“好制度”为何不能总是带来“好结果”?——中美洲国家兴衰的比较历史分析  

Why “Good Institutions” Could Not Always Achieve “Good Goals”? A Comparative Historical Analysis of the Development of Central American Countries

作　　者：释启鹏 Shi Qipeng(Beijing Foreign Studies University,Beijing)

机构地区：[1]北京外国语大学国际关系学院

出　　处：《经济社会体制比较》2021年第5期184-193,共10页Comparative Economic & Social Systems

基　　金：国家社会科学基金一般项目“比较政治学的学科范畴研究”(项目编号:19BZZ008)。

摘　　要：将制度视作"经济长期增长的根本原因"已经得到西方学界广泛认可。从诺斯到阿西莫格鲁等一大批学者坚信,以保护私有产权为核心的"好制度"可以通过激励投资和创新进而推动经济增长。但现实世界表明,许多采取了"好制度"的第三世界国家并没有因此走向繁荣,反而加剧了经济低迷与不平等。中美洲五国所经历的自由主义改革以及由此形成的发展差异为重思发展经济学构建的"制度崇拜"提供了经验材料。从19世纪中叶到20世纪初,中美洲五国先后开启了以土地私有化为核心的自由主义改革。在这场"有效制度"替代"无效制度"的变迁中,民众赖以生存的土地被地主阶级与商业寡头攫取,中美洲也被彻底纳入世界资本主义体系。改革虽然带来了出口经济的繁荣,但也阻碍了这些国家的长期发展。比较历史研究的经验表明,私有产权制度之所以能够推动经济发展,既有赖于贫富分化不那么悬殊的国内社会结构,也有赖于国家在世界体系中所具有的相对独立性。如果缺少这一前提条件,"好制度"不仅很难促进经济发展,反而会巩固甚至加剧既有的不平等秩序。From North to Acemoglu, a large number of scholars in economics of development, who regard the institutions as "the fundamental cause of long-run growth", believe that institutions which protect private property could promote economic development by encourage investment and innovation. Different from the promise of "institutional monocropping", many Third World countries adopting "good institutions" have not achieved sustained economic development, but encountered further social inequality. Five Central American countries’ liberalism reforms and different outcomes of development provided empirical materials for rethinking the "Institutional Monocropping" pervaded in mainstream economics. From the middle of the 19 th century to the beginning of the 20 th century, five Central American countries have experienced the liberalism reform with land privatization at the core. During the institutional change period, when the "effective institutions" was replaced by the "ineffective institutions", a large amount of land has seized by land aristocrats and business oligarchs. At the same time, Central America was completely integrated into the world capitalist system. Liberal reform brought prosperity as for the export-oriented economy, which has also obstructed their long-term development. Comparative historical studies suggested that relatively equal domestic social structure and international exchange structure are the premise for private property rights to promote economic development. Without this structural premise, the establishment of private property protecting arrangements will not promote economic development, but will consolidate or even aggravate the unequal structure.

关 键 词：中美洲国家 私有产权 自由主义改革 比较历史分析 

分 类 号：D73[政治法律—政治学] D77[政治法律—中外政治制度]