Economic growth has stalled. Let's fix it | Dambisa Moyo

譯者: 易帆 余 審譯者: Gentian Pan

Our ability to create and sustain economic growth

我們創造及維持經濟成長的能力

is the defining challenge of our time.

是我們這個世代的關鍵性挑戰。

Of course there are other challenges --

當然還有其他挑戰--

health care, disease burdens and pandemics,

衛生保健、疾病負擔、流行病、

environmental challenges

環境變遷的挑戰、

and, of course, radicalized terrorism.

當然，還有激進的恐怖主義。

However,

然而，

to the extent that we can actually solve the economic growth challenge,

以我們實際上能解決 經濟成長挑戰的程度而言，

it will take us a long way

若要解決我剛剛說明的那些挑戰，

to solving the challenges that I've just elucidated.

我們還有很長的路要走。

More importantly,

更重要的是，

unless and until we solve economic growth

除非直到我們解決 並創造了穩定、永續的經濟成長，

and create sustainable, long-term economic growth,

we'll be unable to address

否則我們將不能解決 看起來很棘手、如今仍瀰漫全球的挑戰，

the seemingly intractable challenges that continue to pervade the globe today,

whether it's health care, education or economic development.

不管是衛生保健、教育或經濟發展。

The fundamental question is this:

最基本的問題是：

How are we going to create economic growth

我們要如何

在高度發達的經濟體，像美國和歐洲，

in advanced and developed economies like the United States and across Europe

at a time when they continue to struggle

在他們經歷金融危後， 現仍持續掙扎的狀況下，

to create economic growth after the financial crisis?

還可以繼續創造經濟成長呢？

They continue to underperform

他們持續表現得不如預期，

and to see an erosion in the three key drivers of economic growth:

而且還可以看出在經濟成長 的三大要素上出現了衰敗現象：

capital, labor and productivity.

資本、勞動力、生產力。

特別是，

In particular,

these developed economies continue to see debts and deficits,

那些發達的經濟體中， 持續有負債、財政赤字、

the decline and erosion of both the quality and quantity of labor

勞動力質量與數量上的下降與侵蝕、

and they also see productivity stalling.

同時也看到生產力停滯現象。

In a similar vein,

同樣的脈絡下，

how are we going to create economic growth in the emerging markets,

我們要如何在

擁有 90% 世界人口居住的地方

where 90 percent of the world's population lives

且 70% 人口平均年齡在 25 歲以下 的新興市場中

and where, on average,

70 percent of the population is under the age of 25?

持續創造經濟成長？

In these countries,

在這些國家中，

it is essential that they grow at a minimum of seven percent a year

至少要 7% 的年增長率

in order to put a dent in poverty

才能減少貧困現象

and to double per capita incomes in one generation.

以及讓人均資本所得可在 一個世代的時間內加倍成長。

And yet today,

但如今，

the largest emerging economies --

最大的新興經濟體

countries with at least 50 million people --

--人口至少5000萬的國家--

continue to struggle to reach that seven percent magic mark.

仍在為那 7% 的「魔法數字」掙扎著。

Worse than that,

更糟的是，

countries like India, Russia, South Africa, Brazil and even China

像印度、俄羅斯、南非、 巴西，甚至是中國這些國家，

are falling below that seven percent number

現今已低於 7% 這個數字，

and, in many cases, actually regressing.

而且，很多國家實際上正在倒退。

Economic growth matters.

經濟成長是十分重要的。

With economic growth,

有了經濟成長，

countries and societies enter into a virtuous cycle

國家及社會才會進入一個良性循環，

of upward mobility, opportunity and improved living standards.

包含社會經濟地位的上升、 就業機會及改善生活水平。

Without growth, countries contract and atrophy,

沒有增長，國家會緊縮與衰退，

not just in the annals of economic statistics

不僅是年度經濟統計數字，

but also in the meaning of life and how lives are lived.

還包括生命的意義與生活的品質。

Economic growth matters powerfully for the individual.

經濟成長對個人也十分的重要。

If growth wanes,

一旦成長的趨勢衰退，

the risk to human progress

人類進步的風險、

and the risk of political and social instability rises,

以及政局和社會不穩定的風險就會上升，

and societies become dimmer, coarser and smaller.

而社會就會更加黑暗、動盪與渺小。

The context matters.

