The unpaid work that GDP ignores -- and why it really counts | Marilyn Waring

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: 易帆 余

(In Maori: My mountain is Taupiri.)

（毛利語：我的山是陶波里山）

(Waikato is my river.)

（懷卡托河是我的河。）

（我的名字是瑪麗蓮。）

(My name is Marilyn.)

(Hello.)

（哈囉。）

As you've heard, when I was very young,

各位可能聽過，我很年輕的時候，

I was elected to the New Zealand Parliament.

就被選為紐西蘭國會議員。

And at that age, you learn mostly by listening to others' stories.

在那個年紀，學習方式 主要是傾聽其他人的故事。

I remember a woman who'd been injured in a farm accident,

我記得，有一名女子

在農場意外中受傷，

and it was coming up to shearing time

該牧場剪羊毛的時間快要到了，

on the farm,

and she had to be replaced by a shepherd,

她得要有一名牧羊人替代她，

by a rousie in the woolshed,

還要一名羊毛剪理捆裝場的勞工，

and of course there was still someone needed to manage the household

當然還需要有人管家，

and to prepare the food for the shearing gangs.

並為剪羊毛的人準備食物。

And her mother came to help with that.

她母親來協助做這些。

But the family got no compensation for the mother,

但這個家庭並沒有給母親報酬，

because that's what mothers and family members are supposed to do.

因為那是母親和家人應該要做的。

One year, a company called Gold Mines New Zealand

有一年，一家叫做 Gold Mines New Zealand 的公司

applied for a prospecting license on our beautiful Mt. Pirongia.

申請了採礦許可證， 要開採我們美麗的皮龍亞山。

It is a mountain

這座山

full of extraordinary ecosystems,

充滿了讓人驚奇的生態系統，

of verdant, virgin native forests.

翠綠、原生的森林。

It produced oxygen, it was a carbon sink,

它會產生氧氣，它是個碳匯 (註：吸收二氧化碳的自然環境)，

it was a home for endangered species and for pollinating species

它是附近農地中瀕臨絕種物種

及授粉物種的家園。

in the farmland around.

And the mining company put up this great economic prospectus

採礦公司提出了 很棒的經濟計畫書，

that was about how much money could be made

說明在我們的山上採礦

from mining our mountain,

可以賺多少錢，

about all the growth and development

能夠為紐西蘭的財政預算

that would show in New Zealand's budgetary forecasts,

帶來多少成長與發展，

and we were just left with the language

只留給我們關於

我們對這座山珍視的官話。

of all that we valued about our mountain.

Fortunately, we stopped.

幸運的是，我們制止了。

And then I remembered

接著，我記得

a woman who had three children under five

有一名女子，她有三個 不到五歲的孩子要照顧，

who was caring for her elderly parents,

還要照顧她年邁的父母，

and nobody seemed to think that at some stage

似乎沒有人認為，在某個時期，

she might actually need some assistance with childcare,

她可能會需要別人幫忙照顧孩子，

because she wasn't in the paid workforce.

因為她不屬於有償的勞動力。

And there began to be a pattern in all of these stories I was being told.

在我聽到的這些故事中， 漸漸浮現出一種規律。

And I started to ask enough questions

于是我開始問更多問題， 試圖從這些規律中追溯出

to try and track to the core of this pattern of values

它們所呈現出來的核心價值，

that was part of all of these stories.

這些故事共有的核心價值。

And I found it

而我找到了，

in an economic formula called the "gross domestic product,"

在一個叫做國內生產總值的

經濟方程式中找到了，

or the GDP.

簡稱 GDP。

Most of you will have heard of it.

大部分人都聽過 GDP 。

Many of you won't have any idea what it actually means.

許多人不知道它到底是什麼意思。

The rules were drawn up by Western-educated men in 1953.

1953 年，一些受西方 教育的人起草了規則。

They established a boundary of production

在起草這些規則時，

他們針對生產力建立了一條界線。

in drawing up these rules.

