AUSTIN, TEXAS – Four hundred years ago, John Rolfe used tobacco seeds pilfered from the West Indies to develop Virginia’s first profitable export, undermining the tobacco trade of Spain’s Caribbean colonies.	奥斯汀，德克萨斯—四百年前，约翰·罗尔夫（John Rolfe）用从西印度群岛偷来的烟草种子发展出弗吉尼亚州第一宗盈利的出口生意，扰乱了西班牙加勒比海殖民地的烟草贸易。


More than 200 years later, another Briton, Henry Wickham, took seeds for a rubber-bearing tree from Brazil to Asia – via that great colonialist institution, London’s Royal Botanic Gardens – thereby setting the stage for the eventual demise of the Amazonian rubber boom.	两百多年后，另一个英国人亨利·威科姆（Henry Wickham）通过殖民机构伦敦皇家植物园（Royal Botanic Gardens）将橡胶树种子从巴西带到亚洲，这导致亚马逊橡胶繁荣的最终消亡。


At a time of unregulated plant exports, all it took was a suitcase full of seeds to damage livelihoods and even entire economies.	在植物出口不受管制的时代，只消一手提箱种子，就能破坏生计甚至整个经济。


Thanks to advances in genetics, it may soon take even less.	而在遗传学进步的推动下，很快连一箱种子也不需要了。


To be sure, over the last few decades, great strides have been made in regulating the deliberate movement of the genetic material of animals, plants, and other living things across borders.	平心而论，在过去几十年里，在监管故意跨境运输动物、植物和其他生命体的基因物质方面取得了巨大的进步。


The 1992 United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, in particular, has helped to safeguard the rights of providers of genetic resources – such as (ideally) the farmers and indigenous people who have protected and nurtured valuable genes – by enshrining national sovereignty over biodiversity.	特别是1992年联合国生物多样性公约将国家主权置于生物多样性之上，有助于保护基因资源提供者的权利——比如（在理想情况下）保护和培育了宝贵的遗传物质的农民和当地居民。


While some people surely manage to evade regulations, laboriously developed legal systems ensure that it is far from easy.	当然，一些人总能设法规避监管，但费尽心机制定的法律制度确保了想达成这一目的绝非易事。


The majority of international exchanges of seeds, plants, animals, microbes, and other biological goods are accompanied by the requisite permits, including a material transfer agreement.	大部分国际种子、植物、动物、微生物和其他生物商品交换都必须具备许可证，包括物质运输协议。


But what if one did not have to send any material at all?	但如果根本就不需要运送任何物质呢？


What if all it took to usurp the desired seeds was a simple email?	如果侵占想要的种子只��要一封简简单单的电子邮件呢？


What if, with only gene sequences, scientists could “animate” the appropriate genetic material?	如果科学家仅凭基因序列就能“制作”想要的遗传物质呢？


Such Internet-facilitated exchanges of biodiversity would clearly be much harder to regulate.	这些互联网推动的生物多样性交换显然更加难以监管。


And, with gene sequencing becoming faster and cheaper than ever, and gene-editing technology advancing rapidly, such exchanges may be possible sooner than you think.	而随着基因测序变得日益迅捷和廉价以及基因编辑技术的迅速进步，这类交换可能比你预想得更早就变成现实。


In fact, genes, even entire organisms, can already move virtually – squishy and biological at each end, but nothing more than a series of ones and zeros while en route.	事实上，基因，甚至完整的生命体，已经可以虚拟移动——在每个移动端都是黏糊糊的生物质，但在移动途中只是一连串1和0。


The tiny virus that causes influenza is a leading-edge example of technical developments.	导致流感的小病毒便是技术发展的一个尖端例子。


Today, when a new strain of influenza appears in Asia, scientists collect a throat swab, isolate the virus, and run the strain’s genetic sequence.	如今，当新的流感菌株在亚洲出现时，科学家收集咽喉棉签，分离病毒，测定毒株的基因序列。


If they then post that strain’s sequence on the Internet, American and European laboratories may be able to synthesize the new virus from the downloaded data faster and more easily than if they wait for a courier to deliver a physical sample.	如果他们接下来将毒株的基因序列放上互联网，美国和欧洲实验室就能通过下载数据合成新病毒，这要比等待邮寄实物样本更迅速、更容易。


The virus can spread faster electronically than it does in nature.	病毒通过电子传播要比通过大自然更快。


More complicated viruses and some bacteria are in the range of such techniques today, though wholly synthesizing a higher organism with a more complex genome, such as maize, is many years away.	如今，更复杂的病毒和一些细菌也能够适用于这一技术，尽管完整地合成基因组更加复杂的更高级的生物体（比如玉米）还需要多年时间。


But that may not matter, as new gene-editing technologies, like CRISPR-Cas9, enable scientists to stitch together complicated new organisms, using gene sequence information from organisms to which they do not have physical access.	但这也许不重要，因为新的基因编辑技术，比如CRISPR-Cas9，能让科学家将来自能够实际接触到的生命体的基因测序信息来拼装复杂的新生命体。


For example, the key traits of a drought-resistant maize from a Zapotec community in Oaxaca, Mexico, might be reproduced by editing the genes of another maize variety.	比如，墨西哥瓦哈卡州（Oaxaca）Zapotec社区的抗旱玉米的关键特征可以通过编辑另一种个玉米品种的基因得到复制。


No major new advance in the technology is needed to unlock this possibility.	释放这一可能性并不需要新的重大技术进步。


What is needed is the genetic sequences of thousands of types of maize.	所需要的只是数千个玉米品种的基因序列。


Those data act as a sort of roadmap and resource pool, enabling scientists to compare sequences on a computer screen and identify pertinent variations.	这些数据就像是路线图和资源集合，让科学家能够在电脑屏幕上比较基因序列，识别适当的品种。


The selected adjustments might then be made to, say, the parents of a new Monsanto or DuPont Pioneer maize hybrid.	选中的调整接着可以用于制作（比如）孟山都公司或杜邦先锋公司的新杂交玉米亲本。


Managing access to large genomic databases thus becomes critically important to prevent a virtual version of the theft carried out by Rolfe and Wickham.	因此，管理大新基因组数据库的接入对于阻止虚拟世界的罗尔夫和威科姆来说至关重要。


And, indeed, in an unguarded e-mail released under the US Freedom of Information Act, one of the US Department of Agriculture’s top maize scientists, Edward Buckler, called such management “the big issue of our time” for plant breeding.	而事实上，在一封根据美国信息自由法披露的欠谨慎的电子邮件中，美国农业部顶级玉米科学家爱德华·巴克勒（Edward Buckler）将这样拙劣的管理称为植物育种的“当代大问题”。


If agricultural biotechnology corporations like Monsanto and DuPont Pioneer – not to mention other firms that work with genetic resources, including pharmaceutical companies and synthetic biology startups – have free access to such databases, the providers of the desired genes are very likely to lose out.	如果孟山都和杜邦先锋等农业生物技术公司——更不用说包括制药公司和合成生物学初创公司在内的其他从事基因资源工作的企业了——能自由进入这些数据库，那么所需要的基因的提供者极有可能蒙受损失。


These are, after all, wholly capitalist enterprises, with little financial incentive to look out for the little guy.	毕竟，这些都是十足的资本主义企业，它们没有关注芸芸众生的财务激励。


In this case, that “little guy” could be African sorghum growers, traditional medicinal practitioners, forest peoples, or other traditional communities – people who have created and nurtured biodiversity, but never had the hubris or greed to claim the genes as proprietary, patented inventions.	在这个例子中，“芸芸众生”可以是非洲高粱种植者、传统医药工作者、森林民族或其他传统社会——他们创造和养育了生物多样性，但从未狂妄或贪婪到将基因作为自有专利发明。


All it would take is for someone to sequence their creations, and share the data in open databases.	只要有人将他们所创造出来的品种进行测序，然后在公开数据库上共享数据，就夺走了他们的工作成果。


Yet open access is the mode du jour in sharing research data.	但开放接入是共享研究数据的惯例。


The US government’s GenBank, for example, doesn’t even have an agreement banning misappropriation.	比如，美国政府的基因银行（GenBank）甚至没有禁止滥用协议。


This must change.	这一情况必须改变。


After all, such no-strings-attached databases do not just facilitate sharing; they enable stealing.	毕竟，这些无附带条件数据库不仅仅便利了共享，也便利的偷窃。


The question of how to regulate access to genetic sequence data is now cropping up in international discussions, including at the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization.	如何监管基因序列数据接入的问题正在成为国际讨论的热门话题，包括世界卫生组织和联合国粮农组织。


Perhaps the most important forum for such discussions is the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, the main treaty regulating access to biodiversity.	也许这些讨论的最重要的场合是生物多样性条约管理机构——生物多样性公约缔约方大会。


The next meeting (COP 13) will take place in Cancún, Mexico, in early December.	下一次会议（COP 13）将于12月初在墨西哥坎昆举行。


Participants at COP 13 must focus on the need to protect the rights of resource providers.	COP13的与会者必须关注保护资源提供者权利的需要。


To this end, they should pursue a careful assessment of existing policies and craft the necessary changes – before synthetic biology outpaces legal systems and renders them impotent.	在这方面，他们必须谨慎评估现有政策并制定必要的修订——要抢在合成生物学发展速度超过法律制度、让法律变得监督无能之前。


Arrangements must be made to supervise access to genetic sequences in a way that ensures fair and equitable sharing of benefits from their use.	必须形成协定监督基因序列数据的接入，确保这些数据的应用所产生的收益得到公正平等的分享。


Otherwise, decades of work to promote conservation and prevent piracy will be undermined, endangering the biodiversity convention – and those it protects.	否则，几十年来促进保护、阻止盗版的工作将毁于一旦，威胁到生物多样性公约及其所保护的东西。


Taking Safety Littorally	建设安全的海岸


PASADENA – In 2011, the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami devastated Japan’s coastal region.	帕萨迪纳—2011年，日本东北地震和海啸摧毁了日本的沿海地区。


Last year, Hurricane Sandy caused a wall of water to engulf low-lying coastal areas on the East Coast of the United States, particularly in New York and New Jersey.	去年，飓风桑迪掀起的滔天巨浪吞噬了美国东海岸的低洼地带，特别是在纽约州和新泽西州。


Such catastrophic events underscore the vulnerability of coastal regions worldwide to extreme weather events that produce intense storm surges (increased water depth at the coast) and large, powerful waves.	这些灾难事件凸显全球沿海地区在引发严重风暴潮（增高沿岸海水深度）和巨浪的极端天气事件面前的脆弱性。


Although Sandy, at its peak, was only a post-tropical cyclone when it hit the US, its winds spanned an area of 1,800 kilometers (1,100 miles), leading to extreme storm surges and waves that decimated the Jersey Shore, flattening communities and destroying the casinos and boardwalks on which the local economy largely depends.	飓风桑迪在袭击美国时已退化为热带气旋，但其风圈仍覆盖了方圆1800公里，掀起了极端风暴潮，摧毁了泽西海岸，夷平了居民区，毁掉了当地经济赖以生存的赌场和游步道。


At Battery Park, on Manhattan’s south end, the surge height reached 4.2 meters, flooding homes and businesses and plunging millions into darkness.	在曼哈顿南端的炮台公园，风暴潮高度达到了4. 2米，洪水吞噬了家园和企业，令数百万人陷入黑暗。


Waves also reached extreme heights, with a buoy near the entrance to New York Harbor measuring a peak wave ten meters high, from crest to trough.	潮水也达到了极端高度，纽约港附近的一个航标测得的极端潮高达到了10米（从波谷到波峰）。


Seven years earlier, Hurricane Katrina struck the coast of the Gulf of Mexico in the US as a Category 3 storm.	七年前，三级飓风卡特里娜摧毁了美国墨西哥湾沿岸。


With a surge height of 7-10 meters, and flooding at some locations extending 20 kilometers inland, Katrina caused catastrophic damage to the Gulf Coast, which has yet to be fully repaired.	风暴潮达到了7—10米，洪水吞噬距离海岸20公里的内陆，墨西哥湾沿岸一片狼藉，至今仍未彻底复原。


In 1989, Hurricane Hugo struck near Charleston, South Carolina, with a surge height of nearly four meters.	1989年，飓风雨果在南加州查尔斯顿（Charleston）附近登陆，掀起了近4米高的风暴潮。


The list goes on.	类似的案例还有很多。


When coastal areas were not heavily inhabited, such storms, while violent, did not cause significant, lasting damage to people’s livelihoods and lifestyles.	在沿岸地区人烟不多的时候，这类风暴尽管来势汹汹，却不曾对人民的生计和生活造成严重、持续的破坏。


But now, with commerce and recreation dominating coastlines worldwide, the “let it be” approach of the past is no longer practical.	但如今，全世界的海岸布满了商业区和娱乐区，“任你来”的办法已不再适用。


Moreover, as climate change causes sea levels to rise, extreme storms’ destructive potential is being significantly enhanced.	此外，随着气候变化导致海平面上升，极端风暴的破坏力也被大大加强了。


Although this rise may seem small in the short run, especially when compared to the immediate increase caused by major storms, its long-term effects must not be ignored.	尽管短期来看，海平面提升幅度很小，特别是与大风暴所引起的即可上升幅度相比。 但其长期影响不容忽视。


Clearly, the combination of storm surges and large waves causes major devastation in coastal areas.	显然，风暴潮和巨浪一起，给沿海地区造成了极大的破坏。


But these challenges are not insurmountable.	但这些挑战并不是不可克服的。


In fact, engineering approaches have been developed that can protect coastal residents from the consequences of extreme storms.	事实上，能够保护沿岸居民免遭极端风暴恶果的工程方法已经开发出来了。


Previous efforts to enhance coastal protection can provide a roadmap to reconstruction that will help to avert future damage.	从前用于加强沿岸保护的方法可以为有助于防止未来伤害的重建提供路线图。


One suggested approach is to leave an uninhabited buffer zone extending shoreward from the water.	一个潜在的方法是在近海留出一块无人缓冲区。


In Hilo, Hawaii, after devastating tsunamis struck in 1946, 1960, and 1964, the vulnerable area near the city was declared a municipal park, where no structures were allowed to be built.	夏威夷的希罗（Hilo）在经历了1946、1960和1964年海啸袭击后将薄弱区改建为市政公园，禁止营建任何建筑。


By contrast, Japan relied almost exclusively on an extensive series of seawalls and offshore breakwaters along the east coast of the island of Honshu.	相反，日本的本州岛东岸几乎完全依靠增加海塘和离岸防波堤。


