���������������������������������������������
CCG持续关注国际关系议题，推动中国与全球化的发展，积极开展国际交流，充分发挥智库“二轨外交”作用，在巴黎和平论坛、达沃斯世界经济论坛、慕尼黑安全会议等重要国际政策与意见交流平台上组织分论坛、边会、圆桌会议、晚宴等活动，促进国际政商学界对话，凝聚共识；CCG积极与各国政界、智库界、工商界开展“二轨外交”活动，每年常态化赴多国调研与交流，促进中外关系攸关方互动，保持与多国政策圈层的沟通渠道。
-
【新华网】高等教育国际化亟须政策优化
近日，由教育部教育发展研究中心和欧洲大学协会共同承办的“首届中欧教育政策智库论坛”在京举行，论坛主题之一为一流大学建设与高等教育国际化，中外学者就提升高等教育国际化亟须的政策支持等进行研讨。 高等教育国际化是大势所趋 “教育对外开放是我国改革开放事业的重要组成部分，今年以来，国家先后出台《关于做好新时期教育对外开放工作的若干意见》和《推进共建一带一路教育行动》两个文件，标志着中国教育开放进入内涵发展、提升水平的新阶段，我们将坚持借鉴与弘扬并举，请进来与走出去并重，努力办出具有中国特色、世界水平的现代化教育。”日前，在由教育部教育发展研究中心和欧洲大学协会共同承办的“首届中欧教育政策智库论坛”上，教育部副部长郝平如是说道。 众所周知，国际化是当今高等教育发展的重要趋势，为高等教育的发展带来了重要机遇，促进了人才培养目标的不断调整、科学研究水平的不断提升、社会服务功能的不断拓宽以及国际交流与合作的不断扩大。以中欧学历学位互认、中外合作办学与涉外办学、双向留学为例，郝平指出，通过中欧高等教育之间的交流合作，提升了双方教育质量，推动了世界教育改革，深化了人文交流，促进了人类和平发展。 “大学的未来发展亟须国际化战略，这已经不是一个工具或者手段，在一定程度上来讲，它已经成为大学的一个功能或者使命。”在同济大学副校长江波看来，高等教育国际化是世界研究型大学发展的一个共同趋势，其表现不仅仅是国际高校间学生和教师的互相流动和交流，还包括实质性的科研合作，比如共建国际合作的实验室，共同开展国际合作项目等等。 “高等教育的国际化并不是按照某一个国家的高等教育模式或者按照某一所高校的模式办大学，所谓国际化不是一国化，不是一校化，而是各国高等教育之间的相互影响、优势互补。”宁波诺丁汉大学党委书记华长慧表达自己的观点。 “接下来的中欧高等教育合作将在以下方面开展：引进一流大学特色学科和高水平师资，合作开展课程开发和科技创新，借鉴先进管理理念，完善内部的治理结构，共同促进中国高校双一流的建设；共同促进中欧学历、学位的互认；共同促进中欧跨境教育质量提升等等。”教育部国际司司长许涛认为，作为中国学生最主要的留学地之一，欧洲与中国高等教育有诸多合作空间。 我国高等教育国际化程度有待提升 2016年初，教育部公布2015年外国来华留学生基本情况。统计显示，共有来自202个国家和地区的39万名各类外国留学人员在华学习。 “这个数字只占到我国高等教育在校生规模的0.5%~0.6%，而其他国家的留学生、国际生占本国高等教育规模比例比我们要高得多，比如英国是两位数。这提醒我们，中国的教育政策应更加开放、更加国际化。”谈起目前中国高等教育国际化现状，国务院参事、中国与全球化智库（CCG）理事长王辉耀列举了一些数字。 在与会专家看来，吸引国际生源来华留学，除去国家经济发展程度以及吸引学生的优厚政策外，更为重要的是优质的国际教师资源。 2015年底，中国教育国际交流协会首次公开发布《2015中国高等教育国际化发展状况调查报告》。报告显示，教师国际化方面，平均每所中国高校的外籍专任教师人数为17人，最多者为234人。报告认为，从各项指标的均值来看，我国高校的整体国际化水平仍然有待提高，未来应着重在课程与教学国际化方面进一步提升。 来自西班牙的马努埃尔·佩雷斯-加尔西亚研究员表示，一个国家高校的国际师资比例以及留学生比例，在一定程度上代表着这个国家的教育国际竞争力。他对中国多所知名高校调研后发现，国际师资不足是掣肘中国高等教育国际化的最主要因素，比如北京大学的国际师资只占到全校教师数量的0.5%，清华是1.6%，浙大仅为0.28%。此外，中国的国际教师的薪酬水平也不高，要吸引到更多优秀人才来华任教，薪酬等相关制度亟待改革。 教育国际化发展亟须政策支持 “中国是一个很适合做科研的地方，我愿意长久地待在中国，但相关的政策必须要改，才能吸引更多优秀老师来中国安家。”来自北京大学的外藉教授何锐思以亲身经历讲述了自己在中国高校任教的困惑。 何锐思说，他在中国任教遇到的最大问题是语言问题，“比如作为外国人，我不能申请国家自然科学基金，因为申请基金必须写中文，可是这不是我的强项，为什么没有英语通道呢。此外，我已经拿到终身教职，但是还必须每年回国办一次签证。诸如此类的问题还有很多，如果能出台一些更加开放的政策，我想会有更多人愿意来中国任教。” 王辉耀认为，在吸引留学生方面，一方面要向来华留学生开展多样性的跨文化领域的融合工作，调整来华留学生与国内学生住宿、交流分离的政策。另一方面，还要重视来华留学生的“人才红利”，给予优秀在华留学生“实习签证”和“工作签证”。此外，不仅要鼓励吸引留学生和引进国际师资，还要鼓励国内高校走出去，“我想不仅是中国企业要走出去，中国的大学也要走出去在海外建立分校，我们应该鼓励更多这种类型的合作。”王辉耀说。 江波认为：“高等教育国际化需要在内容和形式上拓展并转型，不仅是简单地增加进出留学生的数量，开展国际活动，更重要的要为中国高等教育改革和发展引入新的视野、内容、方法，引发高校改革的连锁反应。此外，要鼓励学科交叉，建立国际化的课程体系，营造多元校园文化生态，让不同文化背景的学生在一起学习和生活，在碰撞和融合中培养学生更强的国际社会适应性。”文章选自新华网，2016年10月18日
