Article/Jia Kang of China Economic 50 People Forum
Because the policy design may be wrong and the implementation mechanism may be biased, we should not completely abandon industrial policies and supply management, which is a state of inaction. I should strive to be rational, do a good job, be active and cautious, and make a difference. This is a basic guide in my understanding.
Not because the industrial policy may be biased As a researcher, I try to draw a rough outline of my basic views on the issue of "industrial policy and supply side reform".
The first level is to look at the supply side from the perspective of topic review and definition.
Generally, writing a paper should have an introduction, or "raising questions". Grasping the proposition of "industrial policy and supply side reform", and combining with reality, I believe that in the innovation of closely linking theory with practice, we need to break through the shortcomings of "demand management" that was considered mature in the past, but we have clearly realized its limitations after the world economic crisis, It is reasonable to propose that there should be more in-depth analysis and understanding of the supply side and theoretical discussion of socialist political economy. The socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics must also be integrated into the exploration and innovation of economics in the development of human civilization. We pay special attention to the supply side, which means we should strive to explore the academic knowledge that supply management and supply side reform must master in relation to the institutional space.
In my opinion, from the supply side perspective, industrial policy is an important proposition of "rational supply management". From the perspective of industry in economic operation, it should deal with the issue of supply side structural policies that are differentiated and highlight the key points. Its optimization has its own special significance for China, but in fact, it has become an unavoidable problem for other economies. The practical significance of this proposition should be incorporated into the concept of reform, that is, it should be combined with effective institutional supply and become a part of the overall consideration of supply side structural reform.
In fact, industrial policy, technical and economic policy, environmental policy, and the "policy preference support mechanism" that the Chinese have discussed for many years are inseparable and closely linked. I and other researchers who have consensus in this regard have devoted themselves to the research of new supply economics over the years, and believe that it is necessary to improve the understanding of the existing mainstream economics in theoretical innovation, or to be more frank, and need to make up lessons after reflection to overcome the asymmetry in the basic understanding framework of mainstream economics so far, The assumptions of some important theories and principles also need to be upgraded.
For example, the perfect competition hypothesis in our previous understanding paradigm has its significance and inspiration, and is indispensable. However, it needs to be further upgraded to the imperfect competition hypothesis, so as to better correspond to the real situation in the real world and improve the explanatory power and guiding power of the theory.
From this perspective, the obvious deficiencies or failures in the past theories related to industrial policies can and should be corrected and improved after a new round of theoretical and practical reflection, and political economics (or theoretical economics), as well as industrial economics, development economics Institutional economics, behavioral economics and so on should be all inclusive and strive to get through them. We have made such efforts in our research, trying to form a five in one understanding framework in the atlas. We have outlined this framework in the published New Supply Economics and Supply side Reform: A Concise Reading of New Supply.
Under the theoretical framework, the second layer should say how to view the necessity of industrial policies.
From the perspective of theoretical investigation and practical verification, three key words should be mentioned, namely, "market failure" (or "market defect"); "Incomplete competition" - I mentioned it earlier; Another is the "catch up strategy".
Theoretically, it is generally acknowledged that there is a market failure problem - except that some scholars think this proposition can be discussed again - our new supply research group accepts such a basic understanding. This market failure leads to the necessity of government intervention. In fact, under the framework of demand management, there has been a relatively shaped "counter cyclical" operation in this regard. What is its theoretical basis? It requires necessary state intervention or government intervention to make up for market failure.
However, what we are promoting now is the government's intervention and intervention, which not only needs to deal with the counter cyclical problem of insufficient effective demand, but also needs to solve the policy supply of the government that must be provided and optimized under the assumption of "imperfect competition". This policy supply can also be demonstrated in a practical sense - in theory, It is to solve the problem of supply optimization in incomplete competition, and to combine the government's policies with the market mechanism. In particular, it is necessary to solve the problem that the government should play its due role in optimizing the effective system supply. The practical significance of supply side policy supply and system supply for China is clear at a glance.
In the whole process of scientific decision-making and policy optimization design of late developing economies, we must actually grasp the thinking of "catching up strategy". This strategic thinking of the Chinese people is mainly reflected in the "three-step" modernization strategy, which was established in the new era of reform and opening up and now seems likely to broaden the road. In my opinion, the essence of this strategy or its inevitable connotation is the overall strategy from catching up to catching up under the unbalanced development of international competition and cooperation. There are obviously different opinions on this issue.
