东亚发展型战略的嬗变及其对我国的启示

二战后,东亚地区的国家(地区)出于冷战背景下的地缘政治格局的要求形成了强国家(地区)主义特色的发展模式,造就了东亚经济的奇迹。这种模式以日本为范例进而被韩国、中国台湾等东亚国家和地区效仿。20世纪80年代后在国际和国内环境等多方面因素的影响下,东亚的发展型政权均背离了原来的发展模式。试图通过分析发展型政权的传统特征、变异的原因和变异的路径来对比我国经济结构中问题的形成,并为我国谋求可持续发展的改革之路提供一些启示。     

中国和东亚经济:从过去展望未来

如果我们想了解中国最近的经济增长以及它所面临的问题,一个非常有用的信息就是要参考过去的一些趋势,尤其是东亚经济过去发展的一些模式,因为我们可以看到中国与东亚的日本、四小龙以及这些国家和地区三十年前的发展是非常类似的.     

东亚经济合作谁主沉浮?

(一) 日本自60年代以来一直充当亚洲经济发展领头大雁的作用。战后东亚经济发展呈现出传输扩散与联动互补效应,通称为"阶梯式连带型的发展"或"雁阵模式"。这种"雁行模式",以日本为雁头、以亚洲新兴工业化国家和地区为雁身、以东盟和中国为雁尾,从而确立了日本在亚洲的核心和主导地位并登上了世界经济大国的地位。"雁行模式"通过梯度产业转移,拉动了东亚国家经济的起飞和发展,也推动了东亚经济一体化的进程。亚洲"四小"从中获得了经     

儒教资本主义与日本的成功

20世纪70年代以来，日本和东亚“四小龙”以令人瞠目的速度迅速崛起，使西方学者在惊叹之余开始探索“东亚经济奇迹”的原因。“是什么力量将这些国家和地区从沉睡的亚洲中唤醒?是谁给了他们‘普罗米修斯之火’或‘浮士德的野心’去主宰他们的环境?”美国著名社会学家、未来学家赫尔曼·卡恩首先明确地以儒家伦理来理解“东亚经济奇迹”。他说：包括日本在内的东亚国……     

东亚模式与中国

东亚(日本及东亚"四小龙":韩国、中国台湾、中国香港和新加坡)在战后取得的奇迹般的经济发展,无疑是20世纪经济增长史上最重大的事件之一.美国著名经济学家斯蒂格利茨(Stiglitz,1997)将东亚的成功列为战后三个最重大的深刻地影响了人们关于发展的思维的事件之一(其它两个事件分别是前苏联的崩溃及全球经济一体化).关于东亚经济发展的评价,人们业已取得的两点基本共识是:第一,存在着某些共同的东亚经验(东亚模式);第二,东亚经验(东亚模式)代表着一种成功的发展经验(发展模式).然而,如我们在有关东亚经验研究的大量文献中可以看到的,在一些基本的问题上仍存在着严重的混淆和分歧,包括东亚模式涵盖的国家/地区范围,东亚模式的确切内涵,对东亚模式与东亚的成功之间的因果关系的解释,等等.     

中国的经济发展如何影响了全球经济:基于经济学文献的答案

本文基于经济学家十多年来的理论与经验研究文献,综述、评估并回答了中国经济对全球经济影响的三个重要问题:第一,高速发展的中国经济对于全球贸易流量和贸易格局具有什么样的影响?中国出口的持续增长是否对一些国家和地区(特别是东亚、拉美和非洲地区的发展中国家)构成严峻的竞争?第二,随着中国的改革开放和经济发展,中国已经成为发展中国家和地区中最大的FDI流入国。中国接收的FDI是否对其他国家(特别是周边国家的FDI流入)带来"转移效应"?第三,中国经济的持续发展对于全球基础商品的价格(特别是石油价格和金属商品的价格)和通货膨胀产生了什么影响?     

东北亚经济合作与黄渤海经济圈的发展前景

谈东北亚经济合作，人们首先遇到的是东北亚的地理范围如何界定的问题。我认为东北亚地区只应包括日本、中国（含港、台）韩国和俄罗斯、蒙古与朝鲜六个国家，其中俄罗斯还只是其西伯利亚和远东地区。1．东北亚是目前世界上经济最有活力的地区。在当今世界上亚太是经济增长最快的地区，东亚则是亚太经济发展最快的地区，而在东亚，东北亚又是经济实力最强和发展最快的地区。东亚经济的蓬勃发展被誉为“东亚奇迹”。正是东亚经济持续高速发展带动了亚太经济的迅速发展和全球经济的增长。而构成东亚经济奇迹的，不仅是6O年代日本经济的迅速发…     

