
近幾年來,制造業(yè)一直是中美兩國科技競爭的核心戰(zhàn)場,而且美國公司均希望將更多供應(yīng)鏈轉(zhuǎn)移到國內(nèi)。
美國總統(tǒng)喬·拜登一直在兜售鼓勵美國生產(chǎn)更多芯片和綠色能源技術(shù)的政策。本月早些時候,拜登政府承諾撥款66億美元,以支持臺積電(Taiwanese Semiconductor)在亞利桑那州擴建工廠。上個月,拜登政府與芯片業(yè)巨頭英特爾(Intel)達成了一項195億美元的資助協(xié)議,用于幫助英特爾在美國新建四家工廠。
但哈佛大學(xué)肯尼迪學(xué)院(Harvard Kennedy School)的國際政治經(jīng)濟教授丹尼·羅德里克認為,美國和其他全球制造業(yè)強國的數(shù)據(jù)表明,就業(yè)需要另當(dāng)別論。
在項目辛迪加(Project Syndicate)發(fā)表的一篇評論文章中,這位經(jīng)濟學(xué)家指出,美國制造業(yè)的勞動生產(chǎn)力自1950年以來增長了近六倍,但其他經(jīng)濟領(lǐng)域的生產(chǎn)力僅翻了一番。
他寫道:“結(jié)果是美國制造業(yè)生產(chǎn)商品的能力顯著增強,但創(chuàng)造就業(yè)崗位的能力卻急劇下降?!弊?980年以來,美國制造業(yè)失去了600萬個就業(yè)崗位。
羅德里克表示,在唐納德·特朗普的總統(tǒng)任期內(nèi),盡管政府堅持“美國優(yōu)先”的立場,并與中國發(fā)起了貿(mào)易戰(zhàn),但美國制造業(yè)在非農(nóng)就業(yè)中所占的比例卻從8.6%下滑至8.4%。
在拜登執(zhí)政期間,盡管在《通脹削減法案》(Inflation Reduction Act)和《芯片與科學(xué)法案》(CHIPS and Science Act)通過后,政府向公司撥款數(shù)十億美元,而且美國私營行業(yè)為新制造項目投入了超過2,000億美元,但這個比例卻進一步下滑至8.2%。
羅德里克表示:“懷疑論者可能會反駁說拜登政府的政策尚未完全見效,而且在官方統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)中沒有體現(xiàn)出來。但事實上,相比實際資金需求,資本密集型半導(dǎo)體工廠創(chuàng)造的就業(yè)機會很少?!?/p>
例如,臺積電預(yù)計在亞利桑那州的新工廠將創(chuàng)造6,000個就業(yè)崗位,羅德里克計算每個新增崗位的成本超過1,000萬美元。他表示,即使臺積電的供應(yīng)商還能再創(chuàng)造數(shù)萬個就業(yè)崗位,但“這在就業(yè)方面的回報依舊微不足道”。
羅德里克還表示,德國和韓國的制造業(yè)在總就業(yè)人數(shù)方面的占比也有所下滑。在中國,工廠就業(yè)崗位無論是絕對數(shù)還是總就業(yè)人數(shù)占比,十多年來持續(xù)減少。
他說道:“自動化和技能偏好型技術(shù),導(dǎo)致制造業(yè)不太可能像以前一樣繼續(xù)吸收勞動力。無論我們喜歡與否,零售、護理和其他個人服務(wù)等服務(wù)業(yè),依舊是創(chuàng)造就業(yè)的主力?!?/p>
他總結(jié)道,不能說《芯片法案》和鼓勵國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)的類似政策存在缺陷,因為它們依舊可以刺激創(chuàng)新,但“重建中產(chǎn)階級,創(chuàng)造足夠多好的就業(yè)崗位,以及振興衰敗的區(qū)域,需要一套截然不同的政策?!保ㄘ敻恢形木W(wǎng))
譯者:劉進龍
審校:汪皓
近幾年來,制造業(yè)一直是中美兩國科技競爭的核心戰(zhàn)場,而且美國公司均希望將更多供應(yīng)鏈轉(zhuǎn)移到國內(nèi)。
美國總統(tǒng)喬·拜登一直在兜售鼓勵美國生產(chǎn)更多芯片和綠色能源技術(shù)的政策。本月早些時候,拜登政府承諾撥款66億美元,以支持臺積電(Taiwanese Semiconductor)在亞利桑那州擴建工廠。上個月,拜登政府與芯片業(yè)巨頭英特爾(Intel)達成了一項195億美元的資助協(xié)議,用于幫助英特爾在美國新建四家工廠。
但哈佛大學(xué)肯尼迪學(xué)院(Harvard Kennedy School)的國際政治經(jīng)濟教授丹尼·羅德里克認為,美國和其他全球制造業(yè)強國的數(shù)據(jù)表明,就業(yè)需要另當(dāng)別論。
在項目辛迪加(Project Syndicate)發(fā)表的一篇評論文章中,這位經(jīng)濟學(xué)家指出,美國制造業(yè)的勞動生產(chǎn)力自1950年以來增長了近六倍,但其他經(jīng)濟領(lǐng)域的生產(chǎn)力僅翻了一番。
他寫道:“結(jié)果是美國制造業(yè)生產(chǎn)商品的能力顯著增強,但創(chuàng)造就業(yè)崗位的能力卻急劇下降?!弊?980年以來,美國制造業(yè)失去了600萬個就業(yè)崗位。
羅德里克表示,在唐納德·特朗普的總統(tǒng)任期內(nèi),盡管政府堅持“美國優(yōu)先”的立場,并與中國發(fā)起了貿(mào)易戰(zhàn),但美國制造業(yè)在非農(nóng)就業(yè)中所占的比例卻從8.6%下滑至8.4%。
在拜登執(zhí)政期間,盡管在《通脹削減法案》(Inflation Reduction Act)和《芯片與科學(xué)法案》(CHIPS and Science Act)通過后,政府向公司撥款數(shù)十億美元,而且美國私營行業(yè)為新制造項目投入了超過2,000億美元,但這個比例卻進一步下滑至8.2%。
羅德里克表示:“懷疑論者可能會反駁說拜登政府的政策尚未完全見效,而且在官方統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)中沒有體現(xiàn)出來。但事實上,相比實際資金需求,資本密集型半導(dǎo)體工廠創(chuàng)造的就業(yè)機會很少?!?/p>
例如,臺積電預(yù)計在亞利桑那州的新工廠將創(chuàng)造6,000個就業(yè)崗位,羅德里克計算每個新增崗位的成本超過1,000萬美元。他表示,即使臺積電的供應(yīng)商還能再創(chuàng)造數(shù)萬個就業(yè)崗位,但“這在就業(yè)方面的回報依舊微不足道”。
羅德里克還表示,德國和韓國的制造業(yè)在總就業(yè)人數(shù)方面的占比也有所下滑。在中國,工廠就業(yè)崗位無論是絕對數(shù)還是總就業(yè)人數(shù)占比,十多年來持續(xù)減少。
他說道:“自動化和技能偏好型技術(shù),導(dǎo)致制造業(yè)不太可能像以前一樣繼續(xù)吸收勞動力。無論我們喜歡與否,零售、護理和其他個人服務(wù)等服務(wù)業(yè),依舊是創(chuàng)造就業(yè)的主力。”
他總結(jié)道,不能說《芯片法案》和鼓勵國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)的類似政策存在缺陷,因為它們依舊可以刺激創(chuàng)新,但“重建中產(chǎn)階級,創(chuàng)造足夠多好的就業(yè)崗位,以及振興衰敗的區(qū)域,需要一套截然不同的政策?!保ㄘ敻恢形木W(wǎng))