But, in many areas, the Tohoku tsunami overflowed and even destroyed these protective structures – including the seawall at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in northern Honshu.	但是，在许多地区，东北大海啸漫过甚至摧毁了这些保护设施——包括本州岛北部福岛第一核电站的海塘。


As a result, the plant’s three active reactors suffered near-meltdowns, leading to a buildup of hydrogen gas, a series of explosions and fires, and leakage of radioactive material into the atmosphere.	结果，核电站的三个活跃反应堆几乎被毁，导致氢气积聚，引发一连串爆炸和火灾，放射性物质因此泄露到大气中。


To be sure, such coastal defenses could help to protect crucial structures.	平心而论，这些沿岸防护可以有助于保护关键设施。


But they should be combined with shoreward buffer zones, where homes, schools, and hospitals would not be permitted.	但它们应该与陆地缓冲区结合起来使用。 陆地缓冲区应禁止存在住宅、学校和医院。


Defensive barriers would not necessarily require heavy investment; they could be mounds of sand several meters high located along and near the shoreline.	防护性堤岸并不要求大手笔投资； 它们可以是近岸地区几米高的沙堆。


In fact, in some areas of the US and other countries, only extensive dune fields and vegetated areas are used to separate buildings from the seashore.	事实上，美国和其他国家的一些地区都使用纯粹的沙丘和植被区来分隔建筑和海岸。


Sand mounds are particularly advantageous, given coastal areas’ economic value.	沙丘特别有用，这是由海岸地区的经济价值决定的。


They provide immediate protection during storm season, but can be removed at times of year when extreme storms are unlikely and recreational beach use is most important.	它们能够在风暴季提供现成的保护，在一年中不可能发生极端风暴、海滩需要用于休闲娱乐用途时又可以轻易地移除。


In order to protect the local economy further, beaches should be repaired after major storms through “beach nourishment” (replacement of lost sand from external sources).	为了进一步保护地方经济，大风暴过后应该用“人工育滩”（用外部资源补充损失的沙子）对海滩进行修复。


Protecting urban areas that are located near the ocean, but lack buffer beaches, requires a different approach.	保护靠近海岸但缺少缓冲海滩的城镇地区需要不同的方法。


One option would be to construct seawalls and/or rock revetments high enough to prevent shoreward inundation.	一个选择是建设足够高的海塘和/或石质海岸以防止海水倒灌。


But local residents may protest such structures, given that they could make the area less attractive.	但地方居民可能反对这样的工程，因为这会使该地区失去吸引力。


And, as Japan’s recent experience demonstrated, protecting against the most powerful threats – such as the 9.0-magnitude Tohoku earthquake and the subsequent three-meter tsunami – would require massive, costly construction projects.	而日本的最新经验表明，对抗最强大的威胁——9. 0级地震及随后三米高的海啸——要求大规模、高投入的建设项目。


For one such area, New York City, an alternative has been proposed: massive storm-surge barriers across the entrance to the harbor region that could be closed when a major storm approaches.	同属此类地区的纽约市提出了一个替代方���：在港区入口处建设大规模风暴潮堤岸，在大风暴来临时可以关闭。


Such structures have been built across the River Thames in London, and a similar barrier project is underway in Venice, Italy.	伦敦泰晤士河已采取了这样的做法，意大利威尼斯也在建设类似的堤岸工程。


But, in addition to requiring substantial investment, this approach raises serious questions, reflecting uncertainty about the effects that river flows can have on harbors, the environmental consequences of closing a bay, and the impact on shipping.	但是，这一做法不但需要大量投资，还会造成严重问题，比如河水径流对港口的影响、关闭港湾的环境影响、对航运的影响等不确定性。


In any case, stricter building codes are crucial for structures built in coastal areas.	无论如何，更严格的建筑法规是沿岸地区工程的关键点。


This could include designing the ground levels of seaside buildings to permit storm-induced surges to pass through without flooding the lower floors, thus minimizing potential damage to offices and homes.	这可以包括设计海滨建筑地平面，允许风暴潮在不淹没低层的情况下通过，从而最小化办公室和住宅的潜在破坏。


In addition, construction in coastal areas damaged by extreme events could be prohibited, as has been done in Hilo, Hawaii.	此外，可以禁止在被极端事件摧毁的沿岸地区进行开发建设，比如夏威夷希罗的做法。


Coastal regions are the most vulnerable to many kinds of extreme weather events.	沿岸地区极易受到许多极端天气事件的影响。


But measures can be taken to protect these communities.	但我们可以采取措施保护这些地区。


By considering safety, economics, and aesthetics, the right approach for a particular area can be developed – and local citizens, businesses, and the environment can be defended.	在考虑了安全、经济和美学后，我们可以为具体区域找出正确的方法，当地居民、企业和环境可以得到保护。


Underinvesting in Resilience	恢复力投资不足


NEW YORK – The hurricane on America’s eastern seaboard last week (which I experienced in lower Manhattan) adds to a growing collection of extreme weather events from which lessons should be drawn.	纽约—上周美国东海岸的飓风（我在下曼哈顿也经历了）是又一次极端天气事件，我们必须从中吸取教训。


Climate experts have long argued that the frequency and magnitude of such events are increasing, and evidence of this should certainly influence precautionary steps – and cause us to review such measures regularly.	气候专家早就指出，这类事件的频度和强度走在增加，这一迹象显然会影响到预防步骤，并让我们定期检查这些步骤。


There are two distinct and crucial components of disaster preparedness.	灾难准备包括两大不同的关键部分。


The one that understandably gets the most attention is the capacity to mount a rapid and effective response.	其一是快速而有效的响应。 毫不奇怪，这一点引起了人们最多的注意。


Such a capacity will always be necessary, and few doubt its importance.	这种能力永远是必须具备的，其重要性毋庸置疑。


When it is absent or deficient, the loss of life and livelihoods can be horrific – witness Hurricane Katrina, which ravaged Haiti and New Orleans in 2005.	如果响应能力缺乏或不足，则可能导致可怕的生命和生活损失——2005年摧毁海地和新奥尔良的卡特里娜飓风就是明证。


The second component comprises investments that minimize the expected damage to the economy.	其二是最小化经济的破坏期望的投资。


This aspect of preparedness typically receives far less attention.	这一方面的准备通常所受关注甚少。


Indeed, in the United States, lessons from the Katrina experience appear to have strengthened response capacity, as shown by the rapid and effective intervention following Hurricane Sandy.	事实上，在美国，卡特里娜飓风的教训似乎增强了响应能力——飓风桑迪过境后的快速而高效的干预就是明证。


But investments designed to control the extent of damage seem to be persistently neglected.	但旨在控制破坏程度的投资似乎一直被忽略了。


Redressing this imbalance requires a focus on key infrastructure.	修正这一失衡需要关注关键基础设施。


Of course, one cannot at reasonable cost prevent all possible damage from calamities, which strike randomly and in locations that cannot always be predicted.	当然，你不可能以有限的成本防止所有灾害造成的可能破坏，因为灾害袭击是随机的，受害地是不可预测的。


But certain kinds of damage have large multiplier effects.	但某些灾难具有很大的放大作用。


This includes damage to critical systems like the electricity grid and the information, communication, and transport networks that constitute the platform on which modern economies run.	这其中包括对组成现代经济运行平台的电网、信息、通信和交通网络等关键系统的灾难。


Relatively modest investments in the resilience, redundancy, and integrity of these systems pay high dividends, albeit at random intervals.	只要对恢复能力、充足性和这些系统的完整性稍作投资，就能获得极高的回报，即使灾难的时间间隔是随机的。


Redundancy is the key. 	其中，充足性是关键。


The case of New York City is instructive.	纽约市的例子是很好的证明。


The southern part of Manhattan was without power for almost a full workweek, apparently because a major substation hub in the electrical grid, located beside the East River, was knocked out in a fiery display when Hurricane Sandy and a tidal surge caused it to flood.	曼哈顿南部断电几乎一整周，这显然是因为位于东河（East River）边上的电网主变电站在飓风桑迪和潮涌导致河水漫堤时被毁所致。


There was no pre-built workaround to deliver power by an alternate route.	该地区没有预先建设好输送电力的第二方案和路线。


The cost of this power failure, though difficult to calculate, is surely huge.	这场大断电的成本难以计算，但肯定小不了。


Unlike the economic boost that may occur from recovery spending to restore damaged physical assets, this is a deadweight loss.	与重建被毁有形资产的重建支出会提振经济不同，这场断电的成本属于无谓损失。


Local power outages may be unavoidable, but one can create grids that are less vulnerable – and less prone to bringing large parts of the economy to a halt – by building in redundancy.	当地断电或许是不可避免的，但若以充足性为原则，本可以建设不至于如此脆弱的电网——或者说不至于导致如此大范围经济陷入停滞的电网。


Similar lessons were learned with respect to global supply chains, following the earthquake and tsunami that hit northeast Japan in 2011.	2011年日本东北部的地震和海啸之后，全球供应链也给我们以类似教训。


Global supply chains are now becoming more resilient, owing to the duplication of singular bottlenecks that can bring much larger systems down.	全球供应链现在已变得更具弹性，因为我们对可能拖垮更大体系的瓶颈做了复制。


Cyber security experts rightly worry about the possibility of bringing an entire economy to a halt by attacking and disabling the control systems in its electrical, communication, and transportation networks.	碳安全专家的担心是正确的：袭击电力、通信和交通网络的控制系统并使之��痪可能导致整个经济陷入停顿。


Admittedly, the impact of natural disasters is less systemic; but if a calamity takes out key components of networks that lack redundancy and backup, the effects are similar.	诚然，自然灾害的影响不那么具有系统性； 但如果一场灾害袭击了缺少充足性和后援的网络的关键部分，将造成类似影响。


Even rapid response is more effective if key networks and systems – particularly the electricity grid – are resilient.	即使是快速反应，如果关键网络和系统——特别是电网——恢复力强的话也将更为有效。


Why do we tend to underinvest in the resilience of our economies’ key systems?	为什么我们总是对经济的关键系统的恢复力投资不足？


One argument is that redundancy looks like waste in normal times, with cost-benefit calculations ruling out higher investment.	一种论点是充足性在平常时候与浪费无异，成本-效益分析抑制了高投资。


That seems clearly wrong: Numerous expert estimates indicate that built-in redundancy pays off unless one assigns unrealistically low probabilities to disruptive events.	这显然是错误的：很多专家的估计表明，除非你给破坏性事件分配低得不现实的概率，否则内嵌充足性就有利可图。


That leads to a second and more plausible explanation, which is psychological and behavioral in character.	这引出了第二种、也是更具说服力的解释，这种解释从心理和行为入手。


We have a tendency to underestimate both the probabilities and consequences of what in the investment world are called “left-tailed events.”	我们有低估投资界所谓的“左尾事件”的概率和后果的倾向。


Compounding this pattern are poor incentives.	让这种模式雪上加霜的是不良激励。


Principals, be they investors or voters, determine the incentives of agents, be they asset managers or elected officials and policymakers.	委托人（投资者或选民）决定了代理人（资产管理人或当选官员和决策者）的激励。


If principals misunderstand systemic risk, their agents, even if they do understand it, may not be able to respond without losing support, whether in the form of votes or assets under management.	如果委托人对系统风险理解错误，则其代理人即使理解系统风险，可能也无法在没有支持的情况下做出响应（不管是选举情形还是资产管理情形）。


Another line of reasoning is that businesses that depend heavily on continuity – for example, hospitals, outsourcing firms in India, and stock exchanges – will invest in their own backup systems.	另一个理由是严重依赖连续性的企业——比如医院、印度外包公司和证券交易所——会投资建设自身的支持系统。


In fact, they do.	实际中确实如此。


But that ignores a host of issues concerning the mobility, safety, and housing of employees.	但这忽略了可移动性、安全性以及员工安置等一系列问题。


A broad pattern of self-insurance caused by underinvestment in resilient infrastructure is an inefficient and distinctly inferior option.	恢复力基础设施投资不足导致的大规模自我保险模式是低效的、远为劣等的次优选择。


Underinvestment in infrastructure (including deferred maintenance) is widespread where the consequences are uncertain and/or not immediate.	基础设施的投资不足（包括维修不力）在后果不确定和/或不紧迫的情形特别严重。


In reality, underinvestment and investment with debt financing are equivalent in one crucial respect: they both transfer costs to a future cohort.	在现实中，债务融资的投资不足和投资充足从某个关键角度看是等价的：它们都把成本转嫁给了后来者。


But even debt financing would be better than no investment at all, given the deadweight losses.	但由于无谓损失的存在，即便是债务融资也比完全不投资要好。


Cities and countries that aspire to be hubs or critical components in national or global financial and economic systems need to be predictable, reliable, and resilient.	渴望成为全国或全球金融和经济体系枢纽和关键部分的城市和国家必须是可预测、可靠、恢复力强的。


That implies a transparent rule of law, and competent, conservative, and countercyclical macroeconomic management.	这意味着透明的法治以及胜任、保守、反周期的宏观经济管理。


But it also includes physical resilience and the ability to withstand shocks.	但这也意味着有形资产的恢复能力和抵抗冲击的能力。


Hubs that lack resilience create cascades of collateral damage when they fail.	缺少恢复力的枢纽在失灵时会造成大量附带伤害。


Over time, they will be bypassed and replaced by more resilient alternatives.	随着时间的推移，它们将失去枢纽地位，被更具恢复力者取代。


Protecting Education in Conflict Zones	保护冲突区的教育


DOHA, LONDON – In conflict zones, it is children who often bear the brunt of the violence.	多哈、伦敦—在冲突区，承受暴力最多的往往是儿童。


Last month, repeated air strikes on a school compound in Idlib, Syria, killed at least 22 children; and children in the besieged Syrian city of Aleppo have, for months, had no way to escape near-constant bombardments.	上个月，叙利亚伊德利卜（Idlib）的一所学校遭遇反复空袭，至少22名儿童丧生； 而几个月来，深陷重围的叙利亚阿勒颇市儿童面对近在咫尺的持续轰炸面前无路可逃。


As the New York Times reported in September, “They cannot play, sleep or attend school.	9月，《纽约时报》报道，“他们无法玩耍、睡觉或上学。


Increasingly, they cannot eat.”	吃的东西也越来越少。 ”


Just a few weeks before that report, a bomb was detonated outside a school in Southern Thailand, just as parents were dropping off their children.	在这篇报道发出前几周，一颗炸弹在泰国南部的一所学校外炸响，而此时家长们正在送孩子们上学。


The blast instantly killed a father and his four-year-old daughter, and injured ten others.	爆炸造成一位父亲和他四岁的女儿当场身亡，并有十人受伤。


