Yasheng Huang: Does democracy stifle economic growth?

翻译人员: Zhangyi Liu 校对人员: Felix Chen

My topic

我演讲的主题

is economic growth in China and India.

是关于中国和印度的经济增长。

And the question I want to explore with you

并且一个我希望与你们探讨的一个问题是

is whether or not

民主政治

democracy has helped or has hindered

是否帮助了或阻碍了

economic growth.

经济增长。

You may say this is not fair,

你也许会说这不公平，

because I'm selecting two countries

因为我选择了两个国家

to make a case against democracy.

来反对民主政治。

Actually, exactly the opposite

事实上，我要做的事

is what I'm going to do.

恰恰相反。

I'm going to use these two countries

我要用这两个国家

to make an economic argument for democracy,

为民主政治来做一个经济论证，

rather than against democracy.

而不是反对民主政治。

The first question there

第一个问题

is why China has grown so much faster

是为什么中国的经济发展的

than India.

比印度快那么多。

Over the last 30 years,

在过去的30年中，

in terms of the GDP growth rates,

从国内生产总值的增长率来看，

China has grown at twice the rate of India.

中国是印度增长速率的两倍。

In the last five years,

在过去的五年中，

the two countries have begun to converge somewhat

这两个国家开始在经济增长方面

in economic growth.

有些类似。

But over the last 30 years,

但是在过去的30年里，

China undoubtedly

中国毫无疑问的

has done much better than India.

发展的比印度好很多。

One simple answer

举一个简单的例子

is China has Shanghai and India has Mumbai.

中国有上海，印度有孟买。

Look at the skyline of Shanghai.

看看上海的高楼大厦。

This is the Pudong area.

这是上海的浦东。

The picture on India

这张印度的图片

is the Dharavi slum of Mumbai

是孟买的达拉维贫民窟

in India.

在印度。

The idea there

在这两张图片后

behind these two pictures

主要的想法是

is that the Chinese government

中国的政府

can act above rule of law.

可以在法律的制裁上行动。

It can plan

这就可以为

for the long-term benefits of the country

国家长久利益与

and in the process,

过程设定计划，

evict millions of people --

驱逐上百万的人--

that's just a small technical issue.

只是一个小小的技术问题。

Whereas in India, you cannot do that,

然而在印度，你却不能做这些，

because you have to listen to the public.

因为政府必须听从民众。

You're being constrained by the public's opinion.

政府被公众的意见所驱使。

Even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh

即使总理辛格

agrees with that view.

也同意这样的做法。

In an interview

在一次

printed in the financial press of India,

印度金融界的采访中，

He said that he wants to make Mumbai

辛格说道他想让孟买

another Shanghai.

成为另一个上海。

This is an Oxford-trained economist

这可是一位沉浸在人文价值中的

steeped in humanistic values,

牛津大学毕业的经济学家，

and yet he agrees

然而他赞同

with the high-pressure tactics of Shanghai.

上海的高压政策。

So let me call it the Shanghai model of economic growth,

所以允许我称上海模式经济增长，

that emphasizes the following features

为促进经济发展

for promoting economic development:

有以下特点：

infrastructures, airports,

基础设施，飞机场，

highways, bridges, things like that.

高速公路，立交桥等等。

And you need a strong government to do that,

并且你需要一个强大的政府去做到，

because you cannot respect private property rights.

因为要做到你不能尊重私人财产权。

You cannot be constrained by the public's opinion.

你不能被公众的意见所驱使。

You need also state ownership,

而且你要有国家公有制，

especially of land assets,

尤其是土地资产。

in order to build and roll out infrastructures

去快速的建设和推出

very quickly.

基础设施。

The implication of that model

这种模式的含义是

is that democracy

民主政治

is a hindrance for economic growth,

是一个经济增长的障碍，

rather than a facilitator of economic growth.

而不会促进经济增长。

Here's the key question.

这里有个关键的问题。

Just how important are infrastructures

那就是基础设施对经济的增长

for economic growth?

有多重要？

This is a key issue.

这是一个关键的问题。

If you believe that infrastructures are very important for economic growth,

如果你认为基础设施对经济增长是至关重要的，

then you would argue a strong government is necessary

那么你就会证明一个强力的政府促进经济增长

to promote growth.

