[08.09.02 印度 经济时报] 印度怎么才能赶上中国？
[媒体] 印度 经济时报
[原文标题] Catching up with China: India needs to focus on social factors
[链接] http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/India_to_focus_on_social_areas_to_catch_up_with_China/articleshow/3434132.cms
[翻译方式] 原创翻译-shaoboss/译
[原文] (by Ramgopal Agarwala)

With China basking in the glory of the Olympics, it is natural to be dazzled by her economic and social achievements. It is also understandable for many in India and abroad to feel that India is not in the same league as China so far as development is concerned and proposals for economic co-operation among them do not fall in the category of co-operation among equals.
China is indeed the most impressive and the most important story of development in human history as of today. Never before have so many people improved their lot so rapidly and that by relying on their own resources and ideas. Using World Bank’s data from World Development Indicators, we find that in 2006, India GDP per capita in international dollars was 53% of China’s, goods exports only 13%, goods imports 22%,and foreign direct investment 13%. Similarly in social dimension the gap is also large: in 2006, India’s literacy rate 61% as against China’s 90.9%; life expectancy at birth 64 years against China’s 72 years.
What may come as a surprise to many in India and abroad is how recent is China’s surge and how in most economic indicators India today (2006) is behind China by only about ten years. If India can achieve double digit GDP growth rates for the next ten years (which is only slightly higher than its performance in the last five years), it will, by 2015, catch up with China today (2006).
In 2006, India’s GDP per capita in PPP constant 2005 dollars was $2392.7—ahead of China’s only eight years ago (1998), when it was $2330.5. During the last four years (2002-2006), the annual growth rate in India’s per capita income was 7.25% and if this rate can be maintained, by 2015 India will be ahead of China’s per capita income in 2006.
Much is made of China’s open economy, in particular, its exports. India’s merchandise exports in 2006 were $120.2 billion, which was equal to China’s only 12 years ago ($121billion in 1994) and if India can maintain the growth rate of its exports during 2002-2006 , its exports will, by 2015, be equal to China’s in 2006 ($968.9 billion). India’s exports of goods and services as percentage of GDP were 23% in 2006, higher than China’s only 7 years ago (20.4% in 1999). Similar situation prevailed for imports.
India’s Foreign direct investment in 2006, at $7.8 billion, were higher than China’s in 1992 ($7.2 billion), but they are growing rapidly and at the current rate of growth they will catch up China’s in 2006 ($60.3 billion) by 2015.
In terms of the structure of GDP, India is tracking the Chinese experience in share of agriculture. The share of services in India is higher than China’s while that of industries lower. But, in that respect, China’s situation is abnormal, out of line with the experience of other middle-income and high-income countries. Over time, as the world moves toward a knowledge economy, India’s emphasis on services will prove to be the winning strategy.
There are some areas such as use of tractors per hectare, agricultural value added per farmer, information, communication and technology as percentage of GDP, where India is actually ahead of China.
India is set to accelerate its growth rate while China’s will slow down largely due to demographic factors. So far as economic indicators are concerned , by 2020, India is highly likely to surpass China of 2008 and may, at least on that basis, be ready to host the Olympics. It is in social areas that India is truly behind China and it needs to accelerate its progress considerably to catch up by 2015 with China of today.
In 2004, 20% of India’s population was undernourished and India was behind China by 23 years. The rate of decline in this ratio was 0.14% per year between 1997-2004, which needs to be increased six fold if India is to reach the Chinese level of 2004 by 2014.
Literacy rate in India in 2006 was 61%, whereas that of China was 91%, and it was never below India’s in the last forty years. Here again, the rate of improvement needs to be increased dramatically if India is to match Chinese levels of today by 2015. Pupil-teacher ratio in primary and secondary schools in India is nearly twice the level of China’s and has shown no decline in recent years.
Mortality rate for under 5 in India was 76.4 per 1000 in 2006 whereas that in China was 24, and India is behind China by 30 years. The rate reduction of recent years (2.2 percentage point decline every year) needs to be trebled if India is to catch up by 2015 with China’s levels in 2006. Physicians per 1000 people were 0.6 in India in 2004 as against China’s 1.51 and, in the last forty years, there is no year when China fell short of India’s level today.
Here again, India needs to accelerate its progress six fold if it is to catch up by 2015 with China’s level in 2004.
The above numbers clearly suggest that while it is commonplace to bemoan India’s economic progress vis-à-vis China’s, the time lag is small. It is in social development that India needs to accelerate its progress dramatically. This finding resonates well with Amartya Sen’s recent lecture in the Parliament, where he drew attention to India’s miserable record on malnutrition and other forms of deprivation of masses.