For example, we think that there are some very important insights in the Washington Consensus. Its initial theoretical assumption is complete competition, which can help us better understand the importance of the "invisible hand" of the market, and also connect with what the Third Plenary Session of the Central Committee said that the market plays a decisive role in the overall allocation of resources. But after the world financial crisis, Not only developing economies such as China, but also developed economies such as the United States have to solve a series of supply management problems without exception. What are the theoretical problems that have to be solved?
The differentiated and focused operation of supply management must correspond to imperfect competition. Our basic conclusion is that the real picture of the real world is not perfect competition, but imperfect competition. We need to raise the original assumption of perfect competition to the version 2.0 assumption of imperfect competition when we further discuss issues, This does not deny the theoretical enlightenment and significance of the assumption of perfect competition, but it should be pointed out that it is not enough.
In the case of imperfect competition, it is obviously closely related to the differences in the inspection of different industries. Then, of course, the question of industrial policy will be raised further down. We already have a concept of general competitive industries. The so-called general competitive industries refer to those with relatively complete competition. In real life, I observed that no one seems to want to impose industrial policies on them, such as catering, hairdressing, clothing, etc., because there is no special necessity, It can be considered that this industry is close to the situation given by the perfect competition hypothesis, but many other industries in the real world are not. If you do not consider industrial policies, technical and economic policies, etc., you will feel that it is too difficult.
So in addition to the general competitive industries, there are other industries with incomplete competition. For example, some states can be called oligopoly competition. In one industry, there have been several entities that are actually "too big to fail". They can form a conspiracy in the competition, and even some industries will have exclusive monopoly at some stages, A situation in which competitive factors are almost eliminated. Of course, if the government administration believes that it is necessary to eliminate this situation through the anti-monopoly law, of course, it is generally considered reasonable. On the contrary, does the anti-monopoly law also have the color of industrial policy? It can be considered together.
If the assumption that imperfect competition is the theoretical premise derived from the recognition that the market has defects and the government needs to intervene is established, the task faced by researchers will certainly be more complex and arduous. For example, if you want to study supply management, especially the problem of optimized "rational supply management", modeling is very difficult, papers cannot be published, and researchers must publish papers to evaluate associate professors, associate researchers, and professors and researchers in the future. Of course, you will be afraid of such problems that even models cannot be built, but this does not mean that, Our research community can give up its research efforts on this matter.
In the face of a new round of research tasks arising from more complex supply side structural problems, I think we should closely combine the thinking of "catching up strategy". Such a strategy, I observe, and the comparative advantage strategy in the new structural economics that Professor Lin Yifu emphasizes very much now, has both similarities and differences.
The new structural economics emphasized by Professor Lin, as well as the new supply economics we are talking about now, all focus on structural and supply side issues, which is obviously the common ground; Both places great emphasis on the efficient market, but also on the promising government. We put more emphasis on "promising" and "limited" expressions, but they are similar to each other; However, in terms of the differences between the two theoretical frameworks, I think Professor Lin's basic idea is that as long as they grasp the resource endowment conditions, and then connect with the comparative advantage strategy, they will basically solve the problem of structural optimization and upgrading, but we think this is not enough. This comparative advantage strategy has its adaptability, but it also has obvious limitations. It is difficult to effectively support the unconventional development that we must solve in real life, that is, from catching up to catching up, and from behind.
For example, the most prominent thing is that in the situation of international cooperation and competition, the first mover economies will be driven by material interests and will naturally suppress the later mover economies to trade with them at the high-end under the so-called framework of comparative advantage. In other words, the Chinese people have become more and more aware of the fact that "no amount of money can buy it, and they will never sell it to you" This is a problem that the cognitive framework of comparative advantage strategy cannot respond to and solve. It is also a crucial problem for the latecomers to truly realize modernization.
