正文
今天早上看到這篇文章, 有兩點啟發:
1, 在全球產業大整合的今天, 中國如何才能盡快在產業鏈中占據有利位置, 而不是滿足於低附加值的份額.
2, 在西方國家大肆叫囂對中國的巨額貿易逆差的情況下, 如何改進我們的宣傳工作, 把中國目前在產業鏈中收益很小卻付出很大的現實, 讓世人有所了解.
全文載於The Globe and Mail. 為方便大家閱讀, 本人拙譯如下.
===============================================
當一台$300(美元)的iPod 從中國進口到美國, 美國海關把它的出廠價值$150記做從中國的進口. 這個數字成為了中國對美國的巨額貿易順差的一部分.
但是那台iPod真的是中國製造嗎? 一群對此持懷疑態度的加利福尼亞研究人員深入研究了iPod來找出答案. 他們發現, 雖然iPod是在中國組裝, 但是組裝本身僅僅價值幾個美金. 其它的部分 - 一塊來自日本的顯示屏, 兩個來自美國的關鍵芯片 - 價值則要高的多. 當然蘋果公司自己 - 作為發明者, 設計者, 和市場策劃者 - 創造了iPod的大部分價值並且收獲了大部分的利潤.
加拿大會議委員會(Conference Board of Canada)的一份新的關於加拿大和亞洲之間"遺失"的貿易的報告, 講述了iPod的故事, 以幫助證明它所提出的觀點: 官方貿易統計數據扭曲了我們和亞洲貿易關係的真實情況. 報告作者Danielle Goldfarb 和Louis Thériault指出, 當報紙和政客們圍繞著我們和中國之間的貿易額(2006年達到340億加元)大做文章的時候, 他們沒有注意到, 象iPod一樣, Wal-Mart和一元店裏大量的商品並不是完全在中國製造的, 而僅僅是在中國組裝的而已.
快速的貿易整合意味著貨物和配件在生產的不同階段運進, 運出亞洲. "因此, 加拿大和任何一個亞洲國家之間的官方進口統計數據, 隻是簡單的反映了貨物的最終進口來源國, 而不是生產了此貨物大部分價值的國家."
當然, 同樣情況也發生在由加拿大出口的貨物裏. 我們出口貨物價值的三分之二是在我們國內生產的. 而其餘部分則來自進口: 例如, 進口的皮革和鞋帶用來製造加拿大生產的冰鞋.
關鍵是, 貿易是一個比官方統計方法所能展示的要複雜的多的東西. 現有的統計方法是在一個政府關注關稅和配額的時代設計出來的. 例如, 它完全遺漏了加拿大海外分公司的銷售額. 一個加拿大保險公司在上海賣出的保險單並沒有被計算進來. 這是很大的一個疏忽, 因為越來越多的全球貿易是通過海外分公司發生的 - 印度的IBM, 中國的General Moters, 越南的Intel. 這些分公司並沒有減少或取代國家之間的貿易, 它們反而增強了國家間的貿易. 經濟合作和發展組織估計, 一個國家對海外投資的每一美元, 能夠產出兩美元的額外出口額.
清楚的是, 我們必須重新考慮我們對全球貿易的想法. 象報告中所說: "當前體係中貿易統計數據, 描述了一次性的, 雙邊的交易, 而並沒有與其它的交易聯係起來. 事實上, 貿易發生在多個夥伴之間, 並且發生在一個完整過程的不同階段. 更重要的是, 當前貿易數據主要是根據貨物貿易分類的, 而不是根據更重要的 - 和更有潛力的角色 - 服務貿易. 並且, 就象iPod的例子所揭示的, 貿易統計數據並沒有捕捉到貨物價值的真正的產地."
報告發現, 如果把這些"遺失的貿易"考慮進來, 加拿大與亞洲的貿易額大大超過政府統計數據(但是與中國的貿易額會有所減少). 這是個好消息. 壞消息是, 貿易成長並沒有我們想象中的那麽快. 加拿大與亞洲貿易的表現比官方統計所顯示的還要落後, 特別是在向亞洲出售服務(而不是貨物)方麵.
更糟糕的是, 加拿大沒有很好的利用全球供應鏈, 這種複雜的鏈接關係可以把生產過程轉移到世界不同的地區以取得最大效率. 象報告指出的: "加拿大並沒有顯示出與亞洲供應鏈緊密的聯係: 我們進口的主要是成品, 而出口的主要是原材料."
那麽該做些什麽呢? Goldfarb女士和Thériault先生說, 我們最好"動搖"(或者類似的效果)一下我們自己.