当国际社会陶醉在北京奥运会的盛事中，人们的目光也被中国改革开放30年的成就所吸引。当我们将印度与中国比较时，发现两个国家的发展程度不在一个级别上。

中国经济的发展速度让世界震惊，在这么短的时间内就让数亿人口脱贫创造了历史记录。与中国相比，印度2006年的GDP(国内生产总值）只有中国的53%；出口产品总额是中国的13%；进口货物总额是中国的22%；国外直接投资金额是中国的13%。在其它方面差距也非常巨大，印度的识字率是61%，而中国是90.9%；印度人均寿命是64岁，中国是72岁。

从以上数据对比中，大家可以看到印度与中国的差距是如此明显。如果以年份来计算，印度现在的国力比中国2006年的水平落后10年。如果印度的GDP年增长率可以达到两位数，印度预计在2015年可以达到中国2006年的水平。以下是各个数据的发展趋势。

GDP---印度2006年GDP是2392.7美元，与中国1998年GDP2330.5美元相比要略多一些。如果保持印度现有增长率7.25%，2015年印度可以超过中国2006年水平。

商品出口总额---印度2006金额是120.2亿美元，大约等于中国12年前的水平。如果印度继续增长，2015年印度可以赶上中国2006年出口额。印度商品出口和外包服务金额占GDP比率为23%，高于中国7年前数值（1999年20.4%）。商品进口数值与出口情况相似。

国外直接投资FDI----印度2006年数值是7.8亿美元，高于中国1992年7.2亿美元的金额。但印度FDI增长迅速，2015年可以追平中国2006数值。

GDP构成--印度GDP中农业经济比重较大，工业比重较轻。但印度的软件业发展迅速，随着世界知识经济时代的发展，印度的发展模式比中国各具优势，拥有战略眼光。同时印度的农业机械化率，农民人均产值，信息通讯技术产业占GDP比重都要超过中国。

经济增长率---印度正在逐步提高经济增长率，而与此同时，中国的增长率会逐渐下降。原因就在于人口增长率。只要印度政府加强经济方面的发展，到2020年印度的经济就可以超过中国今天的成就。

国民营养不良比率--2004年，印度20%的人口存在营养不良的状况，落后中国23年。以每年0.14%的下降比率计算，印度在2014年可以达到中国2004年水平。

识字率---印度2006年是61%，而中国是91%。如果印度要赶上中国，需要大力提高教育水平。现在，印度中小学老师的数量只有中国的20%。


婴儿出生死亡率--印度每千个婴儿死亡人数是76.4，而中国是24.在这一方面，印度落后中国30年。现在，这一指标正以每年2.2%的比率下降。2015年可以赶上中国2006年水平。印度1000个人拥有的内科医生是0.6个，中国是1.51.


综合以上指标，印度如果要达到中国2004年水平，需要将发展速度提高六倍。政府应加大社会发展步伐，全力赶超中国。

[ 本帖最后由 shaoboss 于 2008-9-4 17:45 编辑 ]

印度需要走一条自己的道路

印度有差中国那么多啊？
一直都以为中国和印度差距不是很大···  一提到亚洲发展最快的，他们都会把印度和中国平头说

印度在很多地方同中国相似
至少在人口上面，养活了10亿多的老百姓，搁谁那都不容易啊

引用:

原帖由 lch110 于 2008-9-4 17:59 发表
印度在很多地方同中国相似
至少在人口上面，养活了10亿多的老百姓，搁谁那都不容易啊

印度的自然环境和国际环境比中国好很多，但是发展情况却比中国差了好多，找原因吧。

印度国土面积比中国小，但可用农田比中国多。
印度的季节单一，不像中国百姓得准备一年四季的衣服，可见他们消费的比中国低的多。
而且中国还是个多发灾害的国家，每年的国民收入还上交给老天爷一部分。

印度的季节单一，不像中国百姓得准备一年四季的衣服，可见他们消费的比中国低的多。
====================================================================
这句话很经典！

我们亚洲的印度可是欧美的干儿子！从干爹哪儿继承了不少欧美东西！比如民主！呵呵！结果国内每隔几年就抽搐一次！闹个政变玩玩！弄个派别冲突耍耍！发展前途光明啊！将来的将来一定超过中国滴！

从这篇文章来看，印度终于从实际出发了。认识自己的差距才能选择正确的方法。可惜没找到一篇关于印度与中国在军事力量的对比，因为印度总认为自己的空军和海军实力居亚洲第一。

有看到网上另一篇关于印度与中国的对比文章。没有时间翻译，如果大家有空可以帮忙翻译一下。http://www.newstatesman.com/book ... china-aiyar-mirrors

India/China reality check
Sukhdev Sandhu

Published 04 September 2008

Print version Listen RSS Smoke and Mirrors: an Experience of China
Pallavi Aiyar
HarperCollins India, 288pp, £15.99

Go to the bookshop of any major international airport and you'll see a raft of titles, usually in the business section, that herald and seek to explain the emergence of a new India, one that is urban, middle-class, a potential treasure trove for canny investors and speculators. In fevered prose awash with asterisks and bullet points - PowerPoint orientalism, as it were - advice is given on how to break into Indian markets, navigate government bureaucracy and taxation laws, make sense of the nation's cultural and religious codes.