2016年10月20日 -
【人民网】中美两国智库举办“WTO与全球治理发展新趋势研讨会”
人民网北京10月19日电 昨天下午，中国与全球化智库(CCG)与美国著名智库美国战略与国际研究中心（CSIS）在北京总部联合举办“WTO与全球治理发展新趋势研讨会”。这是时值中国加入WTO十五周年即将到来之际，中国和美国知名智库首次举办研讨交流活动。 研讨会就全球治理的新格局将会给WTO带来哪些影响、WTO如何应对新兴的区域经济合作体及国际贸易新情况、中国在当前国际经贸格局下将发挥怎样的作用、 如何回顾与展望中国加入WTO的成功经验与发展前景等议题进行深入讨论。CCG主席、原外经贸部副部长龙永图，CCG顾问、中国外交部原副部长何亚非，CCG主任、国务院参事王辉耀，CSIS中国研究项目副主任甘思德，CCG特邀高级研究员霍建国等与会嘉宾参加研讨。CCG主席、原外经贸部副部长、中国入世首席谈判代表龙永图 会上，龙永图表示通过加入WTO，中国向世界表明愿意遵守全球规则，并成为参与者和执行者。他很希望两国的智库，针对各自在全球治理中的共同点和共同利益进行合作研究，给予各自的政府一些建议，来加强两国在全球治理方面的作用。王辉耀指出，中美两国二轨智库合作研讨，相互充分交流，达成理解、共识，发挥二轨外交作用，不仅有利于形成良好的社会舆论环境，也能为决策者提供有益参考，对于未来的全球治理提供参考建议。 据悉，中国与全球化智库（Center for China & Globalization，简称CCG）成立于2008年，致力于中国的全球化战略、人才国际化和企业国际化等领域的研究，在中国顶级智库排行榜中名列第七位。文章选自人民网，2016年10月19日
2016年10月20日 -
陈宁： 具有社会价值的产品和服务才是人工智能的终极目标
2016年9月23-24日，“2016全球化企业发展中国论坛”在宁波盛大举行。本届论坛是G20杭州峰会后首届关注投资中国和全球化企业发展的论坛，以“世界大市场--谋转型发展促产业融合”为主题，由宁波市人民政府、中国与全球化智库（CCG）、商务部中国国际经济合作学会共同主办，1000余位来自国际国内的知名企业家和跨国公司代表参加了此次论坛。CCG常务理事、深圳云天励飞技术有限公司创始人兼CEO陈宁在本次论坛平行论坛一“工业互联网与中国智造”的发言中指出，在数字化经济这样一个共享经济的时代，将来的消费者要买一个产品时，看到的是我到底买到一个什么样的价值或服务。所以我们谈的智能制造就是根据提供什么样的服务来营造产品。以下是陈宁先生的发言实录对于工业制造和互联网，我想谈两个观点，一个是技术，一个是商业竞争。我是做人工智能的，我认为人工智能、大数据、物联网，是推动智能制造和工业物联网逐步走向成熟的核心底层技术。对于底层的技术，通过国家资源资本的大力投入带动社会资本的投入，去推动这些基础理论研究的基础技术的逐步成熟。今年3月份的一盘围棋的人机大战让人工智能跃入大众视野，但是背后的深度学习和深度神经网络技术在2013年才逐步走向成熟，并带动了语音识别、图片分类等等技术点，有了一个本质的量变引起质变的飞跃。其实人工智能深度学习也是依靠黑盒子的理论，真正对人工智能的掌握和理解以及大规模的产业化，还有一条非常漫长的路。而中国在今天，其实并不比欧美的这些科研巨头有太大的差距，这是我们形成一个弯道超车的绝佳机会。人工智能这个词不断涌现。确实，它将会颠覆我们所看到的各行各业，而智能制造只是其中一个行业，会影响我们的生活，甚至会催生一个新的物种--机器人。机器人是否会取代人，或者机器人是否会消灭人，这是一个伪命题，可能还没有等到那一天，会有一个人机混合的新物种，很有可能在有生之年我们都可以看到。你可以想象，现在的很多行业都不会存在，人工智能将会把人类一些重复性、烦琐性的劳动中解放出来，但是又会催生今天根本不存在的行业。比如说年轻人现在去开发APP，在移动互联网出现之前，这个行业是根本不存在的。而人工智能将会以更快的速度去摧毁现有的行业，产生新的行业、新的格局，甚至去摧毁人类原有的生活习惯，产生新的生活习惯和新的生活方式。而基础理论的研究和突破是极其重要的，所以在技术层面我们有必要去重视。技术不是我们的目标，而产品和具备社会价值的服务才是所有人工智能企业，包括智能制造的一个最终的目标，这就涉及到产品的服务形态、商业模式以及市场竞争。在技术层面国家需要大力投入去推动扶持以外，在市场竞争层面，我认为有必要产生百家争鸣、百花齐放。