作者：陶一桃,袁易明
出版社：社会科学文献出版社
格式: AZW3, DOCX, EPUB, MOBI, PDF, TXT
东亚国家的可持续发展(英文版)试读：
Preface Ⅰ
Tao YitaoYou are now presented with the proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainable Development in East Asia Countries, which is held for the 30th anniversary of the academic exchange and cooperation between China Center for Special Economic Zone Research (CCSEZR), Shenzhen University (SZU), a key research base for humanities and social sciences of Ministry of Education of China, and Institute of Foreign Affairs (IFA), Kumamoto Gakuen University (KGU). The proceedings include 28 academic papers authored by scholars from China, Japan and South Korea on academic issues including industrial policy and structural transformation, social security system and public policy, and government’s role in innovation, etc. Scholars from different countries have made either similar or different theoretical explanations for issues confronting their respective economies and regional economic cooperation during economic globalization from political, economic and even cultural perspectives based on the status quo on the economic and social development in their respective countries. Rational dialog, inclusive development, scientific discussion, mutual respect and common prosperity are not only the philosophies that we have consistently adhered to, but also what we wish for, so to speak. Collisions of ideas may result in new insights and wise talks may bring about enlightenment. It is my belief that, in the world of human cognition, nothing is more charismatic and powerful than the ideas and wisdom that lead human to rationality, dignity and prosperity.
The academic exchange and cooperation between the CCSEZR and the IFA can date back to thirty years ago on the day of October 2, 1987. At that time, the CCSEZR was known as the Institute for Special Economic Zone Research (ISEZR), Shenzhen University while the IFA was known as the Institute of Foreign Affairs of Kumamoto Commerce University (IFA of KCU). Prof. Chen Zhuohua, the then director of the ISEZR, and Prof. ShiroTajima, the then director of the IFA of KCU, signed the Academic Exchange Agreement in Japan, which heralded the beginning of and laid a good foundation for the academic exchange and cooperation between SZU and KGU. The Academic Exchange Agreement covered matters in the following four aspects:
1.To jointly promote academic exchange between the two institutes;
2.To exchange research materials and journals with each other;
3.To conduct joint research and investigation into academic fields and issues of mutual interest on the basis of mutual consent of the two parties;
4.To jointly publish and release the results of joint research and investigation.
The past thirty years have witnessed 21 exchange visits between the two institutes with almost 100 exchange visitors in aggregation. The year of 2007 marked the 20th anniversary of the friendly academic exchange and cooperation relationship between the CCSEZR and the IFA. Through joint efforts of Prof. Cao Longqi, the then director of the CCSEZR, and Prof. Masatoshi Kagawa, the then director of the IFA, SZU held the International Academic Seminar on the Economic and Social Development of China, Japan and South Korea and published the collected works - Comparative Studies on Chinese and Japanese Economy and Society in Chinese and Japanese. Over the past thirty years, the two institutes have maintained friendly exchange and cooperation with mutual understanding, allowing the sakura to blossom in the campus of SZU and the bright red color of lychee to shine amongst the cherry blossoms.
Looking back on the course of academic exchange and cooperation between the CCSEZR and the IFA throughout the past thirty years, we must extend our heartfelt gratitude to predecessor scholars who made continuous efforts and selfless contribution to propel and promote the friendly cooperation of the two institutes. Among these scholars are Prof. Shiro Tajima, a former director of the IFA of KCU, Prof. Chen Zhuohua, a former director of the ISEZR, Prof. Masatoshi Kagawa, a former director of the IFA, Prof. Cao Longqi, a former director of the CCSEZR, Prof. Su Dongbin, the late deputy director of the CCSEZR and a prestigious economist, Prof. Judy Yoneoka, a former director of the IFA, Prof. Joseph Tomei at the IFA, Prof. Yuan Yiming and Prof. Gao Xingmin, deputy directors of the CCSEZR. In some sense, they are pioneers of history, messenger of friendship and disseminator of ideas. They made history while writing brilliant pages of history and expected the future while shaping it. Being far-sighted, they provided the successors with a broad and open academic platform for dialog between ideas.