What they were keen to measure

他們熱切想要測量

was everything that involved a market transaction.

和市場交易有關的一切。

So on one side of the boundary,

所以，在界線的一邊，

everything where there was a market exchange was counted.

凡是有市場交易的一切 活動都會被計算進來。

It doesn't matter whether the exchange is legal or illegal.

不論是合法或非法的交易。

Market exchange in the illegal trade in armaments, [munitions],

非法行業中的市場交易 包括軍備、〔軍火〕、

drugs, endangered species,

毒品、瀕臨絕種的物種、

trafficking of people --

人口運販——

all of this is great for growth

對經濟成長而言，這些通通都很棒，

and it all counts.

都可以計算在內。

On the other side of the boundary of production,

在生產界線的另一邊，

there was this extraordinary phrase in the rules

在規則中，用到一個很特別的詞，

that the work done by the people they called "nonprimary producers"

所謂「非主要生產者」所做的工作，

was "of little or no value."

是「很少或無價值的」。

So I thought, let's see how many nonprimary producers we have here today.

所以，我心想，咱們來看看 現今有多少非主要生產者。

So in the last week or so,

在上週左右，

how many of you have transported members of your household or their goods

在座有多少人曾經幫家人運送物品

without payment?

但沒有拿酬勞？

How many of you have done a bit of cleaning, a bit of vacuuming,

在座有多少人有多多少少 做了點清理、吸塵、

a bit of sweeping, a bit of tidying up the kitchen?

打掃、整理廚房？

Yeah?

有嗎？

How about going shopping for members of the household?

那麼，去幫家人採買呢？

Preparing food? Cleaning up afterwards?

準備食物？吃完之後的清理？

Laundry? Ironing?

洗衣服？燙衣服？

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Well, as far as economics is concerned,

就經濟來說，

you were at leisure.

你們是清閒的。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

(Applause and cheers)

（掌聲及歡呼）

Now, how about the women

那麼，有沒有已經有孩子的女性

who have been pregnant and who have had children?

又有身孕了呢？

Yes.

有。

Now, I really hate to tell you this,

我實在很不想告訴各位，

because it might well have been hard labor,

因為這應該算得上是苦工，

but at that moment, you were unproductive.

但目前，你是沒有生產力的。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

And some of you may have breastfed your infant.

有些人可能會餵嬰兒母乳。

Now, in the New Zealand national accounts --

在紐西蘭國民經濟核算中——

that's what the figures are called, that's where we get the GDP --

也就是這些數字， 我們從這裡算出 GDP ——

in the New Zealand national accounts,

在紐西蘭國民經濟核算中，

the milk of buffalo, goats, sheep and cows

水牛、山羊、綿羊、 母牛的奶是有價值的，

is of value

but not human breast milk.

但人奶卻沒有。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

It is the very best food on the planet.

它是世界上最棒的食物。

It is the very best investment that we can make in the future health

它是我們能為孩子的 未來健康及教育

and education of that child.

所能做出最好的投資。

It doesn't count at all.

它卻完全不算數。

All of those activities are on the wrong side of the production boundary.

所有這些活動位在 生產界線的「錯的那一邊」。

And something that's very important to know

關於這個計算框架，

有一點很重要，必須要知道：

about this accounting framework:

they call it "accounts,"

雖然叫「核算（會計制度）」， 但它卻沒有借方。

but there's no debit side.

We just keep market exchanges going,

我們必須要讓市場交易持續進行，

and it's all good for growth.

對成長很有益。

We're in Christchurch,

我們在基督城，

where people have lived through a devastating natural disaster

這裡的人度過了嚴重的天然災難

and recovered.

且從中恢復了。

And ever since that time,

從那時起，

New Zealand has been told

紐西蘭就一直聽說

our growth figures are great, because we're rebuilding Christchurch.

