Industrial policy debate should avoid Guan Gong and Qin Qiong debate – financial Sohu k9084

Industrial policy debate: should avoid "Guan Gong and Qin Qiong" debate – Sohu finance     Zhang Weiying and Yifu Lin two economists recently on the "industrial policy" is a different point of view, some media called for China fate debate, caused widespread concern in economic circles. But in my opinion, the two scholars talk, is actually a different problem, if we put together the theory, there will only be "Guan Gong and Qin Qiong" of the situation, to solve the problems of no benefit. The viewpoint of Professor Zhang Weiying, the industry in the development of "cutting-edge innovation", also is the innovation without any precedent bear Pete and knight in "pure abstract theory". This innovation will undoubtedly have an irreplaceable important role, and it is difficult to foresee, unplanned. But in real life, this kind of innovation can not cover all the innovation activities, but can not cover all the activities of economic and industrial development. In many areas, although the final results of innovation may not be predictable, but in a direction to invest in R & D theory can achieve effective results, but in many cases can be expected. Most of the R & D activities in reality are not completely free exploration, but can be expected and planned to a certain extent. Therefore, logically, can not rule out the effectiveness of government policies to support the development of specific areas of research results. In fact, the United States of new energy industry, information industry, Bio Industry and aerospace industry, have been the government’s policy support. Although the Americans themselves rarely talk about industrial policy, but as long as we look at the state of the Union and the budget report of the president of the United States, we can not deny the United States the actual existence of industrial policy. Professor Yifu Lin’s view on the effectiveness of developing countries in the process of catching up with the developed countries in the use of industrial policy. In this sense, the industrial policy, a lot of time and innovation has nothing to do with learning. That is to say, because of the development of modern market economy there are some universal rules, especially the existence of leading industry escalation phenomenon to the high added value from low added value, developing country according to the law, conscious use of government policies to promote industrial upgrading, and further enhance the level of income faster. The core content of this process is not Zhang Weiying’s innovation, but learning and transplantation. For developing countries, learning and transplanting is the threshold and cost, not all countries can because of the low level of wages and international investment and trade will complete this process. From the perspective of historical experience, only a part of the "self motivated", the government is relatively strong ability of the country, through the implementation of public policy to achieve this process faster. Since the Second World War, the East Asian economies have been prominent in developing countries, and the government is actively using industrial policy is inseparable. This is what Yifu Lin calls "the government and the economic development.". To return to China’s reality, which one is true for China? The author believes that in China, the two views have their respective areas of application. It is not half hearted, but because of the large scale and complex Chinese economic structure and.相关的主题文章: