中國放緩危及安倍經濟學

　　9月1日口譯文章：中國放緩危及安倍經濟學

　　放在10年前，中國經濟放緩險些不會在日本激發波濤。

　　其時，日本重要對華出口液晶表現器之類的零配件。它們會在日資工場被組裝成電視，然後再出口。主要的是花費品終極市場的需求，特殊是美國這個市場的需求。

　　但現在時期分歧了。高盛(Goldman Sachs)首席日本經濟學家馬場直彥(Naohiko Baba)表現：“對付日本經濟而言，中國終極需求的主要性正在晉升。在2011年前次數據出爐時，中國需求的主要性險些與美國持平。到2014年，中國大概已遇上美國。”

　　因為日本經濟已經是搖搖欲墜(按年率盤算，本年第二季度，日本經濟壓縮1.6%)，中國經濟疲弱正成為損壞“安倍經濟學”(Abenomics)刺激籌劃的最新外部襲擊。日本輔弼安倍晉三(Shinzo Abe)把本身的引導權押在了該籌劃上。剖析人士表現，中國經濟放緩大概會迫使日本央行(Bank of Japan)進一步放松泉幣政策。已因海內花費疲軟蒙受壓力的日本央行，在10月和來歲1月集會上采用行為的大概性最大。在這些集會上，日本央即將做出新的經濟猜測。

　　日本央行堅稱，其大範圍資產購置籌劃仍舊有望克服通縮。日本央行行長黑田東彥(Haruhiko Kuroda)周三在紐約重申了這點，但彌補稱，日本央即將“在需要時絕不遲疑地做出調劑”。

　　馬場直彥應用一個新的環球投入產出數據庫估量，在2000年時，來自中國的終極需求占日本經濟產出的0.5%，美國終極需求占3.5%，兩國如今均吸納了日本約2%的附加值商品。

　　是以，就像國民幣匯率同樣，中國經濟增速也變得對日本很主要。中國海內需求下滑1個百分點，將致使日本海內臨盆總值(GDP)削減0.1%，而國民幣匯率下滑1個百分點，將致使日本GDP削減0.01%。假如題目只是對日本出口發生直接影響的話，這類損壞將是苦楚的，但頗有限，但是直接出口是最不主要的。

　　日本有18%的出口流向中國，54%流向全部亞洲，而中國經濟放緩會波及亞洲全部經濟體。日本企業大概推延對海內新的出口才能的投資，這將進一步影響需求。

　　國際泉幣基金構造(IMF)在其《溢出效應申報》(Spillover Report)中試下模仿中國經濟低迷的影響。2014年的申報表現，在中國經濟低迷打擊下，新興市場增速每下滑1個百分點，將致使日本增速下滑0.5個百分點;其對日本的影響是對美國的影響的5倍。

　　別的，中國經濟放緩正發生更加普遍的通縮效應，在大批商品價錢方面表示的最為顯著。油價降至每桶40美元上下，險些會搗毀日本央行令通脹回到2%的籌劃。日本央行的猜測基於油價反彈至每桶70美元或75美元。

　　黑田東彥表現：“較歷久而言，油價下跌應會對經濟運動發生有益影響，但短時間內，經由過程動員汽油和電力等能源價錢下跌，將對通脹造成下行影響。”

　　花旗(Citi)駐東京經濟學家估量，能源價錢對通脹的拖累將在10月到達1.5個百分點，並將在2016年中堅持在1個百分點以上，這將令日本墮入團體通縮的大概性增大。

　　黑田東彥堅稱，這類影響將是臨時的。“清除通縮的趨向是不是已停止?”他表現，“究竟遠非如斯。”

　　日本央行的題目在於其政策依附於讓企業和花費者信任通脹將會上升。在需求低迷之際，通脹保持在零程度的時光越長，日本央行進步通脹的難度就會越大。

　　【參考譯文】

　　As recently as 10 years ago, an economic slowdown in China would have caused barely a ripple in Japan.

　　At that time, most of Japan’s exports to China were components such as liquid crystal displays. They would be assembled into televisions at Japanese-owned factories and then re-exported. What mattered was demand in the final markets for consumer goods, in particular the US.

　　But times have changed. “The importance of final demand in China is increasing for the Japanese economy. It was almost to the US level as of the last data in 2011. It probably matched the US by 2014,” said Naohiko Baba, chief Japan economist at Goldman Sachs.

　　With the Japanese economy already wobbling — the economy contracted by an annualised 1.6 per cent in the second quarter — weakness in China is the latest global shock to undermine the Abenomics stimulus programme on which Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has staked his leadership. China’s slowdown could force the Bank of Japan’s hand on further easing of monetary policy, analysts say. The BoJ, already under pressure from weak consumption at home, would be most likely to act at its October and January meetings, where it makes new economic forecasts.

　　For its part, the BoJ insists its massive asset-buying programme remains on course to overcome deflation. Haruhiko Kuroda, BoJ governor, reiterated this in New York on Wednesday, but added that the BoJ would ”make adjustments without hesitation if necessary”.

　　Using a new global input-output database, Mr Baba estimates that whereas in 2000, final demand in China accounted for 0.5 per cent of Japanese output versus 3.5 per cent for the US, both countries now absorb about 2 per cent of Japan’s value-added goods.

　　As such, China’s growth rate has become as important to Japan as its exchange rate. A fall of 1 percentage point in China’s domestic demand costs Japan 0.1 per cent of gross domestic product, while the hit from a percentage point fall in the renminbi is only 0.01 per cent. Were it just a matter of the direct effect on Japan’s exports, the damage would be painful but contained, but direct exports are the least of it.

　　Whereas 18 per cent of Japan’s exports go to China, 54 per cent go to Asia as a whole, and a slowdown in China hurts all of the region’s economies. Japanese businesses may postpone investment in new export capacity at home, further hurting demand. japan export

　　The International Monetary Fund tries to model the effects of a Chinese downturn in its Spillover Report. The 2014 edition finds a 1 percentage point shock to emerging market growth leads to a 0.5 percentage point fall in Japanese growth; five times bigger than the effect on the US.

　　In addition, China’s slowdown is having a broader deflationary effect, most obviously through commodity prices. Oil’s drop to about $40 a barrel all but destroys the BoJ’s schedule for getting inflation back to 2 per cent. Its forecasts are predicated on a bounce in prices to $70 or $75 a barrel.

　　“Although the oil price fall should have a favourable impact on economic activity in the longer term, in the short term it has a downward impact on inflation via the drop in energy prices such as gasoline and electricity,” said Mr Kuroda.

　　Economists at Citi in Tokyo estimate the drag on inflation from energy prices will reach 1.5 percentage points by October, and stay above 1 percentage point in the middle of 2016, making a dip into headline deflation more likely.

　　Mr Kuroda insists this effect is temporary. “Has the trend towards overcoming deflation come to an end?” he said. “This is far from the case.”

　　The BoJ’s problem is that its policy relies on convincing companies and consumers that inflation will rise. The longer prices remain stuck at zero amid sluggish demand the harder it is to do.