从“世界工厂”到“全球办公室”——中印制度与经济发展模式比较

From "World Workshop" to "Global Office" :A Comparative Study of Institutions and Economic Development in China and India

中国和印度的要素禀赋相似,但经济发展模式却截然不同。制度对经济增长的影响不仅仅在于通过保护产权来激励投资,它也可以通过影响生产要素流动性来改变要素配置,从而影响国家的经济增长模式。具体而言,中国的劳动和土地制度加快了劳动力的流动性。高流动性加强了劳动力资源的比较优势,吸引了更多资本投入劳动密集型的制造业,因此创造了"世界工厂"。相比之下,印度的劳动和土地制度限制了劳动力在城乡之间、行业之间以及正式和非正式部门之间的流动。割裂的就业市场因此削弱了劳动力资源的成本和规模优势,降低了劳动密集型制造业对资本的吸引力,反而引导资本投入到相对高技术密集型的现代服务业,由此形成了"全球办公室"。理解国内制度对经济发展模式的影响对国家治理有很大的启示。尽管劳动力的高流动性有助于提高经济活动的效率,但通过限制个人权利而使劳动力流动性被动提高却可能伤害国家的技术创新能力。

China and India have distinct patterns of economic growth with China being the world's workshop and India the global office.The author argues that domestic institutions shape a country's growth pattern by affecting the mobility of production factors.Specifically,institutional arrangements in labor and land markets play an important role in enhancing or undermining labor mobility.China's high labor mobility strengthens its comparative advantage in labor-intensive production,making the manufacturing sector attractive to investment.In contrast,India's low labor mobility undermines its comparative advantage in labor-intensive production,making its skilled service sector more attractive to investment.Understanding the mechanism of institutional effect on growth pattern has important implications on good governance.Although high labor mobility is desirable for economic efficiency,mobility-enhancing institutions that constrain labor rights might undermine a country's innovative capability in the long run.