中国模式——魅力难以抗拒

【俄罗斯《政治杂志》周刊10月2日】中国的发展模式，或者说东亚的发展模式，对所有发展中国家具有难以抗拒的诱惑力，因为这种模式引发了世界经济史上前所未有的一轮增长。中国和以中华文化为基础的日本、韩国及东南亚国家近几十年来保持了快速的年均经济增长率。东亚成为2O世纪下半叶唯一成功地缩小了与西方国家之间的经济差距的地区。     

以中国为中心的东亚经济新秩序正在浮现

东亚是指中国、日本和四个新兴工业经济体(韩国、台湾、香港、台湾和新加坡),以及东盟经济体。东亚第一波高增长由日本引领,并迅速扩散到四个新兴工业化经济体和一些东盟国家。这是第一代东亚共同体的崛起。东亚第二波高增长是由中国引领的,目前正被扩散到整个东亚区域。比较而言,中国引领的第二代东亚共同体在经济上比日本引领的第一代更为强大。中国不仅是东亚增长的引擎,也是区域经济整合的催化剂。然后,在未来相当长的时期内,中国还不能改变东亚地缘政治的形势。中国"和平崛起"这一理念并未得到东亚国家的广泛认同。中国与其他东亚经济体的总体关系仍将是"政冷经热"的局面。美国不断在东亚增强其政治和战略地位,使得中国与其他东亚经济体的新兴关系更为复杂化。因此,东亚现有的地区秩序将继续被不确定性和不稳定性因素所破坏。东亚共同体不仅需要建立在可持续的经济增长和地区整合的基础上,还需要建立在相互具有和睦安全关系的基础之上,因此在未来还有很长的路要走。     

战后日本经济发展模式评析

东亚经济发展进程是一个有机整体,是各国(地区)经济发展运动的内在迭加形成了东亚地区现代化发展的总绩效和总趋势。因此,东亚经济发展模式既是一个加速东亚地区经济增长的内在整体,也囊括了各国(地区)经济增长的若干范示。日本经济是东亚经济发展的引擎,其成功的发展模式颇具典型意义,对我国经济加速发展具有重要的启迪。     

China–Japan–United States integration amid global rebalancing: A computable general equilibrium analysis

Using a global general equilibrium trade model, this paper assesses the long-term implications of global rebalancing for Asian economies and explores the benefits of China–Japan–United States (US) integration. The analysis suggests that consumption evaporation, a growth slowdown in the US, and the consequent current account correction would force China, Japan, and other East Asian economies to undergo substantial structural adjustments. A combination of domestic reform aimed at boosting service sector productivity and external liberalization aimed at fostering broader economic integration will be critical for East Asian economies to facilitate their economic rebalancing and sustained growth. Our global computable general equilibrium (CGE) analysis suggests that China and Japan need to strengthen their economic ties with the US while at the same time bringing other East Asian economies into this integration process.     

产业赶超发展战略理论演进及其对中国产业发展的启示

国家实现产业赶超是“二战”后世界发展动态的一个重要经济现象,几乎所有国家都制定了自己的产业赶超发展战略。然而,日本、德国等战败国,韩国、新加坡等国以及中国台湾、香港地区成功地实现了产业赶超发展。而中国大陆、东欧和俄罗斯等大部分转型经济体和印度则通过FDI还未成功地实现产业赶超。如何解释这些国家和地区产业赶超的成功经验和失败教训,国际经济理论界发展了成熟的产业赶超发展战略理论。本文试图对这些产业赶超发展战略理论的演进进行总结归纳,并在此基础上得出若干结论性的启示和反思,以期对处于转型发展中的中国如何调整好产业赶超发展战略有所裨益。     

Prospects for East Asian economic regionalism in the 21st century

It is not likely that East Asian states will regress to the mercantilist developmental state that used to engineer compressed economic growth. However, it is evident that the pattern of transformation East Asian states are undergoing, is not analogous to the path of Anglo‐American development Although the government refrains itself from arbitrarily supplying economic resources (especially financial resources in the form of subsidies or policy loans) to promote strategic industries, it does not give up commanding the market to attain a relatively higher economic growth. The relationship between the state and the market is still set up in a hierarchical fashion in favor of the former. The economic system to emerge in East Asia is the state‐governed rather than market‐centered, even if it has absorbed neo‐liberal condiments. The state‐dominant economic system of East Asia is expected to survive for a considerable period. In this regard, the establishment of a financial system to sustain the East Asian economic system has been strongly suggested. Here lies in the reason we discuss the rise of the East Asian economic identity in the post‐financial crisis era.     