環境條件很重要。

And countries in emerging markets

新興市場的國家，

do not need to grow at the same rates as developed countries.

不需要像已開發國家那樣的成長率。

Now, I know some of you in this room find this to be a risky proposition.

現在，我知道在場有些人 會覺得我接來說的是個大膽的論點。

There are some people here

這裡有些人，

who will turn around and be quite disillusioned

會轉身過去不理會 並對世界周遭發生的事情

by what's happened around the world

不抱任何希望，

and basically ascribe that to economic growth.

且基本上，還把罪怪在經濟成長上。

You worry about the overpopulation of the planet.

你擔心地球上人口過剩，

And looking at the UN's recent statistics and projections

並看著聯合國最近的統計及規劃，

that the world will have 11 billion people on the planet

了解到地球會在公元 2100 年以前

before it plateaus in 2100,

來到 110 億的人口數量，

you're concerned about what that does to natural resources --

你擔心這對自然資源 會造成甚麼樣的衝擊--

arable land, potable water, energy and minerals.

可耕種的土地、 可飲用的水資源、能源、礦產。

You are also concerned about the degradation of the environment.

你也擔心環境的惡化。

And you worry about how man,

你也會擔心，

人們在支持企業全球化的體現，

embodied in the corporate globalist,

has become greedy and corrupt.

怎麼變得這麼貪婪與腐敗。

But I'm here to tell you today that economic growth

但我今天要告訴各位，

經濟成長已經成為

has been the backbone of changes in living standards

全世界好幾百萬人 改變生活水平的骨幹。

of millions of people around the world.

And more importantly,

而且更重要的是，

it's not just economic growth that has been driven by capitalism.

經濟成長並不是 只被資本主義所主導。

The definition of capitalism, very simply put,

資本主義的定義，簡單的說，

is that the factors of production,

就是那些生產力因素，

such as trade and industry, capital and labor,

像是，貿易、工業、資本和勞動力，

are left in the hands of the private sector and not the state.

掌握在私人企業而非國家手上的部分。

It's really essential here that we understand

在這裡很重要的一點，我們要知道，

that fundamentally the critique is not for economic growth per se

基本上應該被指責的 不是經濟成長本身，

but what has happened to capitalism.

而是資本主義出了甚麼問題。

And to the extent that we need to create economic growth over the long term,

所以若考量到我們長期 需要創造經濟成長率的廣度，

we're going to have to pursue it with a better form of economic stance.

我們就要用比較好的 經濟角度方式去追尋它。

Economic growth needs capitalism,

經濟成長需要資本主義，

but it needs it to work properly.

但要好好地進行。

And as I mentioned a moment ago,

正如我稍早提過的，

the core of the capitalist system has been defined by private actors.

資本主義系統的核心已被定義為 以私人企業所主導。

And even this, however, is a very simplistic dichotomy.

然而，即使這只是很簡單的二分法。

Capitalism: good; non-capitalism: bad.

資本主義：好；非資本主義：不好。

When in practical experience,

但以實務操作而言，

capitalism is much more of a spectrum.

資本主義像是個光譜。 （資本的分配有很多種方式）

And we have countries such as China,

我們有像是中國這類的國家，

which have practiced more state capitalism,

實施的資本主義 較傾向於「國家」主導。

and we have countries like the Unites States

也有像美國這類的國家，

which are more market capitalist.

實施的資本主義 較傾向於「市場」主導。

Our efforts to critique the capitalist system, however,

然而，我們對資本主義的批評

have tended to focus on countries like China

大部分是針對像中國那種 擺明不是純市場資本主義的國家。

that are in fact not blatantly market capitalism.

However, there is a real reason and real concern

然而，我們有一個真正的理由 及真正要注意的地方就是

for us to now focus our attentions on purer forms of capitalism,

現在要把注意力放在 有較單純架構的資本主義上面，

particularly those embodied by the United States.

特別是那些由美國 體現出來的資本主義。

This is really important

這真的很重要，

because this type of capitalism

因為這類的資本主義，

has increasingly been afforded the critique

它正在孳生腐敗，

that it is now fostering corruption

批判的聲音不斷地增加，

and, worse still,

而更糟的是，

it's increasing income inequality --

收入不公平的現象一直在持續擴大--

the idea that the few are benefiting at the expense of the many.