我們的成長數字很漂亮， 因為我們重建了基督城。

Nothing was ever lost

在國民經濟核算中

from the national accounting framework

沒有什麼損失

because of the loss of lives,

是由生命損失所造成、

the loss of land,

因為土地損失所造成、

the loss of buildings,

因為建築物損失所造成、

the loss of special spaces.

因為特別空間損失所造成。

Now, it might also be becoming obvious to you

各位可能漸漸能看出，

that this boundary of production works in terms of our environment.

這條生產工作的界線 是犧牲我們的環境換來的。

When we're mining it,

當我們在環境中採礦，

when we're deforesting,

當我們採伐森林，

when we're deleting our environment,

當我們消滅我們的環境，

when we're fishing out our marine resources,

當我們把海洋資源給捕盡，

legal or illegal,

不論合法或非法，

as long as market is exchanged, it's all good for growth.

只要市場有在做交易， 對成長就是有益。

To leave our natural environment alone,

不破壞我們的天然環境，

to sustain it, to protect it,

讓它永續、保護它，

is apparently worth nothing.

在他們眼中顯然一文不值。

Now, how and what can we do about this?

對此，我們能做什麼？怎麼做？

Well, I wrote first about it 30 years ago.

三十年前，我寫過相關的題材。

Then in 2008, after the global financial crisis,

接著，2008 年， 全球金融危機之後，

President Sarkozy of France

法國總統薩科吉

asked three men who had all won Nobel Prizes in Economics --

請三位諾貝爾經濟獎的得主——

Sen, Fitoussi and Stiglitz --

森、菲圖西、史迪格里茲——

to discover what I'd written about

來探究我三十年前所寫的內容。

30 years ago.

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

(Applause)

（掌聲）

"Relying on per capita GDP, relying on these growth figures," they said,

他們說：「仰賴人均 GDP、 仰賴這些成長數字，

"doesn't appear to be the best way to proceed

似乎不是制訂公共政策的

to make public policy."

最好方式。」

And I totally agree with them.

我完全認同他們。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

One of the things that you notice about these rules --

關於這些規則， 可以注意到一點——

they are revised; 1968 they were revised, 1993, 2008 --

它們是修正過的；1968 年修改過，

還有 1993 年、2008 年——

is that the revisions are mostly done by statisticians,

大部分的修改都是 由統計學家來進行，

and the statisticians do know what is wrong with the data,

而統計學家確實知道 資料有什麼問題，

but hardly any of the economists ever stop to ask that same question.

但卻幾乎沒有任何經濟學家 願意停下來問同樣的問題。

So, in 2019,

所以，2019 年，

the GDP is in even worse shape.

GDP 的狀況更糟糕了。

You see, to measure GDP,

要知道，若要測量 GDP，

you have to assume that some kind of production

就必須要假設某種生產、

or service delivery or consumption

服務提供，或消費，

occurs inside a nation-state,

是在國家內部發生的，

and you know where that is.

且你知道是何處。

But trillions of dollars are circling the globe,

但有數兆美元在全球流通，

in many part from our Googles, our Facebooks, our Twitters,

透過我們的 Google、臉書、 推特，一點一點流通，

siphoned through a number of tax shelters,

透過一些合法的避稅手段，

so that when we click on our computer

當我們在電腦上按一個按鈕，

and go to download some software,

去下載某個軟體，

we don't know where it was produced,

我們不會知道它是哪裡生產的，

and frankly, no one knows where we are as we're consuming it, either.

坦白說，也沒人知道 我們是在哪裡消費的。

These tax-free havens

這些免稅避風港

distort the GDP to such an extent

扭曲了 GDP，且扭曲程度高到了

that about three years ago,

大約三年前

Europe looked askance at Ireland

歐洲懷疑愛爾蘭

and said, "We don't think you're reporting correctly,"

並說：「我們不認為 你們回報的資料正確。」

and in the next year, their GDP went up 35 percent.