譯者:劉進龍
審校:汪皓
Manufacturing has been front and center in recent years as the U.S. and China engage in a tech rivalry while companies look to reposition more of their supply chains domestically.
President Joe Biden has touted his policies to encourage more U.S. production of chips and green-energy technologies. Earlier this month, his administration pledged up to $6.6 billion so that Taiwanese Semiconductor can expand its facilities in Arizona. And last month, the administration reached a $19.5 billion funding deal with chip giant Intel for four new U.S. plants.
But data in the U.S. and other global manufacturing powerhouses show that employment is another matter, according to Dani Rodrik, a professor of international political economy at Harvard Kennedy School.
In an op-ed published in Project Syndicate on Tuesday, the economist pointed out that labor productivity in U.S. manufacturing has surged by nearly six times since 1950, while the rest of the economy has seen productivity double.
“The result has been a striking increase in the manufacturing sector’s ability to produce goods, but also an equally dramatic decline in its capacity to generate jobs,” he wrote, with 6 million manufacturing jobs lost since 1980.
And despite an “America first” agenda and a trade war with China, U.S. manufacturing’s share of non-farm employment slipped to 8.4% from 8.6% while Donald Trump was president, Rodrik said.
That share has dipped further to 8.2% under Biden, even as the government doles out billions to companies and the U.S. private sector has committed over $200 billion to new manufacturing projects after his Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS and Science Act passed.
“A skeptic might object that Biden’s policies have not fully borne fruit and are not yet captured in official statistics,” Rodrik added. “But the fact is that hugely capital-intensive semiconductor plants generate few jobs, relative to the physical investment they require.”
At TSMC’s new plants in Arizona, for example, the company projects 6,000 jobs will be created, which Rodrik calculated would be more than $10 million per job. And even if tens of thousands of additional jobs among TSMC’s suppliers are created, “that is a paltry return for employment,” he said.
Similarly, manufacturing’s share of total employment has dropped in Germany and South Korea, Rodrik continued. And in China, factory jobs have been in decline for more than a decline, both in absolute terms and as a share total employment.
“Automation and skill-biased technology have made it extremely unlikely that manufacturing can become the labor-absorbing activity that it once was,” he said. “Whether we like it or not, services such as retail, care work, and other personal services will remain the primary engine of job creation.”
To be sure, the CHIPS Act and similar policies to encourage domestic production aren’t necessarily flawed, as they could still boost innovation, but “rebuilding the middle class, generating enough good jobs, and reinvigorating declining regions call for an entirely different set of policies,” he concluded.