環(huán)境與經濟全球化外文翻譯

1、<p>　　1610單詞，2935漢字</p><p><b>　　外文翻譯 </b></p><p><b>　　原文 </b></p><p>　　The Environment and Economic Globalization</p><p>　　Material So

2、urce: Globalization: What’s New Author: Frankel </p><p>　　Regulation</p><p>　　It will help if we clarify one more fundamental set of issues before we turn to the main subject of the chapter, th

3、e role of globalization per se. </p><p>　　It is logical to expect environmental regulation to cost something, to have a negative effect on measured productivity and income per capita. “There is no free lunch

4、,” Milton Friedman famously said. Most tangible good things in life cost something, and for many kinds of regulation, if effective, people will readily agree that the cost is worth paying. Cost-benefit tests and cost-min

5、imization strategies are economists’ tools for trying to make sure that policies deliver the best environment for a</p><p>　　Occasionally there are policy measures that have both environmental and economic b

6、enefits. Usually these “win-win” ideas constitute the elimination of some previously existing distortion in public policy. Many countries have historically subsidized the use of coal. The United States subsidizes mining

7、and cattle grazing on federal land, and sometimes logging and oil drilling as well, not to mention water use. Other countries have substantial subsidies for ocean fishing. Elimination of such subsid</p><p>　

8、　Another idea that would have economic and environmental benefits simultaneously would be to remove all barriers against international trade in environmental equipment and services, such as those involved in renewable en

9、ergy generation, smokestack scrubbing, or waste treatment facilities. There would again be a double pay-off: the growth-enhancing effect of elimination barriers to exports in a sector where the United States is likely to

10、 be able to develop a comparative advantage, together with th</p><p>　　A different school of thought claims many opportunities for saving money while simultaneously saving the environment. The Porter Hypothe

11、sis holds that a tightening of environmental regulation stimulates technological innovation and thereby has positive effects on both the economy and the environment -- for example, saving money by saving energy. The anal

12、ytical rationale for this view is not entirely clear. Is the claim that any sort of change in regulation, regardless in what direction, stimulat</p><p>　　Effects of openness to trade </p><p>　　T

13、he central topic of this chapter is the implications of trade for the environment. Some effects come via economic growth, and some come even for a given level of income. In both cases, the effects can be either beneficia

14、l or detrimental. Probably the strongest effects are the first sort, via income. Much like investment, technological progress, and other sources of growth, openness tends to raise income [via classical comparative advant

15、age -- that is, each country specializes in doing what it d</p><p>　　What about effects of trade and investment that do not operate via economic growth? They can be classified in three categories: systemwide

16、 effects that are adverse, systemwide effects that are beneficial, and effects that vary across countries depending on local “comparative advantage.” </p><p>　　Race to the bottom </p><p>　　The “

17、race to the bottom” hypothesis is perhaps the strongest basis for fearing that international trade and investment specifically rather than industrialization generally will put downward pressure on countries’ environmenta

18、l standards and thus damage the environment. Leaders of industry, and of the unions whose members are employed in industry, are always concerned about competition from abroad. When domestic regulation raises their costs,

19、 they fear that they will lose competitiveness against </p><p>　　Often domestic producers sound the competitiveness alarm as a way of applying political pressure on their governments to minimize the burden o

20、f regulation. To some, the phrase “race to the bottom” connotes that the equilibrium will be a world of little or no regulation. Others emphasize that, in practice, it is not necessarily a matter of globalization leading

21、 to environmental standards that literally decline over time, but rather retarding the gradual raising of environmental standards that wou</p><p>　　Once again, it is important to distinguish 1 the fear that

22、globalization will lead to a race to the bottom in regulatory standards, from 2 fears that the environment will be damaged by the very process of industrialization and economic growth itself. Opening of national economie

23、s to international trade and investment could play a role in both cases, but the two possible channels are very different. In the first case, the race to the bottom, the claim is that even for a given path of economic gr

