世界需求和競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力對(duì)出口和經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的影響

1、本科畢業(yè)論文外文翻譯原文外文題目：Effects of World Demand and Competitiveness on Exports and Economic Growth 出 處：Growth and Change (Vol.25,Winter 1994,pp.3-24) 作 者： JESSIE POON 原 文：Effects of World Demand and Competitiveness on Exports and Economic GrowthIntroductionThe role of exports in economic growth has been mu

2、ch debated since the 1950s. Two viewpoints characterize the development literature on the relationship between exports and economic growth. The first considers that economic growth is a consequence of favorable internal and supply-related factors. Exports promote growth because they stimulate the ef

3、ficient use of these factors for economic production and enable a country or region to remain competitme (Bhagwati 1988; Kravis 1973; Riedel 1987). In the second viewpoint, the success of export-led growth is said to rest on a favorable trade environment which depends on the economic prosperity of c

4、ore regions. This demand-oriented viewpoint suggests that exports are not expected to expand faster than the demand for them by core regions (e.g. Lewis 1980; Nurkse 1961; Prebisch 1962). The difference between the two viewpoints lies in the weight given to the mechanisms determining the link export

5、s and economic growth. One outcome of the polarization of the literature is that regions trying to develop are confronted with development models which often assume dualistic forms. For example "inward" versus "outward" trade orientation, or, "export" versus "impor

6、t" substitution strategies.' Broadly, these dualisms are circum- scribed in what has come to be known as the "export optimism-export pessi- mism" debate(Bhagwati 1988). The need to collapse the export optimism-export pessimism dualism for a more integrative perspective has been ra

7、ised by Streeten (1982). Increasingly too, the literature suggests that a mix of both perspectives merits a closer look (e.g. Gereffi 1989). This paper examines the relationship between export growth and economic growth within an integrative framework. It argues that developing countries (abbreviate

8、d to LDCs) are rather differentiated in their economic structures so that the relationship between exports and economic growth is likely to vary. Thus, it is unlikely that the above relationship may be fully explained by one viewpoint. Two variables, world demand and competitiveness, capturing deman

9、d-oriented as well supply-oriented explanations of the mechanisms linking export growth to income growth are first established. The two variables are then incorporated into an exports-growth model, and, their effects on the aforemen- tinned relationship investigated. The primary units of analysis ar

10、e developing countries, although the study is also relevant to regional development. Particularly when developing countries may be conceived as regional units, except that many of the decisions governing economic growth in the former are made at the national level. The paper is organized as follows:

11、 the next section documents the theoritical and empirical underpinnings of export optimism as well as export pessimism , and their resulting polarized positions . The model for investigating integration is introduced next, followed by a discussion of the data and results. The paper ends with a summa

12、ry of the findings and their implications. The Exports-growth DebateThe question as to whether economic growth may be rapidly promoted through exports is characterized by two schools of thought: Export optimism. Export optimists consider trade to be an engine of growth and place much confidence in t

13、he role of prices to allocate resources efficiently. Countries or regions that are able to compete in their exports enhance their economic growth because this increases productivity and specialization, and improves efficiency through better resource allocation. Drawing on the principles of classical

14、 comparative advantage as well as vent-for-surplus and staple theories (see for example Myint 1958; North 1955; 1961), export optimists point to the potential gams that arise as a result of trade. Export optimists explain the link between exports and economic growth in terms of supply factors such a

15、s natural resources, entrepreneurship, skilled labor, and institutions. Trade results m economic growth by expanding the supply of labor and capital, while technological advances raise the productivity of the factors of production(Riedel 1987). Outward-looking trade strategies such as export promoti

16、on have been popularized on the premise that exports lead to rapid economic growth and development. Exports help to overcome a country or region's limited market and provide an outlet for the surplus products that are not consumed domestically. Idle or surplus resources are absorbed into exporta

17、bles which have the effect of stimulating economic growth (Myint 1958). Engaging in export producUOn therefore ensures greater capacity utilization through economies of scale Balassa 1985). It has also been maintained that economies that are oriented towards exports produce a higher level of industr

18、ialization (Joint ECLA/UNIDO Industrial Development Division 1986) and generate higher quality products because of the exposure to international consumption patterns. Other compelling arguments include the need by developing countries to earn foreign exchange in order to finance imports for mdustria

19、hzation(Esfahani 1991), as well as the deployment of abundant labor so that it leads to the growth of employment and wages (Krueger 1988). Export optimists support their position by drawing extensively from econometric studies relating economic growth to some indices of export performance under impl

20、icit assumptions of favorable supply conditions. Several of these studies concluded that economic performance is highly correlated to export growth (Balassa 1978; 1985; Dodaro 1993; Emery 1967; Feder 1982; Fosu 1990; Kavoussi 1984; Maizels 1968; Michalopoulos and Jay 1973; Rana 1988; Syron and Walsh