決策者和記者們必須停止把貿易說成一個雙邊的, 國家對國家的, 他們贏我們輸的過程, 而應該開始理解現代全球經濟的複雜性 - 和巨大的潛力. 企業們必須找到利用亞洲供應鏈發展自己的途徑, 或者在亞洲設立分支機構, 或者從亞洲進口配件. 而政府則應該使加拿大公司走向全球化變的更加容易. 消除所有剩餘的關稅和非關稅壁壘是一個開始, 他們說. 簡化外國投資的限製也會有所幫助.
無論我們采取什麽行動, 讓我們記住iPod所包含的東西, 和他們所講的複雜的故事.
****
關於iPod的數字
30GB iPod中最貴的配件, 2005, 以美元計, 原產地
$73.39 - 硬盤, 日本
$20.39 - 顯示模塊, 日本
$8.36 - 圖象/多媒體處理器, 美國
$4.94 - 便攜式播放器 CPU, 美國
$3.70 - 測試, 裝配, 中國, 台灣
$2.89 - 電池, 未知
$2.88 - 顯示驅動器, 日本
$2.30 - 移動式SDRAM存儲器, 南韓
$2.30 - 後封蓋, 未知
$1.90 - 主板, 未知
來源: Portelligent Inc.
===============================================
Made in China? Take a closer look
MARCUS GEE
00:00 EST Wednesday, February 06, 2008
When a $300 (U.S.) iPod is imported from China to the United States, U.S. Customs records its estimated factory value of $150 as an import from China. That figure contributes to China's massive trade surplus with the United States.
But is that iPod really "Made in China"? A group of skeptical California researchers looked at the guts of an iPod to find out. They discovered that, though the device was assembled in China, that accounted for only a few dollars of its value. Other parts - a display from Japan, two critical microchips from the U.S. - were far more valuable. And of course Apple itself - the creator, designer, marketer - created much of the iPod's value and reaped much of the profit.
A new Conference Board of Canada report on Canada's "missing" trade with Asia tells the iPod story to help prove its case that official trade statistics distort the true picture of our Asian trade relationship. Authors Danielle Goldfarb and Louis Thériault note that when newspapers and politicians make a big deal over our trade with China ($34-billion Canadian in 2006), they fail to note that, like the iPod, much of the stuff found in Wal-Marts and dollar stores is not truly made in China, merely assembled there.
Rapid trade integration means that goods and parts are shipped to and fro across Asia at various stages of production. "Therefore, official import figures between Canada and a particular Asian country may simply reflect the last place goods were shipped from, rather than where most of the value was created."
Of course the same thing could be said about many goods exported from Canada to other places. About two-thirds of what we export is made up of actual domestic content. The rest comes from imported inputs: the imported leather and laces for a Canadian-made hockey skate, for example.
The point is that trade is a much more complex thing than official measures - designed in an age when governments were fixated on levying tariffs and imposing quotas - can possibly capture. For example, they entirely miss the sales of Canadian affiliates abroad. A Canadian insurer selling policies in Shanghai isn't counted. That's quite an oversight, because more and more global trade takes place through foreign affiliates - IBM in India, General Motors in China or Intel in Vietnam. Those affiliates don't replace trade between nations, by the way, they enhance it. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development estimates that each dollar of direct investment a country sends abroad generates two dollars in additional exports.
Clearly, we have to rethink the way we imagine global trade. As the report puts it: "Trade statistics in the current system describe one-time, bilateral transactions that are not linked to other transactions. In reality, trade takes place between multiple partners, and at different stages of an overall process. Moreover, the way trade data are classified focuses almost entirely on goods trade, despite the greater role - and the greater potential role - of services. And, as the iPod example illustrates, trade statistics fail to capture where value is actually created."
The report finds that if this "missing trade" is factored in, Canada does much more trade with Asia as a whole (but less with China) than government data show. That's the good news. The bad news is that trade is not growing nearly as quickly as we imagined. Canada underperforms in Asian trade even more than the official stats suggest, especially when it comes to selling services (as opposed to goods) to Asians.
Worse, Canada is not taking good advantage of global supply chains, the complex linkages that see the production process farmed out to various parts of the world to maximize efficiency. As the report puts it: "Canada does not appear to be tightly linked into Asian supply chains: We import predominantly final goods and export mostly raw materials."
What is to be done? Ms. Goldfarb and Mr. Thériault say we had all better give ourselves a shake (or words to that effect).
Policy makers and journalists have to stop talking about trade as a two-way, country-to-country, they-win-we-lose process and start to understand the complexity - and wondrous potential - of the modern global economy. Businesses have to figure out how to prosper from Asian supply chains, either by setting up an affiliate in Asia or importing inputs from Asia. And governments have to make it easier for Canadian companies to go global. Eliminating all remaining tariffs and non-tariff barriers would be a start, they say. So would be easing limits on foreign investment.
