Jeffrey Sachs A World Adrift 漂泊的世界

Jeffrey D. Sachs  A World Adrift 

http://www.project-syndicate.org/print/a-world-adrift 

 22 April 2012

The IMF/World Bank meetings remind us of an overarching truth: our highly interconnected and crowded world has become a highly complicated
vessel. If we are to move forward, we must start pulling in the same direction, even without a single captain at the helm.

漂泊的世界

http://www.project-syndicate.org/print/a-world-adrift

傑弗裏·D·薩克斯 2012 年 4 月 22 日

紐約—國際貨幣基金組織和世界銀行的年度春季會議為了解推動全球政治和世界經濟的兩大基本趨勢提供了一個窗口。 地緣政治正在從一個由歐洲和美國主導的世界轉向一個擁有許多地區大國但沒有全球領導者的世界。 經濟不穩定的新時代已經到來
另一方麵，增長的實際限製與金融動蕩一樣重要。

歐洲經濟危機主導了今年國際貨幣基金組織/世界銀行的會議。 該基金正在尋求建立緊急救助機製，以應對弱勢群體的情況歐洲經濟體需要另一次金融救助，並已轉向主要新興經濟體

– 巴西、中國、印度、海灣石油出口國和其他國家 – 幫助提供必要的資源。

他們的答案很明確：是的，但前提是要換取國際貨幣基金組織的更多權力和選票。 由於歐洲想要國際金融支持，它必須同意。

當然，新興經濟體對更多電力的需求是眾所周知的。 2010年，當國際貨幣基金組織最後一次增加財政資源時，新興經濟體隻有在其在國際貨幣基金組織中的投票權增加約6%的情況下才同意該協議，而歐洲則損失了約4%。 現在，新興市場要求獲得更大的權力份額。

其根本原因不難看出。 根據國際貨幣基金組織自己的數據，1980年歐盟現有成員國占世界經濟的31%（以各國GDP衡量，並根據購買力進行調整）。 到 2011 年，歐盟份額下滑至 20%，基金組織預計到 2017 年將進一步下降至 17%。

這一下降反映出歐洲人口和人均產出增長緩慢。 另一方麵，包括中國、印度在內的亞洲發展中國家占全球GDP的比重從1980年的8%左右飆升至2011年的25%，預計到2017年將達到31%。

美國一貫堅稱不會加入任何新的國際貨幣基金組織救助基金。 美國國會越來越多地接受孤立主義經濟政策，特別是在為他人提供經濟幫助方麵。 這也反映出美國實力的長期衰落。 美國占全球GDP的比重從1980年的25%左右，到2011年下降到19%，預計2017年將下滑到18%，屆時中國經濟的絕對規模（調整後）將超過美國。 購買力）。

但全球力量的轉移比北大西洋（歐盟和美國）的衰落和新興經濟體尤其是金磚國家（巴西、俄羅斯、印度、中國和南非）的崛起更為複雜。 我們也正在從主要由美國領導的單極世界轉向真正的多極世界，在這個世界中，美國、歐盟、金磚國家和較小的國家（例如尼日利亞和土耳其）擁有地區影響力，但不願承擔責任。 全球領導力，尤其是其財務負擔。 問題不隻是現在有五六個大國；而是現在有五六個大國。 此外，他們都希望以犧牲其他人的利益為代價搭便車。

向多極世界轉變的好處是，沒有任何一個國家或小集團能夠主宰其他國家。 每個區域最終都會有回旋餘地和尋找自己路徑的空間。 然而，多極世界也帶來巨大風險，特別是重大全球挑戰將無法應對，因為沒有任何一個國家或地區能夠或願意協調全球應對措施，甚至參與全球應對措施。

美國已經從全球領導地位迅速轉變為搭便車，似乎繞過了全球合作的舞台。 因此，美國目前為自己在氣候變化、國際貨幣基金組織金融救助計劃、全球發展援助目標以及提供全球公共產品方麵國際合作的其他方麵的全球合作找借口。

鑒於必須應對的挑戰的嚴重性，全球政策合作的弱點尤其令人擔憂。 當然，人們立即想到的是持續不斷的全球金融動蕩，但其他挑戰更為嚴峻。

事實上，國際貨幣基金組織/世界銀行會議還討論了世界經濟的第二個根本性變化：初級商品價格居高不下且不穩定，目前已成為全球經濟穩定和增長的主要威脅。

自2005年左右以來，大多數主要商品的價格都在飆升。 石油、煤炭、銅、黃金、小麥、玉米、鐵礦石和許多其他商品的價格已經翻了一番、三倍，甚至上漲更多。

燃料、糧食和礦物都受到了影響。 一些人將上漲歸因於大宗商品價格泡沫，原因是低利率和大宗商品投機容易獲得信貸。 然而，最令人信服的解釋幾乎肯定是更為根本的。

世界對初級商品的需求不斷增長，特別是在中國，

正在大力衝擊全球資源的實物供應。 是的，可以生產更多的石油或銅，但邊際生產成本要高得多。

但問題不僅僅在於供應限製。

全球經濟增長也引發了日益嚴重的環境危機。 今天糧食價格居高不下，部分原因是世界各地的糧食種植地區正在經曆人類引起的氣候變化的不利影響（例如更多
幹旱和極端風暴），以及過度使用河流和含水層淡水造成的水資源短缺。