是必须的。

If you believe

如果你相信

that infrastructures are not as important as many people believe,

基础设施对经济增长没那么重要的话，

then you will put less emphasis

那么你就不会那么着重于

on strong government.

强力的政府。

So to illustrate that question,

为那个问题举个例子，

let me give you two countries.

让我给你两个国家举例。

And for the sake of brevity,

为了简单的目的，

I'll call one country Country 1

我就称他们为国家1

and the other country Country 2.

另外一个是国家2.

Country 1

国家1

has a systematic advantage over Country 2

在基础设施方面比国家2

in infrastructures.

拥有系统的优越性。

Country 1 has more telephones,

国家1拥有更多的手机，

and Country 1 has a longer system of railways.

并且国家1有更长的铁路线。

So if I were to ask you,

所以如果我问你，

"Which is China

“这俩个国家哪个是中国

and which is India,

哪个是印度，

and which country has grown faster?"

并且哪个国家增长的更快？”

if you believe in the infrastructure view,

如果你相信那个基础设施的观点，

then you will say, "Country 1 must be China.

那么你就会说，“国家1一定是中国。

They must have done better, in terms of economic growth.

他们一定是因为基础设施更好促进了经济发展。

And Country 2 is possibly India."

国家2应该是印度。”

Actually the country with more telephones

事实上拥有较多手机国家

is the Soviet Union,

是前苏联，

and the data referred to 1989.

这是根据1989年的数据得到的。

After the country reported very impressive statistics on telephones,

在前苏联报告了如此冷人钦佩的手机统计后，

the country collapsed.

这个国家倒塌了。

That's not too good.

这可不是好事。

The picture there is Khrushchev.

这是一张赫鲁晓夫的图片。

I know that in 1989

我知道在1989年

he no longer ruled the Soviet Union,

他已经不是前苏联的总统了，

but that's the best picture that I can find.

但是这是我能找到的最好的一张图片。

(Laughter)

（笑声）

Telephones, infrastructures

手机，基础设施

do not guarantee you economic growth.

并不能保证经济的增长。

Country 2, that has fewer telephones,

国家2，那个拥有少数手机的，

is China.

是中国。

Since 1989,

自从1989年，

the country has performed at a double-digit rate

这个国家以每年两位数字的速率

every year for the last 20 years.

成长了20年。

If you know nothing about China and the Soviet Union

如果你除了手机那件事之外

other than the fact about their telephones,

一点都不了解中国和前苏联的话，

you would have made a poor prediction

那你就对未来20年

about their economic growth

经济的增长

in the next two decades.

做了个错误的预告。

Country 1, that has a longer system of railways,

那个拥有更长铁路的国家1，

is actually India.

是印度。

And Country 2 is China.

国家2是中国。

This is a very little known fact

这是个关于这两个国家

about the two countries.

很少为人知的事实

Yes, today China has a huge infrastructure advantage

是的，在今天中国比印度拥有

over India.

巨大的基础设施优势。

But for many years,

但是在很多年里，

until the late 1990s,

直到90年代，

China had an infrastructure disadvantage

中国的基础设施比印度

vis-a-vis India.

还比印度不足

In developing countries,

在发展中国家里，

the most common mode of transportation

最常见的交通工具

is the railways,

铁路，

and the British built a lot of railways in India.

并且英国人在印度建了很多铁路。

India is the smaller of the two countries,

印度比这两国都小，

and yet it had a longer system of railways

但是它却用更长的铁路系统

until the late 1990s.

直到90年代。

So clearly,

所以明显地，

infrastructure doesn't explain

基础设施并不能解释

why China did better before the late 1990s,

为什么中国比印度

as compared with India.

在90年达末之前也做得好。

In fact, if you look at the evidence worldwide,

事实上，如果你在全球寻找证据，

the evidence is more supportive of the view

证据反而会偏向显示

that the infrastructure are actually the result of economic growth.

基础设施事实上是经济增长的结果。

The economy grows,

在经济增中，

government accumulates more resources,

政府积累更多的资源，

and the government can invest in infrastructure --

并且政府才能投资更多的基础设施--

rather than infrastructure being a cause

而基础设施并不是经济增长

for economic growth.