去培育一个良好、健康的、靠市场竞争的一个环境，能够让真正具备核心技术和产品竞争力、以及具备像共享经济这样形成良好闭环商业模式的新兴企业和业态，可以在激烈的市场竞争中胜出，逐步沉淀为一个行业的标准。比如说，也许在未来，我们今天的这些2C的产品，不再是在工厂里把玩具生产好，交付到客户手里。也许在未来，家里都会有一台3D打印机，可能设计人员给设计好，甚至由用户如你的子女，互动地进行设计，直接可以在家里把这款玩具打印出来，那也许生产玩具的流水线、生产线就会消失。工业互联网也好，移动互联网也好，物联网也好，这些技术，新的商业模式和业态，使我们今天的生产线和工厂可能只是其中的一个环节。在商业模式产生剧变的过程中，我们现在的企业怎么去顺应未来的发展的趋势，重新定位，并且进行一个有效的技术和模式的转型，很多都是值得我们思考的。而最终这需要一个良好的市场竞争环境，来形成一个淘汰，形成一个行业的标准。这是我在技术和市场竞争方面的两个观点。 （根据CCG常务理事、深圳云天励飞技术有限公司创始人兼CEO陈宁在由中国与全球化智库（CCG）主办的“2016全球化企业发展中国论坛”上的演讲速记整理，未经本人审阅，转载请注明出处。）
2016年10月20日 -
王辉耀：如何打造中国特色智库人才“旋转门”
文 | 中国与全球化智库（CCG）主任王辉耀 在美国，智库与政府间存在一种特殊的人才交换通道——“旋转门”。思想者与行动者、学者与官员通过“旋转门”机制实现身份转换，在一定程度上沟通了学界与政界、思想与权力，实现了两者的相互渗透。一方面，智库人才进入政府任职，从政策研究者转变为政策制定者，增强了智库对国家政策的影响力；另一方面，智库大量吸纳政府离任官员，成为高级人才的蓄水池和引力场，提升了智库政策研究的质量。 中国智库同样面临人才流通问题。中办、国办印发的《关于加强中国特色新型智库建设的意见》指出，要“推动党政机关与智库之间人才有序流动，推荐智库专家到党政部门挂职任职”。据此，应逐步打造中国特色的“旋转门”机制，促进党政机关与智库之间的人才双向流动。 今天，我国已有部分优秀研究人员由体制内智库进入政府工作，部分离任官员进入智库从事研究或顾问工作。但这种“旋转门”机制并不完善，政府和智库间尚无法实现真正的人才双向流转。主要表现在两个方面：一方面，到智库工作的政界人士多为退休官员，且即使是退休官员，包括大使、参赞这类国际化人才，也大多进入各种协会机构，只有很少一部分选择进入智库。另一方面，由于现行公务员制度限制，由智库或学界进入政界的机会比较小，少量成功案例几乎都是党政智库人才到政府部门任职，社会智库等则极少有人才直接到政府部门任职的情况。 如何打造中国特色智库人才“旋转门”？特提出如下建议： 试点探索，逐步建立政府官员与智库学者间的轮换、挂职机制。选取与智库研究关联度较大的相关政府部门作为智库学者挂职锻炼或借调工作的试点，把部分关键职位在一定时限内提供给智库学者。同时，选择符合一定条件的智库作为交流试点，选拔相关岗位的政府官员到智库担任访问学者等研究职务。这样可以极大增进智库与政府间的理解与沟通，有助于培养具有学术素养的政策制定者和熟悉政策制定过程、更加务实的智库学者。对于成功的试点经验，可探索将其制度化，并加以推广。 建立健全政府和智库、学界、企业间的人才流转机制。改进公务员聘任政策，规范聘任人员的选拔方式、标准、程序和任期，完善保障措施，鼓励和吸纳社会优秀人才到政府部门任职，向政府输送新鲜血液。同时，逐步建立健全公务员等体制内人才向智库、学界、企业流转的制度和法律体系，完善相关保障措施。 创新智库运营机制，避免智库建设行政化。党政干部，特别是退休的政府高官到智库任管理职务，在提升智库对政策把握水平的同时，也可在一定程度上提升智库的公众影响力。智库应一方面吸纳符合条件的党政干部任职，一方面切实创新运营机制，避免智库建设的行政化色彩，同时明确边界，规范党政干部向智库管理者和研究者转型，更好地发挥他们的优势。 打造国际人才“旋转门”。随着对全球治理的参与日渐深入与广泛，我国对国际化人才的需求愈加突出。应创造条件鼓励和支持政府机构、智库与国际组织间的人才流转，广泛邀请符合条件的海外华人华侨、港澳台人才、归国留学人员和外国专业人士加入智库。有条件的地区，可以从公共部门的个别专业岗位开始探索吸纳国际人才，提升公共治理的国际化水平。同时，还可以通过交流、实习、挂职、专家顾问等方式加强向各类国际组织输送人才，在国际规则制定过程中发出更多中国声音、注入更多中国元素，维护和拓展我国利益。 充分发挥前外交官员的专业优势，推动智库“二轨外交”。西方国家通过“旋转门”进入智库的离任官员，其重要作用之一是推动了智库的“二轨外交”。中国也需要在更加广泛、更加深入的国际交流中与其他国家加深相互理解。应促进前外交官员、前商务参赞等富有经验的国际化人才向智库流转，充分发挥这一群体具有全球视野、熟悉海外情况、了解外交工作的专业优势。文章刊于《光明日报》，2016年10月19日
2016年10月20日 -
【Knowledge@Wharton】Wang Huiyao : How Should China Change Its National Brand?
