實體經濟去金融化

實體經濟去金融化

https://www.ft.com/content/f33fcdba-fd5d-3c69-8b96-5640a0e3e827

客座作家 2014 年 7 月 22 日

Mariana Mazzucato 是本周在倫敦舉行的以使命為導向的金融會議的組織者和薩塞克斯大學 SPRU 創新經濟學 RM Phillips 教授，她正試圖挽救創業國家的理念，揭穿關於私營和公共部門創新的神話。 這是她對 FT Alphaville 的 Mission Finance 係列的最新貢獻。

今天，我們以使命為導向的創新金融會議在國會大廈開幕。 英國商業、創新和技能大臣文斯·凱布爾將在今晚開場，他表示，認真致力於資助創新意味著創新支出翻倍。

他希望這將使英國從低於經合組織平均水平的 R&D/GDP 位置轉變為高於平均水平，更接近丹麥、德國和美國（處於 2.5-2.8% 之間，而英國落後於 1.7%） . ) 這是一個令人鼓舞的消息，表明英國有望走上“再平衡”的道路，從偏向金融服務的經濟轉向“實體經濟”的創新和生產力增長。

過去，我將此稱為從破壞性創造的金融轉向創造性破壞的金融。

他和其他國際政策製定者麵臨的關鍵問題是確保這種再平衡在兩個同等重要的方麵解決金融問題。 一方麵，再平衡讓金融為實體經濟提供資金。 這意味著要解決下麵圖 1 所示的可怕情況，即與實體經濟（除金融和農業以外的一切）相比，金融自我融資的程度導致由金融中介構成的附加值呈指數增長 ).

這張圖來自安迪·霍爾丹 (Andy Haldane) 在英格蘭銀行的工作，該工作強調需要創造更少的投機性金融和更多的長期金融。 事實上，在我們今晚的活動中，霍爾丹將討論“短期主義的代價”以及如何應對。

霍爾丹的主題演講將在巴西國家投資銀行 (BNDES) 行長盧西亞諾·庫蒂尼奧 (Luciano Coutinho) 之後發表。 KfW 和 BNDES 等國家投資銀行是長期患者融資在全球範圍內采用的多種形式之一。

卡洛塔·佩雷斯 (Carlota Perez) 是世界上最重要的經濟史學家之一，她將成為霍爾丹的討論者，並將爭辯說，長期主義需要一個方向——市場本身並沒有給我們帶來 IT 革命，也不會給我們帶來“綠色增長”。 考慮到經濟績效的新指標，在一個公共部門“選擇”哪條路的任何角色都被貼上“挑選贏家”或“擠出”標簽的世界中，捕捉“方向”目標是非常困難的——正如我 在我的第一個 Mission Finance 博客中指出，如果公共政策的重點不僅在於解決市場失靈，而且在於創造和塑造市場，那麽體現市場創造作用的績效指標就是基礎。

還需要將頂尖人才引入政府，以便在技術和經濟方麵的深厚知識指導戰略。 您可以在會議資源頁麵上閱讀 Perez 和我關於這些主題的政策簡報。

再平衡要解決的第二個關鍵問題，不僅是如何從“實體經濟”中獲取更多的附加值，從“金融中介”（金融融資金融）中獲取更少的附加值，還包括如何讓實體經濟本身去金融化！

比爾·拉佐尼克 (Bill Lazonick) 將在會議第三天的發言中解決這個問題，明天他將發表一篇精彩的 FT Alphaville Mission Finance 博客。 這個問題最明顯地體現在私營公司在股票回購等“金融化”做法上花費了多少（以提高股價、股票期權和高管薪酬）：財富 500 強公司在過去十年中花費了 3 萬億美元用於股票回購，其中許多 IT 和製藥公司在股票回購上的支出高於研發支出。

比爾的工作表明，這確實是高管薪酬上漲背後的主導因素——即 收入最高的 1% 人群的收入呈指數級增長。 在我們最近關於風險和回報的期刊文章中，我們認為這與技能或才能無關，而是價值提取的力量。 我們的以任務為導向的創新金融會議將討論如何讓政府和企業重新大膽思考。

承認創新不僅有“速率”而且有“方向”將是這場辯論的關鍵。 如果不能相信市場能夠獨自找到正確的方向，我們如何才能讓公共部門使用其所有工具（稅收、研發支出、采購、監管等）來創造更多的價值，並允許這種價值 創造比價值提取更有價值？

 

De-financialising the real economy

 

https://www.ft.com/content/f33fcdba-fd5d-3c69-8b96-5640a0e3e827 

Guest writer JULY 22 2014

Receive free University of Sussex updates; we'll send you a myFT Daily Digest email rounding up the latest University of Sussex news every morning.

