海外之声 | BIS总裁：在后疫情时代维持健全的货币政策
导读
新冠肺炎疫情在最初几个月，也就是最危急的时期，给经济带来的影响主要是流动性紧缩，当时各国政府都采取了积极的货币和财政刺激措施来应对。但现在由于疫情迟迟未能结束，危机进入了新的阶段，其特征是企业的偿付能力风险大大提高。决策者面临两难选择：既要扶持处于困境中的企业，又不想在没有希望渡过难关的企业身上白费功夫，该怎么做？最初的应急措施已经包含了能想到的所有合理应对措施，甚至更多。公司在基本上仍具有偿付能力，人们的工作和工资都保住了，2020年上半年公司破产的数量也要少于前五年。
目前看来，市场指标显示投资者期望违约率和破产率能保持在较低水平。但这可能只是一厢情愿：从历史上看，破产率和失业率的上升往往滞后于GDP增速的下降，要在最初的冲击过去一年之后才达到顶峰，然后在接下来的两年中居高不下。
如果没有额外的政策支持，这可能就是世界经济未来的走向。据国际清算银行估计，明年发达经济体企业的破产率可能会增长20％以上（对比2019年的数据）。
很明显，决策者必须持续为企业提供支持，以防止企业大量倒闭破产带来更大的损失。但具体该如何支持？
要回答这个问题，决策者必须首先认识到经济格局可能已发生根本性变化。众所周知，在疫情期间，诸如电子商务等数字技术得到了更为广泛的应用，而这种趋势仍会持续。
实际上，消费者的态度和消费行为可能再也不会回到疫情之前的模式。疫情之后，即使不再需要进行社交隔离，很多人可能仍会远程工作。在未来一段时间内，他们可能还是会降低外出旅游、购物或就餐的频率。
尽管经济活动的这种变化能够推动一些行业的发展，但也会将曾经繁荣的企业变为一潭死水。如果决策者支持此类企业发展，就会为金融业带来压力，最终导致更大程度的经济萎缩和更高的失业率。
要决定是否值得给一家公司提供额外救助并不容易。仅是公司在危机前的表现不能提供准确的指导。而且经济前景仍然有高度不确定性。
虽然想要确定哪家公司长期来看可以继续发展并没有完美的方法，但是银行拥有丰富的评估经验，用以指导银行贷款，也会提供有价值的见解。银行即使会蒙受损失，在有些情况下，也应该停止向不赚钱的公司提供贷款。
无论如何进行资源重新分配，显然在漫长的危机期，决策者都不能再仅仅依靠财政和货币刺激，还需要进行结构性改革，提供有针对性的支持。
挑战有两方面。第一，在新经济中可以取得成功的企业在进行债务重组，修复资产负债表时，需要获得帮助，以制定有效的战略。为此，可以减小基础广泛的财政措施的规模，并为虽然承担了不可持续的巨额债务但是长期来看仍然可行的公司提供财政支持。
第二，决策者必须鼓励并让受灾最严重的行业的企业将资源重新分配给在后疫情经济中可能蓬勃发展的行业。多年以来政府努力让业务开展变得更加容易，现在也必须简化解散失败企业的过程。资源腾出得越早，越可以更快地促进增长活动。
简化破产程序和劳工制度对此可能会有所帮助。公司重组时，激励措施也很重要。对于失业工人，决策者要提供激励措施和机会，帮助他们获得技能，以便能在更有活力的行业求职。
为了引导重新分配的资源（包括人力资本）流入长期来看真正能够造福国民经济的行业，决策者应考虑制定前瞻性的产业战略作为补充，以促进对基础设施、气候友好型行业和医疗保健领域的投资。与此同时，如果想要获得技术创新的好处，就需要打造良好的监管和法律环境，保护产权，建立提供必要股权融资的金融体系。
此次重新分配可以说是前所未有的，需要所有的私人和公共部门利益相关方共同采取行动，包括债务人、债权人、中央银行、财政当局以及许多其他政府机构，例如税务机关、法院、社会保障管理部门、劳动部门和地方政府等。国际协调也至关重要。因此，关键在于政府要坚决抵制保护主义的诱惑。
经济增长终将恢复，但是增长动力与疫情前不同。如果决策者能尽早认识到这一点，制定有针对性的经济支持战略，加大结构性改革力度，那么经济复苏将会更快、更强、更有韧性。
作者 | 奥古斯丁·卡斯滕斯（Agustin Carstens），国际清算银行总经理
英文原文如下：
The Great Reallocation
Op-ed from Mr Agustín Carstens, General Manager of the BIS, for Project Syndicate, published 12 October 2020.
Initial emergency measures certainly did as much as could have reasonably been hoped, if not more. Firms have remained largely solvent, and jobs and wages have been protected, with fewer corporate bankruptcies in the first half of 2020 than in the previous five years.
As it stands, market indicators suggest that investors expect defaults and insolvencies to remain low. But this might be wishful thinking: Historically, there is a lag between declining GDP growth and rising bankruptcies and unemployment, which tend to peak a year after the initial shock and remain high for another two years.
Without additional policy support, the world may be headed for just such a future. The Bank for International Settlements estimates that bankruptcies among advanced-economy firms could rise by more than 20% (from the 2019 baseline) next year.