Wang Huiyao, President of CCG.Few are as qualified as Huiyao Wang to analyze China’s future. He is the founding director of the Center for China and Globalization (CCG), a Chinese think tank on global talents, returnees and migration, and he has also been a Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation official. Today Wang is a senior fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, among other activities. Ahead of his October visit to speak at the Wharton Nation Brand Conference, Wang spoke with marketing professor David Reibstein about the best future course for Chinese business and the nation’s brand.Wang Huiyao: How Should China Change Its National Brand? | Knowledge@WhartonDavid Reibstein: What is the Center for China and Globalization and its mission?Huiyao Wang: The Center for China and Globalization (CCG) is the largest independent think tank in China. We have been established almost nine years now, and we are lucky that we are ranked by the University of Pennsylvania’s Think Tank and Civil Society Program as 110th out of the top think tanks in the world, No. 7 in China and the No. 1 for independent think tanks in China. We’re fairly large and have almost 100 people in research and on staff. We have several locations in China, including Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou.The mission for the CCG is to become a bridge and a platform for the exchange of scholars and researchers and policymakers and the business academic community, in terms of strengthening the process of China and globalization. Also, its mission is to serve better the policy community, both in China and the outside world. We want to be a bridge and focus particularly on the globalizing of the talent and the enterprises, and the migration between China and other countries.Reibstein: You have been a consultant to many global companies such as GE, Siemens, ABB, Westinghouse, Mitsubishi, and so on. And I’m assuming you have worked with them to better connect them with China. But you have also been responsible for numerous Chinese firms going global. Is that the primary responsibility of the center?Wang: Yes. CCG hosted a large conference in Zhejiang Province, which just concluded the G20 Summit there. We had people from several hundred countries to talk about globalized enterprise in the contemporary world — basically how to invest in China and invest globally. We are having another conference called China Outbound Forum, which will have several hundred Chinese firms come regarding Chinese investment overseas. So, our center does involve a lot of exchanges and also promoting the cooperation between Chinese enterprises, multinationals, foreign enterprises and Fortune 500 companies. We do involve quite a bit of business exchanges and collaborations.Reibstein: Let’s talk about how China is perceived globally and how you’re trying to promote the image to better attract businesses to China, as well as acceptance of China’s businesses overseas. China is well known for its low-cost manufacturing. But I’m curious about what other characteristics you think should be better understood about China outside of China.Wang: That’s a very good question, thank you. I think since China has opened up, gradually the image of China, particularly for Chinese enterprises, has changed a lot. In the past, 30 years ago, all businesses in China were state-owned enterprises. Now, at least half of the enterprises are privately owned. That’s probably the image that China should show the world, that China is not only a country with state-owned enterprises but with a very vibrant and actively rigorous private sector as well.“Thirty years ago, all businesses in China were state-owned enterprises. Now, at least half of the enterprises are privately owned. That’s probably the image that China should show the world.”For example, the private sector employs about 70% of the Chinese workforce. Multinationals and foreign enterprises have employed over 60 million to 80 million of the labor force at one point in time. I think there are a lot of good stories that should be told. For example, Wal-Mart, one of the biggest companies in the United States, is in China producing $20 billion a year of different products that are made in China that keep consumer prices low in the U.S.I think the dialogue and the communications between Chinese companies and outside foreign companies sometimes are less well understood. When a Chinese company is buying a company in the U.S., sometimes it would be regarded as negative. But some are good examples. For example, we know that the U.S. government in recent years has been calling for Made in the U.S.A., and trying to attract back the manufacturing sector. We know that some U.S. companies and government officials have come to China. We know that one of our friends, a company like Fuyao Glass, one of the largest auto glassmakers in China and probably one of the largest in the world, now has invested $600 million in the United States. Now they have several factories in the United States, making all the glass for the American industry.Examples like that should be well talked about and the story should be told so that they have a better understanding. They come to the United States, they begin to create jobs, they begin to offer employment, they’re going to generate income. I think this kind of a story on both sides, like Wal-Mart being one of the biggest foreign employers in China, is really good. The globalization benefits both countries, both countries’ people and the companies. I think in order to promote image, maybe those stories should be well told and explained.SPONSORED CONTENT:Reibstein: Wal-Mart is an interesting story. By the way, I should let you know that my first time going to China was 1981.Wang: Oh, that’s very early.Reibstein: It’s very early. I’ve got all sorts of stories I could share about that, but I’ll do that when you’re here in the U.S. But I know that Wal-Mart got into China fairly early. I find Wal-Mart a really interesting example because when they were operating before going into China, their trademark was that all of their products were made in America. Then they dropped that. Obviously, they get a large number of products from China. But if I think about a global brand for a company, it becomes very difficult because within the United States they’re known as very low price. But in China, Wal-Mart is not the lowest-priced retailer.Wang: That’s right.Reibstein: It’s interesting how they have a different image within China than they do in the United States and elsewhere in the world. I suspect that’s true for the brand China itself. Since you mentioned Made in the U.S.A. as something that at least our current political candidates have been bandying around, there was the Made in China campaign that has been advertised quite broadly. Do you have any thoughts about that particular campaign, whom it was really targeted toward and whether it’s been successful?