What Types of Countries Have a Market Economy?

A market economy country is a country that implements a market economy. The government of this country recognizes the market economy and ensures the independence and neutrality of the national system in the market economy. There are certain differences and deviations in the basic characteristics of market economy countries. It is a colorful market economy interval formed mainly by the commonness of market economy and supplemented by differences.

Market economy country

Right!

A market economy country is a country that implements a market economy. The government of this country recognizes the market economy and ensures the independence and neutrality of the national system in the market economy. There are certain differences and deviations in the basic characteristics of market economy countries. It is a colorful market economy interval formed mainly by the commonness of market economy and supplemented by differences.

To say that some countries are market economy countries and some enterprises are market economy companies will naturally lead to a question: what is a market economy? What is a standard market economy or what is a market economy standard? Otherwise, how can it be concluded that some countries are or are not market economy countries?

In fact, some people acknowledge and deny the existence of market economy standards. Admitters and negates have their own reasons. Here, we can accept a proposition raised by anti-dumping in international trade that market economic standards exist; but at the same time, we also believe that market economic standards are relative.

I see that some recognized market economy countries have different economic systems. No one will assert that a country is a market economy country, and those who differ from it cannot be considered a market economy country. Different countries have different foundations, different traditions, and different stages of development. The form of market economy and even some of the contents will inevitably be different. However, differences do not prove that market economy standards do not exist. It is incorrect to deny the existence of market economy standards based on differences. Market economy, as an economic system in human history, originated in modern times and prospered in modern times. It is different from the natural economy in history and different from the planned economy. Of course, it has its inherent regulations. This inherent prescriptiveness is a commonality that exists among market economy countries at different stages of development.

Finding commonality from all kinds of market economy countries and establishing a framework will help us to judge in anti-dumping which countries are market economy countries and which countries are not yet market economy countries. It is correct to acknowledge that there is a certain standard for the market economy, but it is also not advisable to make this standard absolute and simple. The framework of this market economy standard is not absolute. It is not a point or a line. It is an interval based on the basic characteristics of the market economy. It is a state interval that allows certain differences and deviations from existence. The market economy forms a rich range of market economy states based on commonness and complementarity.

(I) Viewing market economy standards from anti-dumping regulations in the United States, the European Union and Canada

The non-market economy countries referred to by the US Department of Commerce refer to countries that do not operate according to the laws of market costs and prices. It has six statutory requirements for the market economy [19U.SC1677 (18)] or specific standards: one is the degree of currency convertibility; the other is the degree of freedom of labor and management to negotiate wages; the third is the establishment of a joint venture or foreign investment The degree of freedom of the enterprise; the fourth is the degree of government's ownership and control over the mode of production; the fifth is the degree of government control over resource allocation, enterprise output and price decisions; and the sixth is other judgment factors deemed appropriate by the Ministry of Commerce. In addition, the US Department of Commerce is also particularly concerned about the export management of exporting countries: First, in law, whether the government controls the export activities of the company. Including: (1) restrictions on the operation and export licensing of various enterprises; (2) any legislation to reduce the control of enterprises; (3) any other government measures to reduce the control of enterprises. Secondly, in fact, whether the government controls the export activities of the enterprise, the Ministry of Commerce usually considers the following factors: (1) whether the export price is determined by the government or must be agreed by the government; (2) whether the exporter has the right to negotiate the contract Terms and sign a contract or other agreement; (3) whether the exporter has autonomy without being restricted by the government when selecting management; (4) whether the exporter has an independent decision on the distribution of profits and make up for losses.

The European Union promulgated Decree No. 905.98 in 1998, allowing Chinese respondent companies to apply for market economy status in anti-dumping investigations, and also stipulated five criteria for determining market economy status: First, the market economy determines prices, costs, and inputs; second, enterprises Basic accounting books that meet international accounting standards; Third, the production costs and financial status of enterprises are not distorted by the former non-market economic system. Enterprises have the freedom to transfer profits or capital abroad, and the freedom to determine export prices and quantities. Have the freedom to carry out commercial activities; the fourth is to ensure that the bankruptcy and asset laws are applicable to enterprises; the fifth is that changes in exchange rates are determined by market supply and demand.

