Article/Xu Xiaonian, a columnist of Sina Financial Opinion Leader (WeChat official account kopleader) from the perspective of Central Europe
Promoting technological innovation is an effective way to solve many economic problems facing China today, but it needs to strengthen the protection of property rights.
After more than three decades of reform and opening up, China's economic development is now at a critical turning point. The smooth transition of this transition period will determine the trend of China's economic development in the next decade or two. These years can be said to be a very critical period.
The turning point is from capital accumulation to innovation driven economic growth, which is a big feature of it.
If we don't need industrial policy at the policy level. What do we need? I proposed four measures on the supply side:
The first measure is to protect private property rights
What is the relationship between the protection of private property rights and innovation? The relationship is too big, because innovation and R&D need to be accumulated for a long time, which can not be generated at a whim. It needs long-term R&D investment and long-term technology accumulation to make breakthroughs. If you want the enterprise to make long-term investment in R&D, you must protect its property rights. The significance of protecting property rights is to establish a stable expectation of future earnings for entrepreneurs. Only under the control of stable expectations can they make long-term investments.
Chinese entrepreneurs like short and fast projects, and Chinese entrepreneurs are unwilling to invest in R&D, why? The reason is that the uncertainty of the future is too high. I have invested in R&D for more than ten years. I still don't know what will happen after ten years. So now you can see that our entrepreneurs do not invest this capital in R&D projects, but transfer the capital abroad.
During the Spring Festival, I participated in the establishment of the China EU Australia and New Zealand Alumni Association. More than 70 China EU alumni from Australia and New Zealand attended the inaugural meeting in Sydney. I told them, I said everyone came here, and I was moved that you still have this feeling for the school, but I am also sad that so many alumni came to Australia and New Zealand, and you should have stayed in China. Of course, I don't blame you. Your behavior is rational.
Why did you run away? The safety of property, the education of children, the air, the environment, so they ran away.
Therefore, protecting private property rights is a prerequisite for long-term R&D investment. You have no effective property rights protection, and no one is willing to make long-term investment. So I say that we agree to engage in the supply side and promote technological innovation. We also believe that it is an effective way to solve many economic problems facing China today, but we need to strengthen the protection of property rights.
In November last year, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council jointly issued a notice, which is worth seeing. It shows that this problem has been reflected in the Central Committee, The Central Committee is already paying attention to this issue. This notice is the Opinions on Respect and Protection of Entrepreneurship In March this year, the Political Bureau adopted another opinion, which was roughly the same. This shows that the problem has become more serious and has attracted the attention of senior management. You should protect private property rights and respect entrepreneurship, otherwise we cannot innovate.
Of course, it's a good thing for you to give documents and opinions, but why didn't it play a role in anticipation? Your documents and opinions cannot effectively achieve your goals. What is the most effective way to protect property rights? rule by law , not the rule of man. What if you send this opinion today and another contrary opinion tomorrow? We see that the government often sends some contradictory opinions, so I am dizzy. I don't know which works. and The rule of law is very clear. It will not change at will with the change of the government, so its protection of property rights is more effective than the government's commitment 。
On the supply side, I agree that we must do it, but the first thing is to protect private property rights.
Second, narrow the scope of the state-owned economy
What will happen if private enterprises fall behind in innovation in the market? The market will punish him, and the market will eliminate him. His innovation is under the pressure of the market.
For example, Nokia used to be the No. 1 mobile phone. Where is Nokia now? Who knows? Why? From the boss into a dead end. Why? We are one step behind in innovation. Nokia has mastered this technology, but it has not launched the product.
When the Apple phone came out, Nokia was still pressing the keyboard. I can't see the keypad clearly. How thin can I use a Nokia phone with such a small phone. Once the first leader was eliminated after a backward innovation. Innovation is not the icing on the cake for enterprises in the market competition environment. Innovation is the top priority for enterprises.