“Fuyao Glass, one of the largest auto glass makers in China and probably one of the largest in the world, now has invested $600 million in the United States.”Wang: I’m not too familiar with that. But I think that one thing about Made in China is that there are also image and brand changes. In the past, Made in China meant cheaper — maybe quality-wise not really very good, but affordable. But now Made in China is trying to change that into also meaning quality and good service. I think there’s another sense, too. For example, all the big automakers from the United States are in China. They’re selling probably more cars in China than in the United States. So now Made in China can be a good example. Now you have all those big brands made in China and mostly selling in China as well.Reibstein: Let me sort of tiptoe on what might be a delicate subject. The notion of Made in China might have translated to not necessarily the highest quality, not necessarily reliable. What is being done to try and change some of that image?Wang: One of the things that could be utilized is that we have so many American companies in China, like Microsoft, GE, GM or Ford. GM cars are now made in China, and Ford cars made in China are really of a very good quality. Microsoft has several research centers outside the United States. There’s a center in Beijing. It’s probably recognized by Microsoft as one of the best in the world that they have utilized the R&D talent and and there are a lot of good products out of China. I think Wal-Mart has opened more Sam’s Stores now in China.There are a lot of things that are made in China that are of good quality. I think that the story can probably be better told by those U.S. companies regarding their products. This is probably one of the things that China hasn’t realized. But if you really tell the story of these Fortune 500 companies that are coming to China and Made in China, and then we can demonstrate the products are of good quality, that can help change the image.Reibstein: I have no doubt that there are some great products that are made within China, and the quality of many of the examples you just mentioned are excellent. But I’m wondering how China is trying to capitalize on that. I suspect that those companies that are making their products in China tend not to promote that very much because of this legacy reputation. What can be done to overcome that?Wang: I think there are probably several ways to tackle that. First, I think the domestic companies really need to do a good job of the design of the brand and making them understood outside China. For example, Lenovo used to be called Legend. They changed their brand and redesigned their logos.We often see in the United States and other international television, the spokesperson or the local representative of Chinese companies is from China most of the time. Just like multinationals do in China, they hire local Chinese. They have a Chinese base in China, and then people felt they are part of the companies that belong here. Whereas in the United States, you probably don’t see that. You see a lot of Chinese representing Chinese companies. Maybe it’s a good idea to have Americans representing Chinese companies, so that like the Japanese have done, you can see a Toyota ad and you don’t see a Japanese talking there, you see an American representing Toyota. That could be the same method that the Chinese companies can adopt to tell the better story and explain better the quality and the product.Reibstein: One of the examples you just mentioned is Lenovo. I believe Lenovo today is the largest PC provider in the world. They could have selected a name that was very Chinese sounding. I often joke that the name Lenovo almost sounds Italian. It’s not, I think, the best ambassador for brand China. I think it is a great example of a company that’s doing exceedingly well with a great product, but I don’t know if it’s carrying the brand China on its shoulders.Wang: Well, they had a Chinese name in the past, Lianxiang. They’d been using that for quite some time, but they changed to their English name to reflect an international market. In the past, their old English name was Legend. But there were several brands already associated with Legend. I guess they wanted to try to demonstrate maybe innovative, novo, new. Like you said, a little Italian, a little French or European style stuff. But that’s a good example that they used that English name before they embarked on this internationalization of the company.Reibstein: But I’m worried about trying to help bring brand China up and who is carrying that banner. I’m wondering if there are any lessons that could be learned from Japan. At one point, Made in Japan had some baggage with it, as well as we could think about Made in South Korea. But the companies that we could think of, like I know you have worked with Mitsubishi, that is a very Japanese-sounding name. Samsung and Daewoo, both of those are not English sounding names. I’m wondering if there are some lessons for China that could be learned from Japan and from South Korea.Wang: I think there are really good lessons to learn from them. And I think sometimes it’s difficult to change the name. But to make the name, even in its own language, whether it’s in Korean or in Japanese, when they’re translating it into English, it’s at least pronounceable. That’s probably important. If a Chinese name is too difficult to pronounce, maybe it’s good to change into a pronounceable name, like Lenovo.