导读
在2024年11月15日于罗马举行的G7研讨会上，意大利央行行长法比奥·帕内塔就“分裂的贸易体系”问题发表了重要讲话。他以历史为引，提及1957年《罗马条约》的签署为欧洲经济共同体奠定了基础，推动人、货物、服务和资本自由流动的全球化愿景。然而，70年后的今天，这些价值观面临着严峻的挑战。
全球贸易在过去两个世纪中从“跨大西洋”扩展到“全球连通”，其总值已达到世界GDP的60%。推动这一扩展的两个主要因素是贸易成本的下降和复杂的全球价值链的发展。例如，国际运输成本的大幅降低和关税壁垒的削减使得进口商品对消费者更加实惠。此外，产品设计和制造的全球化分工也提升了生产效率。然而，全球化并非全然无害。供应链中断和地缘政治紧张局势加剧了对经济安全的担忧。近年来，主要经济体之间出现了技术出口限制和经济去风险化的趋势，这些变化反映了对全球化的一些根本性疑虑。
尽管全球化的进程没有终结，但其格局正在发生变化。许多企业开始根据地缘政治考虑调整投资和供应链。过于广泛的保护性政策可能带来高昂的经济和社会代价，包括效率的损失和供应链的复杂化。单纯依靠保护主义壁垒难以解决经济韧性问题，反而可能带来新的风险。例如，双边贸易限制可能通过第三方国家间接规避，从而增加成本并削弱透明性。他主张采取更有针对性的方法来应对供应链风险。
一种以信息、创新、灵活性和国际合作为核心的去风险化策略应运而生。更深入的供应链分析和数据共享是识别潜在脆弱性的关键，G7国家需要开发更完善的工具来监测关键原材料的供应风险，进一步强化全球范围内的透明度和协作。研发替代材料和生产技术是应对供应链单一化的重要途径，通过公私合作伙伴关系资助大规模项目，并通过多边金融机构将支持多元化供应链建设。全球经济和地缘政治格局的快速变化要求政策具备高度适应性。尽管未来创新和地缘政治动态难以预测，但设定长期目标并保持灵活性是必要的。例如，欧洲应在减少对关键矿物依赖的同时，推进经济外交以扩大供应来源。在多边合作面临挑战的背景下，与志同道合的国家加强合作是务实的选择，通过协调工业政策、避免补贴竞争、重启贸易和投资协定谈判等方式能够提升合作效率。
最后，帕内塔指出，国际分裂的代价不仅是经济上的，还包括社会进步和国际合作的损失。他警告说，孤立主义可能破坏贸易、投资和知识共享的自由，而这些自由正是实现长期繁荣与和平的基础。在全球化进程面临挑战之际，应更加重视合作与创新，避免过度保护主义对经济和社会造成的负面影响。
Speech at G7-Seminar in Rome
Fabio Panetta
Governor of Banca d’Italia
15 November 2024
How should we address the challenges of global fragmentation?
Recognizing that this is an extremely complex issue, I will refrain from offering a specific solution. Instead, I will propose a methodological approach and outline some concrete examples of its application.
My basic premise is that we must avoid the illusion that blanket measures erecting protectionist barriers are the solution to our problems. A blanket measure is like a kitchen knife: it is not the right instrument to perform complex surgery. The global economy is extremely complex in its trade, investment and financial interconnections. Attempts to divide the global economy into rival blocs would do more harm than good.
An escalation of trade barriers between blocs would lead to severe efficiency and welfare losses for all. It would reduce the diversification of our economies and increase the volatility of output and inflation. Indeed, several studies have shown that trade openness and participation in global production networks improve the diversification of sources of supply and demand, thereby reducing exposure to local shocks. The weaponization of critical supply chains by commodity-producing countries would severely affect EU manufacturing production, with heterogeneous effects across regions, sectors and firms. For example, value-added in the electrical equipment industry could fall by more than 7 per cent, three times as much as in the textile industry.
Protectionism would not be as protective as it might seem, as blunt policies would inevitably be circumvented. Key products targeted by bilateral trade restrictions would find indirect routes to opposing blocs through trade with third countries, simply turning a bilateral relationship into a three-party trade. This would only add a third trade intermediary, increasing costs and risks and reducing transparency. Such unintended consequences would undermine economic efficiency and security.
So, how can we pursue a more focused de-risking strategy?
In my view, this strategy rests on four main pillars: information, innovation, flexibility and international cooperation. As an example of this approach, I will refer to possible de-risking strategies in the sourcing of critical raw materials. This is a crucial issue for the EU, which accounts for only 0.5 per cent of global production of these inputs.
With better information, we can better identify and monitor vulnerabilities. Many G7 public institutions, including the European Commission and the US Department of Commerce, have developed analytical tools to map critical vulnerabilities in the availability of raw materials. However, our understanding of production interdependencies remains limited. More data needs to be collected and pooled, and best practices and tools need to be shared.
Innovation is the second pillar. Scientific research and product development can provide us with alternative materials and technologies. This can be financed partly through public-private partnerships for large projects. In addition, multilateral financial institutions such as the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development can finance new supply chains that help diversify sources of critical raw materials.
Third, our policies must be flexible enough to adapt to an ever-changing landscape. We cannot predict exactly what future innovations will look like. Nor can we predict geopolitical developments. Nevertheless, we should set long-term goals. Flexibility is all the more important when change takes time.
The fourth pillar is cooperation. To unlock the greatest gains, we should remain committed to making cooperation truly global. The cost of a fragmented world would in fact be very high. Some research suggests that it could exceed 6 percent of global GDP in extreme scenarios.
But as global cooperation becomes more difficult, there are reasons to at least strengthen cooperation among like-minded countries. The rewards are great: it was a joint US-European supply chain that developed and distributed one of the most successful vaccines against COVID-19. The EU is already discussing new ways to further coordinate its members’ policies. We also need to work better with our international partners. For instance, we should reinvigorate discussions on trade and investment agreements. On industrial policy, better coordination would at least allow us to avoid costly subsidy wars.
（本文观点仅供了解海外研究动态，不代表平台的意见和立场。）
扫码查看原文
来源
作者：
法比奥·帕内塔（意大利央行行长）
来源：
国际结算银行（Bank for International Settlements，BIS)
编译：朱俊逸
监制：崔洁、李婧怡
来源｜国际结算银行
版面编辑｜王浩
责任编辑｜李锦璇、阎奕舟
主编｜朱霜霜
近期热文