也就是少數人享受著 多數人勞動成果的問題。

The two really critical questions that we need to address

有兩個真正的關鍵 我們需要解決，

is how can we fix capitalism

就是，我們要如何修正資本主義，

so that it can help create economic growth

讓它可以幫助創造經濟成長，

but at the same time can help to address social ills.

同時幫助解決社會弊端。

In order to think about that framing, we have to ask ourselves,

為了要思考這個架構， 我們必須問我們自己，

how does capitalism work today?

現今的資本主義是如何運作的？

Very simplistically,

非常簡單，

capitalism is set on the basis of an individual utility maximizer --

資本主義是架構在 個人利益最大化上--

a selfish individual who goes after what he or she wants.

讓一個謀私利的個體 去追尋他或她想要的。

And only after they've maximized their utility

也唯有在他們的利益獲得最大化後，

do they then decide it's important

他們才會去認真思考，

to provide support to other social contracts.

提供援助履行「社會契約」的重要性。

Of course, in this system governments do tax,

當然，在這系統下，政府會抽稅，

and they use part of their revenues to fund social programs,

然後再用部分的稅收 來提供社會福利，

recognizing that government's role is not just regulation

為的是讓人民知道，政府的角色 不是只有立法管理，

but also to be arbiter of social goods.

同時也扮演了社會福利仲裁者的角色。

But nevertheless,

但儘管如此，

this framework --

這個框架結構--

this two-stage framework --

這兩個階段的框架結構--

is the basis from which we must now start

是我們現在必須開始思考

to think about how we can improve the capitalist model.

要如何改善資本主義模式的基礎。

I would argue that there are two sides to this challenge.

我認為這個挑戰有兩方面。

First of all,

首先，

we can draw on the right-wing policies

我們可以借鑒右翼政策，

to see what could be beneficial for us

去看看對我們有甚麼利益

to think about how we can improve capitalism.

去思考如何改善資本主義。

In particular,

特別是，

right-leaning policies

右傾的政策

have tended to focus on things like conditional transfers,

已經傾向專注於像是 「條件式補助」的事情上，

where we pay and reward people for doing the things

就是我們支付並獎勵人民進行

那些我們認為可以 幫助經濟成長的事。

that we actually think can help enhance economic growth.

For example,

例如，

sending children to school,

送小孩上學，

parents could earn money for that,

父母可以得到補助酬賞，

or getting their children inoculated or immunized,

或者讓他們的孩子注射疫苗，

parents could get paid for doing that.

父母可以因此得到酬賞，

Now, quite apart from the debate

現在，不用去爭論

on whether or not we should be paying people

我們是否應該提供酬賞

to do what we think they should do anyway,

支付給父母親做他們 本來就應該做的事，

the fact of the matter is that pay for performance

真正重要的事實是， 這種酬賞的實行

has actually yielded some positive results

已經產生一些正向的結果，

in places like Mexico,

像是在墨西哥這個地方、

in Brazil

在巴西，

and also in pilot programs in New York.

以及在紐約試辦的計畫。

But there are also benefits

但在左傾政策上也有一些 福利政策及顯著的變革正在進行。

and significant changes underway on left-leaning policies.

Arguments that government should expand its role and responsibility

他們的論點是： 政府應該擴大它的角色及責任，

讓它不再是那麼狹隘地 被舊思維所定義，

so that it's not so narrowly defined

and that government should be much more of an arbiter

而是要讓政府扮演生產力要素的 仲裁者角色，

of the factors of production

have become commonplace with the success of China.

而這些論點在中國已經是 司空見慣的成功模式。

But also we've started to have debates

但同時我們也要開始辯論

about how the role of the private sector

有關於私人企業該扮演的角色

should move away from just being a profit motive

應該跳脫只顧營利的動機，

and really be more engaged in the delivery of social programs.

而真正地更加投入社會計畫。

Things like the corporate social responsibility programs,

像是企業的社會責任計畫，

albeit small in scale,

即使規模不大，

are moving in that right direction.

也是往正確的方向在進行。

Of course, left-leaning policies have also tended to blur the lines

當然，左傾政策也已經模糊了，

政府與非政府組織及私人企業的界線。

between government, NGOs and private sector.

