其他
【特别关注】英国《金融时报》连续刊发中国学者文章疾呼，别被“逆全球化”蒙蔽了（中英文）
作者王文系中国人民大学重阳金融研究院执行院长、教授，本文刊于4月19日FT中文网，原标题为《新兴市场将引领全球化进程》；英文原文刊于4月10日Financial Times网站，原标题为Emerging markets are set to lead globalisation。
全球范围内反对全球化的浪潮日益高涨。从普遍的贸易保护主义到贸易增长缓慢以及移民政策收紧，全球似乎正面临一场针对全球化的反弹。
然而，数据和理论推演却揭示了不同的情况：经济全球化仍是常态。实际上，全球化的引擎已从发达经济体转向新兴经济体。因此，后者应继续开放市场并抓住下一轮全球化将带来的机遇。
几十年来，反对全球化的运动间歇出现，冲击全球进步。西方经济学家已对全球化与反全球化共存现象提出解读。
有鉴于此，当前的反全球化浪潮更像是西方国家在这个特定阶段出现的区域和周期性倒退。西方对全球影响巨大，但崛起中的强国似乎对全球化有着非常不同的看法。
另外，从中长期角度来看，数据显示，西方的影响力可能受损。从2011年到2015年，贸易占全球国内生产总值（GDP）的比重仍持稳。
尽管以美元计价的全球商品贸易略有放缓，但鉴于美元强势以及叠加性因素（例如美国对外国能源的依赖下降以及大宗商品价格长期处于低位），这种滑坡在很大程度上可能被证明为一种“统计错觉”。
另外，在2008年金融危机之后的7年里，全球服务贸易增速超过GDP，服务贸易对GDP的贡献从2008年的12.5%升至2015年的13%，成为推动全球经济增长和增加就业的重要因素。
在资金流动方面，全球外国直接投资也在强劲复苏。2014年，全球外国直接投资曾降至1.2万亿美元，但2015年快速反弹至1.76万亿美元，为此次金融危机以来最高。
2015年，全球跨国并购规模增至4.9万亿美元，超过了2007年的4.6万亿美元，并为跨国企业在全球化背景下的扩张提供了强有力的证据。
显然，面对全球经济困境和风险、安全问题（例如难民和地区冲突）以及社会问题（例如收入差异扩大以及失业），人们对于全球化怀有顾虑，也有反对之声。然而，全球化趋势并没有逆转。实际上，全球化“输家”通过互联网在公众舆论中夸大了情况。
西方的担忧
西方的反全球化情绪从政策上就明显可见。随着西方国家在当今世界的竞争优势缩小，它们正寻求自我保护，根本原因可能有三重。
首先，这种情绪是内部矛盾加深以及全球化负面影响叠加效应的结果。全球化是一把“双刃剑”，这意味着在得失都是相对而言的竞争逻辑中，全球化不可避免地会产生赢家和输家。
全球工业链的劳动力分配和生产外包，再加上科技进步，导致制造业迁移到发展中国家（制造业构成实体经济的核心）。发达国家的中产阶级和下层阶级失去了工作或薪资下降，因此他们是全球化中的“输家”。
同时，互联网放大了负面的公众舆论，因此焦虑和愤怒就像传染病一样迅速蔓延，欧洲的难民危机和恐怖主义威胁恶化了这种形势。所有这些因素共同为那些愿意利用公众不满的政客创造了大批受众。
接下来，包括中国在内的崛起中的强国正让西方感到紧张。新兴经济体显示出了参与全球治理的更大兴趣和能力，而受到危机打击的西方正在衰落和退下世界舞台。
在这种背景下，西方评论人士提出，传统的全球化已走到终点，应该建立服务于西方利益并让西方保持领先的新贸易体系，例如区域贸易机制。
反全球化的言论正设法在全球化过程中让本国利益最大化。正如西方一位学者所言，全球化应按照“每个国家的自由意愿”继续下去。
新一轮全球化
社会生产率提高和科技进步意味着全球化趋势是不可逆转的。然而，由于各国资源和政策导向的差异，全球化产生了部分负面结果。因此，由西方发达国家主导的旧的全球化体系无法满足当前需求。出于这个原因，全球治理的升级、全球化的转型、以及新一轮全球化的开展迫在眉睫。
中国国家主席习近平今年1月在达沃斯的讲话引起了全球的注意。在某种程度上，他的主要理念勾勒出新全球化的道路：建立创新驱动的动态增长模式；通过协调良好、互联互通的方式，建立开放互惠的合作模式；建立均衡、公正和包容的发展模式。
当然，这条路不会好走，至少需要解决两个主要问题。
第一个任务是挑战落后的全球治理概念。新自由主义和华盛顿共识（Washington Consensus）的破产，要求提出新的理念，以解决发达国家的内部问题，还有解决全球公共品的缺乏以及全球共同利益和各国利益之间的错位。
由于全球治理问题、猖獗的恐怖主义、能源和食品安全危机、以及传染病扩散等问题具有普遍性，非传统威胁存在溢出效应。然而，现有的多边体系和双边应对机制互不兼容又不统一，催生了各种风险和危机。基于这个原因，时代呼唤伟大创意。
其次，现有的全球安全、贸易和金融机制——比如联合国、世贸组织（WTO）及国际货币基金组织（IMF）——很难应对全球各地正在发生的危机。依照最新国际架构来改革原始机制和重塑全球治理规则的必要性越来越大。发展中国家需要被更好地纳入决策过程，以最终保障各项全球机制的执行以及这一机制的权威。
“一带一路”倡议
全球化的发展促进了贸易与投资，令中国受益。在这一背景下，我们在最近几年见证了史无前例的情况。从二十国集团（G20）杭州峰会和亚太经合组织（APEC）利马峰会，到今年5月即将召开的“一带一路”（BRI）高峰论坛，每个场合都见到中国领导人、政府官员、商界人士和学者试图说服西方同僚对全球化有信心。
中国提议的新一轮全球化强调，所有国家——不论其规模和实力——都有平等的参与机会，并通过贸易交流和投资合作分享全球化的积极成果。
在规则和理念方面，全球治理应合理反映所有各方的需求。而通过由大国提供全球公共品，所有国家终将公平分享成果和收益。
可以预见的是，西方将继续对全球化进程持谨慎态度。不过，新全球化模式的发展需要西方的参与，才能从全球利益共同体推进至命运共同体。
鉴于全球经济和金融公共品的缺乏，“一带一路”倡议已成为由崛起中的中国提供的最大公共品，它体现了中国在新时代推动经济开放的主要理念。
总而言之，为应对不断攀升的反全球化思潮，我们确实应热情支持全球化的新时代。
英文原文
There has been a rising wave of opposition to globalisation across the globe. From widespread trade protectionism to slow trade growth and tightened immigration policies, it would seem that the world is facing a backlash against globalisation.
However, data and theoretical deduction tell a different story: economic globalisation is still the norm. In fact, the engine of globalisation has shifted from developed to emerging economies. Therefore, the latter should continue to open up their markets and seize the opportunities the next round of globalisation will bring.