Brad Adams of Human Rights Watch described the bombing as an act of “incomprehensible brutality”: “Calling this a war crime does not fully convey the harm done to the victims, or the far-reaching impact such attacks have on children in the region.”	人权观察组织的布拉德·亚当斯（Brad Adams）将此次爆炸描述为“令人发指”：“称之为战争罪行不足以充分描述它对受害者所造成的伤害或这类袭击对地区内儿童所造成的巨大影响。 ”


And just weeks before the Thailand bombing, on August 13, air strikes on a school in Yemen’s northwestern Saada region killed ten children and injured about 30 more.	而在泰国爆炸案发生前几周，即8月13日，对也门西北部萨达（Saada）地区一间学校的空袭造成十名儿童死亡，30多名儿童受伤。


Given these recent examples, there is clearly a need to prevent attacks – by state and armed non-state actors alike – on educational institutions and facilities.	这些最近的例子表明，我们显然需要阻止针对教育机构和设施的袭击——通过国家和有武装的非国家行动方实现。


That is why Education Above All (EAA) has established its advocacy program, Protect Education in Insecurity and Conflict (PEIC).	因此，教育至上（Education Above All，EAA）成立了一个维权计划——保护不安全和冲突中的教育计划（Protect Education in Insecurity and Conflict，PEIC）。


The rationale underpinning PEIC is straightforward: education provides critical opportunities for children and young people, and this is especially true for those living in conflict zones.	PEIC的初衷非常直观：教育为儿童和年轻人提供至关重要的机会，对于生活在冲突区的儿童和年轻人尤其如此。


Schools and universities give students a vital link to normality, while encouraging them to maintain hope and pursue their aspirations.	学校和大学是学生过上正常生活的关键一环，并鼓励他们保持希望、追逐梦想。


They not only train the next generation of doctors, journalists, lawyers, and community leaders; they also furnish children with mentors, food, water, and knowledge about basic health and sanitation.	它们不但训练下一代医生、记者、律师和社会领袖； 它们也为孩子们提供导师、食物、水和关于基本健康和卫生的知识。


And yet, as the attacks on schools in countries such as Syria, Yemen, and Sudan show, what are supposed to be safe havens often are under direct threat.	但是，叙利亚、也门和苏丹等国家针对学校的袭击事件表明，本应成为安全港的校园正在面临直接威胁。


If children can still attend school during conflicts, they will be the green shoots that emerge to re-rebuild their war-torn societies when the fighting is over.	如果儿童在冲突期间仍然能够上学，他们就能成为茁壮成长的幼苗，在战斗结束后重建被毁于战争的社会。


To protect students’ basic human right to education, universities and schools in conflict zones should be shielded in the same way that health-care facilities are.	为了保护学生受教育的基本人权，冲突区的大学和学校应该获得与医疗��施一样的庇护。


Indeed, like hospitals, schools concentrate one of the most vulnerable populations in any society.	事实上，和医院一样，在任何一个社会里，学校集中了最脆弱的人群之一。


Attacks on children and schools often draw international condemnation, but words alone are clearly not an effective deterrent.	袭击儿童和学校常常会遭到国际谴责，但光靠言语显然无法形成有效威慑。


Thus, PEIC’s mission is to use the enforcement mechanisms available under international law to strengthen our collective political will to prevent attacks on educational facilities.	因此，PEIC的任务是通过依据国际法的执行机制增强我们阻止袭击教育设施的集体政治意愿。


EAA wants to ensure that education is recognized as being fundamental to human development – and thus is accorded the fullest protection.	EAA希望确保教育被承认为人类发展的基础——因此应该受到最充分的保护。


We should be creating a world where everyone who wishes to learn, teach, or conduct academic research can do so in peace and with dignity.	我们应该创造这样一个世界：在这个世界里，每一位想要学习、做老师和从事学术研究的人都能在和平环境中带着尊严实现愿望。


But this shared ambition requires shared action, because it will take collaboration, cooperation, and mutual trust to develop the new international arrangements needed to protect educational institutions in conflicts.	但这一共同的雄心需要共同行动实现，因为必须具备协同、合作和共同信任才能制定保护冲突中的教育机构所需要的新国际安排。


Toward that end, and in partnership with the Global Coalition to Protect Education from Attack, PEIC has taken a leading role in promoting the Safe Schools Declaration, which includes a promise to protect “schools and universities from military use during armed conflict.”	为了实现这一目标，在保护教育免受袭击全球联盟（Global Coalition to Protect Education from Attack）的合作下，PEIC在推进安全校园宣言（Safe Schools Declaration）方面起到了领导作用。


This clause is essential for safeguarding schoolchildren, teachers, and facilities during times of war.	该宣言承诺保护“学校和大学免于在武装冲突中被用作军事用途”。


We hope that, in time, the Declaration in its entirety will become a universally recognized international standard.	该条款对于保护战争期间的在校儿童、教师和设施至关重要。 我们希望，这份宣言能够全篇成为举世公认的国际准则。


In September, Albania became the 56th country to sign the Declaration, and the Albanian government has now publicly committed to protecting education during periods of armed conflict.	9月，阿尔巴尼亚成为该宣言第56个签署国，阿尔巴尼亚政府现在公开承诺在武装冲突期间保护教育。


In making this pledge, Albania has joined countries such as Iraq, where there is a pressing need to safeguard children’s futures, as well as Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Italy, Kenya, Nigeria, New Zealand, Norway, Qatar, and South Sudan.	随着这一承诺，阿尔巴尼亚加入了伊拉克（眼下保护儿童的未来是其紧迫需求）、阿根廷、巴西、智利、意大利、肯尼亚、尼日利亚、新西兰、挪威、卡塔尔、南苏丹等国家的行列。


EAA is committed to preventing schools from becoming battlegrounds, and it is calling on all countries that have not yet signed the Declaration to do so.	EAA致力于阻止学校变成战场，它呼吁所有尚未签署宣言的国家加入进来。


Signing the Declaration amounts to a political commitment to protect education, even during the most savage conflicts – which is to say that it is a commitment to protect the world’s children.	签署宣言即做出了政治承诺保护教育，即使是在最残酷的冲突中也是如此——也就是说，这是一个保护全世界儿童的承诺。


It is in every country’s interest to guarantee that today’s students will have the opportunity to serve as tomorrow’s leaders.	保证今天的学生有机会成为明天的领袖符合所有国家的利益。


As the world watches schools being destroyed in Syria, Yemen, and other conflict zones the Safe Schools Declaration is more important than ever.	世界正在目睹叙利亚、也门和其他冲突区的学校被毁，安全校园宣言的意义也变得比任何时候都更加重要。


Protecting Zimbabwe	保护津巴布韦


JOHANNESBURG – Although the Chinese ship that was carrying arms to Zimbabwe, the An Yue Jiang, has reportedly turned back, we don’t know where else President Robert Mugabe’s military and paramilitary forces may be acquiring weapons.	约翰内斯堡--尽管据报道称中国运送军火到津巴布韦的安岳江号已经受阻返回了，但是我们不知道穆加贝总统的军队和准军事组织还会不会从其他地方搞到武器。


In light of the escalating violent repression of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change – and of those whose support apparently helped the MDC to prevail in the presidential election, the results of which have still not been announced after four weeks – an international arms embargo on Zimbabwe is urgently needed.	总统大选的结果在四周后依然没有公布。 鉴于对反对派争取民主变革运动以及那些显然帮助争取民主变革运动赢得大选的支持者的暴力镇压持续升级，现在迫切需要的是国际上对津巴布韦实施武器禁运。


In addition, we call on the African Union, with the support of the United Nations, to send an investigative mission to Zimbabwe to determine what additional measures may be required to carry out the internationally accepted “responsibility to protect.”	此外，我们呼吁非盟在联合国的支持下委派一个调查小组到津巴布韦，看看还需要采取那些措施以履行为国际社会所接受的“保护的责任”。


The concept of the “responsibility to protect” was adopted unanimously by the UN World Summit in 2005.	“保护的责任”的概念是在2005年世界首脑峰会上被一致通过的。


Yet, it remains controversial because it is often assumed that it implies the use of military force for purposes of humanitarian intervention.	然而，因为它经常被认为暗示可以出于人道主义干涉的目的而使用武力而倍受争议。


We believe, as was recognized at the UN World Summit, that military force should only be a last resort when needed to prevent or halt large-scale loss of life.	我们认为，就像世界首脑峰会上所认同的那样，动用武力只是在需要防止或阻止大量人员伤亡时才使用的最后的解决办法。


The first step is to gather reliable information so that it is possible to know what international measures are required to prevent a disaster.	我们首先要做的是收集可靠的信息以便了解国际社会需要采取那些措施以防止灾难的发生。


In the case of Zimbabwe, it is extremely difficult to obtain such information.	在津巴布韦的问题上，要获得这样的信息显得特别困难。


Mugabe’s regime has systematically shut down independent media, attacked independent civil society organizations, denied visas to foreign journalists, and has arrested and beaten journalists who nevertheless enter the country.	穆加贝政权系统性地封锁了独立媒体，袭击独立的平民组织，拒绝给外国记者颁发签证，并且逮捕和殴打那些侥幸进入这个国家的记者。


Foreign observers were present when the voting took place in Zimbabwe on March 29, and their presence helped to ensure that the election itself was peaceful.	外国观察员到场见证了3月29日举行的津巴布韦大选，他们的存在帮助确保选举本身得以和平地进行。


The observers have long since left the country, however, and the reports that have filtered out suggest that in some parts of the country, Mugabe’s opponents are now experiencing a reign of terror.	然而在这些观察员早就离开这个国家后，传出的报道称在该国的部分地区，穆加贝的反对者正在遭受恐怖镇压。


The Constitutive Act of the African Union provides in Article 4 the “right of the Union to intervene in a Member State pursuant to a decision of the Assembly in respect of grave circumstances, namely: war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity [as well as a serious threat to legitimate order].”	《非盟组织章程》的第4条明确指出“在发生严重状况时，即战争罪行、种族灭绝行动和反人类的罪行[以及对合法秩序发生严重威胁时]，根据全体会议的决定联盟有权对一个成员国进行干涉。 ”


Here too, however, actual military intervention should only be a last resort.	不过在这里，实际军事干涉只是在万不得已时才采取的措施。


In the case of Zimbabwe, for example, it is possible that sending in unarmed observers from other African countries would be sufficient.	比如在津巴布韦的问题上，可能由其他非洲国家委派非武装的观察员就足够了。


Their presence and ability to provide objective information might prevent continuation or further escalation of the violence of the last few weeks to the point where it would require military intervention.	他们的存在以及提供客观信息的能力可能会阻止过去四周以来持续或进一步升级的暴力，而不必再需要军事干涉。


Unarmed observers could also help to ensure that emergency international food assistance, on which much of Zimbabwe’s population now depends for survival, is distributed equitably, without regard to the political leanings of those requiring it.	非武装的观察员还能帮助确保津巴布韦人现在赖以生存的紧急国际食品援助能够得到公平的分配，而不区分需要这些食品的人的政治立场。


Earlier this year, the African Union, through the good work of former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, averted a calamity in Kenya after a disputed election led to widespread violence.	今年早些时候，通过联合国前秘书长安南的积极斡旋，非盟阻止了肯尼亚在受到争议的选举后引发的大规模骚乱没有最终演变为一场灾难。


The danger in Zimbabwe appears to be comparable.	津巴布韦现在似乎也面临着相似的危险。


Once again, the African Union, with the support of the UN, should provide the leadership that would demonstrate that Africa has the capacity and the will to resolve a great crisis in a manner that mitigates the suffering of African people.	现在非盟再一次需要在联合国的支持下展现它的领导能力，证明非洲有能力和意愿解决一场重大危机以缓解非洲人民所承受的痛苦。


No Time for Trade Fundamentalism	没有时间理会贸易原教旨主义


CAMBRIDGE – “One of the crucial challenges” of our era “is to maintain an open and expanding international trade system.”	坎布里奇——我们这个时代的关键挑战之一“是保持一套开放并不断拓展的国际贸易体系。


Unfortunately, “the liberal principles” of the world trade system “are under increasing attack.”	”不幸的是，世贸体系的“自由主义原则”“正在遭受越来越严重的打击。 ”“保护主义越来越无孔不入。


“Protectionism has become increasingly prevalent.”	”“系统有极大危险会陷入崩溃. .


“There is great danger that the system will break down … or that it will collapse in a grim replay of the 1930s.”	或者重演20世纪30年代严峻的崩溃局势。 ”


You would be excused for thinking that these lines are culled from one of the recent outpourings of concern in the business and financial media about the current backlash against globalization.	你以为这种说法截选自最近商业和金融媒体担忧当前全球化所引发反弹的大批文章是可以理解的。


In fact, they were written 35 years ago, in 1981.	而事实上，它们写于35年前的1981年。


The problem then was stagflation in the advanced countries.	滞胀是当时发达国家的问题。


And it was Japan, rather than China, that was the trade bogeyman, stalking – and taking over – global markets.	当时日本、而非中国，扮演着困扰并接管全球市场的贸易怪兽的角色。


The United States and Europe had responded by erecting trade barriers and imposing “voluntary export restrictions” (VERs) on Japanese cars and steel.	美国和欧洲的对策是通过设立贸易壁垒对日本汽车和钢材强制实施“自愿出口限制”（VER）政策。


Talk about the creeping “new protectionism” was rife.	“新保护主义”言论无孔不入。


What took place subsequently would belie such pessimism about the trade regime.	随后发生的事件证明这种对贸易制度悲观看法的错误。


Instead of heading south, global trade exploded in the 1990s and 2000s, driven by the creation of the World Trade Organization, the proliferation of bilateral and regional trade and investment agreements, and the rise of China.	在世贸组织成立的推动下，双边和区域贸易及投资协定迅速扩展及中国的崛起导致1990年代和2000年代全球贸易爆发，而非大幅滑落。


A new age of globalization – in fact something more like hyper-globalization – was launched.	全球化新时代——事实上更像某种超级全球化时代——拉开序幕。


In hindsight, the “new protectionism” of the 1980s was not a radical break with the past.	事后看来，20世纪80年代的“新保护主义”并非与过去的彻底切割。


It was more a case of regime maintenance than regime disruption, as the political scientist John Ruggie has written.	政治学家约翰·鲁吉写道，它更像是某种政权维护而不是政权破坏。


The import “safeguards” and VERs of the time were ad hoc, but they were necessary responses to the distributional and adjustment challenges posed by the emergence of new trade relationships.	当时的进口“保障”和自愿出口限制具有特殊性，但它们是应对新贸易关系出现所带来分配和调整挑战的必要对策。


The economists and trade specialists who cried wolf at the time were wrong.	当时大喊狼来了的经济学家和贸易专家犯了错误。


Had governments listened to their advice and not responded to their constituents, they would have possibly made things worse.	如果政府听取了他们的建议，没有理会当时的选民，他们可能会使局势进一步恶化。


What looked to contemporaries like damaging protectionism was in fact a way of letting off steam to prevent an excessive buildup of political pressure.	在同代人看来颇似破坏性保护主义的政策其实是一种防止政治压力过度积累的不满发泄方式。


Are observers being similarly alarmist about today’s globalization backlash?	观察家是否同样担心今天的全球化后座力？


The International Monetary Fund, among others, has recently warned that slow growth and populism might lead to an outbreak of protectionism.	国际货币基金组织最近警告缓慢增长和民粹主义可能导致保护主义爆发。


“It is vitally important to defend the prospects for increasing trade integration,’’ according to the IMF’s chief economist, Maurice Obstfeld.	国际货币基金组织首席经济学家莫里斯·奥斯特菲尔德（Maurice Obstfeld）认为，“保护贸易一体化的增长前景至关重要。 ”


So far, however, there are few signs that governments are moving decidedly away from an open economy.	但到目前为止，几乎没有迹象表明政府正在远离开放经济。 globaltradealert.