The so-called "catching up strategy", of course, should be noted that it is easy to go to a state of deviation. In the name of catching up, it violates objective laws, and even has the "Great Leap Forward", which has taught us a very serious and painful lesson in the past. But in real life, "children and bath water can't be thrown away together". To solve the problem of China's economy getting rid of backwardness after falling behind and being left behind by other developed economies in this big wholesale exhibition, the path to choose must be unconventional. The strategy of catching up from catching up to catching up cannot be abandoned, Otherwise, China will not be able to return to the first camp after falling behind.
This theoretical analysis from catching up to catching up has been explored. Some influential western scholars, including Krugman, have involved a leapfrog model that connects with the advantages of latecomers. In our new supply research, we have also put this understanding into practice to support productivity upgrading with successful innovation on the supply side, The curve that will bring about the leap forward development of the whole economy and society is not a slant upward curve that looks like a straight line, but a qualitative step at a certain point, and then a step at a certain point, which is called the overall leap upward development curve in stages.
This kind of extraordinary development is necessary in the exploration of objective laws, not limited to subjective wishes, because the development of the whole thing is unbalanced. Western scholars have also noticed that Britain surpasses the Netherlands, and the United States surpasses Britain. How to explain? We believe that this is not a proposition that can be contained by a simple comparative advantage strategy. It needs to be more straightforward.
From the perspective of integrating theory with practice, there are still quite a lot of empirical studies. For example, when we observed the development process after World War II, the Japanese supply management and industrial policies were very impressive. Although after the bursting of its economic bubble, there were many reflections - there must be some defects, but at least some things were done in the second half of the 1940s, the 1950s, and the 1960s, Now it seems that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages obviously, supporting Japan's economic take-off and entering the ranks of developed economies.
In the mid-1990s, I participated in the study arranged by an international organization in Vienna. There was a special topic in the World Bank's working paper (I didn't see it published later), which focused on Japan's policy finance, financial investment and financing, and supported a very clear focus on industrial policy: the end of World War II, This kind of financial investment and financing is a policy based financing mechanism for industrial restructuring and development, which supports the recovery of heavy chemical industry, namely steel, coal, etc., and then quickly turned to seize the opportunities in the world market at the beginning of the 1950s to support the development of Japan's shipbuilding industry, and then to the second half of the 1950s, It supports the improvement of the efficiency of the socialized large production line and manufacturing industry of automatic machinery, and then quickly turns to the so-called "semiconductor". Now when we hear about semiconductor, we know that it is connected with the information revolution. After the 1970s and 1980s, this kind of industrial policy support has become more and more characteristic of supporting non general competition fields. For example, the last support is mainly the construction of affordable housing in Japan, but it is still a mechanism that can connect with the market.
Let's take another look at American practice. In the 1980s, I was also known as a young and middle-aged economic researcher. The autobiography of Yakoka, which was popular throughout the country, was a statement made by a very excellent American entrepreneur about how he saved Chrysler. His book impressed me deeply, It is a core point put forward by Yakoka after so many discussions and reviews: the way to revitalize the United States is to master industrial policies - which is translated into "industrial policies" in Chinese - in fact, industrial policies.
This kind of industrial policy that Yakoka valued most at that time can also be seen in the aforementioned experience summary of Japanese development, but it is really not seen that later scholars have incorporated it into a theoretical framework and fully systematized it. But after the world financial crisis, we do not need to wait for foreign scholars to make a systematic summary of the new round of regulation experience. We should be able to start from reality and go to the forefront of theoretical innovation.
The starting point of innovative understanding is still to look at practice: the regulation practice of Americans is obviously beyond the scope of mainstream economics textbooks. After the crisis, at the key nodes, Americans summarized the lesson that the financial tsunami quickly escalated into a global financial crisis without saving Lehman Brothers, Later, it was relatively decisive to use public resources to inject capital into Citigroup and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac successively, until it reached the real economy level of General Motors with public resources, and then it became a turning point in the actual anti crisis process of the United States. The original panic in the market has been significantly alleviated, and then it will enter a recovery process.
As the largest country in the world, the US authorities have also used several rounds of quantitative easing as demand management tools during the recovery process, but at the same time, they have done a series of impressive supply management measures of industrial policies and technical and economic policies. These measures can not find theoretical support points in the teaching books or are relatively fully discussed, But its significance for the overall situation can be seen at a glance.
