-
【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 -
【澎湃新闻网】李显龙访澳提升战略关系，每年派近两万新加坡士兵赴澳训练
据《联合早报》10月13日报道，当地时间12日，新加坡总理李显龙对澳大利亚进行国事访问，并受邀在澳大利亚议会发表演讲，成为获此待遇的第12位国家领导人。 在演讲中李显龙声称，新澳均“视美国为良性力量，在促进亚洲的和平与稳定上扮演重大角色。”他同时也表示，中国是新澳两国的最大贸易伙伴，双方“希望同中国加强合作，也支持中国在区域内扮演建设性角色。” 除此次演讲之外，李显龙此访最重要的成果是与澳大利亚成功达成了关于“澳新全面战略伙伴关系协定”的四项配套协定。李显龙称，澳新此次达成的协定将把两国带到一个新的里程碑。 英国《国际商业时报》11日报道显示，这四项协定中最重要的是一项关于防务合作的谅解备忘录，允许在未来25年内，每年有不超过18,000名新加坡士兵在澳大利亚进行多达18周的训练。 据报道，尽管新加坡士兵赴澳训练已经是一个长久以来的传统，但此前每年只有约6000名新加坡士兵在澳受训。此次达成的这一耗资约17亿美元的项目将极大拓展两国防务合作的规模。 近年来，新加坡不断加强与美国的盟友联系，而有关其在中国南海问题上的表态频频成为媒体关注的焦点。就在两周前（9月底），李显龙对日本进行为期四天的访问。期间，他就南海问题声称，新加坡在南海存在“关键利益”。 8月初访美期间，李显龙还就所谓的南海“仲裁案”表达强有力的支持立场。 就在10月12日刚刚结束的香山论坛上，新加坡国防部长黄永宏通过中国媒体表示，新加坡将“关注中国如何在南海问题上，就军事和民用船舶通行建立规则”。 在10月11日中国与全球化智库（CCG）举办的一次研讨会上，北京大学国际关系学院教授、CCG特邀高级研究员翟崑对澎湃新闻记者表示，面临地区形势的急剧变化，新加坡变得异常“纠结”，既希望将美国的力量越来越多地引入到东南亚地区，又希望贯彻并保持自己独立的外交理念，这可能将增加新加坡和中国之间在政治、外交和安全方面的的“摩擦”。 但与此同时，新加坡通过在重庆开设政府间合作项目，参与到渝新欧国际铁路联运大通道之中，成为全世界唯一一个既参与“丝绸之路经济带”、又参与“21世纪海上丝绸之路”的国家，在中国的对外经贸合作战略中发挥着重要作用。 翟崑认为，在这种“政经分离”的局面下，中方需要进行相当程度的努力，才能既维护自己的核心利益，又在开展国际经贸合作时，最大程度地发挥新加坡的重要作用。文章选自澎湃新闻网，2016年10月13日
2016年10月18日