原文标题：The secret behind China’s economic success
China’s economic success is due less to its authoritarian system and more to Deng Xiaoping’s leadership, its Far Eastern location and investments by its diaspora.
Among simplistic views on development, the latest is the ‘Beijing Consensus’, coined by Joshua Cooper Ramo (Foreign Policy Centre, London, 2004), whereby China is becoming the model for developing countries: an authoritarian regime, and a mixture of market economy and public interventions.
It is the antithesis of the ‘Washington Consensus’ (1989), which advocated democracy and neo-liberalism.
Although the Chinese are very restrained about their ‘model’, the Beijing Consensus is gaining ground. Yet Chinese achievements have hardly anything to do with it.
China has benefitted from three major advantages after Mao Zedong’s death in 1976. When Deng Xiaoping took over (1978), he became the last of the outstanding personalities who shaped the destiny of their country during the twentieth century.
Without him, there would have been changes, but not a new revolution. The Chinese people were utterly fed up with all the excesses under Mao: incredible interference in private life, the famine following the Great Leap Forward (1959-61) with 30 million dead out of a population of 700 million, and the countless sufferings during the Cultural Revolution since 1966. All these factors helped Deng. His personality and charisma and a shrewd sense of reality enabled him to win.
Although 74 years old, with very limited experience of the outside world, Deng fully understood that his people wanted a better material life and more freedom.
As for the economy, it needed thorough overhauling and modernisation, like education and health, judicial institutions and the armed forces.
Many factories – the early ones built with Soviet aid in the 1950s before the break between Moscow and Peking (1960) – relied on obsolete techniques. China had been little touched by the technological progress that was widespread in the West or in Japan.
The economy relied mostly on state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and collective units, especially in agriculture, leading to inefficiency and heavy procedures.
That is why agriculture was de-collectivised, a number of SOEs were closed and the private sector in trade and industry was encouraged, along with foreign investment.
Between 1950 and 1960, 7,500 students went to the Soviet Union and 38,000 cadres enjoyed some training there. After 1960, very few Chinese studied abroad, while Chinese universities were badly shaken during the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution.
In spite of the achievements under Mao, China was left behind in most fields of life. After visiting the Nissan factory in Japan (1978), Deng Xiaoping exclaimed: “Now I understand what is modern industry.”
In 1980, senior army officers attended manoeuvres in France, with a combination of air forces, tanks and artillery. They were flabbergasted by electronic devices.
The same year, my institute received a delegation of the People’s Bank. None of them knew English.
They were taking notes (thanks to a translation) on banking, inflation, the law of supply and demand, as though they were being taught in the first year of an economic faculty.
Side by side with the opening out to the world, 1.2 million Chinese students were sent abroad, of whom 320,000 had returned by 2008.
Foreign professors are invited to China in order to strengthen existing universities and create new centres of research.
While personal freedom has made enormous progress, the media are today much more open about development, corruption, the defects of the new judiciary and intra-party discussions.
There are, however, limits to be respected, as shown by the arrests of dissidents for promoting parliamentary democracy.
China has shifted from a totalitarian system to an authoritarian one, still relying on the Communist Party.
No less striking was the succession to Deng, which went smoothly and, later, the accession to power of the present leadership in 2002-03.
The second factor is that overall development has been considerably helped, first by Hong Kong, and then by Taiwan and the Chinese diaspora in South East Asia.
From 1980 onwards, many factories from Hong Kong were relocated, mostly opposite it in Guangdong (or Canton, and more recently the new city of Shenzhen), which accounts for 30 per cent of exports.
From 1980 to 1996, FDI (foreign direct investment) coming from Hong Kong amounted to two-thirds of the total inflow. Until today, FDI from Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore accounts for more than half of the total disbursed per year. (Total cumulative FDI until 2010 was $700-800 billion.)
The third factor is China’s location in a most dynamic part of the world – the Far East and South East Asia. The first push came from Japan in the 1960s, followed in the 1970s by the ‘four dragons’ – South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore.
In the 1980s, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Viet Nam started moving fast. Within South East Asia, the Chinese diaspora (about 30 million people) acts like a lubricant with a dense network of banks and industries.
China imports many components from South East Asia, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan, which are assembled through FDI and exported as finished goods, electronics, electrical appliances, office material and TV sets.
As a result, China has become – not the workshop of the world – but the assembly workshop of the world.
None of these three factors can be found in other emerging countries. Looking at India, it lacks a Hong Kong at its door. It is not located in such a dynamic area, and its diaspora has fewer big businesses than China’s.