24、o</p><p>　　Gains from trade </p><p>　　While the possibility that exposure to international competition might have an adverse effect on environmental regulation is familiar, less widely recognize

25、d and more surprising is the possibility of effects in the beneficial, which we will call the gains from trade hypothesis. Trade allows countries to attain more of what they want, which includes environmental goods in ad

26、dition to market-measured output. How could openness have a positive effect on environmental quality, even for a given level</p><p>　　One possibility concerns technological and managerial innovation. Opennes

27、s encourages ongoing innovation. 13 It then seems likely that openness encourages innovation beneficial to environmental improvement as well as economic progress. A second possibility is an international ratcheting up of

28、 environmental standards. The largest political jurisdiction can set the pace for others. Within the United States, it is called the “California effect;” when the largest state sets high standards for auto p</p>&

29、lt;p>　　Multinational corporations MNCs tend to bring clean state-of-the-art production techniques from high-standard countries of origin, to host countries where they are not yet known, for several reasons: </p>

30、<p>　　“First, many companies find that the efficiency of having a single set of management practices, pollution control technologies, and training programmes geared to a common set of standards outweighs any cost

31、advantage that might be obtained by scaling back on environmental investments at overseas facilities.Second, multinational enterprises often operate on a large scale, and recognisethat their visibility makes them especia

32、lly attractive targets for local enforcement officialsThird, the prospect</p><p>　　Corporate codes of conduct, as under the U.N. global compact, offer a new way that residents of some countries can pursue en

33、vironmental goals in other countries. </p><p>　　Furthermore, because trade offers consumers the opportunity to consume goods of greater variety, it allows countries to attain higher levels of welfare for any

34、 given level of domestically produced output, which, as before, will raise the demand for environmental quality. Again, if the appropriate institutions are in place, this demand for higher environmental quality will tran

35、slate into effective regulation and the desired reduction in pollution. </p><p><b>　　譯文 </b></p><p><b>　　環(huán)境與經濟全球化</b></p><p>　　資料來源: 全球化:什么是新的 作者:弗蘭克爾&l

36、t;/p><p><b>　　環(huán)境法規(guī) </b></p><p>　　在翻過這一篇之前,我們要搞清楚一個更為基本的不變的主題,就是作為主角的全球化本身。 </p><p>　　預計設立環(huán)境法規(guī)將要花費什么成本也是合乎邏輯的,它對生產力和人均收入都有負面影響?！笆郎蠜]有免費的午餐?！边@是弗里德曼的至理名言。得到生活中最真實最美好的事物總得付出什么,對

37、于各種各樣的法規(guī),如果生效了,人們將會欣然接受并支付其成本。成本效益考察和最低成本策略是經濟學家試圖確保法規(guī)提供了一個最好的環(huán)境給既定的經濟成本,或者對于一個既定的環(huán)境目標支付的最低經濟成本的一個工具。例如,能源稅,特別是在碳氫燃料,是一個相當有效的環(huán)境管制模式如果收入效率"再循環(huán)"。而CAFé規(guī)程稍微達到一個較低的效率(分化型CAFé規(guī)程,例如,鼓勵時尚多功能運動車的生產)。原來的“命令與控制”

38、措施仍然更有效率例如,政府關于特定技術必須被堅持使用的命令]一些環(huán)保法規(guī),當立法或執(zhí)行還不夠周全的時候,就向企業(yè)、勞動者和消費者征收了非常大量和不必要的經濟成本。 </p><p>　　偶爾有些政策措施會同時包含環(huán)境和經濟效益。通常這些“雙贏”的理念構成排除了一些現(xiàn)存失真的公共政策,許多國家在歷史上有用煤補貼,美國在聯(lián)邦政府土地上有采礦和畜牧補貼,有時也會有伐木搬運業(yè)和煉油的補貼,更不用說用水補貼了,其他國家對海