隔年，他們的 GDP 提升 35%。

Now, all that work that you're doing

當你很空閒、沒有生產力的時候

when you were at leisure and unproductive,

所做的所有工作，

we can measure this,

我們都可以測量，

and we can measure this in time use surveys.

且我們可以透過調查來及時測量。

When we look at the amount of time that's taken

如果我們去探究無酬薪產業

in the unpaid sector,

所花的時間，

what we find is that in almost every country where I've ever seen the data,

我們會發現，針對我在資料中 曾經看過的幾乎每個國家，

it is the single largest sector of the nation's economy.

這個產業都是佔全國 經濟最大的產業。

In the last three years, for example,

比如，在過去三年，

the UK statistician has declared

英國統計學家宣佈

that all of that unpaid work is the equivalent of all manufacturing

在英國，所有無酬薪的工作等同於

所有的製造和零售加總。

and all retailing in the UK.

In Australia,

在澳洲，

the single largest sector of Australia's economy is unpaid childcare,

澳洲經濟中最大的產業

是無酬薪的兒童照顧，

and the second-largest sector is all the rest of the unpaid work,

第二大的產業是所有 其它的無酬薪工作，

before banking and insurance and financial intermediation services

然後市場產業中最大的部分才是

clock in at the largest part of the market sector.

金融、保險、金融中介服務。

Just last year, the Premier of the Victoria state of Australia

去年，澳洲維多利亞省的首長

declared that half of that state's GDP

宣稱該省 GDP 有一半

was, in fact, the value of all the unpaid work.

事實上是所有無酬薪工作的價值。

Now, as a policy maker,

身為政策制訂者， 你無法制訂出好的政策，

you cannot make good policy

if the single largest sector of your nation's economy

如果你的國家的經濟當中 最大的產業是看不見的。

is not visible.

You can't presume to know where the needs are.

你不能自行推測需求的所在。

You can't locate time poverty.

你不能找到時間匱乏的所在。

You can't address the most critical issues of need.

你無法處理最重要的需求議題。

So what can go in the place of GDP?

所以，有什麼可以代替 GDP？

Well, GDP has got many other problems, OK?

GDP 還有許多其它問題，好嗎？

We don't behave in a way that assists GDP.

我們的行為模式並不會促進 GDP。

Large numbers of people around the planet

如今地球上有很多人

are now using household assets -- their cars, their homes, themselves --

使用家庭的資產—— 他們的汽車、家、他們自己——

for Uber, for Airbnb.

用來做 Uber、Airbnb。

And no, we're not supposed to use assets from the unpaid sector

不，我們不應該用 無酬薪產業的資產

to make money in the market sector.

在市場產業中賺錢。

This is confusing!

這會讓人搞混！

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

And very difficult to measure.

且非常難測量。

So economists don't want to know

所以，經濟學家不想要知道

what's wrong with their most important GDP,

他們最重要的 GDP 出了什麼問題，

and I think they've got so many problems, they can just move off to a quiet corner

我想他們有太多問題，

可以跑到安靜孤獨的角落，

and continue to publish that

繼續出版那些

and not come anywhere near the rest of us

無法貼近我們生活的說法，

with this talk of capitals

對我們談的資本

and natural assets

與自然資產，卻丁點不提，

and other ways in which to colonize the rest of our lives.

並只會用其它方式來 限制我們的生活。

I think time use is the most important indicator going forward.

我想，若要有所進展， 最重要的指標會是時間使用。

Every one of us has exactly the same amount of it.

我們每個人擁有的 時間全都一樣多。

If there are going to be critical issues as we move forward,

如果隨著我們走下去， 將會出現重大議題，

we need a solid database,

那麼我們就需要夠實在的資料庫，

because whatever we change away from the GDP,

因為不論我們做了 什麼改變來遠離 GDP ，

we're going to be stuck with it for about 50 years,

我們都還得和它 綁在一起大約五十年，

and we need something that's solid and immutable

因為我們還是需要實在、 不會變的東西，

and that everybody understands,

且要讓人人能了解，

because if I put time use data in front of you,

因為如果我把時間使用 資料放在你面前，

you'll immediately start nodding.

