自由市场必然导致不平等？
欧洲改革中心高级研究员菲利浦·怀特（Philip Whyte）为英国《金融时报》撰稿
2008年6月17日 星期二
许多欧洲人认为，自由经济改革与社会公正不可两者兼得。他们指出，与欧洲大陆相比，英美两国产品和劳动力市场的自由度更高——但两国的贫困与收入不均的程度也更高。因此欧洲国家面临着一项选择：它们或是放开其产品与劳动力市场，并接受由此而来的各种弊端；或是抵制英美形式的新自由主义，从而维护社会的团结。
但是，这种市场自由化会加剧社会不平等的见解，得不到相应论据的支持。当然，英国贫困和收入不均的程度要高于法国或德国。但单单挑出这一点，不过是选择性地运用例证来支持某种预设的结论。如果市场自由化水平与社会结果之间真存在着强烈的关联，我们应该会看到这种模式在整个欧盟内部被一再复制——而不只是在精挑细选出的少数国家。
这是一种清晰可辨的模式吗？并非如此。在欧盟内部，贫困和收入不均程度最低，以及长期失业率最低的国家，都是丹麦。该国拥有竞争性的产品市场，以及一些限制性最弱的劳工法律。而社会结果最差的那些国家（希腊、意大利和葡萄牙），都有着限制性很强的产品与劳工法律。看来，自由化对于社会公正的威胁程度，并不比法规对社会公正的保障程度更高。
那么，如何解释社会结果的这些差异呢？你也许会想，答案一定在于政府支出上的差异。在北欧等奉行平等主义的国家里，社会支出水平自然较高。但它也只是和法国一样高，而法国的社会不公则更为明显。同样，在人们心目中铁石心肠的英国，其社会支出与奉行平等主义的荷兰处于同一水平。与通常的观点相反，统治英国的并不是一个无情的极简派政府。
平等主义在北欧国家与荷兰成果最为明显的原因在于，这些国家提供了最好的教育。在整个欧盟地区，教育与社会结果之间的关联十分明显。接受过中等教育、但成绩较差的那些人，最容易遭受贫困。此外，一个人的受教育程度越高，他就业的可能性也就越大：接受过高等教育的欧洲人就业率为80%，而那些未能完成中等教育的人就业率仅为50%。
北欧的教育体系为何如此特殊？部分原因在于它的平等性：北欧15岁青少年的识字率与计算能力都高于南欧地区的同龄人。但是，学生在校时间的长短也同样重要。在丹麦、芬兰和瑞典25岁至34岁的人群中，90%的人都已完成了中高等教育——40%的人则将继续攻读高等教育资格证书。在葡萄牙，相应数字分别为43%和19%，而希腊的数字则为57%和25%。
英国的情况如何？英国的公共教育支出比例略低于国内生产总值(GDP)的6%，与欧盟的平均水平大致相当。而结果有所差异。经济合作与发展组织(Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development)的研究显示，英国15岁青少年的识字率与计算水平大致与德国相当（高于法国的水平）。此外，许多国际研究报告将英国的大学列为欧洲最佳。那么英国的问题在哪里呢？答案是：每4个英国孩子中，就有一位在完成中高等教育之前辍学——这一比例远高于欧洲平均水平。
简言之，与英国的不平等现象关联更大的，似乎是中高等教育体系中的高辍学率，而不是这个国家的私有铁路系统、自由劳工法，或是社会流动水平。如果这个分析正确的话，这意味着英国政府所面临的任务就像是逆水行舟，试图在通过税收与福利政策来减少不平等现象。这同时意味着，那些辍学率较高的国家，更容易出现全球化与技术变革造成的收入不平等加剧现象。
长久以来，教育一直是国家财富的重要决定因素。当中国与印度越来越多地融入全球经济，及国际分工迅速发展之际，教育对社会凝聚力的影响越来越重要。而那些最有可能面临社会不平等不断加剧风险的欧洲国家，也正是那些教育体系表现较差的地方。
作者为欧洲改革中心(Centre for European Reform)高级研究员
译者/李晖
阅读本文章英文,请点击 Why free markets have little to do with inequality
Why free markets have little to do with inequality
By Philip Whyte
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Many Europeans believe liberal economic reforms are incompatible with social justice. The US and the UK, they point out, have more liberal markets for products and labour than in continental Europe – but also higher levels of poverty and income inequality. European countries therefore face a choice. They can either free their product and labour markets and accept the downsides or they can protect social solidarity by resisting Anglo-American neo-liberalism.
But the belief that market liberalisation increases social inequalities is not borne out by the evidence. The UK certainly has higher levels of poverty and inequality than France or Germany. But pointing this out is just selective use of evidence to support a predetermined conclusion. If there were a strong correlation between levels of market liberalisation and social outcomes, one would expect to see the pattern replicated across the European Union – not just in a carefully selected group of countries.
Is such a pattern discernible? No. The nation with the lowest levels of poverty and income inequality in the EU, as well as the lowest rate of long-term unemployment, is Denmark – a country with competitive product markets and some of the least restrictive labour laws. Countries with the worst social outcomes (Greece, Italy and Portugal) all have restrictive product and labour market laws. Liberalisation, it seems, no more threatens social justice than regulation guarantees it.
So what explains these differences in social outcomes? The answer, one might think, must be differences in spending by governments. Social spending is certainly high in egalitarian countries such as the Nordics. But it is just as high in France, where social inequalities are more marked. Likewise, it is as high in the supposedly heartless UK as it is in the egalitarian Netherlands. Contrary to popular belief, the UK is not governed by a callous minimal state.
The reason the Nordics and the Dutch have the most egalitarian outcomes is that they provide the best education. The correlation between educational and social outcomes across the EU is striking. People with low levels of attainment at secondary education are most exposed to the risk of poverty. Moreover, the more educated people are, the more likely they are to be in work: the employment rate for Europeans with tertiary education is 80 per cent, whereas it is just 50 per cent for those who fail to complete their secondary education.
What makes Nordic education systems special? Partly, it is quality: 15-year-olds in northern Europe have higher literacy and numeracy levels than those in southern Europe. But the length of schooling is equally important. In Denmark, Finland and Sweden, 90 per cent of 25- to 34-year-olds have completed upper secondary education – and 40 per cent have gone on to obtain tertiary qualifications. In Portugal, the respective figures are 43 per cent and 19 per cent, while in Greece they are 57 per cent and 25 per cent.
How about the UK? Public spending on education is just under 6 per cent of gross domestic product – around the EU average. The results are mixed. Studies by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development show that levels of literacy and numeracy among 15-year-olds are about the same as in Germany (and higher than in France). Many international studies, moreover, rank British universities as the best in Europe. So what is the problem? The answer is that one in four children leave school before completing upper secondary education – a much higher share than the EU average.
In short, inequality in the UK seems to have more to do with high drop-out rates from upper secondary education than with the country's privatised rail system, liberal labour laws or levels of social transfers. If this analysis is correct, it suggests that the British government faces an uphill task trying to reduce inequalities through the tax and benefits system. It also suggests that countries in which drop-out rates are high are the most exposed to increases in income inequality resulting from globalisation and technological change.
Education has long been an important determinant of countries' wealth. As China and India become more integrated in the world economy and the international division of labour proceeds apace, it is also having an increasingly important influence on social cohesion. The European countries most at risk of rising social inequalities are those with underperforming education systems.
The writer is a senior research fellow at the Centre for European Reform市场自由化,自由市场经济观察,自由市场必然导致不平等
