China’s Policy Disharmony

China was hardly lacking in policy pronouncements in the final months of 2013. Given the likely tradeoffs between strategy and tactics – that is, between long-term reforms and short-term growth – can Chinese policymakers really accomplish all of their objectives?

NEW HAVEN – China was hardly lacking in policy pronouncements in the final months of 2013. From the 60-point reform program issued by the Central Committee’s Third Plenum in early November to the six core tasks endorsed by the Central Economic Work Conference a month later, China’s leaders proposed a raft of new measures to address the daunting challenges that their country faces in the years ahead.

But, seen in their entirety, the risk of incoherence has become evident. The Third Plenum initiatives, for example, have a strategic focus: promoting the economy’s long-awaited pro-consumption structural rebalancing. While the Work Conference’s core tasks embody the spirit of these reforms, they also reflect a tactical focus: “keeping growth steady.” Given the likely tradeoffs between strategy and tactics – that is, between long-term reforms and short-term growth imperatives – can Chinese policymakers really accomplish all of their objectives?

Of course, such tradeoffs have long been evident in most economies – developed and developing alike. What has separated China from the pack has been its strong inclination to place greater emphasis on strategic objectives in charting its economic-development path.

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

To continue reading, please log in or register now. After entering your email, you'll have access to two free articles every month. For unlimited access to Project Syndicate, subscribe now.

required

By proceeding, you are agreeing to our Terms and Conditions.

Log in

http://prosyn.org/w48pJX3;

Cookies and Privacy

We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. To find out more, read our updated cookie policy and privacy policy.