Global trade, investment
For decades, anti-globalisation movements have emerged intermittently, impacting global progress. Western economists have already provided an interpretation of the coexisting globalisation and anti-globalisation phenomenon.
In this light, the current anti-globalisation wave is more like a regional and cyclical relapse at this particular phase among western countries. Though the West has great influence on the world, rising powers seem to perceive globalisation quite differently.
In addition, from a mid and long-term point of view, data indicate that the influence of the West might be impaired. Trade, as a percentage of GDP, in the world remained steady from 2011 to 2015.
Though there has been a modest slowdown in global trade of goods denominated in dollars, a large part of this decline could be proven to be a “statistical illusion” given the impact of dollar strength and overlapping factors, such as decreasing US dependence on foreign energy and the long-term low price of commodities.
Moreover, in the seven years after the 2008 financial crisis, the global service trade grew faster than GDP, and the contribution of service trade to GDP climbed from 12.5 per cent in 2008 to 13 per cent in 2015, serving as an important force for boosting global economic growth and increasing employment.
In capital flows, global foreign direct investment is also recovering robustly. Though it dropped to $1.2tn in 2014, it quickly bounced back to $1.76tn in 2015 — the highest level seen since the crisis.
Global transnational mergers and acquisitions amounted to $4.9tn in 2015, surpassing the 2007 level of $4.6tn and providing hard evidence of the expansion of multinational corporations in the context of globalisation.
It is evident that there have been doubts about and opposition to globalisation in the face of global economic difficulties and risks; security issues, such as refugee and regional conflicts, as well as social problems, such as widening income disparities and unemployment. However, the trend of globalisation has not been reversed. It is indeed exaggerated by the “losing end” of globalisation via the internet in the public opinion game.
Concerns in the West
The anti-globalisation sentiments in the West can be seen on the surface in policy. Western countries pursue self-protection as their competitive edge diminishes in today’s world, and the underlying reasons could be threefold.
For one, the sentiments are the result of the overlapping effect of intensified internal contradictions and the negative influence of globalisation. Globalisation is a “double-edged sword”, which means that in the competitive logic of relative gains, it will inevitably produce winners and losers.
Labour distribution and production outsourcing in the global industrial chain coupled with technological progress has led to the relocation of the manufacturing industry, which forms the core of the real economy, to the developing countries. The middle and lower classes in developed countries have lost jobs or seen reductions in pay, so they are the “losers” in globalisation.