Though China and Japan, as important economies in the world, have to seek their respective interests, they are faced with the reality that win-win cooperation overwhelms disputes. We will be confronted with opportunities as well as challenges together. Maybe, it is our way to achieve common prosperity of cross-border regional communities by adhering to the ancient Chinese philosophy which states “All living creatures grow together without harming one another; ways run parallel without interfering with one another”.
As the saying goes, “How far a nation can go depends on how much it has learned from the past.” I sincerely hope that we will learn from the past and make the academic exchange and cooperation between the CCSEZR and the IFA continue to harvest rich fruits and see a bright future.Tao Yitao, Professor at Shenzhen UniversityVice secretary of CPC Committee of Shenzhen UniversitySecretary of the Discipline Inspection Commission of Shenzhen UniversityDirector of the China Center for Special Economic Zone Research— a Key Research Base for Humanities and Social Sciences of Ministry of Education of ChinaSangtaidanhua, Shenzhen, ChinaFebruary 23, 2017
Preface Ⅱ
Joseph TomeiIt gives me great pleasure to present this collection of papers, >thwhich celebrates the 30 anniversary of the sister school relationship between Shenzhen University and Kumamoto Gakuen University. I believe it stands as a testament to the strong relationship between our two universities and KGU is fortunate to have a partner like Shenzhen.
In addition to acknowledging the support of Shenzhen, without which this volume would not exist, there are several other people and groups that I need to thank.
First of all, I’d like to thank the faculty and staff from Chonnam University, another sister school to KGU, for participating together with us in this conference. Linguists sometimes talk of the Sinosphere, the area that was influenced by Chinese culture and language, and as a native speaker of English, it is good to watch people from the three countries of Japan, China and Korea interact and be reminded that the world does not revolve around English, especially in light of recent political events.
I’d also like to thank the Institute of Economics and Business for their support. Institute of Economics and Business is the older sibling of the Institute of Foreign Affairs and their help and support for this conference is greatly appreciated.
We had planned to have this conference in March of 2017, but Kumamoto was struck by the Kumamoto Earthquake
I also have to add a note of thanks to the research office as well as IWAMOTO san, as well as the former head of the Institute of Foreign Affairs, Judy YONEOKA. The conference and these papers would not have been possible without their advice and assistance.
So please enjoy these papers as we look forward to another 30 years of cooperation and collaboration.Joseph Tomei, Professor at Kumamoto Gakuen UniversityHead of the Institute of Foreign Affairs, Kumamoto Gakuen UniversityKumamoto, JapanMarch1, 2017Part ALaw and Institutional StudiesThe Belt and Road Initiative Implementation Institution-culture Constraint[1]Tao Yitao
The proposal of Belt and Road Initiative is an important manifestation of Chinese society’s shifting from policy opening to institution opening and from export-oriented economy to an open economy; the natural choice with high accumulations of capital, technology and productivity that are due to thirty-eight years’ tremendous economic development in Chinese society since the reform and opening-up policy; the inevitable trend of economic transition and sustainable development in Chinese society; and moreover, the concrete embodiment of inclusive development and common prosperity ideas that China adheres to in economic globalization process today. Basically, the implementation of the “Belt and Road Initiative” is not a pure economic issue for China or neighboring countries, but a non-economic issue that the culture outweighs capital and institution outweighs technology. In terms of capital and technology, the institution-culture constraint is not only the softest constraint, but also the hardest constraint, and therefore the most fundamental constraint. As a matter of fact, it is the common rules and value which define a society and the choice behaviors of this society or community and individuals. Given this, the established informal institution developed in a society or community is not only a constituent part of the institutional system, but also a part of the cultural system. Therefore, the crux of crossing institution-culture constraint is establishing a common operable institution-culture cognition system with mutual respect and mutual inclusion. Whether in logical or in realistic significance, it would be a leading strategy and wise consideration to the powerful implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative.1 Interpretation of Culture Constraint — Institution from the Perspective of Institutional Economics