For example, as we all know, the oil shale revolution not only boosted confidence and prosperity in the process of anti crisis, but also actually affected the long-term global basic strategic energy pattern; 3D printer is a major breakthrough in meeting the demand for customization in the information age, which is not only to maintain the characteristics of socialized mass production, but also to solve the increasingly specific market demand for customization and process difficulties; We also noticed that the "information superhighway", an industrial policy that President Clinton spared no effort to focus on as the first priority when he was in office, has been upgraded again and again. In the current global information revolution, everyone has to admit that Americans are leading the trend; We also noticed that "manufacturing industry returns to the United States", which is also a very important industrial policy implementation strategy. Obviously, it is not simply returning to the United States, but the spiral return of the upgraded version of "negation of negation" in the intelligent era.
We also noticed that in terms of human capital, it is actually closely related to industrial policies and technological and economic policies. The United States has already seen the advantages of attracting talents in the world, but until now, it has spared no effort to continue to focus on attracting high-end talents from the world to serve in the United States.
Then there is the "point regulation" type tilt support that is particularly obvious in some specific economic growth points: for example, we know that the leader of Tesla, Mask, who is very courageous in doing things, one of his key products is electric vehicles, not to mention other pipeline high-speed trains, as well as the significant and amazing progress that has been made in civil aerospace, In the field of electric vehicles, when he was facing the bottleneck period, he welcomed the inspection of Tesla production line by Steven Chu, the Chinese American Secretary of Energy, and soon there was a considerable amount of preferential low interest loans from the US Department of Energy to support him to break through the bottleneck period.
Later development is not sure to be smooth, but it can be seen clearly that Tesla's electric vehicle products have been deployed in China, and at the same time, there has been the most typical scheme of how to build charging piles along the long-distance expressway between Beijing and Shanghai in China, It has already planned to take a strategic position in the market - the role of government supply management can be seen behind these things, which is very worthy of our further rise from practice to theory.
To put it bluntly in this field, we believe that practice has long been ahead of theory. Unfortunately, so far we have not seen any systematic summary of influential economists in the United States and their influential economic literature to reflect this set of supply management practices in the United States, but I don't think Chinese people need to wait, We can pierce this layer of window paper and stand at the forefront.
What we need to do now is not to innovate for the sake of innovation, but to really meet the needs of reality and break through the limitations of economics. The innovation made under the framework of new supply economics is to upgrade the existing practice to theory. At the level of basic theory, it is necessary to give observation, analysis and deepen understanding, which may better support our scientific decision-making and policy optimization.
The Chinese people's own practice tells us that it has never been possible to learn from demand management while bypassing supply management, but the original concept is not clear enough. Comrade Zhu Rongji was pointed out by Comrade Xiaoping to preside over the economic work at the front line after Deng Xiaoping's southern tour that year. He consciously learned from the indirect regulatory framework and counter cyclical institutional arrangements necessary for market economy, and determined to launch the extremely difficult fiscal and tax reform that began on January 1, 1994, The central banking system was equipped with an economic decentralized fiscal system. After these achievements, the Asian financial crisis in 1997 followed.
After the impact of the Asian financial crisis on China became apparent in the second quarter of 1998, he was keenly aware of the need to make major adjustments to the mid year budget plan that had not been done in the past, issue long-term construction bonds, and expand the total amount, which was the first issue considered by counter cyclical demand management.
But then, we have to consider how to use these long-term national debt construction funds? Put forward six key points, including the governance of large rivers and the repair of dangerous reservoirs (the big flood in 1998 made this issue more urgent); There is also upgrading of railway, highway, airport and other infrastructure; Moreover, he was particularly concerned about the implementation of the reform of the rural grain circulation system at that time. According to his ideas, we must build tens of millions of square meters of state-owned grain depots across the country; It was also realized at that time that the future development of rural areas must involve the transformation of rural power grids (the strategy of "new rural construction" later connected to the central government); Moreover, the real estate industry has become a pillar of the national economy. However, the real estate industry must not only have a market track, but also have a supporting security track. Therefore, one of the key points is the construction of affordable housing, and so on. In the second year, the six key points must be adjusted. The original said that no money is allowed to be used in the processing industry. The extended long-term treasury bond construction funds can be used in combination with financial discount and other mechanisms for technological transformation of large backbone enterprises to support state-owned enterprises to extricate themselves from difficulties in three years. These are all industrial policy issues and supply management issues.