Mariana Mazzucato organiser of this week’s Mission-Oriented Finance conference in London and RM Phillips Professor in the Economics of Innovation, SPRU, University of Sussex, is attempting to rescue the idea of The Entrepreneurial State, debunking myths about private and public sector innovation. Here is her latest contribution to the Mission Finance series at FT Alphaville. 

Today our mission-oriented finance for innovation conference begins at the Houses of Parliament. Vince Cable, UK secretary of state for business, innovation and skills will be kicking off this evening arguing that a serious commitment to funding innovation means doubling innovation spend. 

He hopes this will allow the UK to move from its below OECD average R&D/GDP position to an above average position, closer to that of Denmark, Germany and the US (which stand between 2.5-2.8% while the UK lags at 1.7&). ) This is encouraging news and shows that the UK is hopefully on the path towards ‘rebalancing’ away from an economy biased towards financial services, towards growth of innovation and productivity in the ‘real economy’. 

In the past, I have called this a move away from finance for destructive creation towards finance for creative destruction. 

The key problem that he and other international policy makers have is to make sure that such rebalancing tackles finance on two equally important sides. On the one hand, rebalancing so that finance funds the real economy. This means addressing the dire situation that figure 1 shows below, i.e. the degree to which finance has been financing itself leading to the exponential rise in the value added made up of financial intermediation, compared to that of the real economy (everything but finance and agriculture). 

This graph comes from Andy Haldane's work at the Bank of England, which stresses the need to create less speculative finance and more long-term finance. Indeed, at our event tonight Haldane will be addressing ‘the cost of short-termism’ and what to do about it. 

Haldane's keynote will occur after that of Luciano Coutinho, the President of Brazil's state investment bank (BNDES). State investment banks such as KfW and BNDES are one of the many forms that long-term patient finance is taking around the world. 

Carlota Perez, one of the world’s foremost economic historians, will be Haldane's discussant, and will argue that long-termism needs a direction—markets alone did not get us the IT revolution, nor will they get us the 'green growth'. Considering new indicators for economic performance, that capture the ‘directions' objective is very difficult in a world where any role for the public sector to ‘choose’ which way to go gets branded as ‘picking winners’ or ‘crowding out’—as I argued in my first Mission Finance blog, if the point of public policy is to not only to fix market failures but also to create and shape markets, indicators of performance that capture this market creating role are fundamental. 

There is also the need to bring top minds into government so that strategies are led by deep knowledge on both the technological side and the economic side. You can read a policy brief by Perez and me on these topics, on the conference resources page. 

The second key issue that rebalancing must address is not just how to get more value added from the ‘real economy’ and less from ‘financial intermediation’ (finance financing finance), but also how to de-financialise the real economy itself! 

Bill Lazonick will be addressing this issue in his intervention on day three of the conference, with an excellent FT Alphaville Mission Finance blog by him tomorrow. This problem is most evidently manifested by how much private companies are spending on ‘financialised’ practices like sharebuybacks (to boost stock prices, stock options and executive pay): Fortune 500 companies have spent $3tn over the last decade on share buybacks, with many companies in IT and pharma spending more on share buybacks than R&D. 

Bill's work has shown that this is indeed the lead factor behind the rise of executive pay—i.e. the exponential rise of the incomes of the top 1 per cent. In our recent journal article on risks and rewards we argue that this has nothing to do with skills or talent-but the power of value extraction. Our Mission-Oriented Finance for Innovation conference will be debating how to get governments and business to think big again. 

Admitting that innovation has not only a ‘rate’ but also a ‘direction’ will be key to this debate. If markets cannot be trusted to alone find the right direction, how can we enable the public sector to use all its instruments (taxation, R&D spend, procurement, regulation, etc.) to enable not only more value creation but also to allow that value creation to be rewarded over value extraction?