的原因。

And this is clearly the story

这是个明显的

of the Chinese economic growth.

中国经济增长的故事。

Let me look at this question more directly.

让我来更直接的看这个问题。

Is democracy bad for economic growth?

民主政治对经济增长不好吗？

Now let's turn to two countries,

现在让我们看看这两个国家，

Country A and Country B.

国家A和国家B。

Country A, in 1990,

国家A,在1990年

had about $300 per capita GDP

拥有300美金的人均GDP

as compared with Country B,

与国际B相比较，

which had $460 in per capita GDP.

它有460美金的人均GDP。

By 2008,

在2008年，

Country A has surpassed Country B

国家A超过了国家B

with $700 per capita GDP

国家A有700美金的人均GDP

as compared with $650 per capita GDP.

而国际B有650美金的人均GDP。

Both countries are in Asia.

这两个国家都在亚洲。

If I were to ask you,

如果我问你，

"Which are the two Asian countries?

“这两个是什么国家？

And which one is a democracy?"

哪一个是民主国家？

you may argue,

你或许会说，

"Well, maybe Country A is China

“恩，说不定国家A是中国

and Country B is India."

国家B是印度。”

In fact, Country A

事实上，国家A

is democratic India,

是民主印度，

and Country B is Pakistan --

而国家B是巴基斯坦--

the country that has a long period

一个长时间在

of military rule.

军事统治下的国家。

And it's very common

并且我们比较印度和中国

that we compare India with China.

是非常常见的。

That's because the two countries

这是应为这两个国家

have about the same population size.

有用相同的人口大小。

But the more natural comparison

但是更加天然的比较

is actually between India and Pakistan.

其实是印度和巴基斯坦。

Those two countries are geographically similar.

这两个国家在地理上是相似的。

They have a complicated, but shared common history.

它们拥有复杂的，但互通的历史。

By that comparison,

在这个比较中，

democracy looks very, very good

民主政治在经济增长方面

in terms of economic growth.

看起来非常非常好。

So why do economists fall in love

所以为什么经济学家沉迷于

with authoritarian governments?

独裁主义政府呢？

One reason is the East Asian Model.

一个原因是东亚模式。

In East Asia,

在东亚，

we have had successful economic growth stories

我们拥有很成功的经济增长的故事

such as Korea, Taiwan,

例如：韩国，台湾，

Hong Kong and Singapore.

香港和新加坡。

Some of these economies

这些经济系统中有些

were ruled by authoritarian governments

在69,70和80年代

in the 60s and 70s

是被专制政府

and 1980s.

所统治的

The problem with that view

这个观点所带来的问题

is like asking all the winners of lotteries,

就像问一个中彩票的人，

"Have you won the lottery?"

“你中过彩票吗？”

And they all tell you, "Yes, we have won the lottery."

他们所有人都回答，“是，我中过彩票。”

And then you draw the conclusion

然后你就下结论：

the odds of winning the lottery

中彩票的几率

are 100 percent.

是百分之百。

The reason is you never go

因为你从来不去问

and bother to ask the losers

也不想麻烦去问那些

who also purchased lottery tickets

也同样买了彩票

and didn't end up winning the prize.

但是没有中奖的人。

For each of these successful authoritarian governments

对于这些东亚成功的

in East Asia,

独裁政府，

there's a matched failure.

他们是失败的。

Korea succeeded, North Korea didn't.

韩国成功了，朝鲜没有。

Taiwan succeeded, China under Mao Zedong didn't.

台湾成功了，毛泽东领导下的中国没有。

Burma didn't succeed.

缅甸没有成功。

The Philippines didn't succeed.

菲律宾也没有成功。

If you look at the statistical evidence worldwide,

如果你看看全世界的统计数据，

there's really no support for the idea

其实没有这个专制政府

that authoritarian governments

比民主政府

hold a systematic edge over democracies

在经济增长上

in terms of economic growth.

更有系统优势的证据。

So the East Asian model

所以东亚模式

has this massive selection bias --

有它巨大的选择偏差--

it is known as selecting on a dependent variable,

它被认为是选择一个被动的变量，

something we always tell our students to avoid.

