【摘要】：20世紀(jì)七八十年代,以美國為首的各主要資本主義國家都出現(xiàn)了經(jīng)濟(jì)滯脹和衰退,制造業(yè)在國內(nèi)的地位停滯不前甚至出現(xiàn)倒退,美國學(xué)界紛紛將這種現(xiàn)象稱為“去工業(yè)化”,并認(rèn)為只有重振制造業(yè)在國民經(jīng)濟(jì)中的地位才能緩解去工業(yè)化帶來的困境,即實(shí)施再工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略。因此,要準(zhǔn)確理解再工業(yè)化的含義,不得不從認(rèn)識(shí)去工業(yè)化開始。其中,產(chǎn)業(yè)空心化與去工業(yè)化往往被誤認(rèn)為是同一概念,而再工業(yè)化概念也經(jīng)常和工業(yè)政策糾纏不清,因此本文在界定再工業(yè)化定義之前,對(duì)這兩組概念作出了區(qū)分。簡(jiǎn)要來說,筆者認(rèn)為產(chǎn)業(yè)空心化是扭曲的、相對(duì)的去工業(yè)化,是包含消極評(píng)價(jià)的去工業(yè)化。而再工業(yè)化和工業(yè)政策的區(qū)別在于,再工業(yè)化涉及的僅僅是微觀層面的工業(yè)政策,而非宏觀上的工業(yè)政策。據(jù)此,可將再工業(yè)化定義為：在發(fā)達(dá)國家或地區(qū)的工業(yè)尤其是制造業(yè)在國民經(jīng)濟(jì)中的地位不斷降低、制成品在國際市場(chǎng)上競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力相對(duì)下降的情況下,發(fā)達(dá)國家或地區(qū)重新充實(shí)工業(yè)基礎(chǔ),發(fā)展先進(jìn)制造業(yè)的過程或戰(zhàn)略。 三十年后,實(shí)施再工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略的呼聲再次席卷歐美,奧巴馬自2009年上任以后,更是將其作為美國經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)戰(zhàn)略中的重中之重,并出臺(tái)了一系列與再工業(yè)化相關(guān)的重大經(jīng)濟(jì)政策。筆者認(rèn)為,奧巴馬實(shí)施再工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略的短期目的在于解決失業(yè)問題并改善財(cái)政和貿(mào)易雙赤字現(xiàn)象。從長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)看,實(shí)施該戰(zhàn)略則在于通過發(fā)展先進(jìn)制造業(yè)維持美國在世界制造業(yè)領(lǐng)域的領(lǐng)先地位。而從根本上看,這卻很可能只是源于凱恩斯主義與新自由主義經(jīng)濟(jì)思潮在美國交替循環(huán)的“慣性”。 盡管美國再工業(yè)化問題越來越吸引學(xué)者們的關(guān)注和研究,但美國是否已經(jīng)實(shí)施再工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略或者說再工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略的效果是否已經(jīng)初步顯現(xiàn),仍然口說無憑。本文從再工業(yè)化的內(nèi)涵出發(fā),確定了四個(gè)度量標(biāo)準(zhǔn),即制造業(yè)對(duì)外直接投資的減少、制造業(yè)產(chǎn)值的增加、制造業(yè)就業(yè)人數(shù)的增加以及制成品凈出口的增加。通過對(duì)這幾個(gè)度量標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的分析,可以看出美國再工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略的實(shí)施傾向和實(shí)施效果在總體上并不明顯,只有在2009年到2010年期間略顯端倪,而這很有可能是金融危機(jī)后美國經(jīng)濟(jì)復(fù)蘇的表現(xiàn),沒有任何證據(jù)表明這恰恰是再工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略的作用。 對(duì)美國再工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略效果不彰的原因,筆者嘗試從以下四個(gè)方面作出了解釋：一是因?yàn)槊绹⑽凑趯?duì)該戰(zhàn)略付諸實(shí)施,而僅僅是出于奧巴馬政治作秀的需要；二是該戰(zhàn)略在實(shí)施的過程中遇到了很多牽制,比如政治體制的牽制、財(cái)政壓力、制造業(yè)高端人才的匱乏等國內(nèi)限制性因素,也有吸引外資困難、受歐債危機(jī)等影響、美國的世界經(jīng)濟(jì)權(quán)勢(shì)地位下降等外部限制性因素；三是該戰(zhàn)略本身在理論上并不具備改變美國的貿(mào)易逆差和事業(yè)現(xiàn)狀的能力；四是再工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略效果具有長(zhǎng)期性,短期內(nèi)難以觀察和評(píng)價(jià)。 最后,本文的結(jié)論是美國再工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略效果不彰根源于再工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略中促進(jìn)傳統(tǒng)制造業(yè)回流的思路違背了全球化浪潮。再工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略要想發(fā)揮其效就只能在發(fā)展先進(jìn)制造業(yè)上下功夫。另外,再工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略不該將目標(biāo)設(shè)定為短期內(nèi)解決就業(yè)和貿(mào)易的問題,而應(yīng)該將其作為重新平衡美國產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)、促進(jìn)美國經(jīng)濟(jì)持續(xù)發(fā)展的長(zhǎng)久之計(jì)。
[Abstract]:In the 1970s and 1980s, the major capitalist countries led by the United States experienced economic stagnation and recession, and the status of manufacturing industry in China stagnated or even retrogressed. The American academic circles have called this phenomenon "de-industrialization", and believe that only by reviving the status of manufacturing industry in the national economy can de-industrialization be alleviated. The dilemma brought about by industrialization is to implement the strategy of re-industrialization. Therefore, to understand the meaning of re-industrialization accurately, we have to start with the understanding of de-industrialization. In brief, the author thinks that the industry hollowing is distorted, the