The Tsinghua People’s Bank of China School of Finance Chief Economists Forum was successfully held on May 14, 2022. The theme of the forum was “Turbulent 2022—Global & China Economy and Policy Outlook.” It entailed in-depth discussions centered on four major roundtable topics. Ju Jiandong, Unigroup Chair Professor of Finance, Tsinghua University People’s Bank of China School of Finance, and director of the Center for International Finance and Economics Research (CIFER) at the Tsinghua National Institute for Financial Research, attended the third roundtable discussion “Innovation, Finance, and S&T Competition” and gave a talk.
5月14日,2022清华五道口首席经济学家论坛成功举办。本届论坛以“动荡中的2022——全球与中国经济及政策展望”为主题,围绕四大圆桌议题展开深入讨论。清华大学五道口金融学院紫光金融学讲席教授、清华大学国家金融研究院国际金融与经济研究中心(CIFER)主任鞠建东出席圆桌讨论三“创新、金融与科技竞争”并发表演讲。
Ju Jiandong believes that upgrading the industrial structure necessitates the formation of an “innovation-scale” virtuous cycle. It is only by overcoming international technology constraints and monopolies, ensuring a certain amount of market share for domestic technologies, and cultivating and developing the competitiveness of domestic technologies that we can realize Chinese technological innovation and industrial upgrading. In view of this, Ju Jiandong proposed a policy of “countering international technology containment” (反国际技术遏制政策), ensuring a 30% domestic market share for Chinese technology, so as to provide the necessary market demand for Chinese technology and pave the way to Chinese technological upgrades. Ju Jiandong suggested that a two trillion RMB per year economic stimulus plan be employed over the next 10 years to promote such a full production chain policy of “countering international technology containment.” Through precise monetary injections, this would build an independent and self-reliant high-technology industrial system in an open economic environment, thus promoting Chinese technological upgrades and realizing [the aim that] “the economy must be kept stable and development must be safe.” Ju Jiandong pointed out that this stimulus plan could increase China’s GDP growth rate by 1%.
鞠建东认为,产业结构升级需要形成“创新-规模”的良性循环。只有打破国际技术的遏制与垄断,确保本土技术一定的市场份额,培育和发展本土技术的竞争力,才能实现中国的技术创新、产业升级。对此,鞠建东提出“反国际技术遏制”政策,确保中国技术的国内市场占有率达到30%,为中国技术提供必要的市场需求,铺设中国技术升级的路径。鞠建东建议,今后10年,通过每年2万亿人民币的经济刺激计划,来推动这种全产业链的“反国际技术遏制”政策。通过精准的货币投放,在开放经济环境中建设自立自强的高科技产业体系,推动中国技术的升级,实现“经济要稳住、发展要安全”。鞠建东指出,这项刺激计划可以增加我国1%的GDP增长率。
The following is a partial and accurate record of Ju Jiandong’s talk:
以下为鞠建东发言部分实录:
Everyone taking part in this roundtable discussion is an expert, and we’re all experts at the cutting edge who have long studied our country’s S&T competition. We just mentioned how, given Chinese-U.S. S&T competition, international technology constraints on industrial upgrading can be overcome. We discussed chips. Chips are a typical, gradually changing technology. In the case of the transition from 10 nanometers to 7 nanometers, technological innovations were achieved through update iterations of the old technology and a gradual accumulation. If our industrial structure cannot be upgraded, then there will be no way to promote economic growth.
参与圆桌讨论的都是专家,而且都是长期研究我们国家的科技竞争的前沿专家。刚才提到了中美科技竞争如何打破国际技术遏制实现产业升级。谈到了芯片,芯片是一种典型的渐变型技术,从10纳米、到7纳米——通过对旧技术的更新迭代并且逐渐积累以实现技术创新。如果我们产业结构无法升级,则无法推动经济增长。
How is the industrial structure to be upgraded? Thinking about it from an intellectual point of view, we find that, on the theoretical level, there is an “innovation-scale” cycle, wherein once R&D inputs have led to technological progress, technological progress wins a certain market share, and, with market share, there is finally profit; and only with profit is it possible to provide feedback on the R&D inputs. If this kind of virtuous cycle encounters an international technology constraint, such as a chip constraint, which prevents our industries from upgrading, the cycle will come to a halt.
