Jeffrey Sachs A World Adrift 漂泊的世界

Jeffrey D. Sachs  A World Adrift 

http://www.project-syndicate.org/print/a-world-adrift 

 22 April 2012

The IMF/World Bank meetings remind us of an overarching truth: our highly interconnected and crowded world has become a highly complicated
vessel. If we are to move forward, we must start pulling in the same direction, even without a single captain at the helm.

漂泊的世界

http://www.project-syndicate.org/print/a-world-adrift

杰弗里·D·萨克斯 2012 年 4 月 22 日

纽约—国际货币基金组织和世界银行的年度春季会议为了解推动全球政治和世界经济的两大基本趋势提供了一个窗口。 地缘政治正在从一个由欧洲和美国主导的世界转向一个拥有许多地区大国但没有全球领导者的世界。 经济不稳定的新时代已经到来
另一方面，增长的实际限制与金融动荡一样重要。

欧洲经济危机主导了今年国际货币基金组织/世界银行的会议。 该基金正在寻求建立紧急救助机制，以应对弱势群体的情况欧洲经济体需要另一次金融救助，并已转向主要新兴经济体

– 巴西、中国、印度、海湾石油出口国和其他国家 – 帮助提供必要的资源。

他们的答案很明确：是的，但前提是要换取国际货币基金组织的更多权力和选票。 由于欧洲想要国际金融支持，它必须同意。

当然，新兴经济体对更多电力的需求是众所周知的。 2010年，当国际货币基金组织最后一次增加财政资源时，新兴经济体只有在其在国际货币基金组织中的投票权增加约6%的情况下才同意该协议，而欧洲则损失了约4%。 现在，新兴市场要求获得更大的权力份额。

其根本原因不难看出。 根据国际货币基金组织自己的数据，1980年欧盟现有成员国占世界经济的31%（以各国GDP衡量，并根据购买力进行调整）。 到 2011 年，欧盟份额下滑至 20%，基金组织预计到 2017 年将进一步下降至 17%。

这一下降反映出欧洲人口和人均产出增长缓慢。 另一方面，包括中国、印度在内的亚洲发展中国家占全球GDP的比重从1980年的8%左右飙升至2011年的25%，预计到2017年将达到31%。

美国一贯坚称不会加入任何新的国际货币基金组织救助基金。 美国国会越来越多地接受孤立主义经济政策，特别是在为他人提供经济帮助方面。 这也反映出美国实力的长期衰落。 美国占全球GDP的比重从1980年的25%左右，到2011年下降到19%，预计2017年将下滑到18%，届时中国经济的绝对规模（调整后）将超过美国。 购买力）。

但全球力量的转移比北大西洋（欧盟和美国）的衰落和新兴经济体尤其是金砖国家（巴西、俄罗斯、印度、中国和南非）的崛起更为复杂。 我们也正在从主要由美国领导的单极世界转向真正的多极世界，在这个世界中，美国、欧盟、金砖国家和较小的国家（例如尼日利亚和土耳其）拥有地区影响力，但不愿承担责任。 全球领导力，尤其是其财务负担。 问题不只是现在有五六个大国；而是现在有五六个大国。 此外，他们都希望以牺牲其他人的利益为代价搭便车。

向多极世界转变的好处是，没有任何一个国家或小集团能够主宰其他国家。 每个区域最终都会有回旋余地和寻找自己路径的空间。 然而，多极世界也带来巨大风险，特别是重大全球挑战将无法应对，因为没有任何一个国家或地区能够或愿意协调全球应对措施，甚至参与全球应对措施。

美国已经从全球领导地位迅速转变为搭便车，似乎绕过了全球合作的舞台。 因此，美国目前为自己在气候变化、国际货币基金组织金融救助计划、全球发展援助目标以及提供全球公共产品方面国际合作的其他方面的全球合作找借口。

鉴于必须应对的挑战的严重性，全球政策合作的弱点尤其令人担忧。 当然，人们立即想到的是持续不断的全球金融动荡，但其他挑战更为严峻。

事实上，国际货币基金组织/世界银行会议还讨论了世界经济的第二个根本性变化：初级商品价格居高不下且不稳定，目前已成为全球经济稳定和增长的主要威胁。

自2005年左右以来，大多数主要商品的价格都在飙升。 石油、煤炭、铜、黄金、小麦、玉米、铁矿石和许多其他商品的价格已经翻了一番、三倍，甚至上涨更多。

燃料、粮食和矿物都受到了影响。 一些人将上涨归因于大宗商品价格泡沫，原因是低利率和大宗商品投机容易获得信贷。 然而，最令人信服的解释几乎肯定是更为根本的。

世界对初级商品的需求不断增长，特别是在中国，

正在大力冲击全球资源的实物供应。 是的，可以生产更多的石油或铜，但边际生产成本要高得多。

但问题不仅仅在于供应限制。

全球经济增长也引发了日益严重的环境危机。 今天粮食价格居高不下，部分原因是世界各地的粮食种植地区正在经历人类引起的气候变化的不利影响（例如更多
干旱和极端风暴），以及过度使用河流和含水层淡水造成的水资源短缺。