“In the past, Made in China meant cheaper — maybe quality-wise not really very good, but affordable.”The second thing I think is that they could use the English alphabet. For example, TCL, one of the largest TV producers in China, or BYD, one of the largest battery and automakers in China for clean energy, is also using the letters of the English alphabet. Those are trying to suit the market. But I think the other thing is that when they do the ads, when they do the brand promotion, when they do the image, they should really use a lot of local representatives. I can give you a good example. At one time, they had an advertisement in Times Square. They flash all [famous] faces from China. But for the audience in the Western world, they don’t know this particular figure or that particular figure….Reibstein: What do you think China’s global image will be in 10 years?Wang: I think we see that China’s image is really changing quite rapidly; probably every decade there’s a big shift. For example, when World War II was finished, we saw the Western companies going global, multinationals emerging. Then in 1964, when the Tokyo Olympics happened, Japanese embarked on globalization. And in 1988, when the Seoul Olympics happened, Korean companies started the globalization and going global. In 2008, the Beijing Olympics happened and Chinese companies started going global. For the last ten or 20 years, we’ve seen China surpass Germany, surpass Japan, and now it’s quite compatible with the U.S. with still some years to catch up on the GDP side. But maybe in 10 years’ time, China will be the largest GDP country in the world. I think China has to really project its image as friendly for the climate now that China has just signed in Paris the climate change agreement with the U.S. We hope that we have maybe a clean and better China, and a more globalized China in 10 or 15 years’ time.We see China has half a million students studying in foreign countries every year. About 300,000 went to the United States and account for about one-third of the foreign students in the United States. China now is the largest country with 110 million people traveling around the world, spending $100 billion outside China. I think the purchasing power, their GDP and their industrial processes will continue.But I think what may be more important is the soft power. China has to match the soft power with the high power they acquire. What I really hope in the next 10, 20 years is that China should gain soft power, gain its compatible global image that other reputable countries have, try to be big stakeholders of this international family and play a more active role to maintain, strengthen and upgrade the global government system. I think there are a lot of things to expect.From Knowledge@Wharton, Oct 17, 2016
2016年10月19日 -
Wang Huiyao: How Should China Change Its National Brand? | Knowledge@Wharton
Wang Huiyao, President of CCG.Few are as qualified as Huiyao Wang to analyze China’s future. He is the founding director of the Center for China and Globalization (CCG), a Chinese think tank on global talents, returnees and migration, and he has also been a Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation official. Today Wang is a senior fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, among other activities. Ahead of his October visit to speak at the Wharton Nation Brand Conference, Wang spoke with marketing professor David Reibstein about the best future course for Chinese business and the nation’s brand.Wang Huiyao: How Should China Change Its National Brand? | Knowledge@WhartonDavid Reibstein: What is the Center for China and Globalization and its mission?Huiyao Wang: The Center for China and Globalization (CCG) is the largest independent think tank in China. We have been established almost nine years now, and we are lucky that we are ranked by the University of Pennsylvania’s Think Tank and Civil Society Program as 110th out of the top think tanks in the world, No. 7 in China and the No. 1 for independent think tanks in China. We’re fairly large and have almost 100 people in research and on staff. We have several locations in China, including Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou.The mission for the CCG is to become a bridge and a platform for the exchange of scholars and researchers and policymakers and the business academic community, in terms of strengthening the process of China and globalization. Also, its mission is to serve better the policy community, both in China and the outside world. We want to be a bridge and focus particularly on the globalizing of the talent and the enterprises, and the migration between China and other countries.Reibstein: You have been a consultant to many global companies such as GE, Siemens, ABB, Westinghouse, Mitsubishi, and so on. And I’m assuming you have worked with them to better connect them with China. But you have also been responsible for numerous Chinese firms going global. Is that the primary responsibility of the center?Wang: Yes. CCG hosted a large conference in Zhejiang Province, which just concluded the G20 Summit there. We had people from several hundred countries to talk about globalized enterprise in the contemporary world — basically how to invest in China and invest globally. We are having another conference called China Outbound Forum, which will have several hundred Chinese firms come regarding Chinese investment overseas. So, our center does involve a lot of exchanges and also promoting the cooperation between Chinese enterprises, multinationals, foreign enterprises and Fortune 500 companies. We do involve quite a bit of business exchanges and collaborations.Reibstein: Let’s talk about how China is perceived globally and how you’re trying to promote the image to better attract businesses to China, as well as acceptance of China’s businesses overseas. China is well known for its low-cost manufacturing. But I’m curious about what other characteristics you think should be better understood about China outside of China.Wang: That’s a very good question, thank you. I think since China has opened up, gradually the image of China, particularly for Chinese enterprises, has changed a lot. In the past, 30 years ago, all businesses in China were state-owned enterprises. Now, at least half of the enterprises are privately owned. That’s probably the image that China should show the world, that China is not only a country with state-owned enterprises but with a very vibrant and actively rigorous private sector as well.