迈克尔?斯宾塞/文

　　在过去两年中，工业化国家屡遭严重金融动荡，眼下又被日益深化的主权债务问题和高失业率搞得焦头烂额。

　　与此同时，被认为更易遭受打击的新兴经济体却显示出强劲的活力。随着经济增长率回到2008年前的水平，中国、印度和巴西的表现成为当今全球经济增长的重要引擎。

　　对发达国家来说，面对即将来临的大规模结构调整，发展中国家经济的高速增长和金融稳定，能帮助其缓解压力。若按当前的模式发展下去，全球经济将永久转型。特别是用市场价格衡量，十余年后发展中国家所创造的GDP将超过世界GDP总量的50％。

　　因此，搞清楚这种爆发式增长是否可持续非常重要。然而，答案取决于两方面：一是新兴经济体处理其所获得的成功的能力；二是全球经济对新兴经济体成功的适应程度。第一个方面没什么问题，第二个方面就难说了。

　　新兴经济体仍有继续利用赶超增长方式的空间，但必须开始着手进行结构调整，改革和制度建设也要跟上。

　　随着政府政策的继续实施，可以预期新兴经济体的内生国内增长引擎逐渐强化，日益扩大的中产阶级将成为中流砥柱。

　　分配与增长同样重要。面对由愈演愈烈的收入不公和获得基本服务机会不均造成的内部紧张局面，新兴经济体需更好地处理，否则将严重损害国内和地区的增长动态。对这一点，新兴经济体在其政策议程中，增长战略的制定已将分配问题纳入考虑范围。

　　新兴经济体能应对工业化国家经济放缓的问题，但更大的挑战在于金融部门的传导机制。目前的低利率环境正使资金蜂拥流向新兴经济体，增加了通胀和资产泡沫风险。一旦西方银行有恙，贸易信贷将大受影响，从而可能殃及国内银行。

　　幸运的是，一些新兴经济体仍拥有缓冲垫和减震器。这些国家在2008年－2009年危机发生时状况良好，现在也没有迹象表明其财政和金融的灵活性已开始告急。

　　总体来说，新兴经济体状况良好，足以在世界因工业化国家危机而摇摆不定时游刃有余。然而，它们尚未完全与工业化国家脱钩。要达到最佳结果，仍需工业化国家能够并愿意接受新兴经济体的不断突起和壮大。这才是风险所在，可能导致一系列潜在问题。

　　新兴经济体高增长率的基础是知识、资金和技术流入，而这些都与开放、法制和全球化的经济密切相关。然而，在发达国家失业率居高不下、金融动荡频发的环境下，这一全球结构面临沉重压力。全球经济增长正向零和博弈发展，导致产生次优反应。

　　结果，工业化国家市场的持续开放不再是理所当然之事。政治和政策风向正变得更狭隘、更偏向国内，而国际议程和追求全球共同利益的声音越来越小。这些挑战在接下来的几年中将越来越大，并牵涉到全球制度和治理事宜。

　　更大的挑战是，在一个增长速度不一致、强弱对比正发生逆转的世界中，处理日益增长和复杂的国际关系。这样一个世界需要更好的全球治理，以使新兴经济体在国际机构中获得合理的话语权和代表权。

　　如果没有这些改变，全球经济只能从一个危机走向另一个危机，最终的结果是经济学家所谓的“纳什均衡”，即一系列次优的组合。

　　这会带来什么？

　　在当前增长不一致的全球经济中，工业化国家过度膨胀的资产负债表需要一个长期的修复过程。在这种情况下，新兴经济体将被要求扮演更重要的角色。单凭自身手段，它们是可以胜任，但事情并非那么简单。

　　新兴经济体为工业化国家的调整所起到的增长润滑剂作用的大小，取决于后者接受全球经济运行和治理结构发生改变的意愿。但愿这些全球问题被认真考虑。

　　作者为2001年诺贝尔经济学奖得主、世行增长与发展委员会主席、美国斯坦福大学名誉教授

英文版

Can Emerging Markets Save the World Economy?

Overall, emerging economies are well placed to continue to navigate successfully a world rendered unstable by crises in industrial countries. Yet, again, the decoupling is not complete.

By Michael Spencer

Over the past two years, industrial countries have experienced bouts of severe financial instability. Currently, they are wrestling with widening sovereign-debt problems and high unemployment. Yet emerging economies, once considered much more vulnerable, have been remarkably resilient. With growth returning to pre-2008 breakout levels, the performance of China, India, and Brazil is an important engine of expansion for today"s global economy.

High growth and financial stability in emerging economies are helping to facilitate the massive adjustment facing industrial countries. But that growth has significant longer-term implications. If the current pattern is sustained, the global economy will be permanently transformed. Specifically, not much more than a decade is needed for the share of global GDP generated by developing economies to pass the 50 percent mark when measured in market prices.

So it is important to know whether this breakout growth phase is sustainable. The answer comes in two parts. One depends on emerging economies" ability to manage their own success; the other relates to the extent to which the global economy can accommodate this success. The answer to the first question is reassuring; the answer to the second is not.

While still able to exploit the scope for catch-up growth, emerging economies must undertake continuous, rapid, and at times difficult structural change, along with a parallel process of reform and institution building. In recent years, the systemically important countries have established an impressive track record of adapting pragmatically and flexibly. This is likely to continue.

With government policy remaining on course, we should expect a gradual strengthening of endogenous domestic growth drivers in emerging economies, anchored by an expanding middle class. Combined with higher trade among them, the future of emerging economies is one of reduced dependence on industrial-country demand, though not a complete decoupling.

Distribution as well as growth matter. Emerging economies still need to manage better their growing domestic tensions, which reflect rising income inequality and uneven access to basic services. A failure on this front would derail their strengthening domestic and regional growth dynamics. This is better understood today, with distributional aspects of growth strategy being firmly placed on emerging countries" policy agendas.

While emerging economies can deal with the economic slowdown in industrial countries, the financial-sector transmission mechanism is more challenging. Today"s low interest-rate environment is causing a flood of financial flows to emerging economies, raising the risk of inflation and asset bubbles. The hiccups in Western banks have served to disrupt the availability of trade credits, and, if amplified, could destabilize local banks.

These risks are real. Fortunately, several emerging economies continue to have cushions and shock absorbers. Having entered the 2008-2009 crisis with sound initial conditions (including large international reserves, budget and balance-of-payments surpluses, and highly capitalized banks), they are nowhere near exhausting their fiscal and financial flexibility ? and hence their capacity to respond to future shocks.

Overall, emerging economies are well placed to continue to navigate successfully a world rendered unstable by crises in industrial countries. Yet, again, the decoupling is not complete. A favorable outcome also requires industrial countries" ability and willingness to accommodate the growing size and prominence of emerging economies. The risks here are significant, pointing to a wide range of potential problems.