登錄×
電子郵件/用戶名
密碼
記住我

為您推薦

亞洲基礎設施投資銀行

Leader_AIIB needs transparency as well as just speed
FT社評:亞投行應兼顧效率與透明

亞投行或許可以在僵化的世界銀行之外提供一個受歡迎的選擇。如果亞投行能夠做到將高放貸標準與快捷放貸結合起來,它將成為其他機構改革的榜樣。

It is fair to say that global opinion was somewhat divided when China announced it was creating a brand new regional development bank in Asia.

當中國宣布將在亞洲發起設立一家全新的地區開發銀行時,實話說,當時的全球輿論對此是有分歧的。

For the gloom-mongers, many of whom reside in the US administration and Congress, the creation of the new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank represents a power-grab by Beijing. It is, US officials mutter, the economic counterpart to the Chinese navy throwing its weight around in the South China Sea, and they are baffled that other western governments, led by the UK, have decided to bolster Beijing』s influence by joining it.

在危言聳聽的悲觀論者——其中許多來自美國政府和國會——看來,創立亞洲基礎設施投資銀行(AIIB,簡稱亞投行)是北京方面攫取權力之舉。美國官員抱怨,亞投行相當於經濟領域的中國海軍——這支海軍正在南中國海耀武揚威。以英國為首的其他西方國家政府決定加入亞投行、使北京影響力得到提升的舉動也讓這些官員感到困惑。

For optimistic souls, the AIIB represents a move towards transparency by China, which has long lent out its vast foreign exchange reserves for development projects unilaterally and without transparency. With a wide membership, including 57 founding governments, the institution may also provide a welcome alternative to the sclerotic and US-dominated World Bank.

樂觀派則認為,亞投行代表著中國向公開透明邁進了一步。長期以來,中國一直在將其龐大的外匯儲備資金貸給一些開發項目,這類單邊貸款活動缺乏透明度。此外,成員廣泛、包括57個創始國政府的亞投行,或許可以在美國主導的、僵化的世界銀行(Word Bank)之外提供一個受歡迎的選擇。

Remarks in an interview with the Financial Times from the AIIB』s new head, Jin Liqun, will give some ammunition to both sides.

亞投行候任行長金立群在接受英國《金融時報》採訪時發表的言論,可以為雙方的觀點都提供一些支持。

Perhaps worryingly, Mr Jin played down the impact of European influence on the institution』s governance, saying that by the time the UK and other developed economy governments had decided to join, the bank』s articles of agreement had more or less been written. More optimistically, he also pledged that the bank』s lending would adhere to tough environmental and social standards, while being faster and more nimble than the World Bank.

金立群淡化了歐洲國家對亞投行治理的影響,稱在英國及其他發達國家政府決定加入之時,亞投行的協議條款已基本擬定,這種說法或許令人擔憂。較為可喜的是,他也承諾亞投行的放貸活動將遵守嚴格的環境和社會標準,並且將比世行更快捷、更靈活。

Other governments should not remain on the AIIB』s board if they are being used as a figleaf to cover lending made to further Chinese interests. Streamlining bureaucracy is not the same as eliminating transparency. Shrill and one-sided though their views sometimes are, campaigners in non-governmental organisations in both rich and emerging countries have helped to keep development institutions honest by scrutinising their activities. If China wants legitimacy for its lending by inviting in other countries, it should accept the norms of transparency that they bring with them.

對其他各國政府而言,如果他們被當作遮羞布加以利用,以遮掩旨在推進中國利益的貸款活動,那麼他們應該不會繼續留在亞投行理事會。簡化官僚做派並不等於消滅透明度。非政府組織的活動人士——不論在富裕國家還是新興國家——儘管有時觀點尖銳而片面,但他們通過監督發展機構的活動,能夠促使這類機構保持誠實公正的作風。如果中國希望通過邀請其他國家加入而使其貸款活動具有合法性,就應接受這些國家帶來的透明度標準。

Yet if the AIIB can manage to combine high lending standards with moving money quickly out of the door, it will serve as a useful model for how other organisations, notably the World Bank, might reform.

然而,如果亞投行能夠做到將高放貸標準與快捷放貸結合起來,它將成為其他機構(尤其是世行)進行改革時的有益榜樣。

Although the World Bank has established a reputation as a centre of expertise over the decades, its lending operations have gathered an accretion of bureaucracy. One weakness in particular has correctly been identified by Mr Jin as a mistake to avoid in the AIIB — a resident executive board that meets frequently, sometimes several times a week, and micromanages the bank』s activities. The need to push so many decisions through a narrow gap snarled with red tape has often prevented the World Bank from reacting quickly to challenges. More freedom for management, with the board』s role limited to setting strategy and exercising an oversight function, should be able to combine accountability with efficiency.

雖然世行幾十年來樹立起了作為專家意見中心的聲譽,其放貸活動卻也滋生了嚴重的官僚作風。金立群準確無誤地指出了世行的一處弊端,他認為這是亞投行要避免的:常設的執行理事會頻繁開會,有時一周開好幾次,並且事無巨細地管理該行的活動。推動眾多決策通過被繁文縟節包圍的狹窄通道的需要,經常阻礙世行對各種挑戰做出快速反應。給管理層更多自由,將理事會的角色限定於制定戰略和行使監督職能,應該有助於打造一個責任明確、有效率的機構。

For the moment, the AIIB is more of a pilot project rather than a full-blown alternative to the World Bank. Since the new institution will take several years to ramp up its lending capacity, it is initially likely to provide a rival model of governance rather than offering a greater volume of disbursement.

目前來看,亞投行更像是一項試點工程,而非羽翼豐滿可替代世行的機構。由於這家新機構將需要若干年時間來提高其放貸能力,最初它可能帶來的只是一種競爭性的新治理模式,而非數量更大的貸款。

That by itself, however, could serve a valuable purpose. The AIIB has made some encouraging noises early on with its commitments to combining lending speed with high standards. Its shareholder governments have the chance to set a new standard and a good example.

不過,這本身就可以服務於一個有價值的目的。亞投行通過承諾將放貸速度與高標準結合起來,在初始階段就發出了令人鼓舞的訊息。其股東國政府有機會去樹立新標準和好榜樣。

譯者/陳隆祥

版權聲明:本文版權歸FT中文網所有,未經允許任何單位或個人不得轉載,複製或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵權必究。
設置字號×
最小
較小
默認
較大
最大
分享×