这是我们一直告诉学生们要避免的。

So exactly why did China grow so much faster?

所以到底为什么中国发展的如此之快呢？

I will take you to the Cultural Revolution,

我会带你到文化大革命时期，

when China went mad,

去比较当中国发狂的时候，

and compare that country's performance with India

和在英迪拉·甘地带领下的印度

under Indira Gandhi.

国家的绩效。

The question there is: Which country did better,

在这里的问题是：在那时这两个国家谁做的更好，

China or India?

中国还是印度？

China was during the Cultural Revolution.

中国那时还处于文化大革命时期。

It turns out even during the Cultural Revolution,

结果是中国即使在文化大革命时期，

China out-perfomed India

在国民生产总值方面比印度

in terms of GDP growth

也要增长的快

by an average of about 2.2 percent every year

将近百分之2.2每年

in terms of per capita GDP.

人均GDP。

So that's when China was mad.

所以当中国发狂了。

The whole country went mad.

整个国家都疯狂了。

It must mean that the country

这一定意味着这个国家

had something so advantageous to itself in terms of economic growth

在经济增长方面有一定的优势

to overcome the negative effects

去克服文化大革命所带来的

of the Cultural Revolution.

负面的影响。

The advantage the country had

中国当时拥有的优势是

was human capital --

人力资源--

nothing else but human capital.

什么都没有就只有人力。

This is the world development index indicator data

这是一个90年代早期的

in the early 1990s.

世界发展指标数据。

And this is the earliest data that I can find.

而且这是我可以找到的最早的资料。

The adult literacy rate in China

成人的识字比率在中国

is 77 percent

是百分之77

as compared with 48 percent in India.

而与之比较印度是百分之48.

The contrast in literacy rates

中国和印度女性的

is especially sharp

识字率的对比

between Chinese women and Indian women.

是有明显的差别的。（非常锋利的）

I haven't told you about the definition of literacy.

我还没有定义什么是识字。

In China, the definition of literacy

在中国，识字的定义

is the ability to read and write

是可以读也可以写

1,500 Chinese characters.

中国1500多的字符。

In India, the definition of literacy,

在印度，识字的定义，

operating definition of literacy,

（准确的说）识字的操作定义是

is the ability, the grand ability,

是可以去

to write your own name

用你会说的语言的文字

in whatever language you happen to speak.

写自己名字的能力。

The gap between the two countries in terms of literacy

这两国在识字方面的差别

is much more substantial

是比这个资料所显示的

than the data here indicated.

更大的。

If you go to other sources of data

如果你去找另外的资料

such as Human Development Index,

例如人类发展指数，

that data series,

这一资料系列

go back to the early 1970s,

可以追溯的70年代早期，

you see exactly the same contrast.

你可以看到一摸一样的对比。

China held a huge advantage

中国与印度相比

in terms of human capital

拥有了人力资源方面

vis-a-vis India.

巨大的优势

Life expectancies:

预期寿命：

as early as 1965,

最早在1965年，

China had a huge advantage in life expectancy.

中国拥有在预期寿命方面巨大的优势。

On average, as a Chinese in 1965,

平均来看，中国人在1965年

you lived 10 years more

可以比印度人

than an average Indian.

平均多活十年。

So if you have a choice

所以如果你有

between being a Chinese and being an Indian,

成为中国人或者是印度人的选择权的话，

you would want to become a Chinese

你肯定会想成为中国人

in order to live 10 years longer.

去多活10年。

If you made that decision in 1965,

如果你在1965年做出了这个决定，

the down side of that

那这个决定的副作用是

is the next year we have the Cultural Revolution.

在下一年我们发生了文化大革命。

So you have to always think carefully

所以关于这些决定

about these decisions.

你一定要小心考虑

If you cannot chose your nationality,

如果你不能选择你的国籍的话，

then you will want to become an Indian man.

那么你就会想成为印度的男人。

Because, as an Indian man,

因为，作为印度男人，

you have about two years of life expectancy advantage

你比印度的女人

vis-a-vis Indian women.

拥有大约2年长的寿命。

This is an extremely strange fact.

这是一个非常奇怪的事实

It's very rare among countries

在国家之间拥有这种模式

to have this kind of pattern.

