[Related Reading]
Zhou Tianyong: the ideological source of planning and market allocation of resource economy
Zhou Tianyong: Big data can lead to planned economy, which may not work
Zhou Tianyong: Advantages and Disadvantages of Planning and Market Allocation Resource Economy after World War II
Whether a country's resource allocation system should adopt a plan or choose a market to develop its economy well? The author published a series of columns on this topic to share with netizens. The fourth issue today.
Zhou Tianyong
As mentioned in the third column above, the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe lost in the East West economic competition after World War II. Therefore, Hungary and other Eastern European countries began to reform the traditional socialist economic system from the 1960s and 1970s, the Soviet Union in the 1980s, and Yugoslavia earlier. Scholars, scheme making system and leaders of the three models of Yugoslavia, Hungary, Romania and the Soviet Union can be divided into "market school", "middle school", "planning school" and "political reform before economic reform school", which typically represent such four different reform orientations.
The Failure of the Former Soviet Union in Promoting Economic Reform and Its Causes
Let's first look at the economic restructuring of the former Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was a pioneer in the construction and operation of the Stalin model socialist planned economic system. This system was in the early and middle stages of a country's establishment. Since industrialization required capital accumulation and the national system had a strong ability to concentrate and mobilize resources, during the period from World War II to 1975, the momentum of economic development and growth was very strong, The gap with the development level of the United States is narrowing rapidly. However, this growth advantage changed from positive to negative. After the 1980s, the country fell into economic difficulties. For example, in terms of economic growth rate, the annual average growth rate of national income was 7.19% from 1961 to 1970, and it dropped to 4.78% from 1971 to 1980; From the perspective of GDP growth rate, it continued to decline to -0.46% from 1981 to 1985, and even to -3.16% from 1986 to 1990.
Mikhail Gorbachev's economic system reform and its failure after he became the leader of the Soviet Union in 1985. When Gorbachev took office, he launched a round of movement to speed up economic growth in the face of negative economic growth. We did not promote economic restructuring to stimulate vitality to promote economic growth, nor did we combine the promotion of economic growth with the adjustment of irrational economic structure. (2) We have promoted the reform of giving and expanding some autonomy to enterprises and raising the wages of employees. However, the way in which various departments manage enterprises has not changed, and enterprises still cannot become independent producers of goods; On the other hand, with the increase of money issuance, the efficiency of enterprises has not improved, and the output has not increased synchronously, leading to serious cost driven inflation. (3) We have promoted political restructuring, but economic restructuring has lagged behind. Economy is the basis of politics. If the economic growth rate is low, the political and social situation cannot be stable. In this situation, the promotion of political system reform will not release the productive forces and will not guarantee a loose economic environment.
A big difference from China's reform is that (1) the Soviet Union's reform did not start with the collective farms in rural agriculture, and the agricultural production efficiency did not improve, agriculture products The shortage of supply can not suppress the rise of consumer prices in the whole economy, causing residents to complain and question the reform. (2) From the perspective of the economic system reform at the end of the Soviet Union, there was no deliberate, sequential, key deployment, risk hedging, and operational plan. There was also no such thing as China's first choice of reform areas and projects, and then the first try, while summing up the experience and lessons of pilot reform, failing to abandon, effective and comprehensive promotion and implementation - "crossing the river by feeling the stones" Try and make such a solid and stable reform process deployment.
At the end of the Soviet Union, the reform of the economic system encountered strong resistance. First, in terms of ideology, many people doubt whether the economic system reform to be promoted is a "social" or a "capital" surname, a "public" or a "private" surname, and whether it is going back to the capitalist road, which has encountered unreasonable resistance. Second, the Soviet Union's planning and control system formed a huge bureaucratic system. The implementation of the market economy meant that all departments, local governments at all levels and many staff members in this system lost their rights and interests, even welfare benefits. They fear reform, oppose it, and deal with it passively. Some people also intend to let the reform fail, and the reform meets resistance from vested interests.
From November 1985 to one thousand nine hundred and eighty-six year April, International oil price The decline reached 69%, one thousand nine hundred and eighty-six year March 31 Per barrel 10.42 US dollars, only in 1990 did it rise to above 30 US dollars per barrel. In addition to the low efficiency of increasingly extensive investment, the collapse of oil prices also hit the Soviet economy of oil for foreign exchange. What happens is that the fiscal revenue decreases, which affects imports, consumer goods are in short supply, prices rise, and ordinary family life is affected. Residents miss the low prices in the planned economy, attribute the price increase to the promotion of reform, and many residents turn into groups opposed to reform.
The market-oriented reform of the former Soviet Union ended in failure.
Yugoslavia's reform: the best economic effect but disintegration due to ethnic problems
Since 1950, Yugoslavia has implemented the socialist autonomy system of enterprise worker autonomy and social ownership, and abandoned state ownership and national plans, which is a great change to the public ownership of Stalin's centralized mode. Its specific content is to expand the autonomy of enterprises in production planning, wage distribution, reproduction fund control, etc., and transfer the social funds originally controlled by the state to the bank for management; Reduce taxes and let enterprises have more own funds; The ceiling price shall be abolished, and the price shall be determined by the supply and demand mechanism; Adjust tariff policy, reduce tariff rate, relax import restrictions, reduce tariff protection, and allow enterprises to operate foreign trade independently; Expand market mechanism and develop free competition among enterprises; In 1966, the original mandatory annual plan was changed into a guiding medium-term and long-term social plan, which played a predictive and guiding role in the development of the national economy. The national plan was completely decoupled from the supply, production and marketing of enterprises.
