This
focus on the physical barriers to productivitiy increase and the
policy-induced constraints to diversification because of the emphasis on
grain production is not just overstated. It also tends to underplay some
of the consequences of agricultural reform for welfare and growth. Thus,
according to some observers the phenomenon of "floating" migrant
workers is in large measure the result of a loss of the institutional
ability to mobilize and utilize labour resources, which was
characteristics of the commune system of production. An example of such
utilization was the pooling of off-season labour resources in building
rural infrastructure. The collapse of the latter not only affected
employment adversely, it also resulted in the neglect of the maintenance
and strengthening of communal infrastructural facilities, with adverse
consequences for productivity. But a perspective which has as its prior
the view that Chinese reform was positive but inadequate inevitably
ignores such questions.
Consider
also the puzzle as to why rural unemployment has increased despite the
success of the TVEs. The
growth of such enterprises in the rural as opposed to the urban areas
was partly because of the opportunity for sustaining ancillary activity
and contract work at extremely low labour costs that excess labour
resources in rural areas provided. Temporarily, at least, the
government's decision to encourage TVEs as a part of the process of
"growing out of the plan" worked because it facilitated the rural
outsourcing of such activities, to sustain low cost production,
including for export markets. As a result, the new system appeared to be
a better way of absorbing rural surplus labour. However, evidence to the
contrary is growing. The demand for such outsourcing was inadequate to
absorb the growing rural labour surplus in full. Further, such
employment tended to be unevenly distributed. Such industries have
developed mostly in coastal provinces and are reportedly much less
visible in the interior provinces, especially in the west of the
country. More recently, there are signs of stagnation and decline in the
TVE sector, with employment in rural enterprises falling by close to 2.5
million since 1996.
Glossing over all this the OECD study asserts that worseninf TVE
performance is due to fundamental structureal problems. These include
financial problems, operating inefficiencies, loss f competitiveness due
to distance from infrastructure. Hence, "even under optimistic
assumptions about how much their performance can be improved, REs (rural
enterprises) are unlikely to be able to take up more than a fraction of
the rural workers who will need to find jobs outside the agricultural
sector."
What
then is the answer? Urban industry does not offer much of an
alternative. The OECD's study points out that: "As in agriculture,
the dynamism to industry imparted by structural shifts seems to be
weakening. Industry financial performance has deteriorated sharply since
the early 1990s. Profits fell to nearly zero in 1998, with more than
one-third of enterprises making losses, and despite noticeable
improvement during 1999-2001, financial performance remains weak in many
sectors. Growth in industry employment and capital spending has declined
markedly. The deterioration has been pervasive and not simply confined
to SOEs. The performance of collective enterprises has worsened nearly
as much as that of SOEs; and the SME sector generally is in particularly
dire straits."
With
foreign investment flows into China already far in excess of other
developing countries, and with a predominant share coming from Hong
Kong, Taiwan and other Asian countries with ethnic Chinese populations,
it is unlikely that this sector can even sustain its growth, let along
help employ the unemployed. In the event, we are likely to see a
worsening of unemployment, because even the high growth associated with
the unusual combination of more than two decades of rapid expansion
accompanied by persisting and even growing unemployment in the Chinese
economy is no more a reality.
Given all this it should be obvious that this is hardly the point in time
when Chinese producers should be subjected to increasing competition
from imports and State-owned enterprises should be restructured through
downsizing or outright closure. But these are inevitable consequences of
China's WTO accession commitments, rendering the argument that this
wide-ranging commitment is an appropriate deepening of reform
questionable. But the study advances that argument by attributing poor
industry performance to inefficiency resulting from wrong investment
decisions and protection and cost ineffectiveness because of social
burdens imposed on them. Even if this were true, reform in a period when
international competition is expected to increase would only result in
closure. And given the dependence of many local industries on the SOEs,
the process is likely to be cumulative.
Yet, in the OECD's view, more reform is the answer. "Trade and
investment liberalisation should help to improve some of the mechanisms
needed to accomplish the necessary restructuring, by increasing
competition, expanding opportunities for alliances between foreign and
domestic firms, and spurring government officials to take measures to
improve the business environment. However, key obstacles that now exist
to improvement in industry performance, such as continued government
interference in enterprise management, poor financial discipline, and
restrictions on exit and other modalities for re-deploying resources,
need to be addressed if the potential benefits of trade and investment
liberalisation are to be realised."
The difficulty is that the OECD's economists are not even satisfied
with the extent of reform implied by WTO commitments. The study argues:
"In China's present situation, the outcomes of particular reforms depend
increasingly on the interaction among measures taken by the economy's
key actors – government, enterprises, workers, and the financial
system – acting in markets whose functioning is shaped by key
framework conditions such as competition, property rights, and corporate
governance. Rather than emphasising particular sectors, reforms now need
to focus more on economy-wide policies to promote more efficient
allocation of resources and to bolster the effectiveness of markets."
Two areas into which the extension of reform is emphasized is the
financial sector and macroeconomic policy. Lamenting that the financial
sector is still dominantly state-owned, the report argues that credit is
inefficiently allocated, with state owned enterprises obtaining the bulk
of funding, to ensure that they operate with soft budget constraints.
This is indeed true since the role of credit in the Chinese system,
hitherto, was a means to realize targeted production as per plan. If in
the name of bank restructuring SOEs are to be now starved of funds,
leading to the collapse of such enterprises, the banks themselves would
not be able to survive unless they are recapitalised by the State. As
the study itself notes: "In a proximate sense, the ongoing problems of
financial institutions reflect the poor condition of their enterprise
customers. A severe vicious circle has developed. Poor enterprise
performance contributes to bank non-performing loans and lowers bank
profits by eliminating much of their core market."
Banks after all cannot restore the health of real economy enterprises.
That has to be the result of appropriate corporate restructuring and
counter cyclical macroeconomic policies. But with the customs duty
reductions and the tax rationalisation associated with reform having
reduced the revenues of the State substantially, the manoeuvrability of
the State is already substantially circumscribed. Though "official
figures suggest that China's fiscal position is healthy and that there
is ample scope for fiscal expansion," this picture is misleading
because it is widely acknowledged that the government will need to take
on debt obligations not yet explicitly recognised. The main obligation,
the funds needed to restore solvency to financial system, could more
than double the government
debt ratio initially."
Given these factors the challenge in China is to restore the room for
manoeuver of the state so that it can restore some dynamism to the
system. This would require reducing rather than increasing China's
integration into the world system. But though its own analysis points in
that direction, the OECD given the predilections of its member
governments to obtaining a foothold in the large, even if stagnating,
Chinese market, is forced to argue to the contrary.