The website globaltradealert.org maintains a database of protectionist measures and is a frequent source for claims of creeping protectionism.	org网站运营着一个保护主义措施数据库，而且保护主义主张偷偷蔓延的说法往往从这里传出。


Click on its interactive map of protectionist measures, and you will see an explosion of fireworks – red circles all over the globe.	点击网站上的保护主义措施互动地图，你会看到红色的圆圈像烟花绽放般遍及全球。


It looks alarming until you click on liberalizing measures and discover a comparable number of green circles.	这点看上去十分惊人，直到你点击自由化措施，并发现绿色圆圈也有着同样的数量。


The difference this time is that populist political forces seem much more powerful and closer to winning elections – partly a response to the advanced stage of globalization achieved since the 1980s.	部分由于20世纪80年代以来进入全球化高级阶段的对策，此次的民粹主义政治力量看似更加强大，也更接近赢得选举。


Not so long ago, it would have been unimaginable to contemplate a British exit from the European Union, or a Republican presidential candidate in the United States promising to renege on trade agreements, build a wall against Mexican immigrants, and punish companies that move offshore.	不久前，认为英国会退出欧洲联盟或美国共和党总统候选人承诺违反贸易协议、筑墙阻挡墨西哥移民和惩罚离岸企业还是难以想象的。


The nation-state seems intent on reasserting itself.	民族国家似乎决意再次巩固其自身地位。


But the lesson from the 1980s is that some reversal from hyper-globalization need not be a bad thing, as long as it serves to maintain a reasonably open world economy.	但20世纪80年代以来的教训是只要有助于维护合理开放的世界经济，超级全球化的某些逆转并不一定是件坏事。


As I have frequently argued, we need a better balance between national autonomy and globalization.	我常说我们需要更好地平衡国家自主和全球化努力。


In particular, we need to place the requirements of liberal democracy ahead of those of international trade and investment.	特别是我们看待自由民主要重于国际贸易和投资。


Such a rebalancing would leave plenty of room for an open global economy; in fact, it would enable and sustain it.	这种再平衡会留下足够空间给开放的全球经济； 事实上，再平衡将促成并维护开放经济。


What makes a populist like Donald Trump dangerous is not his specific proposals on trade.	唐纳德·特朗普这样的民粹主义者其危险性不在于对贸易的具体建议。


It is that they don’t add up to a coherent vision of how the US and an open world economy can prosper side by side (it is also of course the nativist, illiberal platform on which he is campaigning and would likely govern).	而是因为他们无法制定美国如何与开放世界经济协调发展的清晰愿景（当然还因为当前竞选和执政可能用到的非自由本土主义平台的缘故）。


The key challenge facing mainstream political parties in the advanced economies today is to devise such a vision, along with a narrative that steals the populists’ thunder.	今天发达经济体主流政党所面临的关键挑战是制定这样的愿景，以及讲出夺走民粹主义者风头的某个故事。


These center-right and center-left parties should not be asked to save hyper-globalization at all costs.	不能要求这些中右及中左翼政党不惜一切代价挽救超级全球化的命运。


Trade advocates should be understanding if they adopt unorthodox policies to buy political support.	贸易倡导者应当理解他们采取非正统政策来赢取政治支持。


We should look instead at whether their policies are driven by a desire for equity and social inclusion, or by nativist and racist impulses; whether they want to enhance or weaken the rule of law and democratic deliberation; and whether they are trying to save the open world economy – albeit with different ground rules – rather than undermine it.	相反，我们应当关注他们政策的驱动因素是平等和社会包容的愿望，还是本土主义和种族主义的本能； 他们是想加强还是削弱法治和民主审议；


What’s the Problem With Protectionism?	保护主义有什么问题？


PORTO – One thing is now certain about the upcoming presidential election in the United States: the next president will not be a committed free trader.	波尔图—如今，即将到来的美国总统选举有一件事是确定的：新总统不会致力于自由贸易。


The presumptive Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, is at best a lukewarm supporter of freer trade, and of the Trans-Pacific Partnership in particular.	推定民主党提名人希拉里·克林顿最多只是自由贸易特别是跨太平洋合作伙伴关系（TPP）的温和支持者。


Her Republican counterpart, Donald Trump, is downright hostile to trade deals that would throw open US markets.	她的共和党对手唐纳德·特朗普则对开放美国市场的贸易协议持完全敌对的态度。


Breaking with modern Republican tradition, Trump envisages a 35% tariff on imported cars and parts produced by Ford plants in Mexico and a 45% tariff on imports from China.	与现代共和党传统相反，特朗普准备对福特墨西哥工厂生产的进口汽车和部件征收35%的关税，对中国进口品征收45%的关税。


Economists are all but unanimous in arguing that the macroeconomic effects of Trump’s plan would be disastrous.	经济学家们一致认为，特朗普的计划将带来灾难性宏观经济效应。


Repudiation of free and open trade would devastate confidence and depress investment.	否定自由和开放贸易将严重影响信心、抑制投资。


Other countries would retaliate by imposing tariffs of their own, flattening US exports.	其他国家也将效而仿之，实施本国关税，拖累美国出口。


The consequences would resemble those of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, enacted by the US Congress in 1930 and signed by an earlier, disgraced Republican president, Herbert Hoover – a measure that exacerbated the Great Depression.	结果将类似于美国国会1930年批准、由声誉不佳的前共和党总统胡佛签署的史穆特-哈雷关税（Smoot-Hawley Tariff）——该措施加剧了大萧条。


But just because economists agree doesn’t mean they’re right.	但仅仅因为经济学家们形成一致并不意味着他们是对的。


When the economy is in a liquidity trap – when demand is deficient, prices are stagnant or falling, and interest rates approach zero – normal macroeconomic logic goes out the window.	当经济陷入流动性陷阱时——即需求萎靡，物价停滞或下跌，利率接近于零时——常规宏观经济逻辑不再有效。


That conclusion applies to the macroeconomic effects of tariff protection in general, and to the Smoot-Hawley Tariff in particular.	这一结论适用于关税保护的总体宏观经济效应，特别是史穆特-哈雷关税。


This is a point I demonstrated in an academic paper written – I hesitate to admit – fully 30 years ago.	我不情愿地承认，我在整整30年前所撰写的学术论文中就证明了这一点。


Consider the following thought experiment.	我们来做一个思想实验。


President Trump signs a bill slapping a tariff on imports from China.	特朗普总统签署了一项法案，对来自中国的进口商品课以重税。


This shifts US spending toward goods produced by domestic firms.	这将促使美国支出偏向本国企业制造的商品。


It puts upward pressure on US prices, which is helpful when there is a risk of deflation.	而这又将推高美国物价，当存在通缩风险时，这样做是有裨益的。


But then President Xi Jinping retaliates with a Chinese tariff, which shifts demand away from US goods.	但接着，习近平主席效而仿之，中国也实施关税，使其需求从美国商品身上转移。


From the standpoint of American consumers, the only effect is that imports from China (now subject to tax) and their US-produced substitutes are both more costly than before.	从美国消费者的角度讲，唯一的影响是来自中国（目前必须缴税）的进口品以及美国制造的替代品都变得比以前更加昂贵了。


Under normal circumstances, this would be an undesirable outcome.	在平常环境下，这是一个不受欢迎的结果。


But when deflation looms, upward pressure on prices is just what the doctor ordered.	但当面临通缩时，物价上证压力正是我们想要的。


Higher prices encourage firms to raise production and households to increase their spending. They also reduce the burden of debts.	升高的物价鼓励公司提高产量、家庭增加支出，也降低了债务负担。


And because inflation is still too low, owing to depressed macroeconomic conditions, there is no need for the Fed to raise interest rates and offset any inflationary effects of the increase in spending.	而由于通胀仍然过低（因为萧条的宏观经济条件），美联储也没有提高利率以抵消支出增加的通胀效应的必要。


To prevent this thought experiment from being misconstrued, I want to be clear: there are other, better ways of raising prices and stimulating economic activity in liquidity-trap conditions.	为了防止这一思想实验被误解，我想做一个澄清：有其他更好的办法在流动性陷阱条件下提高物价、刺激经济活动。


The obvious alternative to import tariffs is plain-vanilla fiscal policy – tax cuts and increases in public spending.	显而易见的进口关税的替代方案是简单的财政政策——减税和增加公共支持。


Still, the point about tariffs is important.	但是，关税方法很重要。


Just as tariff protection is not a macroeconomic problem in deflationary, liquidity-trap-like conditions, freer trade, the economist’s familiar nostrum, is not a solution.	正如关税保护在通缩的流动性陷阱式条件下不构成宏观经济问题，经济学家们所所熟悉的秘方——自由贸易也不是解决方案。


Those seeking a cure for the current malaise of “secular stagnation” – slow growth and sub-2% inflation – shouldn’t claim too much for the beneficial macroeconomic effects of trade agreements.	寻求当前“长期停滞”——缓慢的增长和低于2%的通胀——症候的良方不应该过度强调贸易协定的宏观经济积极效应。


And they shouldn’t invoke the old saw that Smoot-Hawley caused the Great Depression, because it didn’t.	同时也不应该援引史穆特-哈雷关税导致大萧条的老观点，因为根本就不是这样。


False claims, even when made in pursuit of good causes, do no one any good.	错误的主张，即使它们是出于好意而提出，也无法带来任何好处。


But Smoot-Hawley did have a variety of other damaging consequences.	但史穆特-哈雷关税确实带来了各种其他破坏性后果。


First, it disrupted the operation of the international financial system.	首先，它打乱了国际金融体系的运转。


Free trade and free international capital flows go together.	自由贸易和国际资本的自由流动相辅相成。


Countries that borrow abroad must export in order to service their debts.	从国外借贷的国家必须出口以维持债务。


Smoot-Hawley and foreign retaliation made exporting more difficult.	史穆特-哈雷关税和外国的下佛昂政策让出口变得更加困难。


The result was widespread defaults on foreign debts, financial distress, and the collapse of international capital flows.	结果是普遍的外债违约、金融抑制以及国际资本流动暴跌。


Second, trade wars fanned geopolitical tensions.	其次，贸易战助长了地缘政治紧张。


The French Chamber of Deputies was outraged by American taxation of French specialty exports and urged an economic war against the US.	法国议会下院被美国的法国出口专门税激怒，对美国进行了经济宣战。


The UK taxed imports from the US while giving special preferences to its Commonwealth and Empire, angering Hoover and his successor, Franklin Delano Roosevelt.	英国对来自美国的进口品课税，并给予英联邦和英帝国属地关税优惠，这又激怒了胡佛及其继任者罗斯福。


Canadian Prime Minister Mackenzie King warned of an outbreak of “border warfare,” diplomacy-speak for deteriorating political relations.	加拿大总理金（Mackenzie King）提出了“边境战争”的警告——即政治关系恶化的外交语言。


Efforts to stabilize the international monetary system and end the global slump were set back by these diplomatic conflicts.	稳定国际货币体系、结束全球不景气的措施因为这些外交冲突而受到拖累。


Worse, US, British, French, and Canadian leaders were at one another’s throats at a time when they should have been working together to advance other common goals.	更糟糕的是，美国、英国、法国和加拿大领导人在本应齐心协力推进其他共同目标的时候互相斗争不止。


After all, economic policy aside, there was an even greater threat in the 1930s, namely the rise of Hitler and German re-militarization.	毕竟，除了经济政策，20世纪30年代还有一个更大的威胁，即希特勒的崛起和德国的再军事化。


Unilateral resort to trade restrictions, by making diplomatic cooperation more difficult, complicated efforts to mobilize a coalition of the willing to contain the Nazi threat.	单方面地采取贸易限制导致外交合作变得更加困难，从而也使动员自愿联盟以遏制纳粹威胁更加复杂。


Tariff protection may not be bad macroeconomic policy in a liquidity trap.	关税保护或许并非流动性陷阱条件下的坏宏观经济政策。


But this doesn’t make it good foreign policy – for Trump or anyone else.	但这并不能让它成为好的外交政策——不管是对特朗普还是对其他任何人。


Protectionism Rides Again	保护主义又抬头


Round up the usual suspects.	又到了秋后算账的时候。


In any US presidential election campaign, you can be sure that protectionism will break in, as it has.	在任何一届美国总统竞选期间，保护主义都会一如既往地乘虚而入。


But America's swing back toward protectionism started long before, with President George W. Bush's steel tariff of 2001.	但这次保护主义在美国卷土重来早在2001年乔治·W·布什总统征收钢铁关税时就开始了。


It was hard to understand what the underlying calculus was when the Bush administration imposed that tariff on steel imports.	布什政府对进口钢铁征收关税的真正意图实在让人琢磨不透。


The tariff was bad economics: it made America poorer.	该关税在经济上不划算：它使美国更穷了。


The tariff was bad mercantilism: it robbed more in profits and unionized jobs from steel-consuming industries than it gave to steel-making industries, and the former were at least as well-organized and vocal in Washington as the latter.	该关税也绝非重商主义的表现：它给钢铁消费行业造成的经济和失业损失要比给钢铁生产行业带来的利益大得多。 而前者的工会力量和在华盛顿的声势至少不输于后者。


Finally, the tariff was also bad diplomacy: why should anyone enter into an agreement with a US government that appears eager to demonstrate that it will break its commitments for the tiniest of imagined domestic political benefits?	该关税在外交上也并不高明：美国政府似乎借此迫不及待地表明它会为了想象中微不足道的国内政治利益而牺牲所有的承诺。 有哪个国家愿意和这样的政府达成任何协议呢？