21、 1968; Tyler 1981). The meteoric rise of the Asian newly-industrializing countries (1VICs) has also been linked to their "superex- porting" development strategy (Balassa 1988; Hughes 1989; Krueger 1985; Riedel 1988). All these motivated the World Bank (1987; 1993) to endorse export promoti

22、on as the dominant development strategy for developing countries. Export pessimism. Export pessimists put less faith in the market, arguing that the ability of developing countries to export is constrained by the external market. They maintain that the hnk between exports and growth (abbreviated to

23、exports-growth) weakened considerably during the oil crisis years of the 1970s due to a contraction in demand especially for LDC exports. Thus, trade enhances growth only when the external demand is favorable. Export pessimists advocate more inward-oriented strategies, namely import substitution, as

24、 the major development model. Import substitution was thought to be beneficial because it reduces a country's vulnerability to international economic crises (Prebisch 1968). One of the earliest researchers to highlight the influence of the external environment on trade performance was Nurkse (19

25、61). Contrasting trade patterns between the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, he argued that economic growth in the industrialized core had not resulted in a proportionate increase in demand for LDC exports. Echoing the same sentiments two decades later, Lewis (1980) points out that since most of

26、the exports of developing countries are destined for markets in developed countries, they have been adversely affected by the economic slowdown in industrialized countries since the mid-1970s. The export performance of countries is therefore said to be tied to the economic conditions of the industri

27、alized core region. The above is characteristic of dependency writings such as those of Cardoso and Faletto (1979). In this case, structural differences between a developed and developing region are seen to determine their asymmetrical trading relationship. Some empirical support for the position of

28、 the export pessimists is provided by studies on the role of external demand on the export performances of developing countries (e.g. Kavoussi 1985; Singer and Gray 1988). These reports indicate that export earnings decline substantially when the level of external demand is depressed. The role of th

29、e external demand assumes even greater significance when the rise of global protectionism is considered. The continued absorptive capacity of the international market for the exports of developing countries in the face of global reswcturing is questioned by Cline (1982) for example. Cline concluded

30、that if several developing countries were to follow in the footsteps of the exportoriented Asian NICs, it would provoke a widespread protectionist response from the developed countries. This further limits the ability of developing countries to grow through trade. An integrative perspective. The deb

31、ate between export optimists and pessimists have adopted rather polarized views so that policy recommendations have also been conflicting. The dualistic framework of the export promolion/outward-orientation versus import substitution/inward orientation models reflects this. The empincal literature h

32、as also not provided a clear resolution of the debate. For instance in investigating the exports-growth relationship, Balassa (1985) reports a higher parametric value for exports in the post-oil crisis period following 1973. Rana's (1988) study contradicts Balassa's conclusions in that expor

33、ts were found to have a less positive effect on growth after the oil crisis. An important source of the conflict between the export optimists and the export pessimists is the degree of openness which is deemed to be desirable during the process of economic development. Import substitution regimes te

34、nd to be characterized by high levels of protection for its producers (e.g. quantitafive restrictions or tariffs on imports) in order to avoid the vagaries of external demand. Export optimists support a higher degree of openness because it enables a country or region to find its comparative advantag

35、e, thus avoiding high-cost, inefficient activities and becoming more competitive. However, Streeten (1982) argues that the process of national production is often a mix of the two strategies. Bruton (1989) has pointed out that mdustrialization through import substitution is credited with building up

36、 the capital goods sector as well as technological maturity. Import substitution is thought to pave the way for successful export performance because a body of knowledge is acquired over time by targeting production towards the domestic market before exposing the products to an international cliente

37、le. This is also consistent with the Infant Industry theory in the economics literature where an industry is protected by first turning inward to the domestic economy until it is sufficiently mature to be exposed to external demand and competition. Frank, Kim, and Westphal's (1975) study of the

38、highly export-oriented South Korea estimated that import substitution and export expansion both contributed positively to the growth of manufactured output between the 1950s and 1960s. The creation of comparative advantage in the petrochemical industry by the Korean government is a good example of t

39、he import substitution of intermediate products. This provided the basis for newer phases of Korean industrial growth and exports in the late 1970s. Gwyne (1990) observed that industrial growth in Korea has been evenly distributed between domestic demand and export markets. Similar observations were

40、 made for Taiwan as well (Joint ECLA/UNIDO Industrial Development Division 1986). The integration of import substitution and export promotion in regional or national production appears therefore to be crucial in the development process. Balassa's (1981) theory of the stages-of-development is esp