The institution-culture constraint here is not simply the combination of institution constraint plus culture constraint, but a concept in institutional economics. It means mutual recognition barriers among different internal institutional arrangements that are formed by different customs, values, and other cultural factors, and also refers to the influences of these internal institutional arrangements with different cultural traits on formal institutional arrangements and conclusions and on the institutional environment formations inside wider areas or communities. As we know, there is no institution without cultural characteristics or culture without institutional functions. In a sense, the culture is institution and the institution is culture. Different nations create different cultures in different modes and different cultures create different nations in different modes, and in this process, the national or state rules, institutions and selection behaviors are determined and formed. Just as Thomas Sowell - an outstanding contemporary American economist said (Sowell, 1998): “Cultures were not collections in museums. They were working regulatory mechanisms in daily life. Definitive judgments were not from researchers and theorists but implied in thousands of millions monomial decisions. These decisions may retain or give up various certain cultural practices. These decision makers might benefit from, or had to assume possible consequential costs, inefficiencies and abandonments all by themselves. The consequential costs did not always appear in the form of currencies, and they might be in varied forms from inconveniences to death.” In fact, the meaning of his words is quite simple. If people cannot reach agreements on some issues, especially on culture-value, they won’t contact with each other smoothly. It also applies to countries.
People usually define the institution as a rule that is made by people. It inhibits arbitrary behavior and opportunistic behavior that may occur in interpersonal communication, and enhances the order and trust between people and people, therefore reducing the uncertainty and cost of communication. German institutional economists Wolfgang Kasper and Manfred E. Streit once stated institution functions in this way (Kasper & Streit, 2000, p1): “All interpersonal communication needs a certain degree of predictability. When people are constrained by the rules (which we call the institution), the behavior of the individual is more predictable. Of course, people would need institutions to improve economic life, as economic transactions would not function in a vacuum. In fact, the type and quality of institutions cause huge differences when the economic growth rates and community members meet the economic goals. A brief review of the economic growth theory proves that the growth is a complex phenomenon. Neoclassical growth theory can only identify the most immediate growth conditions, such as capital accumulation and technological change. To explain why the people should save, invest, study and collect the useful knowledge, we should look at various institutional systems and value systems at the back of economic success or failure.”
The institution, as a mean to guide the people’s actions may be divided into internal institution and external institution according to different sources. The internal institution is defined as a rule that evolves with experience within a group, such as habits, customs, manners, morality, culture, values and etc.; while the external institution is defined as the social rules which are designed extrinsically and imposed on the society from top to bottom by means of the political actions. That is to say in real time, many internal institutions evolve according to experience and control the interactions between people. The people have reserved internal institutions for a long time as some people find them and think them useful. The importance of internal institution on building social interactions, communicating between the self-centered individuals and realizing the social integration, has been recognized by antecedent philosophers and sociologists. Scholars like John Locke (1632-1704), David Hume (1711-1776) and Adam Smith (1723-1790) once expressed similar ideas: The institutional framework of a society must be based on the evolution of the internal institutions. The rules adopted consciously and passed by legislation, and the whole structure of institutions determined in the political process should base on the internal institutions (Kasper & Streit, 2000, p112). The most powerful supporters also include Friedrich August von Hayek (Hayek, 2000, pp52-78, 152-190).
The institution is also divided into formal institution and informal institution according to the punishment mode or different compulsory degrees regarding breach behaviors. Generally, the punishment for violating the internal institution is the decentralized and spontaneous social feedback because most internal institutions recourse to voluntary coordination. However, the punishment for the violation of the external institution is enforced through the formal and organized mechanism. Relative to informal institution, the compulsory order of formal punishment leaves much smaller space for the individual to evaluate the loss and gain. Most internal institutions are informal institutions. However, in many cases, the internal institutional arrangement is not only rigid, but also restricts the formal institutional arrangements to a considerable extent. It often plays a vitally important role in the real life. Customs, habits and values as the important contents of the internal institution have such power and effects.
Some types of the internal institutions fall into the category of culture, and even the rule system is a part of culture basically. British sociologist, Edward Burnett Tylor once defined culture in the following way (Tylor, 2005, p1): “Culture, or civilization, taken in its broad, ethnographic sense, is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society.” Scholars of institutional economics believe that Tylor’s definition of culture not only appropriately points out the communications between man and social group through culture communication, but also focuses on a fact, that is, culture adheres to learning-and-acquisition institutions and the values supporting these institutions. In this sense, the culture consists of language, thought, value, internal institution and external institution, and even, it is a concept with connation larger than that of the institution.
Culture contains many internal institutions, such as customs and habits and so on. Some scholars believe that the habits and customs influenced by different cultures and with the particular culture brands are difficult to clearly expound with language, but also difficult to transmit to the people outside the culture scope. Therefore, culture can be regarded as a system of rules which basically can only be sensed. The internal institution, formed from the culture which is commonly familiar with and recognized, reduces the people’s communication risks and costs. Therefore, the people are more adept in the institution arrangement within their own culture and feel more active and easier relative to other cultural rule system. However, with international and cultural diversity, a person may belong to a village culture but also share a world of cultural practices in the industry. When sharing the benefits of international division of labor, people have also gradually realized that alien things are not absolutely bad or threatening. Even so, in a multicultural society, the people can only compare the quality of cultural institutions by verifying that how the cultural institutions help the people to achieve the common basic values of freedom, peace and prosperity in practice. With regard to coordinating the people’s behaviors or coping with the changes, not all cultures are equally effective. Therefore, the open and inclusive culture does not affirm all cultures have values without criticism, but includes those rules which we are familiar with and accustomed to and save our transaction costs (Kasper & Streit, 2000, pp196-198).
The culture usually evolves slowly. The so-called path dependence is often due to the solidification of the culture, especially [2]the role of the cultural institution. However, when new ideas occur from the original cultural system and the external factors strike and influence the existing cultural system, people would either deeply feel that they may not obtain the potential benefits if not changing the original rules, or they would strongly realize that when the external cultural institution has more superiority than their own culture, the new culture characteristics are imitated and the number of people receiving the culture exceed a critical point, such external cultural institution will become a new rule or institution. From the aspect of world economic development history, “Merchants and manufacturers would move to other countries, whose governments are thought to be more restricted by rules and whose institution environments are thought to be more reliable. It not only forces the rulers to give up arbitrary opportunism and provide reliable rules, but also encourages some internal cultural institutions, such as honesty, punctuality and frugality” (Kasper & Streit, 2000, pp196-198). When internal cultural institutions and external institutions are generally accepted by different nations with varied cultures, an institution with public goods’ nature -- an international practice is thus formed.
What could be said is that, the process of breaking institution-culture constraint during the Belt and Road Initiative implementation is the process of gradual inclusion and recognition of the important components of internal institutions, cultural institutions (such as customs, habits, values and beliefs) in wider regional communities Because they are the softest as well as the toughest bases or the conclusion of formal institutions between regional communities.2 Institution-culture Constraint for the Belt and Road Initiative Implementation
It should be said that after nearly 38 years of reform and opening-up and national strength increasing, China has the considerable potential to expand the impacts in the developing countries through exporting infrastructure construction. However, we, to some extent, have a poor knowledge about many countries along the Belt and Road Initiatives; to some extent, we regard the Belt and Road more as a pure economic project; to some extent, we focus more on our wishful thinking of achieving political performances; and to some extent, we haven’t fully gotten rid of “movement psychology” and subconscious of seeking quick success and instinct benefits. Thus, in objective reality, our original goodwill and actions that would benefit ourselves and please others as well might encounter awkwardness and setbacks. The issue of Burma’s Myitsone Dam is the most typical case.
On September 30, 2011, Thein Sein - the President of Burma announced that “to respect the people’s wish”, Myitsone Dam invested and established by China has been paused until his five-year term ends. This heart-breaking ending surprised many of us, including the
试读结束[说明：试读内容隐藏了图片]