, and there is an inclusion agenda.

那么就要有一个改革计划，以及一个吸纳各方力量的计划。

The inclusion agenda doesn't come from elections.

这个吸纳计划不是通过选举产生——

Elections produce a loser, who is then excluded.

选举产生的是失败者，要排除在外。

So the inclusion agenda means genuinely

吸纳计划是真正

bringing people inside the tent.

将人们集聚到同一个帐营下来。

So those three actors.

这就是重建繁荣的三个重要角色，

And they are interdependent

他们在很长的一段时期内，

over a long term.

是相互依赖的。

If the Security Council doesn't commit to security

如果安全委员会

over the course of a decade,

十年内不能致力于社会安定，

you don't get the reassurance which produces private investment.

就没法让人安心进行个人投资；

If you don't get the policy reform and the aid,

如果没有政策改革和捐助，

you don't get the economic recovery,

经济就不能复苏，

which is the true exit strategy for the peacekeepers.

维和人员就没法真正撤出。

So we should recognize that interdependence,

因此，对于这种相互依赖性，

by formal, mutual commitments.

应该以各方的正式承诺来相互认定。

The United Nations actually has a language

事实上，联合国对于这种相互承诺，

for these mutual commitments, the recognition of mutual commitments;

有专门的表述，

it's called the language of compact.

叫做约定语言，

And so we need a post-conflict compact.

而我们需要的就是冲突后约定。

The United Nations even has an agency which could broker these compacts;

联合国甚至还有个对这类约定仲裁的机构，

it's called the Peace Building Commission.

叫做“和平建立委员会”。

It would be ideal to have a standard set of norms

要是有一套标准就理想了，

where, when we got to a post-conflict situation,

这样不论何时何地出现冲突后事件，

there was an expectation of these mutual commitments

人们可以期待上述三个角色

from the three parties.

建立履行这些承诺。

So that's idea one:

以上是我的两条改变冲突后现状的补充方法之一——

recognize interdependence.

认识相互依赖性。

And now let me turn to the second approach, which is complimentary.

下面我要讲的是第二个补充办法，

And that is to focus on a few critical objectives.

即专注于实现几个关键目标。

Typical post-conflict situation is a zoo

传统的冲突后情况就像一个动物园，

of different actors with different priorities.

里面有许多不同的角色，他们都有不同的侧重点。

And indeed, unfortunately, if you navigate by needs

如果以需求为导向，那么很不幸的，

you get a very unfocused agenda,

将会有一堆杂乱、没有重点的事要办。

because in these situations, needs are everywhere,

这是因为冲突后，需求无处不在，

but the capacity to implement change is very limited.

而满足这些需求的能力是有限的。

So we have to be disciplined and focus on things that are critical.

所以我们应有秩序，集中解决关键的事。

And I want to suggest that in the typical post-conflict situation

我的建议是，在一般的冲突后情况下，

three things are critical.

三件事是关键的。

One is jobs.

一是就业，

One is improvements in basic services --

一是改进基础服务，

especially health, which is a disaster during conflict.

尤其是卫生，冲突时根本无卫生可言。

So jobs, health, and clean government.

另一个是廉洁的政府。

Those are the three critical priorities.

这三者是当务之急。

So I'm going to talk a little about each of them.

下面我会就这三者稍微分别谈论一下。

Jobs.

就业

What is a distinctive approach

什么方法是明确有效的，

to generating jobs in post-conflict situations?

能在冲突后的地区创造就业机会？

And why are jobs so important?

还有为什么就业如此重要？

Jobs for whom? Especially jobs for young men.

让谁就业？首要是年轻男人。

In post-conflict situations,

发生过冲突的地区，

the reason that they so often revert to conflict,

之所以日后常常再次发生冲突，

is not because elderly women get upset.

不是因为上了年纪的妇女，

It's because young men get upset.

而是因为年轻男人不安分。

And why are they upset? Because they have nothing to do.

他们为什么不安分？因为他们没事做。

And so we need a process of generating jobs,

正因此，要有套流程，

for ordinary young men, fast.

给普通年轻男人制作工作机会，而且要快。

Now, that is difficult.

而要做到这一点，是不容易的。

Governments in post-conflict situation

冲突后的政府

often respond by puffing up the civil service.

通常的应对方式是猛招公务员。

That is not a good idea.

这不是个好方法。

It's not sustainable.

它不是长久之计。

In fact, you're building a long-term liability

实际上，把政府部门变得臃肿，

by inflating civil service.

是在欠下长期债务。

But getting the private sector to expand is also difficult,

然而，要让私人行业扩张也很困难。，

because any activity which is open to international trade

因为任何国际贸易相关的业务

is basically going to be uncompetitive

在冲突后情况下

in a post-conflict situation.