Unfortunately, America's swing back toward protectionism did not stop there.	不幸的是美国重蹈保护主义的覆辙还不止于此。


It continued last year when the Bush administration, recognizing that it had no policies to boost employment, explored whether China's undervalued exchange rate might be blamed for closed factories in Ohio.	去年，当布什政府发现没有推动就业的有效政策时，又故伎重演地调查俄亥俄州的一些工厂倒闭是否应归罪于中国过低的汇率。


No surprise, then, that the Democratic Party has now picked up the protectionist baton.	有鉴于此，民主党现在又一次举起保护主义的大棒就不足为奇了。


Its leading candidate for the presidential nomination, John Kerry, talks about how "Benedict Arnold CEO's" betray America by outsourcing jobs.	其最主要的总统提名候选人约翰·凯利大谈"本尼迪克•阿诺德似的CEO"将工作外包是对美国的背叛。


Kerry's remaining competitor, John Edwards, talks about how the gap on trade between him and Kerry is wide and deep - with Kerry on the free-trade side.	凯利剩下的竞争对手约翰·爱德华兹也称他和凯利在贸易政策方面有着难以弥合的深刻分歧-而凯利是站在支持自由贸易的一边。


The past three years have seen much less progress on freeing up world trade than almost any free-trade advocate would have hoped.	在过去的三年里世界贸易自由化的进展比任何一个自由贸易的倡导者所希望的都要小得多。


Unless the swing of the pendulum in the US can be stopped, the rest of this decade will be as bad.	除非美国停止其在贸易政策上的摇摆，否则今后七年会依然如故。


Neither the European Union nor Japan can be counted upon to do anything more than allow themselves to be dragged kicking and screaming into trade liberalization agreements.	决不能指望欧盟和日本能够心甘情愿、毫不抗拒地签署任何贸易自由化协议。


Without aggressive US leadership - which means a US executive and congress that believe in free trade - trade liberalization simply will not happen, and there will be more "emergency" tariffs, "extraordinary" quotas and "voluntary" export restraints.	没有美国的积极领导-即没有崇信自由贸易的政府和国会-贸易自由化就不会实现，并且会出现更多的"紧急"关税，"特别"配额和"主动"出口限制。


All of these steps will have minimal impact on the US. But they have the potential to cause countless disasters for emerging market countries that export to America.	所有这些举措对美国的影响都极为有限，但却可能给向美国出口的新兴市场国家造成无数的灾难。


Can anything halt this swing of the pendulum?	有什么能阻止美国贸易政策的摇摆吗？


Absent a sudden, immediate, and strong boost in US domestic demand that turns into a durable boom with rapid employment growth, probably not.	除了一股突然、即时、强劲并能形成持续繁荣的内需增长及由此带来的就业率增长以外，似乎别无他法。


The fall over the past three years in the proportion of the working-age population with jobs in America has been the biggest in percentage terms since the Great Depression.	过去三年里，美国工作年龄人口的就业比例已跌至大萧条以来的最低点。


American workers and voters are more anxious about job security and more willing to blame anything for job insecurity because they have seen the most profound deterioration in labor market conditions in the memory of anyone younger than eighty-five.	让美国的工人和选举人更为焦虑的是工作保障。 由于目睹了85年来最为严重的劳动力市场衰退，他们更愿意将工作没有保障的情况归罪于任何事。


That slack labor market is powering this swing of the protectionist pendulum.	正是疲软的劳动力市场在驱动着保护主义的钟摆。


So we probably must accept that protectionist sentiment will remain strong.	所以我们可能必须要接受保护主义情绪甚嚣尘上的现实。


But we should seek ways to diminish the time spent and the damage done at the protectionist end of this political cycle.	但我们也应该寻求途径以减短这一政治循环的保护主义终点所持续的时间并减轻其造成的损失。


There are two arguments and one economic shift that could accelerate a return to trade liberalization.	有两种意见和一种经济上的转变可能会加速贸易自由化的回归。


The two arguments in favor of free trade are powerful, but by and large they have not been deployed.	这两种赞成自由贸易的观点虽然都是强有力的但却基本没被采纳。


The first argument needs to be made by countries that export to the US: they should tell journalists, politicians, voters, and workers in the US about all the American jobs that would not exist without their exports to America.	第一种观点应该由向美国出口的国家来表达：它们应该让美国的记者、政客、选举人和工人知道所有那些由于它们向美国出口而为其带来的工作机会。


Fear that expanded trade will destroy jobs and disrupt the American economy needs to be balanced by fear that reduced trade will destroy jobs and disrupt the American economy.	对扩大贸易会造成失业和扰乱美国经济的恐惧应该由对缩减贸易会造成同样后果的恐惧来平衡。


The second argument needs to be made by those who care about America's national security.	第二种观点应该由关心美国国家安全的人士来表达。


The 21st century will see the world constantly at war against terrorism.	21世纪的世界将会面临恐怖主义的持续挑战。


An important part of that war will consist of shaping the foes of terrorism into a durable alliance.	而这场战争的一个重要部分将会是把恐怖主义的敌人转变为持久的同盟。


Increased world trade can be an important part of that alliance-building process.	世界贸易的增长可以成为建立同盟进程中的一个重要步骤。


An economic shift also needs to be carried out by Europe and Japan: a shift from deflation to reflation.	经济上的转变则应该由欧洲和日本担当：从通货紧缩向通货再膨胀转变。


Strong demand growth in Japan and Europe that produces a higher level of American exports would be the most powerful pro-trade liberalization force imaginable.	日本和欧洲强劲的需求增长会推动美国的出口达到一个更高的水平，从而成为可以想见的，促进贸易自由化的最强大力量。


For too long, Europe and Japan have subordinated the quest for full employment to other goals, whether extremely low inflation (Europe) or avoiding the costs of a bubble economy (Japan).	长久以来，欧洲和日本一直将寻求充分就业让位于其它的目标-或是极低的通货膨胀（欧洲），或是规避泡沫经济的成本（日本）。


Convincing ordinary American voters that trade liberalization is a positive force will be easier when the US is not the only locomotive pulling world demand forward, and not the world's importer of last resort.	当美国不再是唯一拉动世界需求的火车头，也不再是"救命稻草"式的进口国时，说服美国的普通选举人相信贸易自由化是一种积极的力量会容易很多。


Death and Hope on the High Seas	公海上的死亡与希望


HALIFAX, CANADA – Sharks and their cousins, the rays, predate the dinosaurs.	加拿大哈利法克斯——鲨鱼及其远亲鰩鱼在恐龙出现前就已经在地球上生活。


They survived the catastrophic mass extinction that finished off Tyrannosaurus Rex and all the rest, as well as the Permian-Triassic extinction that wiped out around 96% of marine species.	它们躲过了消灭霸王龙及其他所有物种的灾难性大灭绝，也躲过了消灭96%海洋物种的二叠纪-三叠纪大灭绝。


Even the more recently evolved shark lineages, such as the hammerheads, have been around for more than 30 million years.	即使是锤头鲨等较新进化的鲨鱼谱系在地球上的生存时间也已经超过3，000万年。


Yet in just a few decades, a quarter of all sharks and rays have become threatened with extinction.	但短短数十年后，四分之一的鲨鱼和鰩鱼就将面临着灭顶之灾。


This is our fault – and it is our responsibility to fix it.	这是我们的错——保护鲨鱼是我们义不容辞的职责。


Shark and ray populations are not alone.	并非只有鲨鱼和鰩鱼在劫难逃。


Many other components of marine biodiversity – especially corals, marine mammals, seabirds, and turtles – are also struggling to withstand human pressures.	海洋生物多样性的其他部分——尤其是珊瑚、海洋哺乳动物、海鸟和海龟—— 也正在疲于应对人类的压力。


As a result, marine ecosystems are at risk of unraveling and becoming less stable and less productive.	结果导致海洋生态系统稳定性和效率下降，并有可能面临四分五裂的威胁。


Given the broad range of threats facing marine life – including overfishing, climate change, pollution, and coastal development – it is easy, perhaps even rational, to be pessimistic.	鉴于海洋生物所面临的大范围威胁——包括过度捕捞、气候变化、污染和沿海地区开发——人们很容易对此抱有悲观情绪，这甚至不失为一种理性的态度。


Yet this year could mark the beginning of a more robust approach to safeguarding ocean ecosystems, particularly with regard to overfishing, which is responsible for precipitous declines in many species.	但今年却可能标志着加强海洋生态系统保护的开始，特别是在导致众多物种数量急剧下降的过度捕捞领域。


The challenge ahead should not be underestimated.	未来面对的挑战不容小觑。


Meeting it will require overcoming one of the most intractable obstacles to marine conservation: ensuring the sustainability of biodiversity in the roughly 60% of the world’s oceans that lie beyond the jurisdiction of individual states.	迎接挑战需要克服海洋保护领域最棘手的障碍之一：在不归属单一国家管辖的约60%的世界公海海面上确保生物多样性可以持续。


Within the 200-nautical-mile limit that comprises their exclusive economic zones (EEZs), a few countries have used a combination of strong legislation, good management, and effective enforcement to preserve fish stocks and ecosystems.	在实行归属管辖的200海里专属经济区（EEZ）内，有几个国家已经综合利用强势立法、良好管理和有效执法来保护鱼类资源和生态体系。


(There have also been far too many counter-examples.)	（但同时还存在太多的反例。 ）


Beyond the EEZs, however, a pernicious problem arises: most living resources are de facto open-access, leaving them vulnerable to overexploitation.	但在专属经济区外已经出现了致命的问题：多数生物资源事实上呈开放状态，很容易受到过度开发的威胁。


While there have been numerous well-intentioned attempts to improve management of these resources, all rely on individual actors’ willingness to concede the short-term economic benefits of intensive resource use for the sake of the long-term common good.	虽然已有不少改善资源管理的善意尝试，但成败与否全部取决于参与者是否愿意为保护长期共同利益而牺牲集约利用资源的短期经济利益。


Whenever a cost arises from engagement with an international process, there will always be an incentive not to play by the rules, to enforce them weakly, or not to participate at all.	参与国际进程的代价会带来不守规则的冲动，导致执行力度偏弱或根本就拒绝参与。 这个问题在涉及环境保护时尤为突出，因为环境问题牵扯到高昂的政治资本；


This is especially true for environmental issues, where the political capital required is high; the need for near-unanimous support is crucial; the issues can be contentious; and the benefits are disproportionately distributed and are realized over a long time horizon.	拿到近乎一致的支持至关重要； 问题可能引起广泛的争议；


A passing familiarity with the Realpolitik of climate change suggests that this is an intimidating – if not intractable – challenge, displaying elements of the most difficult political and social quandaries: the prisoner’s dilemma, the free-rider problem, and the tragedy of the commons.	收益分布不成比例，并且需要较长的时间跨度才能实现收益。 气候变化现实政治的经验表明上述挑战即便不是无法解决，至少也令人生畏，体现着最难以解决的政治和社会困境元素：包括囚徒困境、搭便车问题和公地悲剧。


At present, a web of legislation – including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Food and Agriculture Organization guidelines, and the Fish Stocks Agreement, as well as the Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals – governs activities that may affect biodiversity on the high seas.	目前，我们靠一张完整的立法网络——包括联合国海洋法公约、粮农组织指导方针、鱼类种群协定和野生动物迁徙物种公约来负责管理影响公海生物多样性的行为。


Yet the protection afforded to living resources remains limited – and riddled with loopholes.	但生物资源受到的保护依然非常有限——并且漏洞极多。


For example, because not all countries are signatories to these agreements, vessels can choose which flag to fly to avoid being bound by regulations (a “flag of convenience”).	比方说，因为不是所有国家都签署了上述协议，船只可以为逃避法规约束而选择悬挂哪国国旗（“方便旗”）。


Some fisheries remain outside the jurisdiction of any of the regional bodies that play a role in resource management.	某些渔场一直没有加入在资源管理领域发挥作用的任何区域组织。


As a result, illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing is worth billions of dollars per year.	结果导致未经报告和监管的非法捕鱼业产值每年高达美元数十亿。


One promising step, recommended by a UN working group in January, is the development of a new, legally binding agreement on high-seas biodiversity, to be ready for the UN General Assembly to review by September.	由联合国工作组于1月提议的充满希望的步骤是就公海生物多样性制定有约束力的新法规。 该法规定于9月提交联合国大会接受审议。


Such a coordinated and harmonized framework may help to close regional gaps in governance; compel existing fisheries bodies to work to improve outcomes; and ultimately enable the development of new bodies that are focused on management and protection of ecosystems, not only fish stocks.	如此协调统一的架构或许有助于弥合区域管理差距； 迫使现有渔业机构合作提升管理效果；


That, in turn, may catalyze the cooperation needed to create high seas marine protected areas, which would enable damaged or depleted ecosystems to recover.	并最终催生侧重于管理保护生态系统，而不仅是渔业资源的崭新组织。 这反过来又将催化打造公海海洋保护区的合作，致使遭到破坏或几近枯竭的生态系统得以休生养息。


Of course, to be effective, such areas must be monitored.	当然，必须对上述区域实行监控以提高效率。


A promising development has been the use of satellite technology to detect and address fisheries violations by individual vessels.	令人期待的是利用卫星技术来发现和处理违反渔业规定的个别船只。


This could bring about a profound change for the better in ocean management, particularly for countries with large EEZs and limited marine enforcement capacity.	这或许会使海洋管理向好的方向发展，对拥有大型专属经济区且海洋执法能力有限的国家尤其如此。


A coordinated system for responding to violations is also vital.	建立处理违规行为的统一体系也有着重要意义。


Closing ports to vessels that break the rules could be achieved through the Port State Measures Agreement, currently awaiting ratification.	可以通过港口国措施协定对违反规定的船只关闭港口，该协定目前正在等候审批。


Ocean governance and conservation is at a critical juncture.	海洋管理和保护正处于关键时刻。


Marine resources cannot be overexploited indefinitely.	对海洋资源的过度开发不能无限期继续。


The forthcoming “biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction” agreement, underpinned by novel ways of monitoring compliance, could improve ocean management dramatically.	即将出台的“国家管辖范围外的生物多样性”协议在全新监管方式的支持下，或许会显著改善对海洋的管理。


The difficulty is that, in any scenario, better management assumes that we choose long-term sustainability over short-term profits.	难点在于无论在何种情况下，提高管理水平意味着我们相比短期盈利会选择长期可持续。


Whether we will overcome our inclination to choose otherwise remains to be seen.	我们能否克服选择短期利益的冲动还有待证实。


Psychiatry’s Conceptual Malpractice	精神病学的概念性过失


NEW YORK – The American Psychiatric Association’s recent proposed changes to its official diagnostic manual – the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (“DSM”), often called the “bible of psychiatry” – may discredit psychiatric diagnosis more than improve it.	发自纽约——美国精神病学协会最近针对其官方诊断手册《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》（人称“精神病学圣经”）提出了修改意见，而这对精神病的诊断来说可能弊大于利。


The DSM specifies the symptoms by which every mental disorder is diagnosed, in effect defining what is psychologically normal and abnormal in the United States – and, increasingly, for much of the rest of the world as well.	这本手册详细规定了所有精神障碍的诊断症状，并有效地定义了心理正常和不正常之间的区别，且手册不但通行于美国，更影响到全世界大部分地区。


Revising the DSM’s diagnostic criteria for the upcoming fifth edition (“DSM-5”) is a heavy responsibility.	手册即将推出第五版，而对新版所列的诊断条件进行订正则是一项不容有失的工作。


Draw the line between normality and disorder too broadly, and individuals may suffer incorrect diagnoses and undergo needless and potentially harmful treatment.	如果将精神正常与障碍之间的界限定得太宽的话，就会有许多人被误诊并接受无谓甚至有潜在危害的治疗。


Indeed, the DSM’s history reveals many such errors of over-inclusiveness.	事实上，在这本手册的前几版中就不乏这类因诊断条件过于宽泛而导致的错误。


But if the line is drawn too narrowly, individuals may not get needed help.	而倘若把界限定得太窄的话，患者就可能得不到所需的治疗。


Although psychiatrists tend to worry more about identifying potential patients in need of help and less about eliminating normal eccentricity and distress from diagnosis, it is crucial in any society that respects human variation and encourages individual moral responsibility to distinguish normal suffering and eccentricity from mental disorder.	虽然精神病学家总是倾向于定义那些需要救治的潜在患者，而不是从那些症状中剔除某些一般性行为异常或者焦虑行为，但对于一个尊重个人差异性，而且认为医生有道德责任将正常的痛苦和行为异常与精神障碍区分开的社会来说，这却是非常重要的。


These are delicate issues of conceptual analysis.	上述都是与概念分析有关的事务。


Yet the psychiatrists who formulated the DSM-5’s proposed changes are not trained in conceptual analysis, and, though amply forewarned, they have addressed the normal-versus-disordered issue in an unsystematic, ad hoc manner.	但那些对手册第五版制定修改意见的精神病学家却没有接受过概念分析方面的训练，而且，虽然事先已经受到了警告，他们却依然用一种不系统的临时性手法来应对“正常还是障碍”的问题。


The result is a form of conceptual malpractice: intellectual negligence resulting in the formulation of invalid diagnostic criteria that will misdiagnose normal individuals as disordered.	这导致了某种形式的概念性过失：因学术上的不足而制订出错误诊断条件，并因此将正常人误诊为精神障碍患者。


Consider the following proposed new disorders:	让我们看看新版中提议新增的以下几种精神障碍：


(1)   Binge eating disorder. If you overeat once a week for three months, lacking self-control and experiencing over-fullness afterward, and are distressed, embarrassed, and disgusted with yourself, you are diagnosable.	（1）饮食失调：如果你在连续三个月内每周过量进食一次，进食时缺乏自我控制能力，进食过后感觉过饱，并有沮丧，尴尬和厌恶感，那么就可以诊断为饮食失调。


Apparently, people who feel bad about not being fully controlled in their eating when confronted by weekend buffet-style feasts are disordered.	很显然，那些在面对周末大餐而无法完全控制自己的人是机能失调的。


(2)   Hoarding disorder. If you resist discarding possessions that others (a spouse, say, or a clinician) find of limited value, and consequently clutter your living space, and you are distressed about this or are creating what others consider an unsafe environment, you are diagnosable.	（2）囤积行为失调：如果你拒绝抛弃一些他人（例如配偶或者临床医生）认为价值有限的物品，并持续在居住区域内堆积此类物体，而且对自己的行为感到沮丧或者制造一个令他人感觉不安全的环境，那么就可以诊断为囤积行为失调。


This category will be welcomed by neatniks irritated by acquisitive partners.	这个分类将受到那些爱整洁，却受到居住伴侣囤积行为困扰的人。


(3)   Hypersexual disorder. If you are highly sexual for six months in a way that feels uncontrolled and becomes distressing, and use sexuality for relieving feelings of stress and boredom or without consideration of the emotional effect on others (formerly known as being a “cad”), you are diagnosable.	（3）过度性行为失调：如果你在六个月以内大量发生性行为，无法控制自己并感到沮丧，同时利用性行为来缓解压力和无聊，且不顾及该行为对其他人造成的精神影响（即过去所认为的“色鬼”），那么就可以诊断为过度性行为失调。


This disorder presumes that using sex to relieve unhappiness, and feeling guilty about it, is also diagnosable.	而那些利用性行为来缓解悲伤情绪，并伴有负罪感的失调行为都可得出类似结论。


Other proposed DSM-5 changes open the door to future abuses.	而其他可能在第五版中作出的改动也为胡乱诊断大开方便之门。


“Pathological gambling” would be placed in a new super-category of “behavioral addictions,” opening the way for “internet addiction” and many other behaviors to be deemed pathological.	比如“病理性赌博”将被归类到一个新门类“行为成瘾”之中，令“网瘾”和许多其他行为都可以被定义为病态。


Likewise, loose or quirky thinking that is not now a disorder but indicates an increased risk of developing a psychotic disorder would be classified as a “psychotic risk disorder.”	此外，类似思维混乱/古怪这些目前尚未被定义为失调，但有逐渐发展成精神性失调风险的行为将被定义为“精神风险性失调”。


Those diagnosed with this condition would be more likely to be treated with potent drugs, though most never develop a psychotic disorder – setting a precedent for confusing risk factors with actual disorders.	在这些条件下的诊断将要求病人服用强效药物，即便大多数人永远不会发展成的精神性失调患者——而且也为特定失调症状的治疗风险因素提供了先例。


Other changes undermine the validity of existing categories.	还有一些更改则破坏了现有分类的有效性。


For example, the DSM currently distinguishes substance dependence – essentially addiction (a disorder) – from substance abuse, a weaker category that includes dubious criteria such as driving while intoxicated or arguing with others about substance use.	比如手册目前将物质依赖（恋物癖）——就是物质成瘾（一种失调症）——和物质滥用区分开来，后者（一个较为弱势的门类）包含了一些模糊的条件，比如酒后驾车或者因为物品的使用而跟他人发生争吵。


The DSM-5 proposes to eliminate the weak “abuse” category, but only by combining its misconceived criteria with current dependence criteria to form a unified “substance use disorder” category, and reducing the number of symptoms needed for diagnosis from three to two.	而第五版手册则想要取消掉这个弱势的“滥用”门类，但要求将该门类中那些模糊性条件与“依赖”的条件相混合，整合成一个叫做“物质使用失调”的门类，并将确定诊断所需要的症状数量从三个减少到两个。


As a result, substance dependence would disappear as a valid category.	结果物质依赖作为一个有效门类即将消失。


Under the proposal, if you occasionally drive your car home from parties after drinking and argue with your spouse about it afterwards, you would have alcohol-use disorder.	在新的修改建议下，如果你在聚会喝酒后开车回家并因此和配偶吵架，你可能被诊断为酒精使用失调。


The vacuity of the abuse category will now infect the dependence category.	而“滥用”门类的消失将影响到“依赖”门类。


A second example: it has been known since antiquity that normal people who recently experienced a significant loss – especially of a loved one – can have the same symptoms (e.g., sadness, insomnia, fatigue, loss of interest in usual activities, lessened appetite) as those indicating major depressive disorder.	再举一个例子：自古以来人人都知道如果一个正常人遭受了巨大的打击——例如失去爱人——会产生和重度忧郁症类似的症状，比如伤心、失眠、疲惫，对周围事物失去兴趣和食欲不振。


Thus, the DSM currently eliminates the recently bereaved from depression diagnosis unless they have certain extreme symptoms suggesting more than intense grief.	因此，目前版本的手册将丧失亲人者排除在忧郁症之外，除非这些人确实有比极度悲伤更加极端的表面症状。


By contrast, the DSM-5 proposes to eliminate the bereavement exclusion.	而反过来，第五版的手册却建议要取消这种排���条件。


Anyone with depressive symptoms for just two weeks after suffering a significant loss would be diagnosed with major depressive disorder, massively pathologizing normal intense grief.	任何在丧亲后两周内有忧郁症状的人都将被诊断为重度忧郁症，将大多数正常的极度悲伤都定义为病态。


Moreover, some obviously invalid current categories have not been addressed.	此外，一些旧版手册中明显有歧义的门类也没有得到处理。


For example, if you are sad for two weeks and have one other related symptom, such as fatigue, insomnia, or lessened appetite, and you are distressed or impaired at work or in other roles, then you have “subsyndromal depression.”	比如你这两个星期都很伤心并伴有其他相关症状，比如疲惫，失眠或是食欲不振，在工作中提不起精神或者不合群，那你就是“亚抑郁症”患者。


But research shows that virtually anyone with two weeks of sadness feels distressed and is likely to be role-impaired, so in effect this category elevates moderately prolonged normal sadness into a mental disorder.	但研究证明其实任何伤心了两个星期的人都会感到沮丧而且不合群，因此这个门类将温和的持续性正常悲伤提升成了一种精神障碍。


All the above categories encompass some genuine disorders.	上述所有门类都是围绕着某些最基本的失调症状。


The problem is that the criteria are drawn so broadly that they pathologize mostly the non-disordered.	问题就是这些条件都被定得太宽，以致将大多数非失调行为都当成了病态。


Normal individuals often need and deserve help, but the decision as to the kind of help they get should not be biased by incorrect labeling of their conditions as mental disorders that suggest something is internally wrong with them. 	正常人经常都需要并应该得到帮助，但提供何种帮助不应该基于将他们的状况定义为精神障碍的错误决定，以及因此导致的错误处理。


The current symptom-based diagnostic system was developed partly to answer criticism that psychiatry is just social control of undesirable behavior dressed up as medicine.	目前这种以症状为依据的诊断系统的产生，在某种程度上正是为了回应外界的批评：认为精神病学只不过是一种伪医学，只是试图对那些不受社会欢迎的行为进行控制而已。


By failing to distinguish adequately normal distress and eccentricity from disorder, the DSM-5’s proposals threaten to increase dramatically the types of abuses that the DSM was designed to prevent.	而由于无法有效地将正常沮丧以及反常行为和真正的失调区分开来，第五版手册的修改意见很可能大幅增加乱诊断行为——而这却正是手册所试图避免的。


Another anti-psychiatric backlash may not be far behind.	由此可见，下一轮的反精神病学浪潮很快就要席卷而来了。


Public Health versus Private Freedom?	公共健康还是私人自由？


PRINCETON – In contrasting decisions last month, a United States Court of Appeals struck down a US Food and Drug Administration requirement that cigarettes be sold in packs with graphic health warnings, while Australia’s highest court upheld a law that goes much further.	普林斯顿—上个月出现了两起相反的判决。 美国联邦上诉法院驳回了美国食品药品管理局关于香烟必须在印有健康警告图片的包装中销售的诉请，而澳大利亚最高法院的判决支持比美国激进得多的法律。


The Australian law requires not only health warnings and images of the physical damage that smoking causes, but also that the packs themselves be plain, with brand names in small generic type, no logos, and no color other than a drab olive-brown.	根据澳大利亚的这项法律，烟草包装盒上不仅必须印上健康警告和吸烟引起的身体伤害的图片，而且包装本身必须非常简单，品牌名称需用小号通用字体印刷，不得带有商标图案，也不许用毫无生气的橄榄棕以外的颜色。


The US decision was based on America’s constitutional protection of free speech.	美国的裁决基础是美国宪法对言论自由的保护。


The court accepted that the government may require factually accurate health warnings, but the majority, in a split decision, said that it could not go as far as requiring images.	法庭接受政府可以要求标上真实、正确的健康警告，但（微弱）多数意见认为不能到要求印上图像的程度。


In Australia, the issue was whether the law implied uncompensated expropriation – in this case, of the tobacco companies’ intellectual property in their brands.	在澳大利亚，问题在于该法是否隐含着无条件征用——在这个案例中，是烟草公司对自身商标的知识产权。


The High Court ruled that it did not.	最高法院的裁决是没有。


Underlying these differences, however, is the larger issue: who decides the proper balance between public health and freedom of expression?	但是，这些差异的背后是一个更大的问题：谁来决定公共健康和言论自由之间恰当的平衡？


In the US, courts make that decision, essentially by interpreting a 225-year-old text, and if that deprives the government of some techniques that might reduce the death toll from cigarettes – currently estimated at 443,000 Americans every year – so be it.	在美国，这由法院决定——从根本上说是通过如何解读有着225年历史的法律条文来决定——这会让政府可能减少香烟致死人数（最新数据表明每年有443000人）的方案受挫？


In Australia, where freedom of expression is not given explicit constitutional protection, courts are much more likely to respect the right of democratically elected governments to strike the proper balance.	也得执行。 在澳大利亚，言论自由并没有宪法明文予以保护，法庭有更大的可能尊重民主选出的政府决定恰当平衡的权利。


There is widespread agreement that governments ought to prohibit the sale of at least some dangerous products.	一个广泛的共识是政府应该禁止销售某些危险品。


Countless food additives are either banned or permitted only in limited quantities, as are children’s toys painted with substances that could be harmful if ingested.	大量食品添加剂要么被禁止，要么被严格限定用量，使用了可能因入口而产生伤害的涂料的儿童玩具也是如此。


New York City has banned trans fats from restaurants and is now limiting the permitted serving size of sugary drinks.	纽约市禁止餐馆使用反式脂肪，目前又在限制含糖饮料的允许份量。


Many countries prohibit the sale of unsafe tools, such as power saws without safety guards.	许多国家禁止销售危险工具，如不带护具的电锯。


Although there are arguments for prohibiting a variety of different dangerous products, cigarettes are unique, because no other product, legal or illegal, comes close to killing the same number of people – more than traffic accidents, malaria, and AIDS combined.	尽管禁止各种不同危险品的呼声此起彼伏，但烟草问题是独一无二的，因为没有哪个商品（不管是合法商品还是非法商品）能和香烟一样夺走如此多的生命——死于香烟的人数比交通事故、疟疾和艾滋病加起来还要多。


Cigarettes are also highly addictive.	香烟还是高致瘾性商品。


Moreover, wherever health-care costs are paid by everyone – including the US, with its public health-care programs for the poor and the elderly – everyone pays the cost of efforts to treat the diseases caused by cigarettes.	此外，只要公共卫生成本是由普罗大众承担的——包括美国在内，它的穷人和老人医保计划便是如此——治疗香烟引起的疾病的成本就是由普罗大众掏腰包的。