是非常少见的。

It shows the systematic discrimination and biases

这显示了在印度社会中

in the Indian society

系统对女性的

against women.

歧视和偏见。

The good news is, by 2006,

好消息是，在2006年

India has closed the gap

印度已经没有了男性和女性的

between men and women

平均寿命的

in terms of life expectancy.

差距。

Today, Indian women have a sizable life expectancy edge

在今天，印度的女性比男性

over Indian men.

拥有相当大的平均寿命优势。

So India is reverting to the normal.

所以印度正在回到正常的状态。

But India still has a lot of work to do

但是印度在性别平等方面

in terms of gender equality.

任然有很多工作需要做。

These are the two pictures

这是两张

taken of garment factories in Guangdong Province

在广东省服装厂和印度服装厂

and garment factories in India.

照的照片。

In China, it's all women.

在中国，都是女性。

60 to 80 percent of the workforce in China is women

在中国的沿海地区

in the coastal part of the country,

百分之60至80的劳动力是女性，

whereas in India, it's all men.

然而在印度，都是男性。

Financial Times printed this picture

金融时报印刷了这张

of an Indian textile factory

印度纺织工厂的照片

with the title, "India Poised to Overtake China in Textile."

与之的标题是“印度的纺织品已超过中国。”

By looking at these two pictures,

就从观察这两张图片来说，

I say no, it won't overtake China for a while.

我说不，印度在一段时间内还不会超过中国。

If you look at other East Asian countries,

如果你看看别的东亚国家，

women there play a hugely important role

女性在经济腾飞中

in terms of economic take-off --

起到了巨大的作用--

in terms of creating the manufacturing miracle

在东亚创造

associated with East Asia.

经济奇迹方面。

India still has a long way to go

印度要赶上中国

to catch up with China.

还有很长的路要走。

Then the issue is,

那么问题是，

what about the Chinese political system?

中国的政治体系如何？

You talk about human capital,

你谈论到人力资源，

you talk about education and public health.

你谈论到教育和公共健康。

What about the political system?

那么关于政治系统呢？

Isn't it true that the one-party political system

一党的政治体制是不是真的

has facilitated economic growth in China?

促进了中国的经济发展呢？

Actually, the answer is more nuanced and subtle than that.

事实上，问题的答案要比它微妙许多。

It depends on a distinction that you draw

这取决于你对区别

between statics of the political system

政治体系的静力

and the dynamics of the political system.

和动力的看法。

Statically, China is a one-party system,

静止的说，中国是个一党政治的系统，

authoritarian -- there's no question about it.

独裁主义--这点是毋庸置疑的。

Dynamically, it has changed over time

动态的来说，它随着时间而改变

to become less authoritarian and more democratic.

成为较少独裁的、更加民主的政治系统。

When you explain change --

当你解释改变--

for example, economic growth;

例如，经济增长；

economic growth is about change --

经济增长是关于改变的--

when you explain change,

当你解释改变，

you use other things that have changed to explain change,

你用别的改变过的事情来解释改变，

rather than using the constant to explain change.

而不是用一个不变的事情来解释改变。

Sometimes a fixed effect can explain change,

有时一个不变的作用可以解释改变，

but a fixed effect only explains changes

但不变的作用仅仅解释了

in interaction with the things that change.

在改变事物上的相互作用的改变。

In terms of the political changes,

在政治变化方面，

they have introduced village elections.

中国已经介绍了村选举。

They have increased the security of proprietors.

中国增加了业主的安全。

And they have increased the security

并且中国增加了

with long-term land leases.

长时间土地租赁的保障。

There are also financial reforms in rural China.

在中国农村也有金融改革。

There is also a rural entrepreneurial revolution in China.

在中国农村也有企业家革命。

To me, the pace of political changes

对我来说，这种政治转变的步伐

is too slow, too gradual.

太慢了，太循序渐进了。

And my own view is the country

并且我的观点是中国

is going to face some substantial challenges,

将会面临一些实质性的挑战，

because they have not moved further and faster on political reforms.

因为他们还没有在政治改革方面走得更远和更快。

But nevertheless,

然而，

the system has moved in a more liberal direction,

这个系统已进入了一个更为自由的方向，

moved in a more democratic direction.