Canada's investigation of non-market economy issues clearly includes five aspects: First, government departments'

Whether the role played in economic management activities does not interfere with the normal operation of the market economy. This includes the impact of government pricing on the weight, structure, product distribution, and degree of quotation, the pricing mechanism for domestic products and services, the management of product production and service planning and market restrictions, and the management of domestic and international trade, and Further reforms of government agencies and functions. The second is how the government department manages and controls the enterprises in terms of production, sales, and procurement, and how they manage or control the financing of enterprises. Third, in terms of international trade, the government determines the conditions and procedures for foreign trade enterprises to conduct foreign trade, and the government's guidance and control on import and export product quotas and prices. Fourth, the degree of marketization of state-owned enterprises, including the form of ownership, the time and completion of state-owned enterprise reform; in government-controlled state-owned enterprises, factor prices include raw materials, energy, labor costs, and the quantity and price of products; how are enterprises determined? Capital management, performance management, profit distribution, labor relations, and methods of obtaining loans. Fifth, is there any difference in interest rates among different enterprises, different industries, and different departments of domestic and foreign trade, whether the exchange rate is a market for exporters, and whether companies have the autonomy to exchange and deposit foreign exchange?

It can be seen that the laws and regulations of the European and American countries on market economy standards are summarized according to the factors that affect fair trade in anti-dumping and are highly targeted. Although there are certain differences in the market economy standards proposed by the United States, the European Union and Canada, the United States directly raises the issue of national market economy standards, while the European Union and Canada mainly address the issue of market economy standards for enterprises and industries. However, it can be seen that this difference is only superficial. As far as its content is concerned, the issues involved are the same and similar, and are essentially the same. These standards form a system and are not used alone. Europe and the United States and other countries do not make judgments based on only one article. Instead, they combine the survey results around all these standards to determine whether an enterprise or industry has reached the critical level of the market economy, and determine and determine whether the country or the industry or enterprise has Conclusions with the conditions of a market economy. Of course, when dealing specifically with anti-dumping cases, the country against which the lawsuit is to be pursued must be based on the standards of the country concerned.

(Two) five factors of market economy

According to the main summary of market economy in modern economic theory, starting from the history and reality of market economy development at home and abroad, and drawing on the US, EU, and Canadian anti-dumping laws and regulations on market economy standards, we believe that in terms of what is a market economy country, there are The five aspects are particularly important, and the five commonalities can be summarized from them.

1. The role of government

Europe and the United States and other countries are concerned about: the government's possession, distribution and control of natural resources, capital and human capital resources, the government's control and management authority over the operation of the national economy, the government's control over production (who produces, how much, how much , For whom to produce) control (involving the property rights system of enterprises, profit distribution and bankruptcy mechanisms), government control of international and domestic trade, government control of intermediary organizations (such as chambers of commerce and guilds) and so on. After all, is the resource allocated by the government or the market? Is the use and pricing of resources a market decision or a government decision? Does the government respect and protect the autonomous rights of economic entities in terms of operation, and does it treat enterprises unfairly? In a word, these problems are the role of government, or more accurately, the role of government in the market economy and the relationship between government and enterprises. We summarize this article as "standardized government behavior."

2. Corporate rights and behavior issues

The U.S. Department of Commerce is concerned about whether the company's output and price decisions are intervened by the government, whether the company has the right to operate and export independently, whether it has an independent decision on management, profit distribution and loss compensation, whether it has negotiated contract terms and The autonomy of signing a contract is particularly concerned about these rights of exporting companies. The European Union is also concerned about the right of enterprises to determine export prices and quantities, whether they have basic accounting books that meet international accounting standards, whether they have the right to finance and transfer profits abroad, and whether they have the freedom to conduct commercial activities. Relevant agencies of the Canadian government are not only concerned with the above aspects, but also concerned with the form of corporate ownership and the reform of state-owned enterprises. In the final analysis, they care about whether the company's behavior in the production and marketing activities is market-oriented or administrative? In summary, the key to this article is about corporate rights and behaviors. We summarize it as "liberalization of economic entities."