产业结构升级怎么做?谈谈书生之见,从理论上来讲有一个“创新-规模”的循环,研发投入有了技术进步,技术进步占领一定的市场份额,有市场份额才有利润,有利润才能反馈给研发投入。这样一个良性循环如果遇到国际的技术遏制,比如芯片上的遏制,使我们的产业无法升级,循环也就走不下去。
Let us suppose that an intermediate link in our “innovation-scale” becomes stuck. For example, our market share is cut off and it becomes impossible to achieve technological progress and industrial upgrading. Whether it’s the United States’ technological containment of Japan in the 1980s or the containment of China in China-U.S. trade disputes, we find that the United States’ containment policy has two characteristics: first, it hits leading enterprises that dare, and are able, to challenge a U.S. technological monopoly, such as Huawei; second, it maintains U.S. monopolies in world (including China) core technology markets and blocks the paths to Chinese technological upgrades.
假如我们的“创新-规模”有一个中间环节被卡了,比如说我们的市场份额被打断,就无法实现技术进步,产业升级。无论是80年代美国对日本的技术遏制,还是中美贸易争端中对中国的遏制,都可以发现美国的遏制政策有两个特点:第一,打击敢于能够挑战美国技术垄断的领军企业,比如说华为;第二,在核心技术的世界(包括中国)市场上保持美国垄断,卡断中国技术的升级路径。
We’ve said that our industries need upgrading. Of all our chips, the best is Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation’s 14-nanometer. Can they rise to the next levels by progressing to 10 nanometers? 7 nanometers? I’m afraid they can’t because there’s no market. China’s chip market is dominated by the United States. So long as you don’t challenge U.S. technological hegemony, China’s mobile phone enterprises can import U.S. chips. So the upgrading path forward for China’s high-end chips is cut off because all these mobile phone enterprises in the middle use U.S. chips.
我们说我们产业需要升级,我们芯片里面做的最好的是中芯国际的14纳米,他们能够爬格子爬到10纳米、7纳米向上升级吗?恐怕不能,因为没有市场,中国的芯片市场被美国占了,只要你不挑战美国的技术霸权,中国的手机企业就可以进口美国芯片,所以中国高端芯片向前升级这个路是断的,因为中间这些手机企业都用的是美国的芯片。
So I’ll pose this question: in the case of a civilian product, if your technology is relatively backwards such that even the Chinese domestic market won’t buy it—there’s no domestic market—how do you upgrade the technology? The United States is, on the one hand, hitting out at the lead enterprises while, on the other hand, it is realizing U.S. monopolies in technology markets. These two core tricks break our industrial upgrading cycle.
所以我提出这样一个问题,民用产品如果你的技术比较落后,即使中国国内市场也不会买,没有国内的市场,技术怎么升级?美国一方面打击头部企业,另一方面在技术市场上实现美国垄断,这样两个核心手段使得我们的产业升级循环是断的。
How do you break out of the containment by international giants? I’d like to offer an opinion, which you are all welcome to criticize and correct. If we don’t break international technology’s monopoly over the Chinese market to make China’s technological upgrading possible, China’s technological innovations and industrial upgrading will be impossible to achieve. As for breaking the international technology monopoly, whatever measures are taken, it will definitely be necessary to cultivate domestic technological competitiveness, and domestic technological competitiveness definitely requires ensuring a certain market share—ensuring that the market share of foreign core technologies does not exceed 70%. Chinese technology must have at least a 30% share of the Chinese market. I call this the “policy to counter international technology containment.”
