实体经济去金融化
https://www.ft.com/content/f33fcdba-fd5d-3c69-8b96-5640a0e3e827
客座作家 2014 年 7 月 22 日
Mariana Mazzucato 是本周在伦敦举行的以使命为导向的金融会议的组织者和萨塞克斯大学 SPRU 创新经济学 RM Phillips 教授，她正试图挽救创业国家的理念，揭穿关于私营和公共部门创新的神话。 这是她对 FT Alphaville 的 Mission Finance 系列的最新贡献。
今天，我们以使命为导向的创新金融会议在国会大厦开幕。 英国商业、创新和技能大臣文斯·凯布尔将在今晚开场，他表示，认真致力于资助创新意味着创新支出翻倍。
他希望这将使英国从低于经合组织平均水平的 R&D/GDP 位置转变为高于平均水平，更接近丹麦、德国和美国（处于 2.5-2.8% 之间，而英国落后于 1.7%） . ) 这是一个令人鼓舞的消息，表明英国有望走上“再平衡”的道路，从偏向金融服务的经济转向“实体经济”的创新和生产力增长。
过去，我将此称为从破坏性创造的金融转向创造性破坏的金融。
他和其他国际政策制定者面临的关键问题是确保这种再平衡在两个同等重要的方面解决金融问题。 一方面，再平衡让金融为实体经济提供资金。 这意味着要解决下面图 1 所示的可怕情况，即与实体经济（除金融和农业以外的一切）相比，金融自我融资的程度导致由金融中介构成的附加值呈指数增长 ).
这张图来自安迪·霍尔丹 (Andy Haldane) 在英格兰银行的工作，该工作强调需要创造更少的投机性金融和更多的长期金融。 事实上，在我们今晚的活动中，霍尔丹将讨论“短期主义的代价”以及如何应对。
霍尔丹的主题演讲将在巴西国家投资银行 (BNDES) 行长卢西亚诺·库蒂尼奥 (Luciano Coutinho) 之后发表。 KfW 和 BNDES 等国家投资银行是长期患者融资在全球范围内采用的多种形式之一。
卡洛塔·佩雷斯 (Carlota Perez) 是世界上最重要的经济史学家之一，她将成为霍尔丹的讨论者，并将争辩说，长期主义需要一个方向——市场本身并没有给我们带来 IT 革命，也不会给我们带来“绿色增长”。 考虑到经济绩效的新指标，在一个公共部门“选择”哪条路的任何角色都被贴上“挑选赢家”或“挤出”标签的世界中，捕捉“方向”目标是非常困难的——正如我 在我的第一个 Mission Finance 博客中指出，如果公共政策的重点不仅在于解决市场失灵，而且在于创造和塑造市场，那么体现市场创造作用的绩效指标就是基础。
还需要将顶尖人才引入政府，以便在技术和经济方面的深厚知识指导战略。 您可以在会议资源页面上阅读 Perez 和我关于这些主题的政策简报。
再平衡要解决的第二个关键问题，不仅是如何从“实体经济”中获取更多的附加值，从“金融中介”（金融融资金融）中获取更少的附加值，还包括如何让实体经济本身去金融化！
比尔·拉佐尼克 (Bill Lazonick) 将在会议第三天的发言中解决这个问题，明天他将发表一篇精彩的 FT Alphaville Mission Finance 博客。 这个问题最明显地体现在私营公司在股票回购等“金融化”做法上花费了多少（以提高股价、股票期权和高管薪酬）：财富 500 强公司在过去十年中花费了 3 万亿美元用于股票回购，其中许多 IT 和制药公司在股票回购上的支出高于研发支出。
比尔的工作表明，这确实是高管薪酬上涨背后的主导因素——即 收入最高的 1% 人群的收入呈指数级增长。 在我们最近关于风险和回报的期刊文章中，我们认为这与技能或才能无关，而是价值提取的力量。 我们的以任务为导向的创新金融会议将讨论如何让政府和企业重新大胆思考。
承认创新不仅有“速率”而且有“方向”将是这场辩论的关键。 如果不能相信市场能够独自找到正确的方向，我们如何才能让公共部门使用其所有工具（税收、研发支出、采购、监管等）来创造更多的价值，并允许这种价值 创造比价值提取更有价值？
De-financialising the real economy
https://www.ft.com/content/f33fcdba-fd5d-3c69-8b96-5640a0e3e827
Guest writer JULY 22 2014
Receive free University of Sussex updates; we'll send you a myFT Daily Digest email rounding up the latest University of Sussex news every morning.