“Thirty years ago, all businesses in China were state-owned enterprises. Now, at least half of the enterprises are privately owned. That’s probably the image that China should show the world.”For example, the private sector employs about 70% of the Chinese workforce. Multinationals and foreign enterprises have employed over 60 million to 80 million of the labor force at one point in time. I think there are a lot of good stories that should be told. For example, Wal-Mart, one of the biggest companies in the United States, is in China producing $20 billion a year of different products that are made in China that keep consumer prices low in the U.S.I think the dialogue and the communications between Chinese companies and outside foreign companies sometimes are less well understood. When a Chinese company is buying a company in the U.S., sometimes it would be regarded as negative. But some are good examples. For example, we know that the U.S. government in recent years has been calling for Made in the U.S.A., and trying to attract back the manufacturing sector. We know that some U.S. companies and government officials have come to China. We know that one of our friends, a company like Fuyao Glass, one of the largest auto glassmakers in China and probably one of the largest in the world, now has invested $600 million in the United States. Now they have several factories in the United States, making all the glass for the American industry.Examples like that should be well talked about and the story should be told so that they have a better understanding. They come to the United States, they begin to create jobs, they begin to offer employment, they’re going to generate income. I think this kind of a story on both sides, like Wal-Mart being one of the biggest foreign employers in China, is really good. The globalization benefits both countries, both countries’ people and the companies. I think in order to promote image, maybe those stories should be well told and explained.SPONSORED CONTENT:Reibstein: Wal-Mart is an interesting story. By the way, I should let you know that my first time going to China was 1981.Wang: Oh, that’s very early.Reibstein: It’s very early. I’ve got all sorts of stories I could share about that, but I’ll do that when you’re here in the U.S. But I know that Wal-Mart got into China fairly early. I find Wal-Mart a really interesting example because when they were operating before going into China, their trademark was that all of their products were made in America. Then they dropped that. Obviously, they get a large number of products from China. But if I think about a global brand for a company, it becomes very difficult because within the United States they’re known as very low price. But in China, Wal-Mart is not the lowest-priced retailer.Wang: That’s right.Reibstein: It’s interesting how they have a different image within China than they do in the United States and elsewhere in the world. I suspect that’s true for the brand China itself. Since you mentioned Made in the U.S.A. as something that at least our current political candidates have been bandying around, there was the Made in China campaign that has been advertised quite broadly. Do you have any thoughts about that particular campaign, whom it was really targeted toward and whether it’s been successful?“Fuyao Glass, one of the largest auto glass makers in China and probably one of the largest in the world, now has invested $600 million in the United States.”Wang: I’m not too familiar with that. But I think that one thing about Made in China is that there are also image and brand changes. In the past, Made in China meant cheaper — maybe quality-wise not really very good, but affordable. But now Made in China is trying to change that into also meaning quality and good service. I think there’s another sense, too. For example, all the big automakers from the United States are in China. They’re selling probably more cars in China than in the United States. So now Made in China can be a good example. Now you have all those big brands made in China and mostly selling in China as well.Reibstein: Let me sort of tiptoe on what might be a delicate subject. The notion of Made in China might have translated to not necessarily the highest quality, not necessarily reliable. What is being done to try and change some of that image?Wang: One of the things that could be utilized is that we have so many American companies in China, like Microsoft, GE, GM or Ford. GM cars are now made in China, and Ford cars made in China are really of a very good quality. Microsoft has several research centers outside the United States. There’s a center in Beijing. It’s probably recognized by Microsoft as one of the best in the world that they have utilized the R&D talent and and there are a lot of good products out of China. I think Wal-Mart has opened more Sam’s Stores now in China.There are a lot of things that are made in China that are of good quality. I think that the story can probably be better told by those U.S. companies regarding their products. This is probably one of the things that China hasn’t realized. But if you really tell the story of these Fortune 500 companies that are coming to China and Made in China, and then we can demonstrate the products are of good quality, that can help change the image.Reibstein: I have no doubt that there are some great products that are made within China, and the quality of many of the examples you just mentioned are excellent. But I’m wondering how China is trying to capitalize on that. I suspect that those companies that are making their products in China tend not to promote that very much because of this legacy reputation. What can be done to overcome that?Wang: I think there are probably several ways to tackle that. First, I think the domestic companies really need to do a good job of the design of the brand and making them understood outside China. For example, Lenovo used to be called Legend. They changed their brand and redesigned their logos.We often see in the United States and other international television, the spokesperson or the local representative of Chinese companies is from China most of the time. Just like multinationals do in China, they hire local Chinese. They have a Chinese base in China, and then people felt they are part of the companies that belong here. Whereas in the United States, you probably don’t see that. You see a lot of Chinese representing Chinese companies. Maybe it’s a good idea to have Americans representing Chinese companies, so that like the Japanese have done, you can see a Toyota ad and you don’t see a Japanese talking