Two very good examples of this are the 19th-century United States,

這個概念有兩個很好的例子， 一個是 19 世紀的美國，

when the infrastructure rollout

當時推出的基礎設施計劃

was really about public-private partnerships.

真的就是「公辦私營」的夥伴關係。

More recently, of course,

更近一點，當然，

the advent of the Internet has also proven to the world

網際網路的出現，已經向世界證明

公眾與私人是可以一起合作改善社會。

that public and private can work together for the betterment of society.

My fundamental message to you is this:

我要給各位傳達的基本訊息就是：

We cannot continue to try and solve the world economic growth challenges

我們不能藉由固執己見或 堅持不必要的意識形態來

by being dogmatic and being unnecessarily ideological.

繼續嘗試並解決世界經濟成長的挑戰。

In order to create sustainable, long-term economic growth

為了創造穩定長期的經濟成長，

and solve the challenges and social ills that continue to plague the world today,

並解決挑戰與現今 持續瀰漫在全球的社會問題，

we're going to have to be more broad-minded

我們必須要有更包容的心胸

about what might work.

了解甚麼是可行的。

Ultimately,

最後，

we have to recognize that ideology is the enemy of growth.

我們必須要認清 意識形態是成長的敵人。

Thank you.

謝謝

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Bruno Giussani： 我想要問一些問題，丹碧莎，

Bruno Giussani: I want to ask a couple of questions, Dambisa,

因為有人可以對你最後一句話做回應，

because one could react to your last sentence

就是，成長的本身也是一種意識形態，

by saying growth is also an ideology,

它可能就是我們這一世代 最主要的意識形態，

it's possibly the dominant ideology of our times.

What do you say to those who react that way?

如果有人這麼回應，你要怎麼回答？

DM: Well, I think that that's completely legitimate,

DM：好的，我認為這完全合理，

我認為我們已經討論過，

and I think that we're already having that discussion.

There's a lot of work going on around happiness

針對幸福這件事還有很多工作要做，

and other metrics being used for measuring people's success

而且，還要其他的測量方式 可以衡量人們的成功，

and improvements in living standards.

以及生活水平的改善。

And so I think that we should be open

所以，我認為我們應該敞開心胸，

to what could deliver improvements in people's living standards

討論做甚麼事可以增進人類的生活水平，

and continue to reduce poverty around the world.

並且持續減少世界上的貧窮現象。

BG: So you're basically pleading for rehabilitating growth,

BG：所以，基本上，你是在為 「回復成長」辯護，

but the only way for that happen

但是唯一

能帶領我們走向

without compromising the capacity of the earth,

不犧牲掉地球利益的 長期發展之路，

to take us on a long journey,

is for economic growth

就是要讓經濟成長

somehow to decouple from the underlying use of resources.

與某一種「資源的潛在利用方式」脫鉤。

Do you see that happening?

你認為這會發生嗎？

DM: Well, I think that I'm more optimistic about human ability and ingenuity.

DM：恩，我認為我對人類的能力與智慧 是持比較樂觀的看法。

I think if we start to constrain ourselves

我想，如果我們開始

約束自己使用我們今日所知道的 有限、稀有、耗盡中的資源，

using the finite, scarce and depleting resources

that we know today,

we could get quite negative

我們就會變得相當負面 (對經濟成長)

and quite concerned about the way the world is.

而且相當擔心世界會變如何。

However, we've seen the Club of Rome,

然而，我們已經看到羅馬俱樂部，

we've seen previous claims

我們已經看到之前的聲明，

that the world would be running out of resources,

全世界的資源會被消耗殆盡，

and it's not to argue that those things are not valid.

不用去爭論這些事情不可能。

But I think, with ingenuity we could see desalination,

但我想，我們可以用智慧 去慢慢減少資源的使用。

I think we could reinvest in energy,

我想，我們可以再投資到能源上面，

so that we can actually get better outcomes.

如此我們就可以得到更好的結果。

And so in that sense,

所以在這概念底下，

I'm much more optimistic about what humans can do.

對人類可以怎麼做， 我是持比較樂觀的看法。

BG: The thing that strikes me

BG：有件事讓我印象深刻，

about your proposals for rehabilitating growth

就是有關於妳對回複經濟成長的提議，

and taking a different direction

裡面提到了一個不一樣的方向，

is that you're kind of suggesting to fix capitalism with more capitalism --

你好像建議用更多的資本主義 去修正資本主義，

with putting a price tag on good behavior as incentive

像是，在「好的行為」上 放上一個價格標籤做為誘因，

or developing a bigger role for business in social issues.