基本都不会有竞争力。

These are not environments where you can build export manufacturing.

这种环境下发展出口型生产是行不通的。

There's one sector which isn't exposed to international trade,

有一个行业，跟国际贸易无关，

and which can generate a lot of jobs,

并且能创造很多工作机会，

and which is, in any case, a sensible sector

而且这个行业，无论怎么说，

to expand, post-conflict,

在冲突后扩大，都是很明智的。

and that is the construction sector.

它就是建筑业。

The construction sector has a vital role,

建筑业很明显，在重建中，

obviously, in reconstruction.

扮演关键角色。

But typically that sector has withered away during conflict.

不过冲突过程中，它一般都萎缩掉了。

During conflict people are doing destruction.

冲突时，人们是破坏建筑，

There isn't any construction going on. And so the sector shrivels away.

没有任何工程在建，行业也因此收缩了。

And then when you try and expand it,

那么当想要扩张的时候，

because it's shriveled away,

由于行业已经收缩了，

you encounter a lot of bottlenecks.

就会碰到很多瓶颈。

Basically, prices soar

基本的，价格飞涨，

and crooked politicians then milk the rents from the sector,

不良政客还要从中牟利，

but it doesn't generate any jobs.

却没有新的工作岗位产生。

And so the policy priority is to break the bottlenecks

为此，应有政策优先打破

in expanding the construction sector.

妨碍建筑业扩张的瓶颈。

What might the bottlenecks be?

瓶颈有哪些？

Just think what you have to do

只要设想一下有个建筑项目，要雇用大量劳动力，

successfully to build a structure, using a lot of labor.

有什么是要顺利完成的，就清楚了。

First you need access to land.

首先需要土地。

Often the legal system is broken down

通常这个时候法律系统是瘫痪的，

so you can't even get access to land.

可能根本没法得到土地。

Secondly you need skills,

其次需要技术，

the mundane skills of the construction sector.

建筑业必须的技术。

In post-conflict situations we don't just need Doctors Without Borders,

冲突后，需要的不只是无国界医生，

we need Bricklayers Without Borders,

还需要无国界的砖瓦匠

to rebuild the skill set.

来重新掌握技术。

We need firms. The firms have gone away.

另外还需要公司。原来的公司已经撤掉了，

So we need to encourage the growth of local firms.

那就要鼓励发展地方企业。

If we do that, we not only get the jobs,

这样做，不仅能制造就业机会，

we get the improvements in public infrastructure,

还能改善基础公共设施，

the restoration of public infrastructure.

修复基础公共设施。

Let me turn from jobs to the second objective,

讲了就业，下面要讲第二个目标，

which is improving basic social services.

即改善基础社会服务。

And to date, there has been a sort of a schizophrenia

然而至今为止，关于冲突后情况下，

in the donor community,

如何改善基本服务，

as to how to build basic services

在捐助者群体中，

in post-conflict sectors.

存在着一种精神分裂。

On the one hand it pays lip service

一方面，他们嘴上说的很好听，

to the idea of rebuild an effective state

要重建一个有效的国家，

in the image of Scandinavia in the 1950s.

以50年代的斯堪的纳维亚为蓝本；

Lets develop line ministries of this, that, and the other,

设立这样那样的部

that deliver these services.

来提供这些服务。

And it's schizophrenic because in their hearts

说捐助者们精神分裂，是因为他们心里知道

donors know that's not a realistic agenda,

这样的计划是不现实的。

and so what they also do is the total bypass:

所以尽管这样说，他们做的却是绕道而行，

just fund NGOs.

即资助非政府组织。

Neither of those approaches is sensible.

这些方法其实都行不通。

And so what I'd suggest

我的建议，

is what I call Independent Service Authorities.

我把它叫做“独立服务权威机构”。

It's to split the functions of a monopoly line ministry up into three.

这个机构把原来政府一把抓的职能分成三个部分

The planning function and policy function stays with the ministry;

规划和制定政策的功能仍归政府部门，

the delivery of services on the ground,

而政策服务的实地执行

you should use whatever works --

要启用任何可用的力量，

churches, NGOs, local communities,

包括教堂，民间组织，当地社区等，

whatever works.

所有的力量。

And in between, there should be a public agency,

而这中间，应该有一个公共机构，

the Independent Service Authority,

也就是我说的“地理服务权威机构”，

which channels public money,

负责将公众的钱

and especially donor money,

特别是捐款

to the retail providers.

发放给各类服务的供应商。

So the NGOs become part of a public government system,

这样，民间组织就变成了一个公共政府系统的一部分，

rather than independent of it.