Exchange rates,global imbalances,and interdependence in East Asia

The paper analyzes East Asian interdependence in the face of global imbalances. A macro-econometric multinational model is used, describing Korea, Japan, China and the rest of East Asia in their respective relations with the United States as well as with the rest of the world. US imbalances and their expected consequences, notably a depreciation of the dollar and the slowdown of US demand, have rather contrasted effects on East Asian economies, depending on relative magnitudes of the two components. Korea is more affected by the dollar depreciation while China is more exposed to the US slowdown. Japan, less open and less dependent on the US market, is less touched. The correction of East Asian exchange-rate misalignments, which have prevailed since the beginning of the 2000s, would badly affect East Asian economies if undertaken too abruptly. Lastly, the perspective of creating an area of stabilised exchange rates between won, yen and other currencies, organized either as a common currencies basket system or in a regime based on the ACU, is explored preliminarily. Sets of simulations comparing adjustment mechanisms between East Asian countries, with or without the possibility of monetary adjustment, illustrate the cost of precluding exchange-rate adjustments in the case of asymmetric demand shocks.     

External adjustments and coordinated exchange rate policy in Asia

In this paper, we estimate structural VAR models with contemporaneous restrictions based on neo-classical and Keynesian theories to investigate whether the cause of current account surpluses for East Asian economies is a “saving glut” or undervalued currencies. Analytical results show that the major determinant of the current account is the real effective exchange rate for all East Asian countries with the exception of China for which the major determinant is domestic GDP. Accordingly, the recently requested revaluation of the Chinese yuan may not be an effective policy for reducing the Chinese current account surplus, and may affect other Asian current accounts. We also investigate whether a Chinese currency revaluation would contribute to the improvement of current account imbalances in East Asia and find that a revaluation would, indeed, improve the current accounts of Japan, Korea, Indonesia, and Thailand. Since the trade structures of major East Asian countries are substitutes with that of China, a Chinese currency revaluation might not lead to a decrease in East Asian current account surpluses. Coordination of currency policy among East Asian countries is, therefore, needed to solve the global current account imbalance.     

The role of the state in skill formation: evidence from the Republic of Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan

We propose a new interpretation of the role of the state inskill formation, with reference to three East Asian newly industrializedeconomies. Rather than see the state as simply redressing externalities,we interpret the state as matching the supply and demand forskills in a rapidly growing economy. This role can be superiorto a strategy of allowing education and training institutionsto be driven by autonomous processes. The role is most likelyto be observed in developmental states. We examine the politicalmechanisms that have helped to ensure that educational and trainingpolicy formation are subordinated to the imperatives of economicgrowth. While the East Asian model cannot be imported wholesaleto western countries such as Britain in different historicalcircumstances, the example lends credence to the value of thestate taking a strategic approach to education and trainingpolicy.     

Economic integration in northeast Asia: Preconditions and possible trajectories

When in November 2001, the leaders of the Southeast Asian and Northeast Asian states met for the “ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations) plus three (China, Japan and Korea),” President Kim Dae‐Jung of South Korea proposed the exploration for an East Asian Free Trade Area (EAFTA) and thereby opened a new chapter of East Asian integration. The special Northeast Asian perspective on regional co‐operation became clear by the simultaneous decision to hold annual meetings of finance and trade ministers of China, Japan and Korea. At the same time, bilateral agreements, like a free trade area between Japan and Singapore, the tentative large free trade area between ASEAN and China and the work‐in‐progress on a Korean‐Japanese Free Trade Area, show the devotion and sometimes even obsession of current policy‐making with reaching regional trade agreements. Regional integration, it seems, is finally on the Northeast Asian agenda. In this paper, the preconditions and perspectives of economic integration in Northeast Asia will be explored. Since economic integration is in various ways linked to political factors, the second section discusses the geo‐political situation of Northeast Asia today. The third section deals with the economic perspectives of different forms of trade integration, followed by an analysis of various attempts for greater macro‐economic and financial co‐operation and a short conclusion.     

International Price Linkage within a Region: The Case of East Asia

This paper investigates how “prices” in East Asian economies correlate with those in Japan and the United States. The analysis is particularly noteworthy because although the East Asian economies are geographically close to Japan, their currencies have been tied more closely to the U.S. dollar. In this paper, we analyze two different types of “prices”: overall price levels in terms of the same currency and relative prices among different commodities. We demonstrate that overall price levels in the East Asian economies are more closely related to those in the United States. However, the relative prices in East Asia, especially those in Taiwan and Korea, are more closely correlated with those in Japan. These price correlation patterns are in marked contrast with those in other regions.J. Japan. Int. Econ.December 1993,11(4), pp. 643–666. Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan; and Department of Economics, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, and Graduate School of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, Japan.