Yugoslavia's market-oriented reform is still very effective. By 1992, before the dissolution of Yugoslavia, Yugoslav families had already popularized household appliances, and the automobile penetration rate was as high as 37%. In 1990, the per capita GDP of Yugoslavia reached 3600 US dollars, more than 11 times that of China. Among them, Slovenia, with developed economy, has a per capita GDP of up to 7600 US dollars, which has become one of the middle-income countries. Even Macedonia, an underdeveloped country among the participating republics, has a per capita GDP of more than US $2400. However, Yugoslavia is located in the west of the Balkan Peninsula. It has more than 20 ethnic groups, including Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Montenegrins, Macedonians, Muslims, and so on. There are significant differences in culture, religion, language, and habits, resulting in a low degree of mutual understanding and recognition between them. Historically, during the period of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Serb rulers pursued "great Serbism" and implemented the strategy of exclusion and oppression against other nationalities, which resulted in tension among ethnic groups and weak national cohesion. On April 27, 1992, the Yugoslav Federation was completely dissolved. The lesson is that the economic system reform of a multi-ethnic country needs a strong political leadership. It should not hesitate to move towards marketization, resolutely reform planned administrative control, take enterprises as the main body, liberalize market regulation and encourage cooperation and competition. The state and government must protect property rights and administer according to law, so as to revitalize the economy, improve efficiency To increase output and enrich the people, it is also necessary to maintain national security and unity in the process of reform.
The effect of Hungary's economic system reform is second
Hungary has been implementing a new economic system since 1968. The central government has abolished the method of issuing mandatory plans, and enterprises have made their own plans; Give full play to the positive role of the market mechanism, make full use of the commodity currency relationship under the premise of the planned economy, and replace the system of unified allocation of means of production by the central government and the method of official distribution of products with the trade system; The management power of macroeconomic processes is in the hands of the central authorities of the state, while the management power of micro processes is maintained at the level of operating institutions.
Hungary's economic system has played a role in the economic recovery. In 1990, although its per capita GDP was lower than that of Yugoslavia, it also reached 3230 dollars. In July 1987, the British weekly Economist commented on Hungary's economic system reform in the article "Lessons from Reform" and believed that the reform did not act according to market rules or plans. But the government felt good. In March 1973, the 11th National Congress of the Hungarian Party put forward the goal and task of "creating conditions for the establishment of developed socialism and the transition to communism". In order to maintain a good impression among the people, the government borrowed heavily. By 1987, the external debt had exceeded 20 billion US dollars, with a per capita debt of 2000 US dollars, ranking first in Eastern European countries. The stagnation of the economy has also led to the rise in the price of necessities for Chinese people, and people's complaints have been widespread.
The worst effect is the Romanian patchwork reform of the nostalgia program
In terms of reform, Romania pays more attention to the centralized and unified leadership of the central government. The planning system is basically reserved, and there is little delegation of power to enterprises. The reform is mainly a small patchwork of the system. Although Romania has taken a series of measures to improve its economic and social management system since 1967, by implementing the general contracting responsibility system in the agricultural sector, it later popularized the general contracting system with remuneration linked to output in other sectors of the national economy, implemented a dividend system for enterprise employees, and contracted small shops to employees, However, Romania is unwilling to touch the highly centralized planning system and ownership structure. The leaders at that time believed that playing the role of market regulation and allowing some people to get rich first was a backward step towards capitalism.
Therefore, Romania's system reform, which is basically still adhering to the planned economy, has the worst effect and the most serious problem. By 1990, Romania's per capita GDP was only about 1700 US dollars, and the inflation was more than 50%. The development of industry at the expense of agricultural development led to an imbalance in the proportion of the national economy, an extreme shortage of supply, low production efficiency, a decline in the rate of economic growth, and the national economy almost fell into despair. The people's lives have been seriously affected. For example, in order to provide more agricultural and sideline products for export, so as to pay off more than 10 billion dollars of foreign debt, it is stipulated that the annual grain ration for each urban resident is equivalent to 150 kilograms of wheat and 30 kilograms of corn, and that each rural resident has only 300 grams of bread per day; The supply of egg milk products and eggs has declined significantly, and people once had to queue up to buy, while meat products have almost disappeared in the market; Some industrial durable goods such as refrigerators, color televisions and cars can only be purchased by appointment registration, while some can't be bought in the domestic market at all; The supply of gas, electricity and fuel oil for civilian use is insufficient, heating for residents, schools and hospitals is insufficient, cooking stoves and lighting are intermittent, and public transportation for travel is also affected.
In the 1980s, Romania issued the Decree on the Implementation of Food Rationing System. As for Israel,. Romanian winter is very cold, which brings great trouble to people's life. The hospital ward, delivery room and operating room were unable to carry out normal medical operations for a time due to the lack of proper temperature. The shortage of fuel has greatly affected public transportation, and it is not uncommon for the elderly and children to suffer from frostbite.
In the end, the former Soviet Union and Eastern European countries embarked on the road of instant transition reform
The above-mentioned mistakes in the subjective and objective aspects of the reform of the Soviet economic system, the resistance and adverse environment, and the failure of the reform in practice prompted the three Baltic republics to become independent in 1990, and triggered the disintegration of the Soviet Union at the end of 1991. In the middle and late 1980s, the failure of the Soviet Union's reform also made the later Russia and the Soviet Union's separated republics and the former socialist countries in Eastern Europe deeply hopeless on the path of socialist asymptotic economic system reform, and they embarked on the reform path of market regulated economic system and privatization.
(About the author: Director of National Economic Engineering Laboratory of Northeast University of Finance and Economics)