而不是独立于政府之外的。

One advantage of that is that you can allocate money coherently.

这样做，一个好处是可以系统地分配钱，

Another is, you can make NGOs accountable.

另外还能使民间组织对自身的行为负责。

You can use yardstick competition,

为此，可以设立竞争的标准，

so they have to compete against each other

这样不同的民间组织可以互相竞争

for the resources.

来获取资源。

The good NGOs, like Oxfam, are very keen on this idea.

优秀的民间组织，如Oxfam，就会赞成这种做法，

They want to have the discipline and accountability.

他们希望有纪律性和责任制。

So that's a way to get basic services scaled up.

以上讲的就是改善基础服务的一个方法。

And because the government would be funding it,

由于这个方法政府也要赞助，

it would be co-branding these services.

因此可以给活动命名时加上自己的名义。

So they wouldn't be provided thanks to

这样活动就不是

the United States government and some NGO.

以美国政府和某个非政府组织的名义了，

They would be co-branded

而是可以加上

as being done by the post-conflict government, in the country.

冲突后国家的政府的名义。

So, jobs, basic services, finally, clean government.

这样，就业和基础服务有了，最后还有了廉洁的政府。

Clean means follow their money.

“廉洁”指的是追踪钱的去处。

The typical post-conflict government is so short of money

一般的冲突后政府都会急缺钱，

that it needs our money

甚至到了要靠我们的捐款

just to be on a life-support system.

来维持生命。

You can't get the basic functions of the state done

如果我们不给这些国家提供核心预算的钱，

unless we put money into the core budget of these countries.

他们的政府基本职能就没法实现。

But, if we put money into the core budget,

但如果我们投了钱进去，

we know that there aren't the budget systems with integrity

我们知道不会有可靠的预算体系

that mean that money will be well spent.

来保证钱用的到位。

And if all we do is put money in and close our eyes

所以，如果我们只是捐钱，然后就什么都不管，

it's not just that the money is wasted --

那么不只钱会被浪费，

that's the least of the problems --

这个问题还是最其次的，

it's that the money is captured.

问题是这些钱会被利用了，

It's captured by the crooks who are at the heart of the political problem.

被那些侵蚀政府的蛀虫给利用了，

And so inadvertently we empower the people who are the problem.

而无意中，我们就成了这些蛀虫的帮凶。

So building clean government means, yes, provide money

所以要构建廉洁的政府，的确是要

to the budget,

提供资金来做预算，

but also provide a lot of scrutiny,

但同时还要提供充分的监督，

which means a lot of technical assistance that follows the money.

即提供了钱之后，还要提供大量的技术支持来追踪钱的去向。

Paddy Ashdown, who was the grand high nabob of Bosnia

帕迪·阿什唐，原联合国

to the United Nations,

波斯尼亚最高代表，

in his book about his experience, he said,

在他的书中说：

"I realize what I needed

“我发现在得到钱以后，

was accountants without borders,

我需要的

to follow that money."

是无国界的会计师来监督那些钱。”

So that's the -- let me wrap up,

所以，这就是，总结起来，

this is the package.

就是一个计划包。

What's the goal?

它的目标？

If we follow this, what would we hope to achieve?

假如遵循这个计划包，我们想达到什么目标？

That after 10 years,

目标就是经过十年，

the focus on the construction sector

集中发展建筑业

would have produced both jobs

会带来工作机会，

and, hence, security --

以及社会安定，

because young people would have jobs --

应为年轻人都有了工作。

and it would have reconstructed the infrastructure.

此外，还完成了基础设施的重建，

So that's the focus on the construction sector.

这既是集中发展建筑业想要实现的目标。

The focus on the basic service delivery

通过独立的权威服务机构，

through these independent service authorities

来集中提供基础服务，

would have rescued basic services

将拯救这些服务，

from their catastrophic levels,

使它们不再是灾难的水平。

and it would have given ordinary people

这个计划包还会使老百姓

the sense that the government was doing something useful.

感觉到政府是做了实事的。

The emphasis on clean government

对廉洁政府的强调

would have gradually squeezed out the political crooks,

会逐渐把政治蛀虫清理掉，

because there wouldn't be any money

因为从政

in taking part in the politics.

再没钱好捞了。

And so gradually the selection,

所以逐渐的选举，

the composition of politicians,

或政府人员的构成

would shift from the crooked to the honest.

会由腐败变成诚实的。

Where would that leave us?

这样会带来什么？

Gradually it would shift

会逐渐的使

from a politics of plunder

一个充满掠夺的政治转向

to a politics of hope. Thank you.

一个充满希望的政治。谢谢。

(Applause)

（掌声）