An important subgenre of this literature is that on "Chindia", an imaginative category as much as a physical place, in which the "elephant" (India) and the "dragon" (China) are analysed because, it is claimed, not only are their increasingly deregulated economies booming, but that success could be at the expense of the west. Now, with the Beijing Olympics fresh in the memory and the next Commonwealth Games due in just two years in Delhi, more Atlantic-based consultants and forecasters than ever before will be hawking the idea of Chindia.

All the more reason to welcome the publication of Smoke and Mirrors, a deeply insightful and often very amusing mixture of travelogue, memoir and political analysis in which Pallavi Aiyar, the first Indian foreign correspondent ever to be based in China who actually speaks the language, offers a perspective on the relationship between the two countries that doesn't read as a breathless praise-song to the transforming, medicinal power of globalisation, and that benefits vastly from the time she has spent talking to villagers, small traders and economic migrants as much as to CEOs and think-tank wonks.

Aiyar, who moved to Beijing in 2002, begins by pointing to the relative novelty of this apparent intimacy between India and China. Hindi films had attracted large audiences for some years, the loud colours and uninhibited emotion of the performers serving as an antidote to the greyscale aesthetics so prevalent across the nation, but in other respects, and especially in recent years, India has been viewed as an over-populated, brazenly impoverished backwater. Indeed, it was only in March 2002 that China introduced a direct-flight service linking the world's two most populous countries.

Soon hundreds, then thousands, of Indians began arriving in Beijing and Shanghai. Some were adventurers pursuing the allure of unknown terrain, others entrepreneurs and gold-rushers who saw opportunities available to them as cooks, exotically turbaned hotel doormen and yoga-school managers, others still medical students attracted by the lower fees charged by Chinese medical schools. What they found was a challenge - indeed, a rebuke - to any residue of nationalist sentiment they may have harboured.

Aiyar, too, though she talks with some pride about the role of parliamentary democracy in India and the emphasis it lays on linguistic and cultural diversity, is far from a patriotic cheerleader. China, she realises, may lack a free press, but its levels of foreign investment, infrastructural development and mass literacy are far superior; she contrasts a 20-metre underpass in Delhi that took three years to build with a 1,000-bed hospital for Sars patients in Beijing that took seven days. The Chinese may lack a voice and a vote, but hundreds of millions of Indians suffer just as badly because of caste and religion.

Smoke and Mirrors is revelatory in its analysis of how the Chinese authorities, fearful that free-market economics leaves a moral vacuum, have sought of late to reintroduce a Confucian rhetoric of stability and harmony into public discourse. Balancing spirituality and capitalism is hard: Aiyar travels to Ningxia Province, whose 1.8 million Muslim population was seen as offering a competitive advantage to local food industries hoping to forge links with the Middle East. Increased traffic between the two regions has led to the rise of orthodox Islam in the province, more women adopting headscarves, and communal identity being geared towards global Islamic brotherhood rather than the nation state.

Aiyar is a droll writer, as adept at evoking the huge changes across contemporary China in her accounts of the booming sex-toy industry and the popularity of plastic surgery as she is at explaining the complexities of international finance. Her most amusing, though also rather chastening, chapter recounts her experiences teaching at a language school. The students are at once ambitious and plain-speaking - one of them calls himself Fat: "I chose this name because I am Fat" - but almost wholly ignorant, and happily so, of the extent of judicial corruption, land expropriation and state censorship throughout the country.

Clever, engaging, reflexive: Aiyar's book will affront "India Shining" ideologues as much as it punctures the gassy platitudes of "Chindia" boosters. As she writes, even if India does manage to rival China's export levels, "As long as half of all Indian women remain unable to write their own names, trumpeting the country's imminent 'overtaking' of China, is balderdash."

这种计算方式本来就不科学。出生死亡率每年2.2%下降.不知道这个作者以什么逻辑来计算的.
当这个比率降低到一定程度的时候根本就不容易再降低了.以印度现在的医疗水平.以2.2%线形计算本来就很可笑.

本文结尾一句"综合以上指标，印度如果要达到中国2004年水平，需要将发展速度提高六倍。政府应加大社会发展步伐，全力赶超中国。"
让人说啥好呢.铺垫了很多结尾还是没有任何有意义的结论出来.只一个发展速度提高6倍...我X你当那是啥啊.哎..还是在空谈

[ 本帖最后由 瓶子里的风 于 2008-9-4 18:35 编辑 ]

一直以为印度领先中国15年的

印度怎麽才能趕上中國？再搞它三十年民主自由就可以了。

这个问题！你们慢慢想！哈哈

婴儿死亡率赶超中国,这样印度不成了世界第一人口大国也赶超中国了吗？