进入了一个更为民主的方向。

You can apply exactly the same dynamic perspective on India.

你可以把一摸一样的民主观点运用在印度。

In fact, when India was growing

事实上，当印度经济增长率

at a Hindu rate of growth --

在增长是--

about one percent, two percent a year --

大约是百分之一，二每年的时候--

that was when India was least democratic.

那是印度最不民主的时期。

Indira Gandhi declared emergency rule in 1975.

在1975年甘地宣布进入紧急状态。

The Indian government owned and operated

印度的政府拥有和操作

all the TV stations.

所有的电视台。

A little-known fact about India in the 1990s

一个在90年代鲜为人知的事实

is that the country

是印度不仅

not only has undertaken economic reforms,

开始进行经济改革，

the country has also undertaken political reforms

印度还进行了政治改革

by introducing village self-rule,

通过引入村自治

privatization of media

媒体私有化

and introducing freedom of information acts.

和介绍信息自由的行为。

So the dynamic perspective

所以从方向方面来看

fits both with China and in India

动态的观点对

in terms of the direction.

中国和印度都是合适的。

Why do many people believe

为什么很多人相信

that India is still a growth disaster?

印度依然是个增长灾难呢？

One reason

其中一个原因是

is they are always comparing India with China.

他们总是把印度和中国相比。

But China is a superstar

但是中国在经济增长方面

in terms of economic growth.

是个超级巨星。

If you are a NBA player

如果你是个NBA球员

and you are always being compared to Michael Jordan,

而且你总是被和迈尔克乔丹相比的话，

you're going to look not so impressive.

你将会看起来没那么印象深刻。

But that doesn't mean

但是这并不证明

that you're a bad basketball player.

你是个差的篮球运动员。

Comparing with a superstar

与超级巨星相比

is the wrong benchmark.

是个错误的标准。

In fact, if you compare India

事实上，如果你把印度

with the average developing country,

和平均的发展中国家相比的话，

even before the more recent period

即使在印度加速增长

of acceleration of Indian growth --

之前--

now India is growing between eight and nine percent --

现在印度增长百分之8到9每年--

even before this period,

就是在这之前，

India was ranked fourth in terms of economic growth

印度在在新兴经济国家中经济增长

among emerging economies.

是排名第四的。

This is a very impressive record indeed.

这确实是一个非常令人印象深刻的记录。

Let's think about the future:

让我们想象未来：

the dragon vis-a-vis the elephant.

巨龙和大象，

Which country has the growth momentum?

哪个国家拥有增长的势头？

China, I believe, still has

中国，我相信，仍然具有

some of the excellent raw fundamentals --

一些优秀的原始经济基本面--

mostly the social capital,

最主要的是社会资本，

the public health,

公众健康，

the sense of egalitarianism

一种你在印度找不到的

that you don't find in India.

某种意义上的平等主义。

But I believe that India has the momentum.

但是我认为印度拥有增长的势头。

It has the improving fundamentals.

它具有正在改善的经济基本面。

The government has invested in basic education,

印度政府已经在基础教育，

has invested in basic health.

基础健康方面投资。

I believe the government should do more,

我认为政府应该做更多，

but nevertheless, the direction it is moving in

然而，这个方向

is the right direction.

已经慢慢拿成为了正确的方向。

India has the right institutional conditions

印度拥有经济增长

for economic growth,

正确的制度环境，

whereas China is still struggling

而中国仍然为政治改革

with political reforms.

努力奋斗着。

I believe that the political reforms are a must for China

我认为政治改革是中国保持增长

to maintain its growth.

必不可少的一部分。

And it's very important to have political reforms,

并且这是非常重要的通过政治改革

to have widely shared benefits of economic growth.

去广泛分享经济增长的利益。

I don't know whether that's going to happen or not,

我不知道这到底会不会发生，

but I'm an optimist.

但我是一个乐观主义者。

Hopefully, five years from now, I'm going to report to TEDGlobal

但愿，五年以后，我可以在TEDGlobal上作报告

that political reforms will happen in China.

说政治改革会在中国发生。

Thank you very much.

非常感谢。

(Applause)

（掌声）