there, you see an American representing Toyota. That could be the same method that the Chinese companies can adopt to tell the better story and explain better the quality and the product.Reibstein: One of the examples you just mentioned is Lenovo. I believe Lenovo today is the largest PC provider in the world. They could have selected a name that was very Chinese sounding. I often joke that the name Lenovo almost sounds Italian. It’s not, I think, the best ambassador for brand China. I think it is a great example of a company that’s doing exceedingly well with a great product, but I don’t know if it’s carrying the brand China on its shoulders.Wang: Well, they had a Chinese name in the past, Lianxiang. They’d been using that for quite some time, but they changed to their English name to reflect an international market. In the past, their old English name was Legend. But there were several brands already associated with Legend. I guess they wanted to try to demonstrate maybe innovative, novo, new. Like you said, a little Italian, a little French or European style stuff. But that’s a good example that they used that English name before they embarked on this internationalization of the company.Reibstein: But I’m worried about trying to help bring brand China up and who is carrying that banner. I’m wondering if there are any lessons that could be learned from Japan. At one point, Made in Japan had some baggage with it, as well as we could think about Made in South Korea. But the companies that we could think of, like I know you have worked with Mitsubishi, that is a very Japanese-sounding name. Samsung and Daewoo, both of those are not English sounding names. I’m wondering if there are some lessons for China that could be learned from Japan and from South Korea.Wang: I think there are really good lessons to learn from them. And I think sometimes it’s difficult to change the name. But to make the name, even in its own language, whether it’s in Korean or in Japanese, when they’re translating it into English, it’s at least pronounceable. That’s probably important. If a Chinese name is too difficult to pronounce, maybe it’s good to change into a pronounceable name, like Lenovo.“In the past, Made in China meant cheaper — maybe quality-wise not really very good, but affordable.”The second thing I think is that they could use the English alphabet. For example, TCL, one of the largest TV producers in China, or BYD, one of the largest battery and automakers in China for clean energy, is also using the letters of the English alphabet. Those are trying to suit the market. But I think the other thing is that when they do the ads, when they do the brand promotion, when they do the image, they should really use a lot of local representatives. I can give you a good example. At one time, they had an advertisement in Times Square. They flash all [famous] faces from China. But for the audience in the Western world, they don’t know this particular figure or that particular figure….Reibstein: What do you think China’s global image will be in 10 years?Wang: I think we see that China’s image is really changing quite rapidly; probably every decade there’s a big shift. For example, when World War II was finished, we saw the Western companies going global, multinationals emerging. Then in 1964, when the Tokyo Olympics happened, Japanese embarked on globalization. And in 1988, when the Seoul Olympics happened, Korean companies started the globalization and going global. In 2008, the Beijing Olympics happened and Chinese companies started going global. For the last ten or 20 years, we’ve seen China surpass Germany, surpass Japan, and now it’s quite compatible with the U.S. with still some years to catch up on the GDP side. But maybe in 10 years’ time, China will be the largest GDP country in the world. I think China has to really project its image as friendly for the climate now that China has just signed in Paris the climate change agreement with the U.S. We hope that we have maybe a clean and better China, and a more globalized China in 10 or 15 years’ time.We see China has half a million students studying in foreign countries every year. About 300,000 went to the United States and account for about one-third of the foreign students in the United States. China now is the largest country with 110 million people traveling around the world, spending $100 billion outside China. I think the purchasing power, their GDP and their industrial processes will continue.But I think what may be more important is the soft power. China has to match the soft power with the high power they acquire. What I really hope in the next 10, 20 years is that China should gain soft power, gain its compatible global image that other reputable countries have, try to be big stakeholders of this international family and play a more active role to maintain, strengthen and upgrade the global government system. I think there are a lot of things to expect.From Knowledge@Wharton, Oct 17, 2016
2016年10月19日 -
【亚太日报】黄日涵、徐磊祥：解除“紧箍咒”对缅甸意味什么？
解除“紧箍咒”对缅甸意味什么？作者：黄日涵，中国与全球化智库（CCG）一带一路研究所所长；徐磊祥，万里常安海外风险研究院研究员；美国总统奥巴马７日发布行政命令，宣布美国终止实施针对缅甸的《国家应急法》，并由此解除针对缅甸的相关制裁措施。美国财政部也在当天发表声明，终止实施针对缅甸的《国家应急法》后，美国财政部监管下的针对缅甸的经济和金融制裁措施将不再有效。这表明美国放开了对缅甸长达20多年的经济制裁。美国对缅甸的制裁始于1997年克林顿政府，当时缅甸正处于军政府统治时期。由于缅甸军政府对昂山素季的持续打压，美国对缅甸的制裁也在逐步升级。从克林顿到小布什，美国对缅制裁法案也从禁止美国投资，进入“缅甸资源的经济发展领域”，不断扩大到禁止从缅进口产品、冻结缅政府在美资产、禁止到缅投资和向缅提供贷款及技术援助等，可以说，美国给缅甸的“紧箍咒”是越拴越紧。美国之所以一步步收紧对缅制裁，除了缅甸国内因素之外，更多是美国对自身国家利益的考虑。缅甸连接东南亚和南亚，毗邻中国，地缘位置非常重要。美国希望缅甸建立一个符合西方价值观的亲美政权，从而服务于它全球战略的需要。而且，冷战结束后，美国迫切想扩张势力范围，巩固霸权地位。在这一大背景下，缅甸军政府显然不符合美国推广其国际战略的需要，经济制裁就成为美国促使缅甸国内政局转变的重要工具。2015年缅甸大选后，昂山素季领导的民盟取得胜利，美国政府认为这是在缅甸成功推行民主价值观的优秀案例。今年4月，民盟上台执政，美国加快了放下“大棒”的速度，从5月开始逐步放松对缅制裁，到9月昂山素季访美之时，奥巴马明确放出了将全面解除对缅甸制裁的信号。缅甸民盟领导人昂山素季。数据图片众所周知，奥巴马政府上台后推出了“亚太再平衡”战略，企图拉拢中国周边国家和地区以遏制中国的发展。此番美国终止对缅甸的经济制裁，与其说是因为缅甸民主进程的推进，还不如说美国是企图通过解除经济制裁来进一步拉拢缅甸，使缅甸民盟政府能够在外交政策上更多地倾向美国。从目前的情况来看，美国解除对缅甸制裁的靴子何时落地仍未可期。而奥巴马任期即将结束，此时出台这项政策，无外乎是想为自己留下“政治遗产”。当然，也是替民主党助选，为希拉里加油添分。毋庸置疑，美国解除制裁，对于缅甸经济发展来说，将是一针“强心剂”。由于美国长期制裁，加上缅甸国内电力匮乏、基础设施落后，缅甸经济长期以来发展比较缓慢。如果这次美国解除经济制裁能够得到切实履行，缅甸国际经济环境将大为改善。其实缅甸拥有不错的天然禀赋，国内自然资源丰富、劳动力充沛低廉，随着制裁的解除，国际投资将会纷至沓来。基础设施落后，经济发展缓慢的缅甸。数据图片目前，有许多人担忧美国解除经济制裁会使缅甸的外交政策更加亲美，然而这一论断在笔者看来有点多虑。一方面，缅甸长期以来一直奉行不结盟的外交政策，倒向美国的可能性并不大。另一方面，从昂山素季领导的民盟上台以来，中缅关系一直保持较为良性的发展，中缅高层互动频繁。缅甸新政府的外交政策也在日渐成熟，对于民盟政府而言，在中美之间寻求平衡，在大国之间寻找共识，将逐渐成为缅甸执政团队的共识，而这一认知将会持续相当长的时间。俗话说“远亲不如近邻”，发展中缅关系的主动权毕竟在中缅两国手中，“任他风吹浪打，我自闲庭信步”。文章选自亚太日报，2016年10月11日
2016年10月18日