怎样打破国际巨头的遏制?我想提一个看法,供大家批评指正。为了使得中国的技术升级能够实现,如果不打破国际技术对中国市场的垄断,中国的技术创新、产业升级是无法实现的。对于打破国际技术垄断,无论是什么措施,一定要培养本土技术的竞争力,而本土技术竞争力一定要确保一定市场份额,要确保外国的核心技术在中国市场份额不超过70%,中国的技术至少要占有中国市场的30%,我称之为“反国际技术遏制政策”。
I’ll give an example. Let’s say we have a brand called Little Fruit Mobile. To ensure that 30% of the chip market downstream is a domestic technology market, it is necessary to start from downstream mobile phones. If, in keeping with the requirement, 30% of the Little Fruit Mobile phones use Chinese chips, then there’s no problem. If less than 30% of the Little Fruit Mobile phones use Chinese chips as required, then there will have to be a punitive tax.
我举个例子,比如我们有个品牌叫小果手机,为了在下游保证芯片市场的30%是国产技术市场,所以需要从下游的手机开始,如果这个小果手机按照规定有30%的小果手机是使用中国芯片的那就没问题,如果没有按规定的30%的小果手机使用中国芯片,就需要有惩罚性的税。
To give an example, if products using Chinese chips are less than 30%, such that the domestic chip use rate is greater than 20%, but less than 30%, a 20% punitive tax would be collected; if greater than 10%, but less than 20%, then a 50% tax would be collected; if less than 10%, then the tax would be 100%; if less than 5%, the tax would be 400%. For example, a mobile phone like Apple’s that does not use any Chinese chips would be subject to a four hundred percent tax. If they wanted to sell phones in the Chinese market, they would have to guarantee that 30% of their products were using Chinese chips. But this causes a problem. The Little Fruit phones using imported chips would be higher quality and more expensive, while the quality of phones using Chinese chips would be relatively poor, in which case one could consider lowering the price down to two thousand, for example—even lowering it below cost. In this situation, the state would have to provide a subsidy to ensure a 10% profit rate for manufacturers of phones using Chinese chips.
我举个例子,如果使用中国芯片的产品不足30%,国产芯片使用率大于20%、但小于30%,则收取20%的惩罚性税;大于10%、小于20%,则收取50%的税;低于10%,则收取100%的税;低于5%,则收取400%的税。比如像苹果手机完全不使用中国的芯片,那就征收百分之四百的税。如果想在中国市场卖手机,就必须保证30%的产品使用中国芯片。但是,这样产生一个问题,使用进口芯片的小果手机质量较高、价格较高,而用中国芯片的手机质量相对较差,此时可以考虑降价,比如降到两千,甚至降到成本以下。在这种情况下,国家要进行补贴,以确保使用中国芯片的手机厂商10%的利润率。
This is an initial suggestion. I believe that, at the moment for the upgrade of China’s industries it is especially important to break through international technology containment, which, in reality, means a 30% import substitution for core technologies. I suggest that we invest two trillion RMB annually over the next 10 years to ensure that the foreign technology share of the Chinese market does not exceed 70% to promote technological upgrading of China’s industries. In this way, we can drive the upgrading of China’s industries from the front and thereupon promote China’s GDP growth, contributing an additional 1% of growth.
这是一个初步的建议,我认为目前我国产业升级特别重要的是要打破国际技术遏制,实际上就是核心技术有30%的进口替代。我建议今后10年每年投两万亿人民币,确保外国技术在中国市场份额不超过70%,推动我国的产业技术升级,从而这方面在龙头上能够带动中国的产业升级,进而推动中国GDP增长,带动1%的增长。
I would like to look back to around the year 1988, to the U.S.-Japanese trade disputes. Japan’s growth rate was 6.8%. Four years later, Japan’s growth rate had dropped to 0.84%. If we fail to achieve industrial upgrading, it will be very hard to ensure the healthy growth of our nation’s economy. These are the opinions I have to offer. Thank you!
我想再回顾一下1988年左右,美日贸易争端,日本的增长率是6.8%,4年以后日本的增长率掉到0.84%,如果不能够实现产业升级的话,很难确保我们国家的经济有健康增长。就提出这些,谢谢!