Email:[email protected]
美國(guó)合作伙伴建立的合資企業(yè)。我們?cè)谶@方面的分析,揭示了當(dāng)前美國(guó)對(duì)未經(jīng)授權(quán)的技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)讓現(xiàn)象的抱怨的根源。
How do these external effects compare tothose from wholly-foreign owned FDI? Our estimates indicate that the extent ofthe knowledge spillovers from these two sources are approximately equal, with each accounting for around 10 percent of the productivity growth of Chinese firms over the period of our sample. These are large effects, but the question must be asked whether China’s joint venture policy leads to a more efficient outcome than what would arise from a more open environment. If the burdens imposed by the IJV requirement act as a deterrent for FDI, it could be the case that China’s economy would benefit from a more liberalized investment regime.
與外商獨(dú)資的FDI相比,外部效應(yīng)如何?我們的估計(jì)表明,來(lái)自這兩種渠道的知識(shí)溢出程度大致相當(dāng),在我們的樣本期內(nèi),每一種都占中國(guó)企業(yè)生產(chǎn)率增長(zhǎng)的10%左右。這些影響是巨大的,但必須要問(wèn)的是,中國(guó)的合資政策是否會(huì)帶來(lái)擴(kuò)大開(kāi)放更有效的結(jié)果。如果合資要求所施加的負(fù)擔(dān)對(duì)外商直接投資起到威懾作用,那么中國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)可能會(huì)從更加自由化的投資體制中受益。(譯者注:引申的意思是說(shuō),如果現(xiàn)在外企和外國(guó)政府都指責(zé)這種合資政策,中國(guó)放棄這種要求,擴(kuò)大開(kāi)放,或許受益更明顯。一方面,第三只腿——“外部效應(yīng)”仍然存在;另一方面,擴(kuò)大開(kāi)放,還會(huì)強(qiáng)化這種“外部效應(yīng)”。)
Broader Implications and the U.S.–China Trade Dispute