At the same time, the internet is a magnifier of negative public opinion, so anxiety and anger, like infectious diseases, spread rapidly, and the situation has been exacerbated by the refugee crisis in Europe and the threat of terrorism. All these factors have conspired to create a large audience for politicians willing to exploit public discontent.
Next, rising powers, including China, are making the West nervous. While the emerging economies show more interest and capacity to participate in global governance, the West, worn down by the crisis, is declining and withdrawing from the world stage.
Against this backdrop, western commentators have argued that traditional globalisation has come to an end, and a new trade system should be in place, such as a regional trade mechanism, that serves their interest and keeps them on top of the game.
The anti-globalisation narratives are in the end looking for ways to maximise national interest in the process of globalisation. Globalisation, as a scholar in the West put it, should continue out of “each nation’s free will”.
New round of globalisation
The progress of social productivity and technology means the trend of globalisation is irreversible. However, due to the differences in national resources and policy orientations, globalisation has created some negative outcomes. Therefore, the old system of globalisation, which has been dominated by developed western countries, cannot meet the current demand. Therefore an upgrade in global governance and a transformation of globalisation as well as a new round of globalisation is imminent.
Chinese President Xi Jinping’s speech at Davos in January attracted global attention. To an extent, his main ideas chart the path of new globalisation: develop a dynamic, innovation-driven growth model; pursue a well-co-ordinated and inter-connected approach to develop a model of open, mutually beneficial co-operation; develop a balanced, equitable and inclusive development model.
Certainly, the undertaking will not be easy and there are at least two major issues to be tackled.
The first task is to challenge backward global governance concepts. The bankruptcy of neoliberalism and the Washington Consensus requires new ideas to solve the internal problems in developed countries as well as the shortage of global public goods and the dislocation between common interests and national interests.
Non-traditional threats have a spillover effect due to the generalisation of global governance issues, rampant terrorism, energy and food security crises and the spread of infectious diseases. However, the present multilateral system and bilateral coping mechanism are incompatible and fragmented, breeding a variety of risks and crises. On this basis, this is a call for grand ideas in this era.
Second, existing global security, trade and financial mechanisms, such as the UN, the WTO and the IMF, are struggling to respond to the ongoing crisis around the world. The need to reform the original mechanism and reshape global governance rules, in accordance with the latest international structure, is increasing. Developing countries need to be better included in the decision-making process in order to ultimately safeguard the implementation and authority of the global mechanism.
‘B & R’ initiative
China benefits from the development of globalisation and open economy that facilitates trade and investment. Against this backdrop, we have seen something unprecedented in recent years. From the G20 Hangzhou summit and the APEC Lima summit to the coming “Belt and Road” summit this May, Chinese leaders, government officials, businessmen and scholars have been seen at every occasion trying to convince their western counterparts to be confident in globalisation.
The new round of globalisation China has proposed emphasises that all countries have equal opportunities to participate, regardless of their size and strength, and share the positive results of globalisation through trade exchanges and investment co-operation.
Global governance should reasonably reflect the demands of all parties in terms of rules and concepts, and though major powers provide global public goods, all countries are bound to share the fruits and benefits fairly.
It is foreseeable that the West will continue be cautious towards the process of globalisation, but the development of a new model of globalisation needs its participation to push forward from a global community of common interests to a community of common destiny.
In the absence of global economic and financial public goods, the “Belt and Road” initiative has become the largest public product provided by a rising China, which embodies its main idea of promoting economic openness in the new era.
To conclude, in response to rising anti-globalisation sentiments, we should really embrace a new era of globalisation.
（欢迎关注人大重阳新浪微博：@人大重阳，微信公众号：rdcy2013）
中国人民大学重阳金融研究院（人大重阳）成立于2013年1月19日，是重阳集团董事长裘国根先生向母校捐款2亿元并设立教育基金运营的主要资助项目。
作为中国特色新型智库，人大重阳旨在把脉金融，钻研学术，关注现实，建言国家，服务大众。人大重阳聘请了来自 10 多个国家的 96 名前政要、银行家、知名学者为高级研究员，与 30 多个国家的智库开展实质合作。
目前，人大重阳被中国官方认定为 G20智库峰会（T20）共同牵头智库、中国金融学会绿色金融专业委员会秘书处、“一带一路”中国智库合作联盟常务理事、中国-伊朗官学共建“一带一路”中方牵头智库。2014年来，人大重阳连续三年被选入由美国宾夕法尼亚大学推出的、国际公认度最高的《全球智库报告》的“全球顶级智库150强”（仅七家中国智库连续入围）。