印度正在消失的中產階級
文章內容來自經濟學人20180113期
本文僅用於英語學習
閱讀難度：
印度正在消失的中產階級
中國之後是哪個國家？過去的二十年里，世界上人口密度最大的國家已經成了每個國際公司尋求增長的市場。隨著中國經濟發展變緩，企業開始尋找下一個類似規模的消費者群體來維持公司穩定發展。
對很多公司來說，印度無疑是下一個市場。印度人口很快將超過中國。而且可能會以「曾經推動中國進入經濟超級大國地位的步伐」成長。印度的增長速度與當年中國成長成為超級經濟大國的速度一樣。中產階級被認為是最早享受到繁榮的成果—產生了數以億計的中國消費者。興高采烈的管理顧問們談到了3億到4億的潛在花花公子、嘉年華司機和環球旅行者。(Exuberantmanagementconsultants speak of a 300m-400m horde of potential frapuccino-sippers,Fiesta-drivers and globe-trotters.)很多總裁訪問了印度之後，均宣稱印度是他們計劃中重要的部分。這些言論中部分可能是外交辭令，但是大多數是實際情況，比如公司IKEA,SOFT BANK,亞馬遜以及星巴克。
營銷人員和相關顧問認為印度的中產階級幾乎不存在。兜售除香皂、火柴、電話卡之外商品的公司，只針對的是一小部分人。印度前1%的人口，8百萬富有的居民，年收入最少2萬美元，就人口和平均收入來講相當於香港。接下來的9%類似於中歐—被全球財富包圍的地方。接著的40%的人口與其南亞貧窮的鄰居：孟加拉國、巴基斯坦相似。剩餘的將近5億人口，可以和非洲最貧困的地方相提並論。可以肯定的是，跨國公司會重視中歐（水平）的市場，大多數盈利來自那裡。但是沒有中國。
中部分裂
更壞的是，印度發展中產階級來追上中國的機會，正在被其不斷加深的不平等給破壞掉了。據Thomas Piketty等經濟學家新的調查，在1980年到2014年之間經濟增長所創造的額外收入，前1%創造財富的人擁有著其中的三分之一。富裕的人比起1980年更富有了十倍。中位數的人收入甚至沒有翻倍。印度成功的讓日收入2美元以下的人收入達到3美元，但是沒有達到其他國家的記錄--使日薪三美元的達到5美元，使5美元成為10美元。中等收入人口處於印度發展舞台的中央，卻遭受著增長帶來最大的傷害。印度人十中有八認為不平等是一個大問題，可以和腐敗相提並論。
失敗的原因並不神秘。數十年的國家干預使得在九十年代當一個自由化的措施實施只有少數人能受益。勞動力糟糕的效率，無疑是因為印度的教育系統粗放地創造了數以百萬計的成年人，他們只能從事不體面的工作。畢業生們長時間工作在小微企業，進行著不規範的操作。這些企業僱傭了93%的人口。中國成為世界工廠，創造了大量的中等工作，印度卻無法如此，因為把小企業升級為生產力更高的大企業政府是不允許的。只有四分之一的女性工作，過去十年份額急速下降，這使得情況變得更糟糕。
好的政策可以為改善前景做大量貢獻。然而希望需要用現實來緩和一下。印度有著根深蒂固的民主制度，但這對於糟糕的決定沒有任何保護作用。2016年經濟突然粗魯的「惡化」是為了經濟增長，但最終傷害了每個人。再加上隨著自動化限制了工廠工作的機會，中國所走的通過生產製造創造就業增收的繁榮之路，已經不再可行。
所有這一切意味著公司需要處理現在存在的印度，而不是他們希望出現的印度。一項戰略等待印度人民發展出全球中產階級的品味—汽車，作為人均收入跨越的第一道門檻；國外假期，當跨越另一個門檻—這些困難導致數十年的災難。只有3%的印度人乘坐過飛機，45個人里只有一個人擁有一輛汽車或者貨車。HSBS宣稱，如果近3億印度人可以算作中產階級，那麼其中部分日薪3美元。
巨大的市場，更少的機會
公司們可能儘力去把企業「印度化」，比如，售賣產品時使用方言，這樣絕大多數印度人都買賬。價格很重要。以同樣的價格在印度提供印度尼西亞的服務將吸引僅僅幾百萬人，而不是幾十億。甚至對於金字塔尖10%的人，Netflix年費訂閱也會花掉他們超過一個星期的收入。相當於美國超過3000美元。蘋果公司的廣告塗在孟買，德里和班加羅爾，但是只有十分之一的印度人，最新款iPhone價格少於他們半年的薪水。在印度，消費者最大的衝擊是那些能提供驚人價值的商品和服務：滑板車和行動電話發展很快，但只是在價格暴跌之後。
最精銳的商業鍛煉將使印度人能夠獲得新的商品。電氣化驅動了對冰箱的需求。廉價的移動數據是流媒體服務的福音。電子商務巨頭建立起來的物流網路首次讓一個三線城市的消費者能夠購買全球時尚品牌。消費者貿易的快速發展使更多的印度人可以買到理想的小玩意。
就政客們創造消費階層的工作而言，歷屆印度政府基本上都失敗了。希望印度中產階級能夠提供下一輪增長的企業不應抱有幻想。公司必須非常努力地工作，才能把潛力轉化為利潤。
雜誌原文：
Indian
The missing middle class
AFTER China, where next? Over the past two decades, the world』s mostpopulous(人口稠密) country has become the marketquanon(條件) of just about every global company seeking growth. As its economy slows, businesses are looking for the next set of consumers to keep thetills(現金出納機，收銀機) ringing.