Mariana Mazzucato organiser of this week’s Mission-Oriented Finance conference in London and RM Phillips Professor in the Economics of Innovation, SPRU, University of Sussex, is attempting to rescue the idea of The Entrepreneurial State, debunking myths about private and public sector innovation. Here is her latest contribution to the Mission Finance series at FT Alphaville.
Today our mission-oriented finance for innovation conference begins at the Houses of Parliament. Vince Cable, UK secretary of state for business, innovation and skills will be kicking off this evening arguing that a serious commitment to funding innovation means doubling innovation spend.
He hopes this will allow the UK to move from its below OECD average R&D/GDP position to an above average position, closer to that of Denmark, Germany and the US (which stand between 2.5-2.8% while the UK lags at 1.7&). ) This is encouraging news and shows that the UK is hopefully on the path towards ‘rebalancing’ away from an economy biased towards financial services, towards growth of innovation and productivity in the ‘real economy’.
In the past, I have called this a move away from finance for destructive creation towards finance for creative destruction.
The key problem that he and other international policy makers have is to make sure that such rebalancing tackles finance on two equally important sides. On the one hand, rebalancing so that finance funds the real economy. This means addressing the dire situation that figure 1 shows below, i.e. the degree to which finance has been financing itself leading to the exponential rise in the value added made up of financial intermediation, compared to that of the real economy (everything but finance and agriculture).
This graph comes from Andy Haldane's work at the Bank of England, which stresses the need to create less speculative finance and more long-term finance. Indeed, at our event tonight Haldane will be addressing ‘the cost of short-termism’ and what to do about it.
Haldane's keynote will occur after that of Luciano Coutinho, the President of Brazil's state investment bank (BNDES). State investment banks such as KfW and BNDES are one of the many forms that long-term patient finance is taking around the world.
Carlota Perez, one of the world’s foremost economic historians, will be Haldane's discussant, and will argue that long-termism needs a direction—markets alone did not get us the IT revolution, nor will they get us the 'green growth'. Considering new indicators for economic performance, that capture the ‘directions' objective is very difficult in a world where any role for the public sector to ‘choose’ which way to go gets branded as ‘picking winners’ or ‘crowding out’—as I argued in my first Mission Finance blog, if the point of public policy is to not only to fix market failures but also to create and shape markets, indicators of performance that capture this market creating role are fundamental.
There is also the need to bring top minds into government so that strategies are led by deep knowledge on both the technological side and the economic side. You can read a policy brief by Perez and me on these topics, on the conference resources page.
The second key issue that rebalancing must address is not just how to get more value added from the ‘real economy’ and less from ‘financial intermediation’ (finance financing finance), but also how to de-financialise the real economy itself!
Bill Lazonick will be addressing this issue in his intervention on day three of the conference, with an excellent FT Alphaville Mission Finance blog by him tomorrow. This problem is most evidently manifested by how much private companies are spending on ‘financialised’ practices like sharebuybacks (to boost stock prices, stock options and executive pay): Fortune 500 companies have spent $3tn over the last decade on share buybacks, with many companies in IT and pharma spending more on share buybacks than R&D.
Bill's work has shown that this is indeed the lead factor behind the rise of executive pay—i.e. the exponential rise of the incomes of the top 1 per cent. In our recent journal article on risks and rewards we argue that this has nothing to do with skills or talent-but the power of value extraction. Our Mission-Oriented Finance for Innovation conference will be debating how to get governments and business to think big again.
Admitting that innovation has not only a ‘rate’ but also a ‘direction’ will be key to this debate. If markets cannot be trusted to alone find the right direction, how can we enable the public sector to use all its instruments (taxation, R&D spend, procurement, regulation, etc.) to enable not only more value creation but also to allow that value creation to be rewarded over value extraction?