The message is clear: policymakers must offer continued support to businesses, in order to prevent a costly wave of closures and insolvencies. But precisely what kind of support is needed?
To answer that question, policymakers must first recognize that the economic landscape may have fundamentally changed. It is well known that during the pandemic, the adoption of digital technologies, such as in e-commerce, has accelerated significantly. This trend is unlikely to be reversed.
In fact, consumer attitudes and spending behavior may never return fully to pre-pandemic patterns. More people are likely to work remotely, even after social-distancing protocols are a thing of the past. And they may travel, shop, or eat out less, well into the future.
While such shifts in economic activity will strengthen some sectors, they will also turn once-thriving businesses into deadwood. And if policymakers prop up such businesses, they could add pressure on the financial sector and ultimately bring about an even larger economic contraction and higher job losses.
Determining whether a firm merits additional relief will not be easy. Pre-crisis performance alone will not provide an accurate guide. And the economic outlook remains highly uncertain.
But while there is no perfect method for identifying which firms are viable in the long run, banks - which have plenty of experience carrying out such assessments to guide their lending - can offer valuable insight. And banks themselves will need to discontinue lending to unprofitable firms in some cases, even if that means incurring losses.
However the reallocation of resources is carried out, it is clear that, during this protracted phase of the crisis, policymakers can no longer depend solely on fiscal and monetary stimulus. Structural reform and targeted support are also needed.
The challenge is twofold. First, businesses that can succeed in this new economy need help - including help formulating effective strategies - as they undergo debt restructuring and repair their balance sheets. To this end, broad-based fiscal measures could be scaled down, in favor of financial support for firms that have accumulated unsustainably large debts, but are likely to remain viable in the long term.
Second, policymakers must encourage and enable businesses in the most severely damaged sectors to reallocate their resources toward those sectors that are more likely to thrive in the post-pandemic economy. Just as governments have worked over the years to make launching a business easier, they now must simplify the process of unwinding failed enterprises. The faster resources are freed up, the sooner they can be channeled toward growth-enhancing activities.
Streamlining bankruptcy procedures and labor regimens could be helpful here. Incentives for firm-level restructuring are also essential. As for displaced workers, policymakers can provide incentives and opportunities for them to acquire the skills they need to shift to more dynamic sectors.
To steer the reallocated resources - including human capital - toward sectors that will genuinely benefit the national economy in the long term, policymakers should consider formulating forward-looking industrial strategies (where they don't already exist) that foster investment in infrastructure, climate-friendly industries, and health care. At the same time, reaping the benefits of technological innovation requires a favorable regulatory and legal environment, including adequate property rights, and a financial system that provides the necessary equity financing.
This unprecedented reallocation will require concerted action by all stakeholders, private and public, including debtors, creditors, central banks, fiscal authorities, and many other governmental agencies, such as tax authorities, courts, social security administrations, labor departments, and subnational governments. International coordination will also be essential. It is thus vital that governments resist the siren song of protectionism.
Economic growth will eventually return. But its engines will not be the same as before the pandemic. The sooner policymakers recognize this and develop targeted economic-support strategies - which must include a heavy dose of structural reform - the faster, stronger, and more resilient the recovery will be.
编译 李文丽
编辑 易景阳
来源 BIS
责编 李锦璇、蒋旭
监制 安然、魏唯
点击查看近期热文
海外之声｜BIS总裁：后疫情时代中国经济转型的新机遇——金融改革和科技创新
欢迎加入群聊
为了增进与粉丝们的互动，IMI财经观察建立了微信交流群，欢迎大家参与。
入群方法：加群主为微信好友（微信号：imi605）,添加时备注个人姓名（实名认证）、单位、职务等信息，经群主审核后，即可被拉进群。
欢迎读者朋友多多留言与我们交流互动，留言可换奖品：每月累积留言点赞数最多的读者将得到我们寄送的最新研究成果一份。
关于我们
中国人民大学国际货币研究所（IMI）成立于2009年12月20日，是专注于货币金融理论、政策与战略研究的非营利性学术研究机构和新型专业智库。研究所聘请了来自国内外科研院所、政府部门或金融机构的90余位著名专家学者担任顾问委员、学术委员和国际委员，80余位中青年专家担任研究员。
研究所长期聚焦国际金融、货币银行、宏观经济、金融监管、金融科技、地方金融等领域，定期举办国际货币论坛、货币金融（青年）圆桌会议、大金融思想沙龙、麦金农大讲坛、陶湘国际金融讲堂、IMF经济展望报告发布会、金融科技公开课等高层次系列论坛或讲座，形成了《人民币国际化报告》《天府金融指数报告》《金融机构国际化报告》《宏观经济月度分析报告》等一大批具有重要理论和政策影响力的学术成果。
2018年，研究所荣获中国人民大学优秀院属研究机构奖，在182家参评机构中排名第一；在《智库大数据报告（2018）》中获评A等级，在参评的1065个中国智库中排名前5%。2019年，入选智库头条号指数（前50名），成为第一象限28家智库之一。
国际货币网：http://www.imi.ruc.edu.cn
微信号：IMI财经观察
（点击识别下方二维码关注我们）
理事单位申请、
学术研究和会议合作
联系方式:
只分享最有价值的财经视点
We only share the most valuable financial insights.