To many, India feels like the heir apparent. Its population will soon overtake its Asian rival』s.It occasionally grows at the kind of pace that propelled China to the status of economic superpower. And its middle class is thought by many to be in the early stages of the journey to prosperity that created hundreds of millions of Chinese consumers.Exuberantmanagement consultants speak of a 300m-400m horde of potentialfrapuccino-sippers, Fiesta-drivers and globe-trotters.Rare is the chief executive who, upon visiting India, does not proclaim it as central to his or her plans. Some of that maybe a diplomatic dose of flattery; much of it, from firms such as IKEA, Soft Bank, Amazon and Starbucks, is sincerely meant.
Hold your elephants. The Indian middle class conjured up by the marketers and consultants scarcely exists. Firms peddling anything much beyond soap, matches and phone-credit are targeting a minuscule slice of the population (see page 16).The top 1% of Indian adults, a richenclaveof 8m inhabitants making at least $20,000 a year,equates to roughly Hong Kong in terms of population and average income. The next 9% is akin to central Europe, in the middle of the global wealth pack. The next 40% of India』s population neatly mirrors its combined South Asian poorneighbors, Bangladesh and Pakistan. The remaining half-billion or so are on a par with the most destitute bits of Africa. To be sure, global companies take the markets of central Europe seriously. Plenty of fortunes have been made there. Buttheyare no China.
Centre parting
Worse, the chances of India developing amiddle class to match the Middle Kingdom』s are being throttled by growing inequality. The top 1% of earners pocketed nearly a third of all the extra income generated by economic growth between 1980 and 2014, according to new research from economists including Thomas Piketty. The well-off are ten times richer now than in 1980; those at the median have not even doubled their income. India has done a good job at getting those earning below $2 a day (at purchasing-power parity) to $3, but it has not matched other countries』 records in getting those on $3 a day to earning $5, those at $5 a day to $10, and soon. Middle earners in countries at India』s stage of development usually take more of the gains from growth. Eight in ten Indians cite inequality as a big problem, on a par with corruption.
The reasons for this failure are not mysterious. Decades of statist intervention meant that when a measure of liberalisation came in the early 1990s, only a few were able to benefit. The workforce iswoefully(可悲) unproductive—no surprise given theabysmalstate of India』s education system, which churns out(粗製濫造) millions of adults equipped only for menial(不體面的) work. Its graduates go on to toil(長時間地工作)in small or micro-enterprises, operating informally; these 「employ」 93% of allIndians. The great swell of middle-class jobs that China created as it became the workshop to the world is not to be found in India, because turning small businesses into productive large ones is made nigh-on impossible by bureaucracy. The fact that barely a quarter of women work—a share that has seena precipitous decline in the past decade—only makes matters worse.
Good policy can do an enormous amount to improve prospects. However, hope should be tempered by realism. India is blessed with a deeply entrenched democratic system, but that is no shield against poor decisions. The sudden and brutal 「demonetisation」 of the economy in 2016 was meant to target fat cats, but ended up hurting everybody. And the path to prosperity walked by China, where manufacturing produced the jobs that pushed up incomes, is narrowing as automation limits opportunities for factory work.
All of which means that companies need to deal with the Indiathat exists today rather than the one they wish to emerge.A strategy of waiting for Indians to develop a taste for products that the global middle class indulges in—cars as income per head crosses onethreshold, foreign holidays when it crosses the next—may lead to decades of frustration. Only 3%of Indians have ever been on an aeroplane; only one in 45 owns a car or lorry.If nearly 300m Indians count as 「middle class」, as HSBC has proclaimed, some of them make around $3 a day.
Bigmarket, smaller opportunities
Companies would do better to 「Indianise」 their business by, for example,peddling wares using regional languages preferred by hundreds of millions of Indians. Pricing matters. Services proffered at the same price in India as Indiana will appeal to mere millions, not a billion. Even for someone in the top 10% of Indian earners, an annual Netflix subscription can cost over aweek』s income; the equivalent in America would be around $3,000. Apple ads mayplasterMumbai, Delhi andBangalore, but for only one in ten Indians would the latest iPhone represent less than half a year』s salary. The biggest consumer hits in India have been goods and services that offer stonking value: scooters and mobile telephony have grown fast, but only after prices tumbled.
The sharpest businesses workout which 「enablers」 will allow Indians to gain access to new goods.Electrification drives demand for fridges. Cheap mobile data (India is in the midst of a data-price war that has hugely benefited consumers) area boon tostreaming services. Logistics networks put together by e-commerce giants are for the first time making it possible for a consumer in a third-tier city to buy global fashion brands. A surge in consumer financing has put desirable baubles within reach of more Indians.
Insofar as it is the job of politicians to create a consumer class, successive Indian governments have largely failed. Businesses hoping the Indian middle class will provide their next spurt of growth should be under no illusion. Companies will have to work very hard to turn potential into profits.
獲取最新一期《經濟學人》PDF
TAG:Ask4 |