如何應對中國的廉價鋼鐵產品

The problem of industrial overcapacity has been troubling manufacturers across the world for years. Of late their complaints, particularly against China and especially concerning steel, have become more acute. Episodes like the proposed sale of the lossmaking Tata steel plant in Port Talbot in south Wales have brought into sharp relief falling prices and global gluts of production.

多年來，行業產能過剩問題一直困擾着全球製造商。最近，他們的抱怨（特別是針對中國，尤其是針對鋼鐵）變得更爲嚴重。塔塔(Tata)擬出售位於威爾士南部塔爾伯特港(Port Talbot)的虧損鋼廠，這讓鋼鐵價格下跌以及全球產量過剩的問題顯露無疑。

Overcapacity is without doubt a serious worldwide phenomenon and it is hard to argue against heavily subsidised Chinese producers being a major cause. But with responsibility so dispersed even within China, it is almost impossible to imagine any kind of negotiated agreement that will significantly bring down global capacity. So, unless governments elsewhere want to engage in expensive and open-ended — and, especially in the EU, probably illegal — state ownership of troubled steel companies, the best option is a judicious and limited use of trade remedies against subsidised imports.

產能過剩無疑是一個嚴重的全球現象，我們很難反駁一種觀點：獲得鉅額補貼的中國製造商是一個主要原因。然而，即便在中國責任也廣泛分散，因此我們幾乎不可能想象任何一項經過協商的協議會大幅降低全球產能。因此，除非其他國家的政府希望對陷入困境的鋼鐵公司進行成本高昂且無休止的（而且可能是非法的，特別是在歐盟）國有化，否則最佳選擇是審慎並有限地使用針對獲補貼進口產品的貿易救濟措施。

This week, China hit back at persistent complaints from the US that it had recklessly expanded industrial capacity and was dumping steel at knockdown prices into the US market. Lou Jiwei, the Chinese finance minister, made the somewhat reasonable point that some of the expansion in production was a result of China’s encouragement of investment to boost growth during the global financial crisis. He also contended that, while Beijing has promised to close excess capacity, it was harder than it appeared: much of the decision-making, including the provision of subsidised lending, was in the hands of local governments.

本週，中國針對美國不斷髮出的抱怨展開回擊。美國抱怨稱，中國肆意擴大工業產能，並以很低的價格把鋼鐵傾銷到美國市場。中國財政部長樓繼偉提出了一個有幾分道理的觀點：部分產量擴張是全球金融危機期間中國鼓勵投資以促進經濟增長的結果。他還提出，儘管中國承諾將關閉過剩產能，但難度比看上去要大：很多決策（包括提供補貼貸款）掌握在地方政府手中。

It seems unlikely that China, which makes up about half of global steel production, will shut down enough plants any time soon to make a dent in worldwide overcapacity. What are governments in the US and Europe to do?

佔全球鋼鐵產量約一半的中國似乎不太可能在較短期內關閉足夠多的鋼廠、使全球產能過剩問題有任何改觀。美國和歐洲的政府該怎麼做？

One option they should swiftly rule out is to provide long-term nationalisation or other indefinite state support to steelmakers. The history of nationalising lossmaking manufacturing is a poor one, and such actions will very probably fall foul of EU state aid rules.

他們應該很快排除的一個選擇是向鋼鐵廠商提供長期國有化或其他無限制的政府支持。將虧損的製造企業國有化的歷史並不光彩，並且這些舉措極有可能違背歐盟國家援助規則。

A better answer is trade remedies, particularly the use of antidumping and countervailing duties against unfairly priced and subsidised imports. The problem is not just that the rules are often arbitrary and skewed — the US has rightly lost case after case at the World Trade Organisation over the way it imposes such tariffs — but that resorting to temporary relief can all too often become a permanent way of life.

一個更好的解決辦法是貿易救濟，特別是針對不公平定價以及獲得補貼的進口產品徵收反傾銷和反補貼關稅。但問題是，不僅這些規則往往是專斷且扭曲的（因此美國徵收這些關稅的做法在世界貿易組織(WTO)訴訟中理所當然地屢戰屢敗），而且訴諸短期救濟很有可能會變成一種永久性方式。

If trade remedies are to be used, they need to take into proper account the full effects of cheap steel on the importing economies. Raising the domestic price of steel in the EU will benefit Port Talbot but it will increase costs for the numerous companies that use steel as an input. The EU, to its credit, has a “community interest” provision in its trade remedies that takes into account the wider interests of other producers and of consumers. The EU has accordingly been less keen than the US in imposing duties on steel imports from China and elsewhere.

如果要使用貿易救濟，需要合理考慮到廉價鋼鐵產品對進口國經濟的全面影響。提高歐盟鋼鐵價格將有利於塔爾伯特港鋼鐵廠，但它將提升將鋼鐵用作原材料的衆多企業的成本。值得稱讚的是，歐盟對貿易救濟規定了一項“公共利益”條款，該條款考慮到了其他生產商以及消費者的更廣泛利益。因此，與美國相比，歐盟不那麼熱心於對來自中國和其他地區的鋼鐵進口產品徵收關稅。

EU member states are embroiled in a contentious revision of the bloc’s trade defence measures, pitting traditional free-traders like the UK against habitual protectionists like Italy. Whatever emerges should reflect the principle that blocking imports has narrow benefits but wider costs.

歐盟成員國正圍繞修訂歐盟貿易防禦措施展開激烈辯論，英國等傳統自由貿易國家與意大利等習慣性保護主義國家針鋒相對。不管結果如何，都應反映出如下基本事實：封鎖進口的好處有限而代價更高。

Excess capacity and low prices can be devastating for those working in the affected industries. Yet care should be taken, when dealing with the human consequences of global production gluts, that a distortion in one part of the economy not be allowed to have self-defeating effects elsewhere.

對於在受到影響的行業工作的人而言，產能過剩和低價可能是災難性的。然而在處理全球產量過剩對人的影響時，應注意經濟某一方面的扭曲不應給其他方面帶來弄巧成拙的影響。