Editorials

Op-Ed Contributors

Chinese Press

Columnists

LETTERS

Book provides clue to institutional reform

By Zhu Yuan
Updated: 2009-08-26 07:41

The financial crisis on Wall Street once again rings the alarm bell that there is no such a thing as laissez-faire being able to give full play to economic growth without any negative effect. The repeated back and forth of regulation and deregulation by governments in the Western world, the United States in particular, reveals the intrinsic problem between markets, institutions and individuals. For such a late-comer as China in terms of market economy, more attention to the relationship between the three elements is more than necessary to preempt pitfalls that the malfunctioning of its social institutions may quite probably cause to its healthy economic growth.

The Chinese translation of Professor C. Mantzavinos' Individuals, Institutions, and Markets published early this year could be a good reading for theoretical analysis of the relationship between the three elements from the perspective of political economy although the book was first published in 2001.

Despite its cross-disciplinary theoretical analysis of how social institutions affect economic outcomes, it may remind us of our lack of enough concern for the timely reform of social institutions that may potentially turn out to be stumbling blocks to the long-term development of our economy.

As far as the issue of social institutions is concerned, it reminds me of what late Professor Yang Xiaokai once mentioned as "Curse to the Late Comer". What it means according to Yang is that it is easier for underdeveloped countries to copy technologies or development models from their developed counterparts, but it is not that easy for them to copy the latter's social institutions because of the interest groups that stand in the way.

The fact that China as a late comer was not that seriously affected as its Western counterparts by the financial crisis, and has showed better momentum of economic recovery from the slowdown seems to provide enough reason that the country does not necessarily need to copy both the political system and social institutions of its developed counterparts.

Some of the country's economists do disagree with the theory of "Curse to the Late Comer" and some scholars even strongly believe that it is China's turn to overtake its developed Western counterparts as the major engine of world economic growth and social progress. That is, of course, what every Chinese hopes.

Yet, good wishes and slogan shouting with great enthusiasm is one thing; objectively looking at the problems we face in reality and making sensible analysis of the possible stumbling blocks in the way of our development is another. It is stupid to replace the latter with the former. Our late leaders made that sort of mistake in the middle of last century and China paid a dear price for it.

Even if our economists or experts have enough reason to deny the possibility of copying the social institutions of developed countries, there is no reason for them to turn a blind eye and deaf ear to the prominent problems that are seriously affecting the healthy development of our own economy. Among others, the increasingly serious environmental pollution, the prevalent corruption among government officials and the rapidly widening income disparity between the haves and have-nots have been touching off social unrest and posing a threat to social stability. Blind optimism is as bad as unreasonable pessimism in this regard.

In whatever direction we reform our social institutions, it is for sure helpful to have a thorough understanding of how social institutions regulate individual behavior and how they interact with markets. To give enough thought to the issue without any prejudice is something we urgently need.

That may be where the significance of the publication of the Chinese translation of C. Mantzavinos' book lies.

(China Daily 08/26/2009 page8)