China's success since it began its transition to a market economy has been based on adaptable strategies and policies: As each set of problems are solved, new problems arise, for which new policies and strategies must be devised. This process includes social innovation.
China recognized that it could not simply transfer economic institutions that had worked in other countries. At the least, what succeeded elsewhere had to be adapted to the unique problems facing China.
Today, China is discussing a "new economic model." Of course, the old economic model has been a resounding success, producing almost 10 percent annual growth for 30 years and lifting hundreds of millions of Chinese out of poverty. The changes are apparent not only in the statistics, but even more so in the faces of the people that one sees around the country.
I recently visited a remote Dong village in the mountains of Guizhou, one of China's poorest provinces, miles away from the nearest paved road. It had electricity, and with electricity had come not just television, but the Internet. While some rising incomes came from remittances from family members who had migrated to coastal cities, the farmers were better off, with new crops and seeds. The government was selling high-grade seeds on credit with a guaranteed rate of germination.
China knows that it must make changes to ensure sustainable growth. At every level, there is a consciousness of environmental limits and the realization that the resource-intensive consumption patterns now accepted in the US would be a disaster for China -- and for the world.
As an increasing share of China's population moves to cities, those cities will have to be made livable, which will require careful planning, including public transportation systems and parks.
Equally interesting, China is attempting to move away from the export-led growth strategy that it and other East Asian countries have pursued. That strategy supported technology transfer, helping to close the knowledge gap and rapidly improve the quality of manufactured goods. Export-led growth meant that China could produce without worrying about developing the domestic market.
But a global backlash has already developed. Even countries committed to competitive markets don't like being beaten at their own game, and often trump up charges of "unfair competition." More importantly, even if markets are not fully saturated in many areas, it will be hard to maintain the current double-digit growth rates for exports.
So something has to change. China has been engaged in what might be called "vendor finance," providing the money that helps finance the huge US fiscal and trade deficits, allowing the US to buy more goods than they sell. But this is a peculiar arrangement: a relatively poor country is helping to finance the US' Iraq War, as well as a massive tax cut for the richest people in the world's richest country, while huge needs at home imply ample room for expansion of both consumption and investment.
In fact, to meet the challenge of restructuring China's economy away from exports and resource-intensive goods, China must stimulate consumption. While the rest of the world struggles to raise savings, China, with a savings rate in excess of 40 percent, struggles to get its people to consume more.
Providing better social services would reduce the need for "precautionary" savings.
More access to finance for small and medium sized businesses would help, too. "Green taxes" on carbon emissions and other pollution would shift consumption patterns while discouraging energy-intensive exports.
As China moves away from export-led growth, it will have to look for new sources of dynamism in its growing entrepreneurial ranks, which requires a commitment to creating an independent innovation system.
But if China wants a dynamic innovation system, it should resist pressure by Western governments to adopt the kind of unbalanced intellectual property laws that are being demanded. Instead, it should pursue a "balanced" intellectual property regime. Since knowledge itself is the most important input in the production of knowledge, a badly designed intellectual property regime can stifle innovation -- as in some areas of the US.
Western technological innovation has focused too little on reducing the adverse environmental impact of growth, and too much on saving labor -- something that China has in abundance. So it makes sense for China to focus its scientific prowess on new technologies that use fewer resources. But it is important to have an innovation system, including an intellectual property regime, that ensures that advances in knowledge are widely used.
That may require innovative approaches, quite different from intellectual property regimes based on privatization and monopolization of knowledge, with the high prices and restricted benefits that follow. Too many people think of economics as a zero-sum game, and believe China's success is coming at the expense of the rest of the world.
Yes, China's rapid growth poses challenges to the West. Competition will force some to work harder, to become more efficient, or to accept lower profits.
But economics is a positive-sum game. An increasingly prosperous China has not only expanded imports from other countries, but is also providing goods that have kept prices lower in the West, despite sharply higher oil prices in recent years. This downward pressure on prices has allowed the Western central banks to implement and follow expansionary monetary policies, underpinning higher employment and growth.
We should all hope that China's new economic model succeeds. If it does, all of us will have much to gain.
Joseph Stiglitz is a Nobel laureate in economics.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this