简而言之，全球经济正在经历可持续发展危机，资源约束和环境压力导致巨大的价格冲击和生态不稳定。 通过采用减少地球生态系统危险压力的技术和生活方式，经济发展需要迅速转变为可持续发展。 这也需要一定程度的全球合作，但目前尚无踪迹。

国际货币基金组织/世界银行会议提醒我们一个首要事实：我们高度互联和拥挤的世界已变得高度复杂
血管。 如果我们要前进，我们就必须开始朝同一个方向努力，即使没有一个船长掌舵。

A World Adrift 

http://www.project-syndicate.org/print/a-world-adrift

Jeffrey D. Sachs  22 April 2012

NEW YORK – The annual spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have provided a window onto two fundamental trends driving global politics and the world economy. Geopolitics is moving decisively away from a world dominated by Europe and the United States to one with many regional powers but no global leader. And a new era of economic instability is at
hand, owing as much to physical limits to growth as to financial turmoil.

Europe’s economic crisis dominated this year’s IMF/ World Bank meetings. The Fund is seeking to create an emergency rescue mechanism in case the weak
European economies need another financial bailout, and has turned to major emerging economies

– Brazil, China, India, the Gulf oil exporters, and others – to help provide the necessary resources.

Their answer is clear: yes, but only in exchange for more power and votes at the IMF. As Europe wants an international financial backstop, it will have to agree.

Of course, the emerging economies’ demand for more power is a well-known story. In 2010, when the IMF last increased its financial resources, the emerging economies agreed to the deal only if their voting share within the IMF was increased by around 6%, with Europe losing around 4%. Now emerging markets are demanding an even greater share of power.

The underlying reason is not difficult to see. According to the IMF's own data, the European Union’scurrent members accounted for 31% of the world economy in 1980 (measured by each country’s GDP, adjusted for purchasing power). By 2011, the EU share slid to 20%, and the Fund projects that it willdecline further, to 17%, by 2017.

This decline reflects Europe’s slow growth in terms of both population and output per person. On the other side of the ledger, the global GDP share of the Asian developing countries, including China and India, has soared, from around 8% in 1980 to 25% in 2011, and is expected to reach 31% by 2017.

The US, characteristically these days, insists that it will not join any new IMF bailout fund. The US Congress has increasingly embraced isolationist economic policies, especially regarding financial help for others. This, too, reflects the long-term wane of US power. The US share of global GDP, around 25% in 1980, declined to 19% in 2011, and is expected to slip to 18% in 2017, by which point the IMF expects that China will have overtaken the US economy in absolute size (adjusted for purchasing power).

But the shift of global power is more complicated than the decline of the North Atlantic (EU and US) and the rise of the emerging economies, especially the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa). We are also shifting from a unipolar world, led mainly by the US, to a truly multipolar world, in which the US, the EU, the BRICS, and smaller powers (such as Nigeria and Turkey) carry regional weight but are reticent to assume global leadership, especially its financial burdens. The issue is not just that there are five or six major powers now; it is also that all of them want a free ride at the others’ expense.

The shift to such a multipolar world has the advantage that no single country or small bloc can dominate the others. Each region can end up with room for maneuver and some space to find its own path. Yet a multipolar world also carries great risks, notably that major global challenges will go unmet, because no single country or region is able or willing to coordinate a global response, or even to participate in one.

The US has shifted rapidly from global leadership to that kind of free riding, seeming to bypass the stage of global cooperation. Thus, the US currently
excuses itself from global cooperation on climate change, IMF financial-bailout packages, global development-assistance targets, and other aspects of international collaboration in the provision of global public goods.

The weaknesses of global policy cooperation are especially worrisome in view of the gravity of the challenges that must be met. Of course, the ongoing global financial turmoil comes to mind immediately, but other challenges are even more significant. 

Indeed, the IMF/World Bank meetings also grappled with a second fundamental change in the world economy: high and volatile primary commodity prices are now a major threat to global economic stability and growth.

Since around 2005, the prices of most major commodities have soared. Prices for oil, coal, copper,gold, wheat, maize, iron ore, and many other commodities have doubled, tripled, or risen even more.

Fuels, food grains, and minerals have all been affected. Some have attributed the rise to bubbles incommodities prices, owing to low interest rates and easy access to credit for commodity speculation. Yet the most compelling explanation is almost certainly more fundamental.

Growing world demand for primary commodities, especially in China, is pushing hard against the physical supplies of global resources. Yes, more oil or copper can be produced, but only at much higher marginal production costs.

But the problem goes beyond supply constraints.

Global economic growth is also causing a burgeoning environmental crisis. Food prices are high today partly because food-growing regions around the world are experiencing the adverse effects of human-induced climate change (such as more
droughts and extreme storms), and of water scarcity caused by excessive use of freshwater from rivers and aquifers.

In short, the global economy is experiencing a sustainability crisis, in which resource constraints and environmental pressures are causing large price shocks and ecological instability. Economic development rapidly needs to become sustainable development, by adopting technologies and lifestyles that reduce the dangerous pressures on the Earth's ecosystems. This, too, will require a level of global cooperation that remains nowhere to be seen.

The IMF/World Bank meetings remind us of an overarching truth: our highly interconnected and crowded world has become a highly complicated
vessel. If we are to move forward, we must start pulling in the same direction, even without a single captain at the helm.