Part of the achievements comes from Confucius emphasising the ability to learn when one is ignorant, a virtue not so common in the world! The result is the “new Chinaman” – well-trained, open-minded, asserting himself, as able as any cadre from Western countries or from India, and enjoying a better life than his parents.
On the other hand, for several years the leadership has been very concerned with corruption, inequality, environment and social tensions. That is why its aim is to promote a “harmonious society”.
The results are limited up to now, as shown by the reactions of the government to the recent demonstrations inspired by the events in the Arab world.
So far, major trouble has been avoided, but to overcome further challenges, China needs to maintain a political leadership of high calibre and rather fast economic growth.
Diff bet India & China
by Rrrr (View MyPage) on Mar 26, 2011 08:55 PM
Chinese have a common vision for themselves and for their country and chinese aam admi is aligned to that vision
whereas in india
people are visionless and they only align for reservation or for corruption…
India will not change because aam admi does not want to change and takes pride in calling himself backward
by Sam (View MyPage) on Mar 26, 2011 01:09 PM
We Indians just show our patriotism during India-Pakistan cricket match
by Raj Gupta (View MyPage) on Mar 22, 2011 11:09 AM
In 1950, China’s main agriculture productions: 132 million tons of grains, 0.692 million tons of cotton, 2.97 million tons of edible oil, 64.01 million of pigs , 46.73 million of sheep (or goats).
In 1978, the numbers were changed to 304.77 million tons of grains, 2.167million tons of cotton, 5.21 million tons of edible oil, 301.29 million of pigs, 169.94 million of sheep (or goats). China’s record of grain production was 530 million tons in 2009.
Lets calculate on these numbers again. China’s grain production grew 1.3 times In the 28 years before 1978, and about 0.7 in the 31 years after the reform. For comparison: India has more arable land than China, but India’s record of grain production was 250 million tons. India only produced 220 million tons in 2009, much less than the 304.77 million tons that China did in 1978. Don’t forget that India has 1.1 billion population today, but China had about 0.9 billion in 1978.
3. Mass education
by Raj Gupta (View MyPage) on Mar 22, 2011 10:57 AM
3. Mass education: China’s illiterate rate was 80% when PRC was founded, but 80% of Chinese were not illiterate anymore before the reform. This is the reason that China has alot of skilled workers. India’s literate rate is still less than 70% today.
4. Chinese’s average life expectancy increased from 40.5 years in 1955 to 65.3 in 1980. Increased almost 25 years. That’s a huge achievement in a country of almost 900 million population. During the same time, Indian’s average life expectancy increased from 38.7 years in 1955 to 52.9 in 1980.
by Raj Gupta (View MyPage) on Mar 22, 2011 10:53 AM | Hide replies
China had only 22,000 km of railways in 1950. But most of them was damaged or totally destroyed in wars. Only 11,000 km of them were operational. in late 1970s, China had about 50,000 km of railways. China constructed more than 1000 km of railways a year in the first 30 year, this was much faster than what China did between the start of the reform and early 1990s. China could only do 300 km a year.
Comparing with India again, India had 55,000 km of railways when it got independence. Now India has about 65,000 km. India has done 10,000 km of new lines in 63 years, only about half of what China had done in the 28 years before 1978. China’s railway system is expanded to 86,000 km today.
On the contrary to this article,
by Raj Gupta (View MyPage) on Mar 22, 2011 10:50 AM | Hide replies
the difference between China and India happened before the reform, not after. According to China’s official data:
1. Industry: China’s industry size was 19.1 billion RMB in 1950, 423.7 billion in 1978, and 15695.8 billion in 2009. According to these data given by China’s Central Statistical Office, China’s industry grew 22 times in the the 28 years before 1978, and 37 times in the 31 years after 1978. There are two things need to be considered: There was almost no inflation before the reform and China experienced huge inflation after the reform. So the 22 times before 1978 was very real, but the 37 times after 1978 has a lot of bubble in it. All the industry before the reform came from Chinese factories, but it is very different in 2009.
At least 1/3 of Chinese industry are now from foreign investments. Foreigners are the main beneficiaries from the investments, not our China. In early 1970s, the size of China’s industry surpassed agriculture. In 1978, China’s industry was 3 times of China’s agriculture even China’s agriculture was more than doubled in the first 30 years of PRC. China had a good industry system already back then. The construction of nuclear submarines and Gezhouba Dam on Yangtze river before the reform stood for the development level of Chinese industry, especially heavy industry.