簡而言之，全球經濟正在經曆可持續發展危機，資源約束和環境壓力導致巨大的價格衝擊和生態不穩定。 通過采用減少地球生態係統危險壓力的技術和生活方式，經濟發展需要迅速轉變為可持續發展。 這也需要一定程度的全球合作，但目前尚無蹤跡。

國際貨幣基金組織/世界銀行會議提醒我們一個首要事實：我們高度互聯和擁擠的世界已變得高度複雜
血管。 如果我們要前進，我們就必須開始朝同一個方向努力，即使沒有一個船長掌舵。

A World Adrift 

http://www.project-syndicate.org/print/a-world-adrift

Jeffrey D. Sachs  22 April 2012

NEW YORK – The annual spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have provided a window onto two fundamental trends driving global politics and the world economy. Geopolitics is moving decisively away from a world dominated by Europe and the United States to one with many regional powers but no global leader. And a new era of economic instability is at
hand, owing as much to physical limits to growth as to financial turmoil.

Europe’s economic crisis dominated this year’s IMF/ World Bank meetings. The Fund is seeking to create an emergency rescue mechanism in case the weak
European economies need another financial bailout, and has turned to major emerging economies

– Brazil, China, India, the Gulf oil exporters, and others – to help provide the necessary resources.

Their answer is clear: yes, but only in exchange for more power and votes at the IMF. As Europe wants an international financial backstop, it will have to agree.

Of course, the emerging economies’ demand for more power is a well-known story. In 2010, when the IMF last increased its financial resources, the emerging economies agreed to the deal only if their voting share within the IMF was increased by around 6%, with Europe losing around 4%. Now emerging markets are demanding an even greater share of power.

The underlying reason is not difficult to see. According to the IMF's own data, the European Union’scurrent members accounted for 31% of the world economy in 1980 (measured by each country’s GDP, adjusted for purchasing power). By 2011, the EU share slid to 20%, and the Fund projects that it willdecline further, to 17%, by 2017.

This decline reflects Europe’s slow growth in terms of both population and output per person. On the other side of the ledger, the global GDP share of the Asian developing countries, including China and India, has soared, from around 8% in 1980 to 25% in 2011, and is expected to reach 31% by 2017.

The US, characteristically these days, insists that it will not join any new IMF bailout fund. The US Congress has increasingly embraced isolationist economic policies, especially regarding financial help for others. This, too, reflects the long-term wane of US power. The US share of global GDP, around 25% in 1980, declined to 19% in 2011, and is expected to slip to 18% in 2017, by which point the IMF expects that China will have overtaken the US economy in absolute size (adjusted for purchasing power).

But the shift of global power is more complicated than the decline of the North Atlantic (EU and US) and the rise of the emerging economies, especially the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa). We are also shifting from a unipolar world, led mainly by the US, to a truly multipolar world, in which the US, the EU, the BRICS, and smaller powers (such as Nigeria and Turkey) carry regional weight but are reticent to assume global leadership, especially its financial burdens. The issue is not just that there are five or six major powers now; it is also that all of them want a free ride at the others’ expense.

The shift to such a multipolar world has the advantage that no single country or small bloc can dominate the others. Each region can end up with room for maneuver and some space to find its own path. Yet a multipolar world also carries great risks, notably that major global challenges will go unmet, because no single country or region is able or willing to coordinate a global response, or even to participate in one.

The US has shifted rapidly from global leadership to that kind of free riding, seeming to bypass the stage of global cooperation. Thus, the US currently
excuses itself from global cooperation on climate change, IMF financial-bailout packages, global development-assistance targets, and other aspects of international collaboration in the provision of global public goods.

The weaknesses of global policy cooperation are especially worrisome in view of the gravity of the challenges that must be met. Of course, the ongoing global financial turmoil comes to mind immediately, but other challenges are even more significant. 

Indeed, the IMF/World Bank meetings also grappled with a second fundamental change in the world economy: high and volatile primary commodity prices are now a major threat to global economic stability and growth.

Since around 2005, the prices of most major commodities have soared. Prices for oil, coal, copper,gold, wheat, maize, iron ore, and many other commodities have doubled, tripled, or risen even more.

Fuels, food grains, and minerals have all been affected. Some have attributed the rise to bubbles incommodities prices, owing to low interest rates and easy access to credit for commodity speculation. Yet the most compelling explanation is almost certainly more fundamental.

Growing world demand for primary commodities, especially in China, is pushing hard against the physical supplies of global resources. Yes, more oil or copper can be produced, but only at much higher marginal production costs.

But the problem goes beyond supply constraints.

Global economic growth is also causing a burgeoning environmental crisis. Food prices are high today partly because food-growing regions around the world are experiencing the adverse effects of human-induced climate change (such as more
droughts and extreme storms), and of water scarcity caused by excessive use of freshwater from rivers and aquifers.

In short, the global economy is experiencing a sustainability crisis, in which resource constraints and environmental pressures are causing large price shocks and ecological instability. Economic development rapidly needs to become sustainable development, by adopting technologies and lifestyles that reduce the dangerous pressures on the Earth's ecosystems. This, too, will require a level of global cooperation that remains nowhere to be seen.

The IMF/World Bank meetings remind us of an overarching truth: our highly interconnected and crowded world has become a highly complicated
vessel. If we are to move forward, we must start pulling in the same direction, even without a single captain at the helm.