【英语财经】不应苛责中国经济政策 China economic policy needs more credit than blame

The visit to the US later this month by China’s President Xi Jinping comes at a politically sensitive time, with volatility in China’s markets — widely attributed to the effect of policy decisions — rippling globally. In our view, however, China deserves more credit than blame for its recent actions.

As China attempts to make the transition to a more open economy, two things are virtually inevitable: market volatility and difficult policy decisions, many of which need to be taken in the heat of the moment.

A case in point is the government intervention that followed the initial correction in the A shares market in July. This was widely interpreted outside China as a panicky reaction. But China’s share market is largely retail driven, and the need to maintain social harmony is of paramount importance to a single-party state. In light of this, the government’s response makes sense.

But what do we make of China’s decision to devalue its currency last month, just weeks before Xi was due to make his first official visit to the US? The move was widely characterised as an attempt by China to shore up its sputtering export performance.

Given that US politicians have for years accused China of keeping the renminbi artificially low, and that bilateral trade will be a key talking point when Xi meets President Barack Obama, surely the timing of the move was, at the very least, politically inept?

We don’t think so. In our view, the currency adjustment provides another example of how easy it is to misinterpret China’s policy actions.

Devaluation? Or a Step in the Right Direction?

Describing the move as a competitive devaluation ignores a number of facts — such as that China’s exports, while challenged, have largely performed better than those of its regional competitors. For this reason alone, it’s hard to see why a competitive devaluation would be necessary.

Also, China’s trade balance is positive (imports are falling faster than exports) and the country has an embarrassingly large trade surplus. Devaluation would simply exacerbate these issues, and do so at precisely the wrong political moment.

Far more plausible, from our point of view, is the explanation by the People’s Bank of China that the adjustment was intended to close an unusually large gap between the currency fix and the spot price. This made sense given that the central bank lowered the fix by just 1.9 per cent and stepped into the market to support the currency when it came under pressure as the devaluation story took hold.

It also made sense as a reflection of government policy, which is to modernize and diversify the economy using private capital from inside and outside the country. To do this, China needs a more market-oriented currency — hence the move to align the fix more closely with the spot price.

Good News, Mr. President

Our research suggests that China is in fact less focused on its currency than on the need to deliver liquidity into the right parts of the domestic economy so that consumption becomes more of a growth driver alongside the traditional engines of exports and investment.

Xi can tell Obama some good news in this respect: recent data show a convergence in fixed-asset investment and retail sales trends, with the former falling and the latter holding steady. While the figures are not particularly exciting in themselves, they suggest that China’s economic rebalancing is under way.

And that will be a welcome development for world trade, as it suggests that China’s consumers — the most affluent of whom are already making their mark in the purchase of international travel and foreign luxury goods — will continue their ascendancy.

Hayden Briscoe is director of Asia-Pacific fixed income at Alliance Bernstein

本月晚些时候中国国家主席习近平访美正值一个政治敏感时期，中国的市场波动——被普遍认为是政策决定所致——在全球引起波澜。然而，在我们看来，在其最近的举动中，中国更值得肯定而不是责怪。

随着中国尝试向更开放的经济体转变，有两件事几乎是不可避免的：市场波动和艰难的政策决定。其中很多政策决定必须在风口浪尖时作出。

一个例子是7月A股市场首次出现调整后中国政府做出的干预。这在海外被普遍解读为一次惊慌失措的反应。但是，中国市场主要由散户驱动，维护社会和谐的需要对一党制国家是最为重要的。因此，中国政府的反应是情理之中的。



但是，我们如何理解上个月——就在习近平将对美国进行首次正式访问的前几周——中国让人民币贬值的决定呢？此举被广泛定性为中国为提振其日益低迷的出口表现进行的一次尝试。

鉴于美国政界人士多年来一直指责中国人为地压低人民币汇率、且双边贸易将成为习近平与美国总统奥巴马(Barack Obama)会晤的一个关键话题，人民币此次贬值的时机从政治上来说至少是不恰当的？

我们不这样认为。在我们看来，人民币汇率调整提供了另外一个例子，证明人们多么容易误读中国的政策措施。

贬值？还是迈向正确方向的一步？

将此举形容为竞争性贬值的说法忽略了很多事实——比如尽管正面临挑战，但中国的出口表现基本上强于其地区竞争对手。单就这个原因，很难看出中国有何必要进行竞争性贬值。

另外，中国贸易平衡为正值（进口的下滑速度大于出口），而且中国还有令人尴尬的巨大贸易顺差。人民币贬值只会加剧这些问题，而且从政治上讲还是在错误的时刻这么做。

在我们看来，中国央行的解释更加说得通，即此轮调整旨在缩小人民币汇率中间价和现货价格之间异常巨大的差距。考虑到中国央行仅将汇率中间价压低了1.9%，又在贬值说盛行、人民币承压时进入市场支撑汇率，这就说得通了。

认为此举体现了政府的政策——利用境内外的私人资本实现经济的现代化和多样化——也合情合理。要实现这个目标，中国需要一个更加侧重于市场导向型的汇率制度——因此采取了拉近汇率中间价和现货价格的举动。

好消息，总统先生

我们的研究表明，实际上中国较少关注人民币汇率，而更关注向国内经济中正确的领域释放流动性，以使消费发挥更大作用，与出口和投资两个传统引擎共同拉动经济增长。

在这方面，习近平可以向奥巴马传达一些好消息：最近数据表明，固定资产投资和零售销售出现了趋同现象——前者不断下滑而后者保持稳定。尽管数据本身并不特别令人振奋，但它们表明中国经济再平衡正在进行中。

而这对世界贸易来说将是一个可喜的发展，因为这意味着中国消费者——其中最为富裕的人已经在出国旅游和购买外国奢侈品方面留下了自己的印记——将继续保持上升势头。

本文作者为联博公司(Alliance Bernstein)亚太固定收益部门主管

译者/马柯斯