When Premier Wen Jiabao launched the 400 billion yuan economic stimulus plan, first of all, politicians comprehensively judged that subordinates recognized that decision-making was "confidence is more important than gold". If they did not start, they could not. What followed was how to use these funds? Presided over a series of executive meetings of the State Council. Each meeting discussed how to focus on a specific field or industry and how to deal with structural issues, which is inseparable from industrial policy issues.
Later, the strategic emerging industries proposed by the relevant departments after a lot of research were listed as seven key points. Later, I noticed that after the central government held a special meeting, the cultural and creative industries could also be considered as the eighth key point. These are just a framework, which actually shows that in real life, it is impossible to avoid such problems as highlighting the key points, giving consideration to the general, driving the overall situation and striving for extraordinary step development after breakthroughs in key areas. From catching up to catching up, we can realize the "Chinese Dream" vision of China's three steps to the end.
Among these practical cases, there are 16 major special projects that were set up in the internal discussion of the mid - and long-term scientific and technological development plan in those years. At that time, it was called the top secret large aircraft project, and now it is no longer necessary to keep it secret. This is a specific case where the country seeks breakthroughs with industrial policies and national efforts like "two bombs and one star" operation, Now we finally see that China's domestic large aircraft C919 has entered the stage of obtaining airworthiness certificate. If not unexpected, it will be allocated to all major routes within a few years, forming an unprecedented domestic supply capacity. Moreover, China has received orders for hundreds of domestic large aircraft from around the world, and this number will continue to rise in the future. The improvement of such supply capacity is obviously closely linked with the previous supply scheme, industrial policy design and the necessary optimization.
From the third level, it is necessary to talk about the challenging "double-edged sword" feature in the formulation and implementation of industrial policies.
A good industrial policy is a powerful tool in catching up and overtaking. If it is not done well, it will make mistakes, and such mistakes often have the characteristics of great impact brought by its mistakes after government intervention. In this regard, theoretically, everyone has noticed that there has been a recognition of "government failure" after "market failure", and that improper handling of the actions closely related to the government will lead to the distortion of "rent setting and rent seeking" - if the policy tilt is handled well, it is a bonus; Bad handling means distortion and score reduction.
In practice, there are indeed some cases that do not seem satisfactory and can even be called failures. After the Japanese had a good momentum of development, they noticed the experience of the Silicon Valley in the United States. Later, there was Tsukuba, a relatively concentrated area with strong support from the Japanese government. Similar to the Silicon Valley, a high-tech area formed naturally in the United States, where the government's preferential policy support was added, and progress was made, But obviously, it cannot be compared with the achievements of Silicon Valley. It does not mean that after the strong support of the government, there are many forms of entrepreneurial teams working together, which will certainly lead to desirable results.
It is also the case of China. As we all know, the relevant departments once agreed that leaders made a decisive decision to launch a leading large-scale project in the field of household appliances to reverse the low-end decentralized investment of the public - a flagship enterprise in the production of video recorders and VCDs, not to engage in so many messy small guerrillas, so they concentrated their efforts on a Chinese recording project, As a result, the whole market has changed and VCDs have been eliminated before the project was put into production according to the original plan. There is also a more complicated case in this regard, that is, the photovoltaic industry in the past few years.
At that time, solar energy thought it was necessary to make efforts to develop, with the government's financial support of the "Golden Sun Project". However, it has not yet been decided whether to take the photovoltaic technology route or the film technology route. However, in the development of photovoltaic, it was almost annihilated for a period of time, and there was a serious crisis. In fact, it can't be simply said that local governments and enterprises are hot headed. What must be reviewed is that it is not easy to consume resources, pollute the environment, and produce photovoltaic cells that can generate clean energy in China. Why can't they be sold in the domestic market and used by themselves?
Not what some people said on the surface, we just don't have the supporting capacity of smart grid. In fact, we can't overcome the difficulties of the system in this area, the manufacturing capacity of China's smart grid can't be upgraded as expected in this area, and the mechanism of bidding for access to the grid can't really move forward, This kind of solar power has not formed certain supporting conditions in terms of technology, plus the sunshine subsidies supported by the Golden Sun Project funds, so that it can solve the problem of how to use it for domestic use along with the bidding network access mechanism, and so on.
This set of institutional arrangements and insufficient supply of systems form the biggest obstacle, rather than the supply of our technology and production capacity is really stuck. These aspects are very worthy of discussion. The industrial policy should be handled well. From the case of photovoltaic, it is not only a problem of the policy itself, but also obviously affects the supporting reform of China.
There are also some specific cases, which can also be mentioned so far. For example, the subsidy for breeding sows is also an industrial policy. The subsidy for breeding sows corresponds to the problem of how to increase the supply of pork, which was particularly concerned by the leaders in previous years. We hope to increase the supply capacity of pigs on hand and designate the financial department to make an emergency plan design. The clear supply management plan is the key point to find the main force is to increase the number of "young and middle-aged sows". Finally, we express it as a literary concept of "breeding sows". Whoever can breed sows should be given specific policy support, That is, the subsidy of financial funds enables more subjects to consider holding breeding sows.
In real life, the distortion of this policy is hard to avoid. At the grass-roots level, it seems relatively easy to grasp the difference between these sows and boars raised by farmers in free range. It is even more ambiguous which pig can breed which pig can not breed. Especially, the grass-roots level has no ability to check one by one after reporting, and the reporting subject has more and more courage, An increasing number of frauds have been formed to obtain subsidy benefits. This case clearly impressed us with the possibility of deviation in industrial policies.
There is also the management of scientific research funds, which is related to industrial policies and technological policies in a sense. Industrial technological innovation requires industry university research interaction and subject research, including a large number of voluntary horizontal subject research. Some time ago, the relevant departments of our country were not able to cope with the intellectuals in the management link. They made such a red tape, played the role of formality, and strengthened the management strictly and meticulously. However, according to the official standard, the principle of administration, and the red tape orientation, which completely violated the laws of scientific research, the Office of the People's Republic of China and the Office of the People's Republic of China jointly issued documents to correct the deviation.
At that time, the disease came like a mountain, but now it goes like a thread. It is said that the detailed rules will be issued before the end of the year. We have to wait and see if we can really return to the track that conforms to the scientific research laws. This kind of supply management and detailed management is irrational. I can also understand from the scholars' discussion that it is better not even to blame such industrial policies indignantly. But I still think that rational discussion cannot go to another extreme of total negation.
So, to summarize, How to promote the advantages and suppress the disadvantages of industrial policies in innovation matters is a real problem. For China and similar late developing economies to catch up and surpass - whether they can really achieve the goal of catching up can not be guaranteed, but at least to pursue the goal of catching up, we must consider supply side management and reform, as well as how to optimize industrial policies under rational supply management, which is a historic test.
In other words, we should not abandon industrial policies and supply management completely because the policy design may be wrong and the implementation mechanism may be biased, which is a state of inaction. I should strive to be rational, do a good job, be active and cautious, and make a difference. This is a basic guide in my understanding. Of course, this also involves scientific decision-making, optimal design, risk prevention, effective correction and other issues that need theoretical support.
At the last level, the integrity of industrial policies in the supply side reform is extraordinary and its mechanism.
This problem should be put in the context of the times: China's supply side reform should strive for the integrity of rational supply management with the reform of overcoming difficulties while optimizing demand management, effective institutional supply as the leader, and structural optimization as the focus. This is the first thing we must adhere to: no matter how we talk about the supply side structural reform, we must carry forward the past and usher in the future. Under Deng Xiaoping's basic line and policy, and on the market-oriented reform track, we must overcome difficulties and strive to bite down the hard bone in the reform deepwater area. The common laws of the market economy must be observed. Only when we understand, comply with, respect and even revere the market laws can we truly grasp the Third Plenary Session of the CPC Central Committee and play its decisive role in resource allocation.
But don't think that if we stick to this principle, we can solve the practical problems in the new stage of China by using the existing experience of the market economy and the preliminary experience we have formed in the past on the track of the market economy. There is no such simple thing. After "sticking to the principle", we must also achieve success, It is a surprise victory supported by supply side innovation. The innovation most needed in this process is bound to be uncertain, and there may be risk of failure, but we must never give up our efforts, and we must strive to achieve this successful innovation after being honest.