Whether to prohibit cigarettes altogether is another question, because doing so would no doubt create a new revenue source for organized crime.	是否一刀切禁烟则是另一个问题，因为这样做毫无疑问会为有组织犯罪带来新的收入源。


It seems odd, however, to hold that the state may, in principle, prohibit the sale of a product, but may not permit it to be sold only in packs that carry graphic images of the damage it causes to human health.	不过，从理论上说，以下观点相当奇怪：国家可以禁售某种商品，但不能规定它只能放在印有它所引起的人类健康伤害的图像的包装盒中销售。


The tobacco industry will now take its battle against Australia’s legislation to the World Trade Organization.	目前，烟草业将就澳大利亚的立法向世贸组织提起诉讼。


The industry fears that the law could be copied in much larger markets, like India and China.	烟草业担心更大的市场（如印度和中国）会仿效澳大利亚的这项法律。


That is, after all, where such legislation is most needed.	毕竟，那些地方才最需要此类立法的。


Indeed, only about 15% of Australians and 20% of Americans smoke, but in 14 low and middle-income countries covered in a survey recently published in The Lancet, an average of 41% of men smoked, with an increasing number of young women taking up the habit.	事实上，只有15%的澳大利亚人和20%的美国人吸烟，但在《柳叶刀》杂志最新公布的一项调查中，该调查所覆盖的14个中低收入国家的男性吸烟比例平均为41%，更有越来越多的年轻女性养成吸烟的习惯。


The World Health Organization estimates that about 100 million people died from smoking in the twentieth century, but smoking will kill up to one billion people in the twenty-first century.	世界卫生组织估计20世纪有1亿人因吸烟而丧命，而在21世纪，在最坏的情况下，吸烟将带走10亿人的生命。


Discussions of how far the state may go in promoting the health of its population often start with John Stuart Mill’s principle of limiting the state’s coercive power to acts that prevent harm to others.	通常认为，关于国家在促进人口健康方面可以走得多远的讨论发轫于约翰·穆勒的原则——国家强制权力应以防止他人受到伤害为界。


Mill could have accepted requirements for health warnings on cigarette packs, and even graphic photos of diseased lungs if that helps people to understand the choice that they are making; but he would have rejected a ban.	穆勒可能会接受必须在香烟包装盒上印健康警告的要求，如果肺病图像有助于人们理解他们的选择所带来的后果，穆勒可能也会同意加上它，但他不会支持禁售香烟。


Mill’s defense of individual liberty, however, assumes that individuals are the best judges and guardians of their own interests – an idea that today verges on naiveté.	但是，穆勒对个人自由的捍卫假设个人才是其自身利益的最佳裁判和卫士，从现在的角度看这有些天真。


The development of modern advertising techniques marks an important difference between Mill’s era and ours.	现代广告技术的发展标志着穆勒的时代和现时代的一个重要差别。


Corporations have learned how to sell us unhealthy products by appealing to our unconscious desires for status, attractiveness, and social acceptance.	企业已经学会了通过诱使我们在不知不觉中感到有地位、有吸引力、被社会接受向我们兜售不健康的商品。


As a result, we find ourselves drawn to a product without quite knowing why.	结果，我们常常不知所以地就对某个产品着了迷。


And cigarette makers have learned how to manipulate the properties of their product to make it maximally addictive.	而烟草商早已学会控制香烟成分，让它具有最大的致瘾性。


Graphic images of the damage that smoking causes can counter-balance the power of these appeals to the unconscious, thereby facilitating more deliberative decision-making and making it easier for people to stick to a resolution to quit smoking.	展示吸烟可能造成的伤害的图像能够抵消这类潜意识消费的诱惑力，从而促进更为自主的决策过程，让人们更坚定地戒烟。


Instead of rejecting such laws as restricting freedom, therefore, we should defend them as ways to level the playing field between individuals and giant corporations that make no pretense of appealing to our capacities for reasoning and reflection.	因此，我们不能因为它限制了自由而拒绝这样的法律，相反，我们应该捍卫它，将它视为让个人和企业巨头平等竞争的方法，让我们的理性和思考不再受到掣肘。


Requiring that cigarettes be sold in plain packs with health warnings and graphic images is equal-opportunity legislation for the rational beings inside us.	要求香烟必须简单包装、且包装盒上必须印有健康警告和图像是我们体内的理性生命的机会公平立法要求。


The Return of Public Investment	公共投资的回归


CAMBRIDGE – The idea that public investment in infrastructure – roads, dams, power plants, and so forth – is an indispensable driver of economic growth has always held powerful sway over the minds of policymakers in poor countries.	发自剑桥——在贫穷国家的政策制定者脑中，公共基础设施投资——公路，水坝，电厂等等——一直都被认为是经济增长不可或缺的驱动力。


It also lay behind early development assistance programs following World War II, when the World Bank and bilateral donors funneled resources to newly independent countries to finance large-scale projects.	这一观点也是二战后初期的发展援助计划——当时世界银行和双边捐助者向新独立国家输送资源以资助大型项目建设——的理论基础。


And it motivates the new China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), which aims to fill the region’s supposed $8 trillion infrastructure gap.	它催生了以中国为首的新亚洲基础设施投资银行（AIIB），其目的是填补该地区据称达8万亿美元的基础设施投资差距。


But this kind of public-investment-driven growth model – often derisively called “capital fundamentalism” – has long been out of fashion among development experts.	但这种公共投资拉动型的增长模式——常被戏称为所谓“资本原教旨主义”——早已在发展专家中失去了市场。


Since the 1970s, economists have been advising policymakers to de-emphasize the public sector, physical capital, and infrastructure, and to prioritize private markets, human capital (skills and training), and reforms in governance and institutions.	自1970年代以来，经济学家一直建议政策制定者不要再强调公共部门，实物资本和基础设施，转而优先发展私人市场，人力资本（技能及培训），以及治理和体制改革。


From all appearances, development strategies have been transformed wholesale as a result.	这些现象说明发展战略的思路已经出现了整体转变。


It may be time to reconsider that change.	如今也是时候重新考量这种转变了。


If one looks at the countries that, despite strengthening global economic headwinds, are still growing very rapidly, one will find public investment is doing a lot of the work.	放眼那些即便全球经济下行却依然实现了高速增长的国家，人们会发现公共投资其实做了很多工作。


In Africa, Ethiopia is the most astounding success story of the last decade.	在非洲，埃塞俄比亚是过去十年中最引人注目的成功故事。


Its economy has grown at an average annual rate exceeding 10% since 2004, which has translated into significant poverty reduction and improved health outcomes.	自2004年以来该国年均经济增长率超过了10％，并因此实现了贫困状况和医疗卫生条件的显著改善。


The country is resource-poor and did not benefit from commodity booms, unlike many of its continental peers. Nor did economic liberalization and structural reforms of the type typically recommended by the World Bank and other donors play much of a role.	该国资源较为贫乏，并未像其它许多非洲国家那样从大宗商品繁荣中获益，其经济自由化进程和体制改革也并未像世界银行和其他捐助者一贯建议的那样扮演主要角色。


Rapid growth was the result, instead, of a massive increase in public investment, from 5% of GDP in the early 1990s to 19% in 2011 – the third highest rate in the world.	这一快速增长实际上是大幅增加公共投资的结果——从1990年代占GDP的5％，到2011年的19%，增速全球排名第三。


The Ethiopian government went on a spending spree, building roads, railways, power plants, and an agricultural extension system that significantly enhanced productivity in rural areas, where most of the poor reside.	埃塞俄比亚政府发动了一场预算支出高潮，修建公路，铁路，电站，以及一项令大部分穷人居住的农村地区生产力显著提升的农业技术推广体系。


Expenditures were financed partly by foreign aid and partly by heterodox policies (such as financial repression) that channeled private saving to the government.	这些支出一部分来自国外援助，另一些则来自引导私人储蓄向政府提供资金的非常规政策（如对金融业的压制）。


In India, rapid growth is also underpinned by a substantial increase in investment, which now stands at around one-third of GDP.	在印度，快速增长也是由大幅增加的投资来支撑，现已相当于GDP规模的约1/3。


Much of this increase has come from private sources, reflecting gradual relaxation of the shackles on the business sector since the early 1980s.	其中大部分都来自私人渠道，体现出自1980年代初以来对商业界政策的逐步松绑。


But the public sector continues to play an important role.	但公共部门仍然发挥着重要的作用。


The government has had to step in as both private investment and total factor productivity growth have faltered in recent years.	政府也在不得不在近几年私人投资和全要素生产率增长稍显缓慢时开始介入。


These days, it is public infrastructure investment that helps maintain India’s growth momentum.	在这些时期，正是公共基础设施投资帮助印度保持了增长势头。


“I think two sectors holding back the economy are private investments and exports,” says the government’s chief economic adviser, Arvind Subramanian.	“我认为，阻碍经济增长的两个部门是私人投资和出口，”印度政府首席经济顾问，阿文德·萨勃拉曼尼亚（Arvind Subramanian）表示，“这就是为何. .


“That is why... public investment is going to fill in the gap.”	要用公共投资去填补缺口。 ”


Turning to Latin America, Bolivia is one of the rare mineral exporters that has managed to avoid others’ fate in the current commodity-price downturn.	至于拉丁美洲，玻利维亚是其中一个在当前商品价格低迷时期不至于爆发类似邻国危机的稀有矿产出口国。


Annual GDP growth is expected to remain above 4% in 2015, in a region where overall output is shrinking (by 0.3%, according to the International Monetary Fund’s latest projections).	在拉美总产出萎缩（约0. 3％，根据国际货币基金组织的最新预测）的背景下，该国2015年全年GDP增长预计将保持在4％以上。


Much of that has to do with public investment, which President Evo Morales regards as the engine of the Bolivian economy.	其中很大一部分源自于公共投资，而总统莫拉莱斯也将此认定为本国经济的增长引擎。


From 2005 to 2014, total public investment has more than doubled relative to national income, from 6% to 13%, and the government intends to push the ratio even higher in coming years.	从2005年到2014年，玻利维亚的公共投资总额相对于国民收入的比率增加了一倍多，从6％提升到13％，而政府则计划在未来几年进一步提高该比例。


We know that hikes in public investment, just like commodity booms, all too often end in tears.	我们知道，公共投资的上调，正如大宗商品繁荣那样，常常以悲剧结尾。


The economic and social returns decline and money dries up, setting the stage for a debt crisis.	一旦经济和社会收益下降，资金枯竭，债务危机就会随之而来。


A recent IMF study finds that, after some early positive effects, most public-investment drives falter.	国际货币基金组织最近的研究发现，在取得一些早期的积极效应后，大部分公共投资的驱动力会逐渐消失。


But much depends on local conditions.	但这在很大程度上取决于当地的情况。


Public investment can enhance an economy’s productivity for a substantial period of time, even a decade or more, as it clearly has done in Ethiopia.	公共投资可以在相当长一段时间提高经济生产力，甚至是十年或更长，正如在埃塞俄比亚所明确展现的那样。


It can also catalyze private investment, and there is some evidence that this has happened in India in recent years.	它还可以促进私人投资，印度近几年也有一些证据证明了这种作用。


The potential benefits of public investment are not limited to developing countries.	公共投资的潜在好处不仅限于发展中国家。


In fact, today it may be the advanced economies of North America and Western Europe that stand to gain the most from ramping up domestic public investment.	事实上，当今北美和西欧发达经济体从大力推动国内公共投资中获益良多。


In the aftermath of the great recession, there are many ways in which these economies could put additional public spending to good use: to increase demand and employment, restore crumbling infrastructure, and boost research and development, particularly in green technologies.	在对大萧条的反思后，这些国家有许多方式来善加使用额外的公共支出：增加需求和就业，整修老旧的基础设施，并推动科学研究——尤其是绿色技术。


Such arguments are typically countered in policy debates by objections related to fiscal balance and macroeconomic stability.	这些观点通常会在政策辩论中遭到反驳，担心会影响到财政收支平衡和宏观经济稳定。


But public investment is different from other types of official outlays, such as expenditures on public-sector wages or social transfers. Public investment serves to accumulate assets, rather than consume them.	但是公共投资与其他类型的政府支出（比如对公共部门工资和社会转移支付）不同，公共投资的作用是积累资产，而不是消耗他们。


So long as the return on those assets exceeds the cost of funds, public investment in fact strengthens the government’s balance sheet.	只要这些资产的回报率能超过资金成本，公共投资就能令政府的资产负债表更加优化。


We do not know how the experiments in Ethiopia, India, or Bolivia will eventually turn out; so caution is warranted before one extrapolates from these to other cases.	我们不知道在埃塞俄比亚，印度，玻利维亚的实验最终将取得何种结果； 所以有必要在推广这些案例经验时慎之又慎。


Nonetheless, all three are examples that other countries, including developed ones, should watch closely as they search for viable growth strategies in an increasingly hostile global economic environment.	然而如果其他国家（包括发达国家）想在日益严峻的全球经济形势下寻求可行发展战略的话，都应当对这三个案例加以密切关注。


Why Public Investment?	为何是公共投资


MILAN – The world is facing the prospect of an extended period of weak economic growth.	米兰—世界有可能面临经济增长的长期低迷。


But risk is not fate: The best way to avoid such an outcome is to figure out how to channel large pools of savings into productivity-enhancing public-sector investment.	但风险不是宿命：避免这一结果的最佳办法是找出如何将为数巨大的储蓄资金池引向增强生产率的公共部门投资。


Productivity gains are vital to long-term growth, because they typically translate into higher incomes, in turn boosting demand.	生产率进步对于长期增长至关重要，因为它们常常能转化为更高的收入，从而反过来提振需求。


That process takes time, of course – especially if, say, the initial recipients of increased income already have a high savings rate.	当然，这一过程需要时间，特别是（比如）收入增量的初始受益者原本就存在高储蓄率的情况下。


But, with ample investment in the right areas, productivity growth can be sustained.	但是，只要在正确的领域投入足够的投资，生产率增长是可以维持的。


The danger lies in debt-fueled investment that shifts future demand to the present, without stimulating productivity growth.	危险在于债务支持的投资，这种投资将未来需求提前到现在，而不会刺激生产率增长。


This approach inevitably leads to a growth slowdown, possibly even triggering a financial crisis like the one that recently shook the United States and Europe.	这一方针难免导致增长减速，甚至有可能触发金融危机——比如最近冲击美国和欧洲的那种。