或者在社會議題上， 讓企業扮演一個更大的角色，

Is that what you're suggesting?

這是妳建議的嗎？

DM: I'm suggesting we have to be open-minded.

DM：我是建議，我們必須要開闊心胸。

I think it is absolutely the case

我想這絕對是一個問題，

that traditional models of economic growth

就是，傳統的經濟成長模式

are not working the way we would like them to.

已經無法達到我們要它達成的目標。

And I think it's no accident

我想，這並不意外，

that today the largest economy in the world, the United States,

現今，世界最大的經濟體，美國，

has democracy,

有民主、

liberal democracy, as it's core political stance

自由民主，作為它的核心政治立場，

and it has free market capitalism --

它還有自由的市場資本主義--

to the extent that it is free --

某種程度上，它是自由的--

free market capitalism as its economic stance.

自由的市場資本主義是它的經濟立場。

The second largest economy is China.

第二大經濟體是中國。

It has deprioritized democracy

它有民主非優先順位的發展制度，

and it has state capitalism, which is a completely different model.

它有國家資本主義， 完全是不一樣的模式。

These two countries, completely different political models

這兩個國家，是完全不同的政治模式，

and completely different economic models,

完全不一樣的經濟模式，

and yet they have the same income inequality number

當然，他們一樣有收入 不平等的現象

measured as a Gini coefficient.

是根據基尼係數所量測出來的。

I think those are the debates we should have,

我想，這些就是我們應該要辯論的地方，

because it's not clear at all

因為我們仍不清楚，

what model we should be adopting,

該採取哪一種模式，

and I think there needs to be much more discourse

我想，仍需有更多不同論述，

and much more humility about what we know and what we don't know.

以及更多的謙卑之心來面對 我們所了解及或不了解的事情。

BG: One last question. The COP21 is going on in Paris.

BG：最後一個問題， 聯合國氣候變化大會即將在巴黎舉行。

If you could send a tweet

如果妳可以傳送一條推特訊息

to all the heads of state and heads of delegations there,

給在那邊的所有國家領袖 及代表團團長，

what would you say?

妳會跟他們說甚麼？

DM: Again, I would be very much about being open-minded.

DM：我在說明一次， 我很希望大家敞開心胸討論。

As you're aware,

你應該知道的，

the issues around the environmental concerns

圍繞在關懷環境的議題上

have been on the agenda many times now --

已經在議程上被提出來很多次--

in Copenhagen, '72 in Stockholm --

72年在哥本哈根，斯德哥爾摩， 舉辦的聯合國人類環境大會--

and we keep revisiting these issues

我們持續關注這些議題，

partly because there is not a fundamental agreement,

部分原因是，根本沒有基本的共識協議，

in fact there's a schism

事實上，仍有分歧的意見，

between what the developed countries believe and want

介於已開發國家的信仰與希望

and what emerging market countries want.

及新興市場國家的希望。

Emerging market countries need to continue to create economic growth

新興市場國家想要持續的經濟成長，

so that we don't have political uncertainty in the those countries.

這裡面我們沒有 政治不確定性的國家。

Developed countries recognize

已發展國家承認，

that they have a real, important responsibility

它們真的有很重大的責任，

not only just to manage their CO2 emissions

要負責二氧化碳排放量的管理、

and some of the degradation that they're contributing to the world,

還有扛起他們對全世界 所造成破壞的責任，

but also as trendsetters in R&D.

但也包含帶領全球研發的潮流。

And so they have to come to the table as well.

所以，他們也必須要上桌討論。

But in essence, it cannot be a situation

但大體上，不會有一種狀況就是...

where we start ascribing policies to the emerging markets

我們一開始就歸咎新興市場的政策 卻不討論已開發國家本身的政策，

without developed countries themselves

also taking quite a swipe at what they're doing

然後還猛烈抨擊他們在已開發市場的 供需問題上所做的一切。

both in demand and supply in developed markets.

BG: Dambisa, thank you for coming to TED. DM: Thank you very much.

BG：丹碧莎，謝謝妳來 TED ， DM：非常謝謝你。

(Applause)

（掌聲）