If we can truly maintain integrity and surprise, optimize the effective market and the promising and limited government, to liberate the productive forces, release the potential vitality and create an upgraded version of our new normal from "new" to "normal", that is, we can bring about the improvement of the quality and efficiency of the entire supply system, form a development potential, and continue to connect unconventional development with the great national rejuvenation.
To put these into practice, the practical problem is how to design and optimize these industrial policies from the perspective of supply side reform and rational supply management. They must be matched with the transition reform. They must be well grasped. They are not a simple technical and managerial problem, but must be combined with the reform of "breaking through the barriers of interest solidification". The overall consideration is to form dynamically optimized industrial policies and technical and economic policies. Its decision-making implementation, supervision, performance evaluation, correction, accountability mechanism, etc., at least have the following points:
First, in terms of scientific decision-making, we must first affirm that there must be a new realm of "planning first, multi regulations in one", in which the government plays the role of public functions. All government departments have always had to make plans, but we used to put them in a drawer and find it difficult to implement them. The constraints on the feasibility of their implementation are closely related to our past departments' independent management and Kowloon's water control - the National Development and Reform Commission has economic and social development plans, industrial layout plans, and other departments also have plans, Including land development planning, urban and rural construction planning, public transport system planning, environmental protection planning, science, education, culture and health development planning, finance must now have a medium-term plan. All these plans are separately prepared, Jiulong water control will be either drought or waterlogging, and various departments often do not buy into each other in terms of the need to connect, cannot fight together, and cannot be organically combined. It is also a difficult problem to really solve this problem, but if the reform of large department system and flat reform are really implemented, the final state of planning is to "plan first and conform to multiple regulations".
Now, to force a Beijing Tianjin Hebei integration, it is necessary to emphasize the priority of planning and the integration of multiple regulations, break the boundaries of administrative divisions, and put all relevant factors together in the new round of overall planning for the development of Beijing Tianjin Hebei. All functional areas, transportation facilities, hospitals and schools, industrial parks, and various elements of livable city construction, All that can be thought of is included. It is impossible to form an optimized structure by grass-roots units and market entities according to the "trial and error method", which is a precondition for overall comprehensive performance.
It can be said that this also shows that the government functions better and must play a leading role in some areas. The top-level plan led by the government, of course, also involves the sharp controversy of different opinions that everyone in the academic community has noticed. For example, Professor Zhou Qiren and Professor Hua Sheng are scholars whom I respect very much. They are both well educated, but their ideas are obviously different.
My above statement is more based on Professor Watson's view on this issue. The so-called "building is not free" does not mean that there is absolutely no freedom, but the road that countries can take now must be a top-level planning of land development covering all real estate development and construction and all buildings, which is a big framework with no choice. However, it is also necessary to grasp the necessary flexibility and diversity, and provide the necessary flexibility space for the market role. Of course, preventing deviation is also a very important issue, which should be considered together according to this mechanism.
Under the principle of planning first and multi regulation integration, the government must fully let experts, think tanks and think tanks express their opinions, listen to the opinions, suggestions and demands of the public, and absorb folk wisdom. But to be honest, there must be a decision-making group to make decisions finally. For example, Beijing Tianjin Hebei integration may have different technical routes, and experts propose different plans, There must be a decision about which technical route to take. At the beginning of the founding of the People's Republic of China, Liang Chen's plan was quickly rejected, that is, no one could listen to it. As a result, more than half a century later, it was found that the level of this plan was really high. Now, when asked by the society, most people believe that Liang Chen's plan clearly reflects the true high level and insights of experts, But he sighed that the rice had been cooked.
In the new round, there is another shadow feature of the Liang Chen plan. In the next two years or more, all the management organizations in Beijing must move out of the Fifth Ring Road to Luhe Town in Tongzhou, where there will be a sub center of the city, which is also a basic pattern problem that can be solved by building a large number of buildings, It is hoped that this can be tested by time and history as a relatively high-level decision.
This kind of thing is a necessary framework decision for our supply management combined with industrial policies. If the top-level planning under such a constraint is not qualified, how can we optimize the relevant layout supported by industrial policies if it is impossible to easily adjust the pattern of real estate in the whole country? This is a major premise.