Such crises cause major negative demand shocks, as excess debt and falling asset prices damage balance sheets, which then require increased savings to heal – a combination that is lethal to growth.	这些危机带来重大消极需求冲击，因为过重的债务和下跌的资产价格损害了资产负债表，而这需要用增加储蓄来弥补——于是就形成了对增长产生致命影响的组合。


If the crisis occurs in a systemically important economy – such as the US or Europe (emerging economies' two largest external markets) – the result is a global shortage of aggregate demand.	如果危机发生在具系统重要性的经济中——如美国或欧洲（新兴经济体最大的两个出口市场）——其结果将是全球总需求不足。


And, indeed, severe demand constraints are a key feature of today's global economic environment.	此外，事实上，严重的需求制约已成为当今全球经济环境的一个关键特征。


Though the US is finally emerging from an extended period in which potential output exceeded demand, high unemployment continues to suppress demand in Europe.	尽管美国终于从长期以来的潜在产出高于需求的状态中走出，但高失业仍抑制着欧洲的需求。


One of the main casualties is the tradable sector in China, where domestic demand remains inadequate to cover the shortfall and prevent a slowdown in GDP growth.	一个主要受害者是中国的可贸易部门。 中国的内需不足以覆盖短缺和阻止GDP增长下滑。


Another notable trend is that individual economies are recovering from the recent demand shocks at varying rates, with the more flexible and dynamic economies of the US and China performing better than their counterparts in the advanced and emerging worlds.	另一个值得关注的趋势时各经济体正在以不同的速度从最近的需求冲击中恢复，更灵活、更有活力的经济体，如美国和中国，表现比发达和新型世界的其他经济体更好。


Excessive regulation of Japan's non-tradable sector has constrained GDP growth for years, while structural rigidities in Europe's economies impede adaptation to technological advances and global market forces.	多年来，日本对不可贸易部门的过度监管制约了GDP增长，而欧洲经济体僵化的结构阻碍了它们利用技术进步和全球市场力量。


Reforms aimed at increasing an economy's flexibility are always hard – and even more so at a time of weak growth – because they require eliminating protections for vested interests in the short term for the sake of greater long-term prosperity.	旨在增加经济体灵活性的改革总是艰难的——在增长疲软的时期更是如此——因为这需要消除既得利益的短期保护以换取长期繁荣。


Given this, finding ways to boost demand is key to facilitating structural reform in the relevant economies.	基于此，找出提振需求之道对于促进重要经济体的结构改革来说是关键。


That brings us to the third factor behind the global economy's anemic performance: underinvestment, particularly by the public sector.	这就引出了全球经济表现低迷背后的第三个因素：投资不足，特别是公共部门投资不足。


In the US, infrastructure investment remains suboptimal, and investment in the economy's knowledge and technology base is declining, partly because the pressure to remain ahead in these areas has waned since the Cold War ended.	在美国，基础设施投资仍没有达到最优，其经济的知识和技术基础投资正在下降，部分是因为自冷战结束以来，在这些领域保持领先的压力有所放松。


Europe, for its part, is constrained by excessive public debt and weak fiscal positions.	至于欧洲，它一直受困于公共债务过高和财政状况不稳。


In the emerging world, India and Brazil are just two examples of economies where inadequate investment has kept growth below potential (though that may be changing in India).	在新兴世界，印度和巴西是投资不足导致增长达不到潜在水平的两个例子（尽管印度也许正在发生改变）。


The notable exception is China, which has maintained high (and occasionally perhaps excessive) levels of public investment throughout the post-crisis period.	中国是显著的例外，它在整个后危机时期都维持了高（有时甚至过高）水平的公共投资。


Properly targeted public investment can do much to boost economic performance, generating aggregate demand quickly, fueling productivity growth by improving human capital, encouraging technological innovation, and spurring private-sector investment by increasing returns.	目标合理的公共投资非常有利于提高经济表现，迅速创造总需求，通过改善人力资本、鼓励技术创新和用增加回报刺激私人部门投资增进生产率。


Though public investment cannot fix a large demand shortfall overnight, it can accelerate the recovery and establish more sustainable growth patterns.	尽管公共投资无法立刻填补大规模需求短缺，但它能加速复苏、带来更加可持续的增长模式。


The problem is that unconventional monetary policies in some major economies have created a low-yield environment, leaving investors somewhat desperate for high-yield options.	问题在于，一些主要经济体的非常规货币政策创造了一个低收益率环境，使得投资者在某种程度上极其渴望获得高收益的选择。


Many pension funds are underwater, because the returns required to meet their longer-term liabilities seem unattainable.	许多养老基金入不敷出，因为其长期���债所要求的回报率难以实现。


Meanwhile, capital is accumulating on high-net-worth balance sheets and in sovereign-wealth funds.	与此同时，资本在高净值资产负债表和主权财富基金上积累。


Though monetary stimulus is important to facilitate deleveraging, prevent financial-system dysfunction, and bolster investor confidence, it cannot place an economy on a sustainable growth path alone – a point that central bankers themselves have repeatedly emphasized.	尽管货币刺激对于促进去杠杆化、防止金融系统功能失调和提振投资者信心方面十分重要，但光靠它无法让经济走上可持续发展之路——央行官员本身也在一再强调这一点。


Structural reforms, together with increased investment, are also needed.	结构改革以及增加投资也是必要条件。


Given the extent to which insufficient demand is constraining growth, investment should come first.	考虑到需求不足大大制约着增长，应该把投资放在首位。


Faced with tight fiscal (and political) constraints, policymakers should abandon the flawed notion that investments with broad – and, to some extent, non-appropriable – public benefits must be financed entirely with public funds.	面临紧张的财政（和政治）约束的决策者应该放弃错误的概念，即能带来广泛——以及在某种程度上不可挪用的公共好处的投资必须完全用公共资金来融资。


Instead, they should establish intermediation channels for long-term financing.	相反，他们应该为长期融资建立中介渠道。


At the same time, this approach means that policymakers must find ways to ensure that public investments provide returns for private investors.	与此同时，这一方针意味着决策者必须找到办法确保公共投资为私人投资者带来回报。


Fortunately, there are existing models, such as those applied to ports, roads, and rail systems, as well as the royalties system for intellectual property.	幸运的是，已经存在这样的模式——如港口、公路和铁路系统，以及知识产权的版税系统。


Such efforts should not be constrained by national borders.	这些方法不应该受国界的束缚。


Given that roughly one-third of output in advanced economies is tradable – a share that will only increase, as technological advances enable more services to be traded – the benefits of a program to channel savings into public investment would spill over to other economies.	发达经济体大约有三分之一的产出是可贸易产出——这一比例只会上升不会下降，因为技术进步让更多的服务变为可贸易——将储蓄引向公共投资的计划的好处可以溢出影响其他经济体。


That is why the G-20 should work to encourage public investment within member countries, while international financial institutions, development banks, and national governments should seek to channel private capital toward public investment, with appropriate returns.	因此，G-20应该致力于鼓励成员国内部的公共投资，同时国际金融机构、开发银行和国家政府应该寻求将私人资本引向公共投资并提供合理的回报。


With such an approach, the global economy's “new normal" could shift from its current mediocre trajectory to one of strong and sustainable growth.	在这一方针下，全球经济的“新常态”可能从当前的平庸轨迹转变为强劲的可持续增长。


Publicly Funded Inequality	政府资助的不平等


WASHINGTON, DC – One of the factors driving the massive rise in global inequality and the concentration of wealth at the very top of the income distribution is the interplay between innovation and global markets.	华盛顿——创新和全球市场的互动在收入分配制度顶层推动全球不平等和财富聚集效应大幅上升。


In the hands of a capable entrepreneur, a technological breakthrough can be worth billions of dollars, owing to regulatory protections and the winner-take-all nature of global markets.	由于监管保护和全球市场赢家通吃的本质，技术突破在叱咤风云的企业家手中可以带来数十亿美元的收入。


What is often overlooked, however, is the role that public money plays in creating this modern concentration of private wealth.	但人们却往往忽视公共资金在创造个人财富聚集效应中的作用。


As the development economist Dani Rodrik recently pointed out, much of the basic investment in new technologies in the United States has been financed with public funds.	发展经济学家丹尼·罗德里克最近指出，美国新技术基础投资主要由公共基金驱动。


The funding can be direct, through institutions like the Defense Department or the National Institutes of Health (NIH), or indirect, via tax breaks, procurement practices, and subsidies to academic labs or research centers.	具体形式既可以是由美国国防部或美国国立卫生研究院（NIH）等机构直接出资，也可以采用税收减免、采购及学术实验室或研究中心补贴等间接形式。


When a research avenue hits a dead end – as many inevitably do – the public sector bears the cost.	当许多研究不可避免地走进死胡同，一般由公共部门承担损失。


For those that yield fruit, however, the situation is often very different.	但最终取得成果的情况却截然不同。


Once a new technology is established, private entrepreneurs, with the help of venture capital, adapt it to global market demand, build temporary or long-term monopoly positions, and thereby capture large profits.	一旦某种新技术地位确立，民营企业家就在风险投资的协助下对其进行改造，以适应全球需求、建立临时或长期垄断地位，进而获取巨额利润。


The government, which bore the burden of a large part of its development, sees little or no return.	而承担大部分研发费用的政府却基本得不到回报。


One example, flagged by the economist Jeffrey Sachs, is Sovaldi, a drug used to cure hepatitis C. As Sachs explains, the company that sells it, Gilead Sciences, holds a patent for the treatment that will not expire until 2028.	经济学家杰弗里·萨克斯特别提到的例子是丙肝治疗药物索非布韦。 萨克斯解释说出售该药的吉利德科技公司所拥有的专利直到2028年前一直有效。


As a result, Gilead can charge monopoly prices: $84,000 for a 12-week course of treatment, far more than the few hundred dollars it costs to produce the drug.	吉利德可以制定垄断价格：12周的治疗费用高达84,000美元，较之该公司数百美元的生产成本不知高出多少。


Last year, sales of Sovaldi and Harvoni – another drug the company sells for $94,000 – amounted to $12.4 billion.	去年，垄断药索非布韦和定价94,000美元的Harvoni的销售总额高达124亿美元。


Sachs estimates that the private sector spent less than $500 million on research and development to develop Sovaldi – an amount that Gilead was able to recoup in a few weeks of sales.	萨克斯估计私营部门花了不到5亿美元研究开发索非布韦——上述成本吉利德仅需销售几个星期就可以回收。


The NIH and the US Department of Veterans Affairs, however, had heavily funded the start-up that developed the drug and was later acquired by Gilead.	美国国立卫生研究院和美国退伍军人事务部曾投入大量资金资助研发该药的创业企业，这家企业后来被吉利德收购。


There can be no doubting that the imagination, marketing savvy, and management skills of private entrepreneurs are critical to the successful application of a new technology.	毋庸置疑民营企业家的想象力、营销经验和管理能力对于新技术成功诞生起到至关重要的作用。


And the lower prices, better products, and consumer surplus provided by the commercialization of many innovations clearly provide large societal gains.	众多商业创新所提供的低价、高质和消费者盈余显然社会收益巨大。


But one should not overlook the role of government in these successes.	但人们不应忽视政府所扮演的角色。


Joint OECD-Eurostat data show that direct government expenditures accounted for 31% of R&D spending in the US in 2012.	经合组织和欧盟统计局联合数据显示2012年美国研发开支的31%来源于政府直投。


Adding indirect expenditures, like tax breaks, would bring this figure to at least 35%.	如果加上税收减免等间接开支，该比例至少上升到35%左右。


Thanks to such public outlays, a few private players are often making huge returns, which are a major cause of excessive income concentration.	少数私人投资者往往借助上述公共开支获得巨额利润，并因此导致收入过度集中。


There are several ways to change such a system.	有几种方法可以改变现行制度。


Rodrik proposes the creation of public venture capital firms – sovereign wealth funds – that take equity positions in exchange for the intellectual advances created through public financing.	罗德里克提出设立公共风险投资公司——主权财富基金——即在公共资金资助取得的知识产权中持有股份。


Another solution would be to reform the tax code to reduce returns when an individual or firm is cashing in on publicly funded research.	另一种办法是在个人或公司利用公共研究成果赚钱时改革税法。


Both solutions face difficulties.	这两种方案各有问题。


Sovereign wealth funds would have to be shielded from partisan politics, perhaps by giving them only non-voting shares.	主权财富基金不能受党派政治的干扰，可能的解决方法是只给他们没有投票权的股份。


Raising taxes on the beneficiaries of publicly funded research would be a challenge, given that the link between an original breakthrough and the wealth it created might be hard to quantify.	鉴于原始突破与所创造财富之间的关系很难量化，提高政府资助研究项目的税收可能带来问题。


There is also the complication of global capital mobility and tax avoidance, which the G-20 is only beginning to address.	此外还有G-20刚刚 开始解决的全球资本流动性和避税并发症。


Other approaches are also possible: tightening up patent laws or imposing price controls for monopolistic industries, such as pharmaceuticals, as many market economies have done.	可能还有其他办法能够解决问题：那就是像许多市场经济国家那样收紧专利法或对制药等垄断行业实行价格管制。


What would not be a solution, however, would be to channel fewer public resources into research and innovation – key drivers of economic growth.	但减少公共资金的研发投入绝不是办法，因为研究和创新是经济增长的主要动力。


It does not take huge rates of returns to mobilize a lot of talent; something like a 50% profit margin for a few years would be an acceptable reward for particularly good entrepreneurship.	其实无需巨额回报就能调动积极性； 即使出色的创业者也可以接受连续几年50%左右的利润。


Multiples of that amount, however, simply end up as gifts by the public to a few individuals.	数倍于此的回报不过是公众给少数个人的大礼。


A combination of measures and international agreements must be found that would allow taxpayers to obtain decent returns on their investments, without removing the incentives for savvy entrepreneurs to commercialize innovative products.	必须同时依靠政策和国际协议让纳税人获得不俗的回报，而不影响精明企业家实现创新产品商业化的积极性。


The seriousness of this problem should not be understated.	我们不应低估这个问题的严重性。


The amounts involved contribute to the creation of a new aristocracy that can pass on its wealth through inheritance.	其中涉及的金额创造新的贵族阶层，可以通过继承将财富传递下去。


If huge sums can be spent to protect privilege by financing election campaigns (as is now the case in the US), the implications of this problem, for both democracy and long-term economic efficiency, could become systemic.	如果可以通过巨额赞助竞选保护特权阶层的利益（美国现在就是如此），这一问题将系统性影响民主和长期经济效益。


The possible solutions are far from simple, but they are well worth seeking.	可能采取的解决办法远非如此简单，但寻找上述办法却绝对必要。


Muzzling the Dogs of War	战争之祸，能免则免