The quantitative growth has ended and entered the era of technological innovation. Innovation is the top priority of enterprises. The CEO of an enterprise must focus on innovation, and the chairman of an enterprise must pay attention to innovation. If innovation fails, the enterprise will fail. It can be said that the purpose of enterprise existence is innovation, not production, not sales, but innovation. Because the market pressure is too great, if you are slow, you will be eliminated.
State owned enterprises don't care if they are slow, because they will not fail, because they will not be eliminated, because they are fed by the emperor, because the government will save them if they have problems. What pressure does he have to innovate? No pressure. He also has no incentive to innovate.
Where does innovation come from? Inspiration from entrepreneurs. What are the incentives for entrepreneurs to innovate? Why did Jobs innovate? Why does Bill Gates want to innovate? People are all the same. As a person, I think the similarities between people are far greater than our differences. The most powerful driving force for Jobs' innovation is to make Apple a century old store and an excellent company that can last forever. He has the feeling of changing the world.
Both of them are great innovators, but their motivations are different. Bill Gates wants to make his business bigger and he wants to become rich. You don't have to blame him for his low level. We don't have to imitate Jobs to pretend to be tall. There is no need. People are complex animals, and his behavior is driven by multiple incentives. Some people want to change the world, others want to make a fortune. Some people want to use their accumulated wealth to do charity, and various motivations to innovate.
However, we can't find any motivation for innovation in state-owned enterprises. If the senior managers of state-owned enterprises succeed in innovation, they will not make a big fortune. Why? Because the boss of the central enterprise sixty Ten thousand, they are in charge of thousands or even trillions of assets. You send them every year sixty Wan, are you kidding me? I was asked to be the chief executive of a central enterprise, in charge of hundreds of billions of assets, and get all the salaries every year sixty Wan, what am I doing? I must steal it It is human nature. I must think about how I can operate these tens of millions of assets, and I can gain some benefits personally.
For example, the purchase price is much higher than the market price. From whom do I buy? I bought it from my friend. Outsourcing is also higher than the market price from my friend's enterprise. The higher part should be scored. They have no incentive to innovate, their salary is capped, and they cannot share the benefits of innovation. They have neither the power nor the pressure to innovate.
The main body of innovation must be private enterprises. Therefore, in order to build China's innovative economy, we must narrow the scope of the state-owned economy.
Third, deregulation and deregulation
Regulation is the enemy of innovation. Why is there a world-class Internet company in China based on market value? One of the reasons is that the government has not responded to the Internet when it first entered China. He got up at once.
Free environment and free flow of resources are the necessary conditions for innovation. Don't worry about me. Look at the emerging industries supported by the government's industrial policies. We find that whichever government supports will collapse. What are the consequences of government PV? Overcapacity is a mess. The leading photovoltaic enterprises have all collapsed. Therefore, innovation does not need government support, it needs the government to create a good competitive environment. Leave it alone.
Now it is said that electric vehicles are a new direction of science and technology, supported by national policies. What is the result? The result is that enterprises and officials collude to defraud state subsidies, all of which are cheating. When he said "I am an electric car", he did not know what an electric car was, the enterprise did not know it, and the officials did not know it, so he cheated the subsidy by doing two sample cars. We are still lagging behind in electric vehicle technology. Therefore, innovation does not need government support, but needs a free and good environment.
Fourth, comprehensive tax cuts
It is not just to help enterprises overcome the difficulties of economic downturn. The significance of comprehensive tax reduction lies in the implementation of the “ Let the market play a decisive role in resource allocation ” To liberate more resources from administrative allocation, that is, from the hands of the government, and to allocate resources by enterprises in the market 。 This is the most important significance of tax reduction, not only to reduce the burden of some enterprises, but also to reduce the burden of enterprises. The more important significance is to transfer resources from administrative allocation to market-based enterprise allocation.
These are the four supply side policies I have proposed. How likely is it to be adopted? Almost equal to zero. Like our marginal return on capital, it is almost equal to 0. But my job is research. My task is to make policy recommendations based on my research results. This is just my job.
(The author of this article introduces that CEIBS is a non-profit institution of higher learning co founded by the Chinese government and the European Union to train international management talents. WeChat: CEIBS6688)