39、釣業(yè)也有大量的補貼金。消除這些補貼可以改善環(huán)境的同時也可以節(jié)省金錢??不單單是為了聯(lián)邦政府的預算,也是為了總實際收入,不可否認,經濟學家征收汽油稅和讓農場主為放牧權支付費用的方式,在政治上是不受歡迎的。 </p><p>　　另一個理念是,擁有經濟效益和環(huán)境效益的同時,在環(huán)保的技能和服務上可以排除所有國際貿易壁壘,比如加入到可再生資源的時代,有煙囪廢氣或者廢物的處理場所。這將又會有雙重的回報:在增長提高中的排除出

40、口商品壁壘的影響(在美國區(qū)域內可能可以發(fā)展比較優(yōu)勢),同時環(huán)境對進口商品輸入的貿易保護措施的影響的加劇,也會促使政府進行環(huán)境保護。 </p><p>　　不同的學派認為有很多機會在節(jié)約金錢的同時拯救環(huán)境。“波特的假設”所持的觀點是一個固定的環(huán)境法規(guī)可以刺激技術的創(chuàng)新,在經濟與環(huán)境都有著積極的影響??例如, 通過節(jié)約能源來節(jié)約金錢。這一觀點的理論依據(jù)還不是非常明確(這一主張在法規(guī)上有沒有一些改變?在哪個方向來刺激創(chuàng)

41、新?或者在環(huán)境法規(guī)上有什么特殊的地方?在能源部門有沒有什么特殊的地方?)這種觀點的支持者援引了一些真實世界中的例子,一個新環(huán)境的主動權原來對于一個特定的公司或行業(yè)是有利可圖的。那些例子確實存在,但是沒有足夠的證據(jù)證明環(huán)境法規(guī)和生產力的增長之間的紐帶存在著大量的問題。這個假設也許更好的理解為建立一個關于“最早成立的優(yōu)勢”的觀點,也就是說,如果世界在未來會向某一特定方向發(fā)展,比如朝更環(huán)保的能源的方向,然后一個國家在別人在該領域有所成就之前,

42、創(chuàng)新該類新的產品、新的技術,就可以賣成果給后來人。 </p><p><b>　　對外貿易的效益 </b></p><p>　　本章的主要觀點是貿易對于環(huán)境的含義。許多效益是通過經濟的增長,某些人為了保持一個固定程度的收入所形成的。在這兩種情況下,這些效益可以有利或不利的,或許最強烈的效益是第一種,,通過收入。很多就像投資、技術進步,其它資源的增長、開放性地提高收入。

43、通過傳統(tǒng)比較優(yōu)勢??也就是說,每個國家進行專業(yè)化做它最擅長的??通過動態(tài)效應,比如,創(chuàng)新。更高的收入相應也會影響一些環(huán)境措施,最初是不利的,但根據(jù)環(huán)境庫茲涅茨曲線,最終變?yōu)橛欣?</p><p>　　關于貿易和投資的效益,不要通過經濟增長操作?他們可以在三個類別上保密:系統(tǒng)的廣泛效益是不利的,系統(tǒng)的廣泛效益是有利的,而不同國家間效益的變化依靠當?shù)亍氨容^優(yōu)勢”。 </p><p><

44、b>　　競次 </b></p><p>　　“競次"的假設,可能是對國際貿易和對外投資特有擔心的最強依據(jù)不是一般的工業(yè)化將會給各國的環(huán)境標準向下的壓力,因此而破壞環(huán)境。產業(yè)的領頭人,和那些受雇于產業(yè)里的員工組成的聯(lián)合工會的領頭人,都擔心來自海外的競爭。當國內的法規(guī)增加他們的成本,他們會擔心失去他們對于自己國家內行業(yè)的競爭力,他們會通過減少銷售、雇傭和投資國外競爭者來做出警告。 <

45、/p><p>　　國內生產者敲響“競爭”的警鐘,是作為向他們的政府申請減少沉重的法規(guī)帶來的壓力的一種途徑,對于一些人,“競次”達到平衡意味著世界上少一點或者沒有環(huán)境法規(guī)。其他人強調,實際上,經濟全球化隨著時間帶領著環(huán)境法規(guī)逐漸減少的問題不是必要的,但是在一定程度上制約了環(huán)境法規(guī)的增加。另一方面,我們的擔心是,在某種程度上國家之間是開放地進行國際貿易和投資,環(huán)境的標準將會低于他們所采用的,但現(xiàn)在重要的是這在實踐上行的通

