【英语财经】达沃斯：世界经济处于十字路口 Global economy hangs in delicate balance

The world economy is precariously balanced between continued recovery and a third leg of the global financial crisis, according to leading economists attending the World Economic Forum in Davos.

The two sharply-contrasting outcomes highlight the uncertainties surrounding the global outlook in 2016 amid fears of a slowdown in China, plunging commodity prices and high levels of corporate US dollar denominated debt in emerging economies.

Economists said the instability threatened to exacerbate the vulnerability of households and companies, which were already responding to disruptive technological changes.

The dilemma facing economists was demonstrated in the International Monetary Fund’s latest update to its World Economic Outlook.

While its central forecast is relatively optimistic, with growth expected to pick up modestly in 2016 and 2017, it also reduced its growth forecasts and acknowledged severe downside risks.

Maurice Obstfeld, IMF chief economist, said financial markets, rocked by volatility since the beginning of the year, were “overreacting” but also acknowledged “there was a difficult adjustment ahead in emerging markets”.

Some of the big name economists in the Swiss Alps this week are notably pessimistic, thinking this adjustment will be more difficult than the IMF central forecast expects.

Noting “the third leg of the debt supercycle does seem to be upon us”, Professor Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard University said: “Anyone who is still telling the ‘This Time is Different’ story for China has their head in the sand.”

Richard Baldwin, professor of international economics at the Graduate Institute, Geneva said: “There are a number of vulnerabilities that individually would suggest problems and slow downs, not a crisis with a capital ‘C’. But these vulnerabilities could merge into a new Crisis”.

According to Nobel laureate professor Michael Spence of the Stern School of Business, New York University: “It is a fragile and deteriorating situation globally with little in the way of effective counter measures.”

Professor Bob Shiller of Yale University, also a Nobel laureate, warned that the recent falls in financial markets had special significance.

“There is more than the usual salience to this event and?.?.?.?a substantial risk of further such drops,” he said.

While recognising the possibility of something worse, an equal-sized group of economists take comfort from the still-healthy rate of Chinese growth. Expecting a further slowdown in the Chinese rate of expansion, Paul Sheard, chief economist of Standard & Poor’s, the rating agency, said an outcome of 6.3 per cent Chinese growth this year would still be positive.

“Let’s not get carried away here,” Mr Sheard said. “6.3 per cent real GDP growth this year is the equivalent of about 14 per cent growth in 2009, in terms of the size of the increment to global GDP.”

Another Nobel laureate, Professor Christopher Pissarides of the London School of Economics, said the fact that US interest rate rises had been telegraphed for so long should help.

Meanwhile, China “is still growing reasonably well and the government seems prepared to help the readjustment to the slower growth rate”.

Professor Ian Golding of Oxford university, noted another reason not to expect a worldwide slide back into recession.

“The world economy is now much more resilient than was the case in past decades, due to the number of growth engines. India is picking up, as China slows, and both continue to grow at rates which are unprecedented in the advanced economies,” he said.

If the big picture for the global economy is teetering between divergent outcomes, households and companies are also struggling with the possibility of even faster technological change.

Professor Ned Phelps of Columbia University and another Nobel Prize winner, said: “Fears that new technologies may further upset advanced economics seem not yet to threaten business confidence, but they are a cause for worry.”

正在达沃斯出席世界经济论坛(World Economic Forum)的一些顶尖经济学家表示，世界经济处于难以预料的十字路口，既有可能持续复苏，也有可能遭遇全球金融危机的第三阶段。

这两种反差鲜明的展望突显了围绕2016年全球经济前景的不确定性，其背景是人们担心中国经济增长放缓，大宗商品价格暴跌，以及新兴经济体企业的美元债务负担过重。

经济学家们表示，这种不稳定可能加剧已经在应对颠覆性技术变革的家庭和企业的脆弱性。

经济学家面临的这种两难困境，在国际货币基金组织(IMF)最新版的《世界经济展望》(World Economic Outlook)中表露无遗。

尽管其核心预测相对乐观（预计2016年和2017年经济增长率将小幅回升），但《展望》也下调了经济增长预测，并承认存在严重的下行风险。

IMF首席经济学家莫里斯?奥布斯特菲尔德(Maurice Obstfeld)表示，自年初以来受到波动性冲击的金融市场有点“反应过度”，但他承认“新兴市场接下来将面临一段艰难的调整”。

本周汇聚瑞士阿尔卑斯山的一些大牌经济学家悲观得令人瞩目，他们认为，本次调整的难度将大于IMF核心预测的预期。

哈佛大学(Harvard University)教授肯尼思?罗格夫(Kenneth Rogoff)指出，“债务超级周期的第三阶段似乎已经降临”。他说：“任何人如果还在讲对中国来说‘这次不同’的故事，肯定是把他们的头埋在沙子里。”

日内瓦国际关系及发展研究生院(Graduate Institute, Geneva)国际经济学教授理查德?鲍德温(Richard Baldwin)表示：“当前有很多脆弱性，个别而言它们暗示着问题和放缓，而不是大写的‘危机’。但这些脆弱性可能聚在一起，形成一场新的危机。”

诺贝尔经济学奖得主、纽约大学斯特恩商学院(Stern School of Business)教授迈克尔?斯宾塞(Michael Spence)表示：“当前全球形势脆弱且日益恶化，却没有什么有效的应对措施。”

同为诺贝尔经济学奖得主的耶鲁大学(Yale University)教授鲍勃?席勒(Bob Shiller)警告说，金融市场近期的下跌具有特别的重大意义。

“这一事件……以及进一步下滑的巨大风险，具有异乎寻常的显著性，”他表示。

与此同时，人数相仿的另一群经济学家尽管承认形势有可能变得更糟，但他们对中国保持健康的经济增速感到欣慰。评级机构标准普尔(Standard & Poor’s)的首席经济学家保罗?谢尔德(Paul Sheard)预期中国经济扩张速度将进一步放缓，但表示，如果今年中国实现6.3%的增长，那仍将是积极的。

“我们不要忘记一件事，”谢尔德表示。“就对全球GDP的增加而言，中国今年6.3%的实际GDP增长相当于2009年大约14%的增长。”

另一位诺贝尔经济学奖得主、伦敦政治经济学院(London School of Economics)教授克里斯托弗?皮萨里德斯(Christopher Pissarides)表示，美国很早就预报加息这一点应该有所帮助。

与此同时，中国“仍然保持不错的增长，而且政府似乎准备在向较慢增速的调整中提供帮助”。

牛津大学(Oxford university)教授伊恩?戈尔丁(Ian Golding)指出了不应预期全球重新陷入衰退的另一个理由。

“相比过去几十年期间的情况，世界经济如今具有高得多的韧性，原因在于增长引擎的数量。就在中国放缓的同时，印度正在加快增长，且两国的增速都仍是发达经济体闻所未闻的，”他说。

如果说全球经济整体面临截然不同的前景，那么家庭和企业也在艰难应对技术变革进一步加快的可能性。

诺贝尔奖得主、哥伦比亚大学(Columbia University)教授内德?菲尔普斯(Ned Phelps)表示：“有关新技术可能进一步打乱发达经济体的忧虑似乎还没有影响商业信心，但这是一件令人担心的事情。”

译者/和风