3. The cost and price of input factors

The U.S. Department of Commerce is concerned about the degree of government control over resource allocation and whether product inputs are paid at market prices; the European Union is concerned about whether the market determines the price of input factors and the authenticity of corporate costs; relevant Canadian government agencies are concerned about the state-owned enterprise factor prices Including how raw materials, energy, labor costs, and product quantities and prices are determined. Anyway,

Europe and the United States and other countries are very concerned about whether production factors such as raw material prices and labor wages are market prices. This is completely understandable, because the input price is related to the cost of the output product and directly affects the product price, which is directly related to anti-dumping. Therefore, any importing country and exporting country's products will pay special attention to the authenticity of its cost and the rules of its price formation. This can be attributed to "marketization of factors of production".

4. Trade issues

Europe and the United States and other countries are concerned about trade activities including international trade and domestic trade. Are trading activities free or suppressed? Is the market infrastructure and market legislation and justice sound? Are market intermediaries independent? What role does it play? Are corporate pricing in trade policies autonomous? How does the government manage exports and export companies? Does the business have freedom of business activities? In short, we care about the trade environment and conditions, and we summarize it as "fair trade environment."

5. Financial parameter issues

Europe and the United States and other countries are particularly concerned about whether the interest rate and exchange rate of the surveyed countries in anti-dumping are formed by the market? Is the local currency convertible or convertible? Are there any differences in interest rates among different enterprises, domestic trade, foreign trade departments, and different industries? Are corporate financial conditions not distorted by non-market economic systems? Does the company have the freedom to transfer profits or capital abroad? Does the enterprise have the autonomy to exchange and deposit? and many more. In a nutshell, they are concerned about the formation and application of the two major financial parameters of interest rates and exchange rates, fairness in the scope of application, and then they involve the formation of these parameters, that is, the rationality of the financial system, which will be summarized here as "rationalization of financial parameters".

Obviously, the five major factors for judging the market economy standards summarized above are based on our knowledge and understanding of modern market economy theory and reality, and on the basis of market economy standards proposed by fully absorbing the anti-dumping requirements of Europe, the United States, and Canada. Raised from a fair trade perspective. We believe that it is pragmatic to compare and discuss these five articles as a measure of market economy and facilitate direct dialogue with European and American countries.

Of course, using these five factors as judgment criteria is different from the classification of market economy or marketization by domestic academic circles. Some experts emphasize that the market economy is composed of three major industries, so it must be divided into three parts to measure; some experts emphasize that the market economy is composed of seven major markets, so they can be divided into seven parts to measure; and some experts emphasize the market The economy should be measured from the three major factors of government, enterprises and markets, and so on. There are various reasons for their existence. As we dissect an elephant, how do we first resolve it? Is it the factor structure of the head, body, and legs, and is it composed of the respiratory system, nervous system, and skeletal muscle system? Still because of concern for the environment, focusing on the classification of internal and external factors, and so on. Classification directly leads to the corresponding factor indicators. We consider it important to classify for research purposes. If it is used by market experts, it naturally emphasizes market classification indicators; if it is a theoretical study, it will focus on comprehensiveness; if it is used in anti-dumping, of course, it must pay attention to the questionnaire requirements of the country concerned and relevant legal indicators. Because we are conducting market economic research from a practical perspective of anti-dumping, we have summarized the "five major factors" from the standards of important anti-dumping parties as the basis for discussion. Obviously, the choice of the five major factors has two major characteristics: First, it does not emphasize the integrity of the market economy, but highlights the iconic indicators of the classification, that is, the five factors that have the greatest impact on trade in the market economy are used as the landmark indicators for judgment and comprehensive analysis. The second is not to classify according to the logic of the market economy theory, but to emphasize the classification and response to targeted issues related to fair trade.

(3) Further analysis of "standardization of government behavior" and "liberalization of economic entities"

In the following, we will discuss the meaning and basic characteristics of factor standards in depth with the two criteria of "standardization of government behavior" and "liberalization of economic entities".

