|
Free exchange Joy to the world 普世欢腾
译者：老狒狒 WHAT is the point of economics? It often seems that the objective is to make the world richer. When global GDP is growing quickly, dismal scientists rejoice; their only misgiving is that growth might slow. Yet this is the season when, for devout Christians at least, the ineffable supplants the material (and the other way around for most folk). That makes it a good time to ponder whether maximising income should really be the be-all and end-all of economic policy. 经济学何用之有？常见的说法似乎是：为了让人们更有钱。如果GDP正在快速增长，那些闷闷不乐的科学家们就会欢呼雀跃；他们唯一的担心就是，增速有可能慢下来。然而，至少对虔诚的基督徒来说，这是一个难以言说之物取代看得见摸得着的东西的季节（虽然大多数人不这样认为）因此，现在正是讨论“经济政策的终极目标是否真得应该是实现收入最大化”的好时机。 Few people consider a big income as an end in itself—with the notable exception of Ebenezer Scrooge, the “squeezing, wrenching, grasping, scraping” anti-hero of Charles Dickens's “A Christmas Carol”. But we do sense that income helps people to lead more comfortable lives. Indeed, people in the ten richest countries in the world have a life expectancy 25 years higher than people in the ten poorest. People with more cash can afford better education, more varied leisure activities and healthier food, all of which improve the quality of life. 很少有人把一大笔收入本身当作是目的。但是，这不是说没有例外之人，而且这个人还是一个很出名的人物。他就是狄更斯《圣诞颂歌》中那个“刮地三尺、贪婪吝啬”的反英雄——埃比尼泽·斯克鲁奇。但是，我们确实有这样一种看法：收入有助于人们过上更舒适的生活。同世界上最贫穷的十个国家的民众相比，最富裕的十个国家的民众能够多活25年。对于一个人来说，手里的钱越多，就越能够承担更好的教育，业余活动就会更加丰富多彩，吃的东西也会更加健康，而上述所有这一切都能够提高生活的质量。 Income is not the only thing that matters, however. A paper from 1999 by William Easterly, of New York University, used data from 1960 to 1990 to see how close the correlation was between economic growth and 81 different indicators of quality of life. He found that it outweighed other factors (technological change, say, or changing social mores) for only 32 of them. A survey of 43 countries, published on October 30th, found that people in emerging markets are within a whisker of expressing the same level of satisfaction with their lives as people in rich countries. 不过，收入并不是决定生活质量高低的唯一要素。纽约大学的威廉?伊斯特利曾在1999年的一篇论文使用了1960年至1990年的数据，来考察经济增长同81种不同的生活质量指标之间的关联性。他发现，经济增长的重要性，只在32个指标中超过了其他要素（比如说，技术变化或者变化中的社会道德）。今年10月30日公布的一份对43个国家的调查报告发现，新兴市场的民众所表达的生活满意度仅仅略低于富裕国家的民众。 If income is an imperfect proxy for quality of life, are there any plausible alternatives? In recent years many have instead focused on happiness. The United Nations has been publishing an annual “World Happiness Report” since 2012. The British government measures “personal well-being” across the country on an annual basis. Yet happiness has its own shortcomings, argues Martha Nussbaum of the University of Chicago. While Scrooge found it easy to count his riches, happiness is harder to pin down. People are prone to what philosophers call “adaptive preferences”, meaning that they may fail to report their “true” happiness. “Tiny Tim” Cratchit, the annoyingly saintly hero of “A Christmas Carol”, should not, by rights, be happy: he is crippled and desperately poor. Scrooge, despite his fabulous wealth and good health (Yuletide hallucinations aside), is miserable. Yet it would seem odd to conclude that Tiny Tim is better off. 如果说收入是生活质量的一个不完美的代理，那么，是否还有其他看似合理的替代方案吗？近年来，许多替代方案都把焦点转到了“幸福”上面。自2012年以来，联合国每年都要发布一份年度《世界幸福报告》。英国政府则是以年为单位评估整个国家的“个人幸福”。然而，正如芝加哥大学的玛莎·娜斯鲍姆所指出的那样，幸福有着其自身的不足。斯克鲁奇发现，清点他的财富是容易的。但是，要想确定自己是否幸福，那就难了。一般来说，人都有着哲学家所说的“适应性倾向”。也就是说，你可能无法言说自己“真正的”幸福。按理说，《圣诞颂歌》中那位不招人喜欢的圣洁英雄“小蒂姆”，不应该是幸福的。因为，他的双腿天生残疾，而且一贫如洗。斯克鲁奇，尽管富得流油，身体健康（除了圣诞假期中的那些幻觉），是可悲的。然而，如果由此认为小蒂姆更加幸福，似乎就有点奇怪了。 If measuring happiness is so difficult, what else could economists look at? Amartya Sen, of Harvard University, argues that “capabilities” are the way to go. The definition of a capability is a bit fuzzy: at its simplest, a capability is something that people have reason to value. The list of potential capabilities is endless: the opportunity to live a long and healthy life, the freedom to take part in political life or to be well nourished. Capabilities, says Mr Sen, are ends that economists should strive to maximise: income is just one of the many means by which we get there. 