Whatever steps we take, let's keep in mind the innards of that iPod and the complicated story they tell.
***
iPod by the numbers
The most expensive inputs in the 30GB iPod, 2005, in U.S. dollars, and country of origin:
$73.39 - Hard drive, Japan
$20.39 - Display module, Japan
$8.36 - Video/Multimedia processor, U.S.
$4.94 - Portal player CPU, U.S.
$3.70 - Test, assembly, China, Taiwan
$2.89 - Battery pack, unknown
$2.88 - Display driver, Japan
$2.37 - Mobile SDRAM memory, South Korea
$2.30 - Back enclosure, unknown
$1.90 - Mainboard PCB, unknown
Source: Portelligent Inc.
© The Globe and Mail
現在西方媒體的宣傳, 某國對中國貿易逆差多少多少, 讓該國老百姓很容易被誤導, 並認為該國的錢都被中國賺走了. 而事實卻不是這樣.
關鍵是, 那樣的數據是有局限性的, 不能直接用來說明問題.
你說的道理沒錯.
問題是, 這種方法統計出的數據是有局限性的: 隻簡單統計了雙邊直接貿易, 沒有統計多邊間接貿易.
這樣的數據也許在某些方麵是有用的, 但是不應該被用來誤導公眾, 尤其不應當被用來當作政策製定的依據.
現在很多西方國家的媒體和政客, 出於種種目的, 直接用這樣的數據來做文章, 我們應該認清這一點, 並改進自己的宣傳工作, 把真實情況告訴公眾.
我不覺得美國海關的統計有什麽問題，最簡單的一個例子：如果中國從日本進口$100.00的家電，再以同樣的價格賣到美國，即使中國一分錢都不賺，美國海關還是會把這$100.00的貿易逆差記在中國的帳上，事實上世界上所有國家的進出口貿易都是這麽統計的。
美國海關沒有義務幫中國去掉其中來自其它各國的原材料的價格，因為那是其它國家對中國的貿易順差，並不能抵消美國對中國的貿易逆差，那部分原材料隻是中國通過用進口的途徑來養肥其它國家，對美國而言，那部分原材料的費用最後還是由美國來支付，因為美國作為一個整體的確在支付這所有的$150.00給中國而不是給其它原材料的生產國。中國不能把這原材料的進口既算成是對日本韓國的貿易逆差，又算成對美國的貿易逆差。
對. 在這個iPod的例子當中, 中國方麵的順差統計應該隻包括了那幾個美元的組裝費. 但是美國對中國逆差統計卻包括了大部分的出廠價值. 這是不公平的. 因為, iPod中很多配件的生產地並不是中國.
這就是為什麽中國對美貿易順差與美國對中貿易逆差總是對不上. 但是, 沒有人向美國人民解釋這一點, 因此中國政府在這方麵的宣傳工作需要加強.
同意. 另外, 管理也非常重要. 如何把一項科技成果轉化為有利可圖的產業, 如何恰當的配置利用資源, 使效益最大化, 等等, 都是值得中國企業和政府研究和學習的方麵.
從冰鞋開始 :-)
This is true for most of the high end products. But the US people don't get that, they are always told by the media and government that US has a huge trade deficit with China. I think the Chinese government has to bring forward the msg to the US public that most of the deficits are actually not originated from China but other countries.
謝謝你的意見, 實際上我已經把英文原文和來源附於譯文之後. 也許本文枯燥無味, 所以很少有人能把全文讀完 :-)
Is this ture??
坦白的講，科技不過是個工具罷了，我倒覺得是資本投資才是第一經濟要素，沒有投資，一切先進技術都是空談，看看光纖和通訊的3g就知道了
$73.39 - 硬盤, 日本
$20.39 - 顯示模塊, 日本
$8.36 - 圖象/多媒體處理器, 美國
$4.94 - 便攜式播放器 CPU, 美國
$3.70 - 測試, 裝配, 中國, 台灣
$2.89 - 電池, 未知
$2.88 - 顯示驅動器, 日本
$2.30 - 移動式SDRAM存儲器, 南韓
$2.30 - 後封蓋, 未知
$1.90 - 主板, 未知
請注意，核心的價值全部控製在美國和日本手裏，美國的cpu和設計與市場開發，日本的顯示，硬盤和電池。鄧公當年早就說過：科技是第一生產力。
必須抓住核心的東西，才能控製全球自由化貿易鏈的上級。
the argement above does not relate to the fundermental. if the author wants some advise, email to wantway@hotmail.com, i do charge, 1000$/hour, prepaid rate and chinese rate,