The requirement of "standardized government behavior" is that the government management system can adapt to the requirements of the market economy and handle the relationship with the market and enterprises. In a nutshell, is a country's resources mainly allocated by the government's administrative allocation or market means? The market economy standards in Europe and the United States and other countries do not require the judgement of each country through a theoretical model or a completely competitive laissez-faire economy. They also acknowledge that there are many different forms and characteristics of the market economy in the world today.

In reality, "standardization of government behavior" is often expressed approximately in terms of "scale of government and degree of intervention." Everyone cares: Does the government play a role or not in a market economy? Does it play a bigger role or a smaller one, that is, a big government or a small government, a strong government or a weak government? The core issue is the relationship between the government and the market. Iaya

While classical economics represented by Smith emphasized small government and the complete liberalization of the market, Keynesian theory emphasized large government and believed that complete freedom cannot achieve the equilibrium of supply and demand, and government intervention in the economy can expand effective demand and achieve supply and demand equilibrium. As far as the modern market economy is concerned, Samuelson's neo-classical comprehensive theory has become the mainstream opinion: that the government must integrate with the market, and the government must play its role of organization and guidance on the basis of market allocation of resources. Here, the government's re-allocation of resources through economic intervention has become a necessary complement to the allocation of resources in the market. According to Samuelson's point of view, the role of the government is: first, to establish a legal system; second, to determine macroeconomic stability policies; third, to influence resource allocation to improve economic efficiency; and fourth, to establish a reasonable mechanism that affects income distribution. The government must interfere less in the market and enterprises, but it cannot renounce its responsibility to provide public goods and pursue a healthy economic environment. In today's society, no economy is a pure (complete) competitive market economy, let alone a market economy economy that is fully contracted by the government. The common understanding is to reduce excessive government intervention, prevent monopoly, promote competition, and implement the legal system.

However, for different countries, different stages of development, and different economic issues, there is a difference in whether the government's role in the economy is large or small. For highly developed market economy countries, some governments have played a smaller role in direct economic intervention, but have a greater effect on indirect economic impact. At the same time, there is another situation: some governments still retain more state-owned capital and rely more on industrial policies. For example, the United States and the United Kingdom emphasize the role of market mechanisms more than Japan and the Nordic countries, while Japan and France have greater recognition of guiding plans and industrial policies. For a transition country like China, despite reforms and opening up, the government functions under the original planned economy have undergone major adjustments, comprehensive economic intervention has become a key intervention, and institutional respect has been strengthened to respect and protect the operation of enterprises. The right to autonomy is treating fairer and more various types of enterprises more and more fairly. But on the other hand, in order to reduce the role of the government in the future, after April 2003 ^[1] , the government must be required to play a greater role. Because without the government's leadership in reform and support for market development, a market economic system cannot be established. Although both mature market economy countries and countries with economies in transition have a combination of moderate government intervention and free market operation, there are differences in the role of government and the degree of intervention in the economy. This difference is normal, and it is the corresponding manifestation at different stages of the market economy.

All government actions involve regulation. If the government controls more than necessary, it will inevitably affect the effectiveness of the market, and ultimately, in the case of protecting the interests of some people, it will greatly affect the interests and rights of other people and harm the freedom of the entire economy. But some necessary controls are indispensable. Because these necessary regulations can protect the interests of social groups and the state on the one hand, and also promote social progress, and ensure that people can freely enjoy the fruits of their labor. The rational judgment of the government's scope and degree of economic intervention, and the definition of the difference interval when it is extended to different countries, are the theoretical foundations for measuring market economic standards.

The requirement of "liberalization of economic entities" is that in a market economy, enterprises (including various types of economic entities here, the same below) are not only legally but in fact independent economic entities, the property rights relationship is clear, and management , Trade and business decisions are independent and autonomous. At the same time, in terms of the allocation of resources (capital, labor, land, and entrepreneurs) and in market transactions, the prices, output, profits, and import and export of enterprises are considered and decided according to market rules, market supply and demand, and are not based on When the government requires decision-making, corporate behavior is also market-oriented. "The liberalization of economic entities" helps enterprises to improve efficiency and take risks themselves, and helps to rationalize the allocation of resources within society. Because of this, the autonomy of enterprises and the marketization of their behaviors have become the signs of judging whether a country is a market economy. It is precisely for this reason that we understand and agree with the European and American countries' standards for marketization of enterprises in terms of market economic standards.