如果衡量幸福是如此的困难，经济学家还有什么其他的选择可以指望吗？哈佛大学的阿玛蒂亚·森指出，“可行能力”是一条可行之路。可行能力的定义多少有点含混不清。简单的说，可行能力是一种人们有理由加以重视的东西。各种潜在的可行能力的名单很长。如，过上一个寿命长久、身体健康的生活的机会，参与政治生活或是得到良好营养的自由。森指出，可行能力应当是经济学家力争实现其最大化的目标，收入仅仅是我们实现目标的众多方式中的一种。 That begs the question of which capabilities a society should maximise. Some worry that the capability approach is deeply paternalistic, with governments deciding what is best for their citizens. Leading theorists have reinforced that perception: Ms Nussbaum goes so far as to recommend “ten central capabilities” that are essential for a good life. For economists, who tend to be lovers of freedom, this is controversial stuff. 问题是：社会应当让哪种可行能力实现最大化呢？有人担心，可行能力方法带有深深的家长制特点，因为在可行能力方法中，是政府在替民众决定什么是最好的。几位这方面的领头理论家始终在强化这种认识，而娜斯鲍姆甚至于到了推荐作为一个好生活之根本的“十种中心可行能力”的地步。对于经济学家来说，因为他们往往都是热爱自由之人，这些都是有争议的东西。 But the capability approach may be less illiberal than it seems. Insisting that GDP is the true measure of economic progress is itself a value-judgment. What is more, according to Mr Sen and Ms Nussbaum, people must have the freedom to select which capabilities they ultimately pursue. Freedom of choice has an impact on well-being; if you give people decent opportunities, what they ultimately decide to do gets less important. Someone who chooses to forgo a Christmas dinner with family and friends (as Scrooge does) is better off than someone who does not have any invitations to turn down, even though both people seem to end up in the same position. Everyone need not go to a Christmas dinner, even though many people get a lot from it. 但是，可行能力方法的狭隘可能没有表面那样严重。坚持GDP是衡量经济进步真正尺度的做法，其本身是一种价值判断。再者，根据森和娜斯鲍姆的观点，民众必须要在最终应该追求何种可行能力的问题上拥有选择的自由。选择的自由对于幸福是有影响的；如果你给人们提供像样的机会，他们最终决定去做什么就变得没有那么重要了。（像斯克鲁奇那样）选择放弃同家人和朋友共享圣诞晚宴的人要比没有邀请可以回绝的人更幸福，纵然这两种人的结局似乎是一样的。就算许多人从中得到许多，也不是人人都需要去参加圣诞大餐的。 Life, liberty and the pursuit of capabilities 生命、自由以及对于可行能力的追求 Measuring capabilities may be even more difficult than measuring GDP or happiness. There are, though, decent proxies. A country with a high life expectancy probably offers its citizens things like good health care and helps to shield them from pollution, which makes it easier for them to live a long, healthy life. A country where girls miss out on schooling or women are not allowed to drive is presumably failing to give them the opportunity to participate fully in civic life. 可行能力的衡量或许难于GDP或者幸福的衡量。不过，可行能力的衡量还是有合适的代理的。高预期寿命的国家或许能给它的公民提供诸如好的医疗保险之类的东西，同时还能够帮助公民免遭污染，从而让他们更容易过上一个生命长久且身体健康的生活。女孩失学或是妇女不被允许开车的国家可能无法给这些女孩和妇女完全参与到公民生活中去的机会。 Some measures of economic success use such data. The Human Development Index (HDI), which Mr Sen helped to devise in 1990, considers not only income, but also life expectancy and schooling, as elements of development (by GDP per person, Norway is the sixth-richest country in the world, but according to the HDI its inhabitants are the world's best-off). On December 10th the UN released the latest version of its “inclusive-wealth index”, which puts a dollar value on things like education and health. 有些衡量经济是否成功的标准使用的就是这样的数据。在森的帮助下于1990年开发出来的“人类发展指数”，不仅把收入作为发展的组成部分考虑在内，还把预期寿命和教育也考虑在内（按照人均GDP计算，挪威是的富裕程度在全世界排名第六；但是，根据人类发展指数，挪威是世界最幸福的国家）。12月10日，联合国发布了最新版的“包容性财富指数”，即对教育和健康等事务用美元进行估值的指数。 It is no easier to raise capabilities, however, than it is to increase income. Bhutan, where the concept has driven government policy, still does not rank that highly on the HDI. Moreover, the capability approach has spawned so many measures, each more complicated than the last, that GDP starts to look appealing again. What other single number can give a decent approximation of quality of life? And yet, by the end of a “Christmas Carol”, even Scrooge realised that there was more to life than GDP. 然而，提高可行能力并不比提高收入更容易。不丹，虽说其政府的政策是由这一概念来决定的，仍然没有排在人类发展指数排行榜的前列。除此之外，可行能力方法还派生出了许多衡量标准，而且每一种标准都要上一个更加复杂，以致于GDP又开始看起来有吸引力了。还有什么其他的单一数字能够给生活质量一个像样的近似值吗？在《圣诞颂歌》的结尾之处，就连斯克鲁奇都意识到了：生活不仅仅是GDP。 From the print edition: Finance and economics |
|
|