by madanmohan siddhanthi (View MyPage) on Mar 22, 2011 08:23 AM
In Chaina , I learnt they hang the corrupt .In India so called governance of the nation is in the hands of the looters Bureacrats and more so the politicians . We reward them by electing them again and again.Next our work force – the hands of the industry gives approximately 50% or less hours of work for which they get paid .Next our white collared employees by design they have work less than 25% of the time for which they have been paid.Efficiency and effectiveness are forgotten words.
by Dev (View MyPage) on Mar 22, 2011 06:31 AM
rediff,its good ur using foreign journos article.
get a foreigner to write their perspective of India and you will get the true picture of india in global view. yes today, i also read china is building 1 airport every 40 days for next 5 years.there is no doubt we need to follow china atleast in making our cities look better,diverting growth,new cities etc
though there is much private sector activity in india..it is overshadowed by the filth of cities, the terrible city maintenance, the lack of town planning and traffic mgmt…the govt. is lacking, no doubt about it !
(even if we had beautiful cities and well-fed ppl but didnt do well in economy, we can still feel hold our head high)
by PO (View MyPage) on Mar 21, 2011 05:08 PM
China prospered without India’s dummy democracy/casteism.
Indians are brainwashed to believe that (voting in elections == democracy) and a solution to all problems.
by om shanti (View MyPage) on Mar 21, 2011 03:48 PM | Hide replies
Chinese are insulated from the following diseases:
5.Caste based reservation
by kumar kn (View MyPage) on Mar 21, 2011 06:16 PM
7. Dynastic politics
8. Vote Bank politics
9. Absence of nationalistic spirit
10.Undeserving politicians to rule
over intellegent people.
by Gajanan (View MyPage) on Mar 21, 2011 11:45 PM
Add obsession of foreign good, foreign language, foreigner as a leader, than there is inferiority complex and we still think white skinned are better than us in almost everything they do (or don’t do)
Olympic 2008 v/s CWG 2010
by Dipesh Sanghvi (View MyPage) on Mar 21, 2011 03:32 PM | Hide replies
They had “mission” to show world how effectively and efficiently we conduct Olympic 2008.
On our side our Government and bureaucrats had an “Objective” to show world how openly and shamelessly we can do corruption in CWG 2010.
East Indian Company Policy
by sam raj (View MyPage) on Mar 21, 2011 02:47 PM
Chinese learned from East Indian Company on how to make export business worldwide effectively
We Indians learned how to destroy the marketing network framed by the East Indian Company with a fear that someone else coming to India for Business will capture the land and we lost our export oriented Business to China
Actually, India is well located in the World map for the export business across the world than China. That is the reason, China has built may ports around Indian subcontinents for their export business
by firstname.lastname@example.org (View MyPage) on Mar 21, 2011 02:38 PM | Hide replies
So, after long and useless article we learn that they WORKED HARD as a TEAM for their SMART choice.
Chinese are hardworking Indians are not
by Pram (View MyPage) on Mar 21, 2011 02:29 PM | Hide replies
Chinese do not play cricket…. That’s the reason they have time for working… But see us Indians, we have to watch IPL, World cup, T-20….. we are burdened.. Make Chinese play cricket and lets see who is in forefront…
Re: Chinese are hardworking Indians are not
by Indian (View MyPage) on Mar 21, 2011 02:34 PM
Exactly……… totally agree with you friend… in India rich is getting more rich and poor more poor…
Chinese are hardworking Indians are not
by Shake Hasina (View MyPage) on Mar 21, 2011 01:52 PM | Hide replies
Chinese are hardworking
Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Nepalese, Srilankans and Indians are not.
Have you ever seen a well dressed beggar doing push-ups on the road fpor money?
Chinese women begs like that — on their belly — on a road
in the embassies district of Beijing.
Re: Chinese are hardworking Indians are not
by Pol Bol (View MyPage) on Mar 21, 2011 02:12 PM
Dont agree. Indians work harder than anyone else when they have the incentive, whether in Gulf or in software indsutry.
The difference with China is of the leadership. Their leadership knew people were fed up of Mao style leadership. In India the richest political party has only one agenda – to perpetuate a dynsaty which has done nothing for India – only for itself. Even Moghuls cared more for people of India than this lousy dynasty.
Re: Re: Chinese are hardworking Indians are not
by shubasrikrishna (View MyPage) on Mar 21, 2011 02:15 PM
The main reason is they have lower IQ and work together as a team. Indians have higher IQ, break rules and work against each other in a team. As simple as that ….
Re: Re: Re: Chinese are hardworking Indians are not
by David Dak (View MyPage) on Mar 21, 2011 03:23 PM
Ha, ha, you e artalking about IQ. Eastern asian mainly Chinese have an IQ 110, western white have 100 and you know who has lowest IQ in the world? brownny indian. Search google and IQ to see the truth.