46、嗎?經濟學家的研究顯示,環(huán)境監(jiān)管不是一個很重要的,企業(yè)進行國際競爭的決定因素。當決定將公司建立在哪里時,跨國公司似乎對比關注嚴厲的地方性環(huán)境法規(guī)更大地關注勞動力成本和市場準入原則。 </p><p>　　另外,區(qū)分一下兩個方面很重要:1全球化在環(huán)境標準的調整下會產生“競次”的擔憂;2在工業(yè)化和經濟發(fā)展過程中環(huán)境會遭到破壞的擔憂。開放的國家經濟來進行國際貿易和對外投資在這兩個方面都扮演了一個重要的角色,但是兩者適用

47、的途徑是很不同的。第一種情況,“競次”這一主張是阻礙了經濟增長、開放了環(huán)境標準的一個既定的路徑。這是一個非常不利的結論,因為它可能意味著在一定程度上通過限制貿易和投資,我們可能會在某一水平的國內生產總值上得到一個好點的環(huán)境。第二種情況,暗示了投資、教育、生產率增長或者其他能源的增加都會影響環(huán)境。 </p><p><b>　　從貿易中獲益 </b></p><p>　

48、　然而,這個可能性表明國際貿易競爭對環(huán)境法規(guī)有著肆意的不良影響,較少的公認性與更多的驚人之處是有利方面可能的影響,就是我們認為貿易好處的假設,貿易使各國可以獲得更多的他們想要的東西,就包括了環(huán)境產品,除了市場緩慢的產出。開放對環(huán)境質量,甚至對一個固定程度的人均國內生產總值怎么會起到積極的作用呢? </p><p>　　有一種可能性關系到技術上及管理上的創(chuàng)新,對外開放鼓勵不斷地進行創(chuàng)新,此外,公開鼓勵創(chuàng)新似乎有利于

49、環(huán)境改善以及經濟發(fā)展。第二個可能性是對環(huán)境法規(guī)進行一個國際化的倒轉,最大程度的政治管轄可以給別人設置一定的步伐,在美國,它將被稱為“加州效應”:當最大程度上給汽車污染控制設備制定了高標準,例如,最終的結果可能是其他國家同類水平達到相似的標準,美國全局中都扮演了同樣的角色。 </p><p>　　跨國公司傾向于從高標準的東道國引進干凈、先進的生產技術,但是東道國在哪他們都還不知道。下面來看幾個例子: </p&

50、gt;<p>　　“許多公司發(fā)現(xiàn)擁有一套單一的管理慣例、污染控制技術和訓練方案連接著相似的超過任何成本優(yōu)勢的標準體系,其效益可以通過縮減對海外設備的環(huán)境投資來得到。其次,跨國企業(yè)經常會有著很大的規(guī)模,而且要認識到,他們的能見度使得他們成為當?shù)貓?zhí)法行政官員的目標。其三,這一未能預見到環(huán)境法規(guī)的不利前景,常常會促進更好的執(zhí)行環(huán)保措施……”??埃斯蒂和眷特律(1997,p.161) </p><p>　　

51、這個觀點不是表明所有的跨國公司在別的國家執(zhí)行業(yè)務時申請了最高的環(huán)境標準,但是平均標準都高于東道國自己執(zhí)行經營業(yè)務時。公司的行為規(guī)范,在聯(lián)合國的全球契約下,給一些國家的居民可以在別的國家追求環(huán)保目標提供了一條新的途徑。 </p><p>　　此外,因為貿易提供了機會給消費者去消費各種各樣的商品,這就允許國家達到高水平的社會福利(包括任意水平的國內產值),在此之前,將要提高環(huán)境質量。如果在一個地方有些適當?shù)姆ㄒ?guī),對于