Second, with the multi compliance in planning, its dynamic optimization will also be carried out in multiple rounds, and multiple supervision will be strengthened. Some relevant specific industrial policies, such as energy policy, need to be optimized after overall planning. The resource endowment of China is obviously that the basic energy is mainly coal, and as the world's most populous country, we have no choice.
Energy sources other than coal, such as crude oil and natural gas, are now more than 60% dependent on imports, which cannot be higher; It is hard to say to what extent the Chinese can learn from the American oil shale revolution; The proportion of hydropower and nuclear power, which were originally intended for further development, in the power supply is declining under various constraints; Our wind power and solar power are developing desperately, and now they only account for three percent of the whole power supply. It is impossible to support the beam in a foreseeable long time.
About 80% of the electricity used in the whole society now is coal fired thermal power. How to clean the use of coal is a completely different problem for any other economy compared with China. The pressure on us is an extraordinary situation under the triple superposition pattern of the Hu Huanyong Line. Where does the extraordinary policy come from? Obviously, it is necessary to have a high-level top-level planning to bring out a series of industrial policies and clean technology policies, and make necessary dynamic optimization and multiple rounds of operations in a timely manner according to the tracking analysis of the implementation. In this regard, if we must grasp the leading function that the government wants to play, we must also have a full set of supervision system arrangements for sunshine implementation, and strictly prevent rent seeking.
If we adopt preferential policies and treat them differently, rent-seeking will occur. Japan's experience in financial investment and financing after the war emphasizes two things: first, collective decision-making by experts; second, multiple audit supervision, which is to minimize the space for rent seeking. Especially in the dual track pattern of real estate investment and financing, the significance of this multiple supervision is self-evident.
I have noticed that some scholars especially emphasized that China should abolish all dual track systems, but I personally observed that it was actually impossible. For example, if there is a market track related to real estate, there must be a security track. In the foreseeable historical period, it is impossible to cancel the security track of public rental housing and co ownership housing, but it must run on two tracks. If it is not handled well, there have been more than 10 kinds of easily distorted ways of doing various things in the name of affordable housing, Up to now, the guidelines are clear, that is, public rental housing and housing with common property rights are two dominant ways, which reflects certain progress.
In terms of finance, there can't be only commercial finance, but also policy finance. We sometimes call it development finance, green finance and so on. In fact, it is a different expression on a big track different from the market track. They must join the dual track operation in a foreseeable long time, and policy finance, development finance Green finance, etc., obviously needs to match the industrial policy and technical policy to provide preferential support. If we master well, we will score points; if we do not master well, we will lose points.
And the third is Performance appraisal must strive to develop Although it is very difficult - because it is beyond the intuitive cost-benefit analysis horizon of microeconomic subjects, plus complex issues such as comprehensive benefits, long-term sustainability, positive and negative spillovers of social economy, we must make efforts in this regard. In terms of supply side management and supply side reform, it may be difficult for us to come up with a quantitative model for its complex structural problems, but we should at least come up with a theoretical model first, and then try to make a further quantitative grasp of it from coarse to fine.
Finally, fourth, Obviously, there is also a mechanism for correction and accountability. Since it is necessary to take the road of sunshine modernization, and since it is necessary to comprehensively govern the country according to law, this correction and accountability should also be designed under the framework of comprehensive rule of law. Of course, there should be no exclusion of rewards and penalties. The necessary incentive mechanism and accountability mechanism should be designed together.
(This is Mr. Jia Kang's speech at the Industrial Policy Seminar jointly held by Peking University and Fudan University on August 21-22, 2016)
Related reading:
First round of industrial policy discussion
Zhang Weiying: Calls for the abolition of all forms of industrial policies
Lin Yifu: To oppose industrial policies is irresponsible
Huang Yiping: Few Successful Industrial Policies in History
Second round of industrial policy discussion
Zhang Weiying: Lin Yifu's Four Mistakes on Industrial Policy
Lin Yifu: Responding to the so-called four mistakes pointed out by Zhang Weiying
(The author of this article introduces: Director of the Institute of Financial Science, Ministry of Finance, researcher, doctoral supervisor.)