你會馬上開始點頭。

You'll immediately start recognizing what it means.

你會馬上開始了解它的意思。

And, honestly,

且，老實說，

if I put the GDP data in front of you,

如果我把 GDP 資料放在你前面，

a lot of you would prefer to leave for morning tea.

很多人可能會比較想 先離開去喝杯早茶。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

We also need to be looking at the quality of our environment.

我們也需要考慮

我們環境的品質。

As every year goes past, we get much better

隨著每一年過去， 我們變得越來越擅長

at measuring the devastation of it,

測量環境被蹂躪的程度，

of measuring how little we protect anymore.

測量我們對於環境的 保護有多麼不足。

And yet, with climate change,

但，就氣候變遷來說，

we don't all have to be scientists to see, to feel, to know

我們不需要全都是科學家

也能了解、感受到、知道

what is happening to our beautiful planet.

我們美麗的地球怎麼了。

We need, in this country,

在這個國家，我們需要

the paramountcy of what we can learn from kaitiakitanga,

非常重視我們能從凱蒂亞基坦加

以及 whanaungatanaga （關係，毛利語）學到什麼，

from whanaungatanaga,

from what Maori, who have been here for centuries, can teach us.

從已經住在這裡數世紀的 毛利人身上學到什麼。

When you're in parliament,

當你在國會裡，

and you're not in an economist's frame of mind,

腦袋不是以經濟學家的模式運作時，

you make decisions across a range of data.

你會根據各種資料來做決策。

You look at the trade-offs.

仔細權衡。

You think deeply about implications

你會深刻地思考 政策對人民的影響，

way beyond whether or not GDP is up or down.

而不是只考慮 GDP 的上升或下降。

Economists want to turn everything into a monetary exchange,

經濟學家想要把一切 都轉換成貨幣交易，

even time use data,

甚至包括時間都要用資料解讀，

so that they can carry on trying to decide

這樣他們才能繼續試圖判定

whether GDP is up or down.

GDP 是上升還是下降。

That's not a great way to go.

再這樣下去，對我們都不好。

And others have said to me,

有人跟我說過：

"Marilyn, why don't you just work on a system

「瑪麗蓮，你為什麼 不想辦法做一個系統，

that includes all the unpaid work

把所有無酬薪工作、

and the pregnancy and the birth and the lactation

懷孕、生產、哺乳都納入

in the GDP?"

到 GDP 當中？」

There's a very important moral and ethical answer to that,

對此，我要用一個很重要的 倫理道德觀念來回答，

and it is that I do not want the most valuable things on earth,

那就是，我不希望 地球上最珍貴的東西，

the things I treasure,

我最珍視的東西，

sitting in an accounting framework that thinks that war is great for growth.

躺在一個認為戰爭有利於 發展的會計制度裡任人宰割。

(Applause and cheers)

（掌聲及歡呼）

So from now on,

所以，從現在起， 每當你聽新聞時，

whenever you listen to the news,

you're not going to go blank when they say GDP.

若聽到 GDP 這個字， 你的腦袋不會再一片空白。

You're going to think,

你會心想：「我知道他們在談什麼， 它並不是什麼好東西。」

"I know what they're talking about, and it's not good."

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

I know that there are alternatives,

我知道有別的方式，

and I'm going to spend my time correcting people,

我將花時間糾正人們，

talking to them about this value base

跟他們講述這個價值基礎，

and talking to them about what the alternatives can be,

並且告訴他們有什麼別的方式，

because humankind

因為人類

and our planet

以及地球

need another way.

需要另一條路。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause and cheers)

（掌聲及歡呼）