41、ecially relevant here as economic progress is conceived in several stages: an "easy" stage of import substitution engaging in the replacement of the imports of nondurable consumer goods. During this period, external economies are generated in the form of labor training and entrepreneurship

42、. Export promotion becomes the next logical step as producers search for ways to overcome the limited size of their domestic markets. As the industrial process deepens, the replacement of more capital- intensive intermediate goods is pursued followed by another phase of export promotion. Thus, expor

43、t promotion is often preceded by a phase of import substitution. Integrating import substitution and induced growth is influenced by both country's competitiveness. Ho's (1984) export promotion implies that trade-induced growth is influenced by both the the levels of external demand and a st

44、udy of LDCs' exports for instance showed that the gains from trade for the NICs is associated with their abilities to maintain their export competitiveness globally. Where external demand has been poor, the more successful performers have been able to keep or even increase their market shares by

45、 dmersifying their exports or "getting around" protectionist measures (Baldwin 1985). Svedberg's (1991) analysis of the export performance of Sub-Saharan Africa similarly suggests that poor performance in exports lies as much in decreased competitiveness and market penetration as in un

46、favorable external demand. This paper therefore argues for a convergence of the perspectives underlying the export optimism-export pessimism schism. From the paper's viewpoint, the contribution of exports to economic growth is affected by both external demand as well as a country or region's

47、 competitiveness. 譯 文：世界需求和競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力對(duì)出口和經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的影響導(dǎo)言出口對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的作用在20世紀(jì)50年代以來(lái)一直被爭(zhēng)論。出口與經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)之間的關(guān)系的發(fā)展文獻(xiàn)有兩個(gè)代表性觀點(diǎn)。第一種觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為，經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)是內(nèi)部和供應(yīng)相關(guān)的有利因素的結(jié)果。出口促進(jìn)增長(zhǎng)，因?yàn)樗鼈兇碳そ?jīng)濟(jì)生產(chǎn)因素的有效使用，使一個(gè)國(guó)家或地區(qū)保持競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力（巴格瓦蒂1988年；卡拉維斯1973年；里德?tīng)?987年）。在第二觀點(diǎn)里，出口帶動(dòng)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的成功是說(shuō)基于一個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)繁榮的核心區(qū)域的有利貿(mào)易環(huán)境。這種需求為導(dǎo)向的觀點(diǎn)表明，預(yù)計(jì)核心地域的 出口比需求不會(huì)擴(kuò)大地太快（例如劉易斯1980年；納科斯1961年；普里比1962年）。兩

48、者觀點(diǎn)的不同點(diǎn)在于出口和經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)之間關(guān)系的確定和聯(lián)系機(jī)制給出的權(quán)重。文獻(xiàn)兩極分化的一個(gè)結(jié)果是，地區(qū)試圖發(fā)展往往采用二元形式發(fā)展模型。例如“走進(jìn)來(lái)”與“走出去”貿(mào)易方向，或“出口”與“進(jìn)口”替代戰(zhàn)略。從廣義上講，這些二元論被已經(jīng)稱(chēng)為“出口樂(lè)觀與出口悲觀”的爭(zhēng)論限制（巴格瓦蒂1988年）。因?yàn)榫C合觀點(diǎn)瓦解“出口樂(lè)觀與出口悲觀”二元論的需要已經(jīng)被斯特（1982年）提高。越來(lái)越多的文獻(xiàn)也表明，兩個(gè)觀點(diǎn)綜合的優(yōu)點(diǎn)值得仔細(xì)看看（如Gereffi,1989）。本文在一個(gè)綜合框架內(nèi)探討出口增長(zhǎng)與經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)之間的關(guān)系。它認(rèn)為，發(fā)展中國(guó)家（簡(jiǎn)稱(chēng)LDCs）在經(jīng)濟(jì)結(jié)構(gòu)方面有相當(dāng)區(qū)別的，因此出口增長(zhǎng)和經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)之間的關(guān)系可

49、能會(huì)有所不同。因此，不太可能由一個(gè)觀點(diǎn)完整地解釋上述關(guān)系。兩個(gè)變量，世界需求和競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力，鎖定需求為導(dǎo)向以及供給為導(dǎo)向的解釋的出口增長(zhǎng)與收入增長(zhǎng)的關(guān)系的機(jī)制首先建立。這兩個(gè)變量納入了出口增長(zhǎng)模式還有前述研究關(guān)系的影響。分析的主要單位是發(fā)展中國(guó)家，雖然這項(xiàng)研究也關(guān)系到區(qū)域發(fā)展。特別是發(fā)展中國(guó)家可能被設(shè)想為區(qū)域單位，除了許多在前面控制經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的國(guó)家級(jí)做的決定。本文結(jié)構(gòu)如下：下一部分是出口悲觀以及出口樂(lè)觀的理論和實(shí)證基礎(chǔ)，和它們所帶來(lái)的兩級(jí)分化的立場(chǎng)。該模型一體化的綜合是，通過(guò)對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)和結(jié)果的討論介紹下面部分。本文最后以調(diào)查和他們的意義總結(jié)結(jié)尾。出口增長(zhǎng)爭(zhēng)論經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)是否會(huì)通過(guò)出口快速增長(zhǎng)這個(gè)問(wèn)題被兩所學(xué)校