Of course, the measurement of "liberalization of economic entities" is complicated and difficult. We have seen that in different periods, different stages of development, and different historical conditions, the market economy standards of enterprises have changed. In terms of corporate property rights, management models and behaviors, there is no absolute standard. There are many forms of corporate organization, and there are many forms of corporate governance. In particular, the existence of state-owned enterprises is different, and the market economy countries have different management models for state-owned enterprises. According to World Bank statistics, by the early 1980s, state-owned enterprises accounted for an average of 10% of global GDP and 35% of total global capital. We should judge the degree of marketization of various types of enterprises, especially state-owned enterprises, and judge the degree of national market economy based on certain standards. We need to allow these standards to be flexible, have certain intervals, and not be too mechanical. For example, we cannot say that the United Kingdom was a market economy country in the 1990s, and it was not a market economy country at the peak of nationalization during the Labor Party s ruling period in the 1970s. Nor can we say that the US government leases most of state-owned enterprises to private individuals. The method of monopoly organization is market economy, and the model of Italian government's layer-by-layer participation and level-by-level control of enterprises through state-level holding companies is not a market economy. In fact, after the Second World War, Britain, France, Italy, and other Western European countries actively promoted the "nationalization" movement. State-owned enterprises were established through direct investment, purchase or confiscation, and state-owned participation. State-owned economic systems of varying sizes and management styles. In 1972, the proportion of state-owned enterprises in the total assets of the country was 29% in the United Kingdom, 33% in France, 30% in Italy, 30% in Germany and 30% in Japan by the early 1980s.

(IV) Absoluteness and relativity of market economy standards

We believe that market economy standards should be a dialectical unity of absoluteness and relativity.

The five major factors are summarized from the anti-dumping market economy standards in Europe and the United States and other countries, which in itself means that we acknowledge the existence of market economy standards. For any country, we can use these five factors to measure whether it is a market economy country. But on the other hand, these five standards are general, rough, with different intervals, flexible, and changing. In reality, there is no 100% market economy country.

Some experts who support absolute standard theory believe that in order to achieve a unified understanding, in order to reach a unified conclusion, even if there is no pure market economy in the realization, theoretically 100% is required as a complete marketization standard, with 0% as a complete plan Standard. Otherwise, the comparison of different countries will lose the uniform standard, and the comparison in different fields or different periods of the same country will also be difficult. Experts holding relative standards believe that there is no 100% market-oriented country in the world, and only a relative comparison and ranking of the degree of marketization is meaningful.

We prefer a combination of these two ideas. We believe that domestic experts mostly take marketization as 100% as a complete standard. This is an absolute theoretical standard. The absolute value is clearly displayed at a glance, but the absolute value is different from reality. It is feasible to judge the degree of marketization using relative rankings. Relative indicators are only ranked, simple and easy, and for good reason, but in this sorting process, it is inseparable from the measurement process of selecting several indicators for scoring. It can be said that the relative ranking does not deny that there is a measure of absolute value in the intermediate process; the result of absolute value cannot deny that even a relative comparison is needed. Absolute numerical judgment and relative ranking need to be combined and unified.

In short, there is no absolutely reasonable standard for marketization, but using the average value of the five major factors of the market economy as a general standard is a more practical standard with relativity. Some people ask: Are these five standards themselves scientific classifications? Our answer is: This is a standard iconic classification from practice, and it is used for a specific purpose. The purpose of our research is how to fair trade and how to properly and fairly anti-dumping, rather than proceeding from the integrity of the theory. In the process of pursuing and reaching consensus among the parties and in the process of promoting fair trade, we believe that we can continue to improve the scientific nature of our measurement work.