relative de-industrialization is the de-industrialization with negative evaluation. The difference between the re-industrialization and the industrial policy is that the re-industrialization involves only the micro-level industrial policy, not the macro-level industrial policy. Re-industrialization is defined as the process or strategy of developing countries or regions to refill their industrial base and develop advanced manufacturing industries under the circumstances that the status of industries, especially manufacturing industries, in the national economy is declining and the competitiveness of manufactured goods in the international market is relatively declining.
Thirty years later, the call for the implementation of the Reindustrialization strategy swept across Europe and the United States again. Since taking office in 2009, Obama has made it the top priority of the U.S. economic growth strategy and issued a series of major economic policies related to reindustrialization. In the long run, the implementation of the strategy will be to maintain the leading position of the United States in the world's manufacturing sector through the development of advanced manufacturing.
Although the issue of American re-industrialization has attracted more and more attention and research from scholars, it is still doubtful whether the effect of the U.S. re-industrialization strategy has already appeared or not. Through the analysis of these metrics, we can see that the implementation tendency and effect of the U.S. Reindustrialization strategy is not obvious on the whole, only in the period from 2009 to 2010 shows a little bit, which is likely to be a financial crisis. There is no evidence that this is exactly the role of the re industrialization strategy.
The author tries to explain the reasons for the ineffectiveness of the American re-industrialization strategy from the following four aspects: firstly, the United States is not implementing the strategy, but only for the needs of Obama's political show; secondly, the strategy encountered many constraints in the implementation process, such as political restraints, fiscal constraints. Pressure, lack of high-end manufacturing talents and other domestic constraints, but also to attract foreign investment difficulties, the impact of the European debt crisis, the decline of U.S. economic power in the world and other external constraints; third, the strategy itself does not theoretically have the ability to change the U.S. trade deficit and career status; fourth, the re-industrialization war. The effect is long term and is difficult to observe and evaluate in the short term.
Finally, the conclusion of this paper is that the ineffectiveness of the American re-industrialization strategy is rooted in the fact that the idea of promoting the return of traditional manufacturing industry in the re-industrialization strategy violates the tide of globalization. Employment and trade issues should be regarded as a long-term measure to rebalance the industrial structure of the United States and promote its sustained economic development.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：F471.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 盛毅;西方發(fā)達(dá)國家“產(chǎn)業(yè)空心化”質(zhì)疑[J];產(chǎn)業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì)研究;2003年04期

2 賓建成;;歐美“再工業(yè)化”趨勢(shì)分析及政策建議[J];國際貿(mào)易;2011年02期

3 孫立堅(jiān);;如何評(píng)價(jià)美國的“再工業(yè)化”戰(zhàn)略?[J];國際市場(chǎng);2011年03期

4 羅文;李燕;;如何看待“美國制造回歸”?——兼評(píng)美國“再工業(yè)化”戰(zhàn)略[J];電器工業(yè);2012年03期

5 陳憲;;“再工業(yè)化”不是“工業(yè)化”[J];傳承;2012年09期

6 郭強(qiáng);;逆全球化:資本主義最新動(dòng)向研究[J];當(dāng)代世界與社會(huì)主義;2013年04期

，

本文編號(hào)：2241757