50、的想法所描述：（一）、出口樂(lè)觀樂(lè)觀主義者認(rèn)為出口貿(mào)易成為經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)，價(jià)格的作用很大，國(guó)家或地區(qū)有能力在出口競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，提高他們的經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展，因?yàn)檫@可以增加生產(chǎn)力和促進(jìn)專(zhuān)業(yè)化，并通過(guò)有效地分配資源更好地提高資源配置的效率。古典的繪圖以比較優(yōu)勢(shì)的原則，及通風(fēng)的過(guò)剩和主食的理論（例如見(jiàn)敏1958年，北美1955年，1961年），出口樂(lè)觀者指出潛在收益的出現(xiàn)是由于貿(mào)易的結(jié)果。出口樂(lè)觀解釋出口和經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)與供給方面各因素之間的聯(lián)系如自然資源、企業(yè)家素質(zhì)和熟練地勞動(dòng)力。貿(mào)易對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的作用在于擴(kuò)大勞動(dòng)力和資金供給，而技術(shù)進(jìn)步提高生產(chǎn)率（里德?tīng)枺?987年）。在促進(jìn)出口等已普及的前提下，實(shí)施外向型貿(mào)易戰(zhàn)略，使經(jīng)

51、濟(jì)快速增長(zhǎng)和發(fā)展。出口有助于克服一個(gè)國(guó)家或地區(qū)的有限市場(chǎng)，并提供一個(gè)剩余未供國(guó)內(nèi)產(chǎn)品出口。閑置或多余的資源吸收到出口商品有刺激經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)（敏，1958年）的影響。從事出口生產(chǎn)，因此確保通過(guò)規(guī)模經(jīng)濟(jì)（巴拉薩，1985年）更大的產(chǎn)能利用率。也有人認(rèn)為，經(jīng)濟(jì)體對(duì)出口產(chǎn)生的工業(yè)水平（聯(lián)合拉美經(jīng)委會(huì)、工發(fā)組織工業(yè)發(fā)展導(dǎo)向部門(mén)，1986年）生成更高，因?yàn)閲?guó)際消費(fèi)模式曝光優(yōu)質(zhì)的產(chǎn)品。其他令人信服的理由，包括由發(fā)展中國(guó)家需要賺取外匯，以資助工業(yè)化的進(jìn)口，以及豐富的勞動(dòng)力的部署，以便它使就業(yè)和工資增長(zhǎng)（克魯格曼，1988年）。在出口樂(lè)觀者的支持下，借鑒與提供的有利條件，出口業(yè)績(jī)指標(biāo)計(jì)量隱含的體現(xiàn)了經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)是經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)

52、研究的一些廣泛的立場(chǎng)。這些研究的結(jié)論是，經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)表現(xiàn)與出口增長(zhǎng)密切相關(guān)的（巴拉薩，1985年等）。在迅速崛起的亞洲新興工業(yè)化國(guó)家也已經(jīng)與他們的“大量出口”發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略（巴拉薩，1988年；休斯，1989年；克魯格曼，1985年；里德?tīng)枺?988年）。所有這些計(jì)劃，經(jīng)過(guò)世界銀行（1987年，1993年）批準(zhǔn)，作為發(fā)展中國(guó)家的主要發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略來(lái)促進(jìn)出口。（二）、出口悲觀出口悲觀主義者對(duì)投放市場(chǎng)信心不足，認(rèn)為發(fā)展中國(guó)家的出口能力受到外部市場(chǎng)的制約。他們認(rèn)為，出口和經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)之間的聯(lián)系（簡(jiǎn)稱(chēng)出口增長(zhǎng)），在最不發(fā)達(dá)市場(chǎng)，尤其是出口需求萎縮的石油危機(jī)相當(dāng)嚴(yán)重，在20世紀(jì)70年代削弱了。因而，加強(qiáng)貿(mào)易增長(zhǎng)只有當(dāng)外部需求大時(shí)是有利的。出口悲觀主義者主張更多內(nèi)向性的戰(zhàn)略，即進(jìn)口替代作為主要的發(fā)展模式。進(jìn)口替代被認(rèn)為是有利的，因?yàn)樗鼫p少了一個(gè)國(guó)家的脆弱性及國(guó)際（普雷維什，1968年）經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)。最早研究者之一（納