对许多南美国家领导人来说，本周来访的中国总理李克强选择了一个绝佳的时机，并且来自一个再好不过的国家。根据《中国-拉美经济通报》(China-Latin America Economic Bulletin)，中国一直与拉美往来密切，已超过美国成为南美在本地区之外的最大出口目的国。
此外，中国还刚刚与委内瑞拉和厄瓜多尔签署了数额庞大的贷款协议，并在今年1月签署了一项意义重大的中国-拉美合作计划，承诺将双边贸易额提高5000亿美元，将投资提高2500亿美元，并在科技、贸易和环境保护方面展开合作。
现在轮到了巴西、秘鲁、智利和哥伦比亚，这四国是此次李克强出访的目的地。外界预期中国将开始落实上述合作计划，并签署科技、贸易和货币互换方面的新协议。
中国-拉美金融数据库(China-Latin America Finance database)的数据显示，中国为拉美各国政府提供的贷款已经超过了世界银行(World Bank)和美洲开发银行(Inter-American Development Bank)的总和，据此来看，预期中国将进行大举投资是合理的。或许还会出现更多像两洋铁路（从秘鲁到巴西）这样的基础设施建设项目。
根据IMF，2014年拉美地区经济仅增长1.4%，预计今年将增长不到1%。与之形成鲜明对比的是，在2003年到2013年兴起主要由中国需求驱动的大宗商品热潮（China Boom，下文简称：中国热潮）期间，拉美地区的经济年增长率超过3%，主要归功于中国对拉美大宗商品的需求，以及大宗商品稀缺性和投机活动带来的价格上扬。
那样的日子已经过去。随着中国对经济进行再平衡，中国的需求出现放缓，这压低了全球的大宗商品价格。增长率的下滑让拉美人意识到政府并未将从“中国热潮”中获得的大部分收入用于投资。固定资本形成总额占该地区GDP的比例仅为19.6%，远低于增长与发展委员会(Commission on Growth and Development)和其他机构认为的国家发展经济所需的25%水平。厄瓜多尔、哥伦比亚和秘鲁的这一比例高于平均水平，但离25%还差得远，而阿根廷、巴西和委内瑞拉的投资率则非常低。
根据IMF的研究，尽管此次“中国热潮”是该地区历来持续时间最长、获利最多的一次大宗商品热潮，但大多数拉美国家在这次热潮中存下的资金没有它们在过去几次热潮中多。联合国拉丁美洲及加勒比经济委员会(ECLAC)今年的年度报告还提出，拉美各国政府的新增税收收入与此次热潮也不成比例。
因此，这也难怪拉美地区几乎没有为提高大宗商品以外行业的出口竞争力进行投资。2003年以来，拉美78%以上的制造业出口商品在全球市场中所占份额减少了。
此外，中国热潮让拉美付出了巨大的社会和环境代价，这些代价并未有效减轻。一项新研究报告《中国在拉美：对南南合作和可持续发展的教训》(China in Latin America: Lessons for South-South Cooperation and Sustainable Development)表明，初级大宗商品开采（例如石油、铜、铁矿石、锡、大豆等等）造成了环境退化。
因此，最近这轮中国热潮加大了该地区水路、森林以及其他资源的压力，突显出对人类健康、生物多样性、全球气候变化以及当地民生的威胁。根据这份报告，与该地区的整体经济活动相比，拉美对华出口的相关经济活动（过去10年，中国是拉美增长最快的出口目的地）排放的温室气体是整体水平的近两倍，耗费的水资源是整体水平的10倍。
因此，货币互换和贸易谈判、科学技术协议以及基础设施融资将非常受欢迎。实际上，拉美每年在基础设施方面的资金缺口占该地区GDP的6.2%，而且IMF表示，基础设施投资给其他经济领域带来的乘数效应最大。
中国和拉美还应努力确保将同样的注意力放在与双方经济关系相关的风险方面。这意味着将双方经济关系所带来的收益投资于竞争力提升以及社会和环境保护方面。
然而，如果拉美没有正确管理其自然资源，它们获得相对优势的来源将减弱，进而会导致经济停滞以及选举失败。如果中国没有缓和其在该地区贸易和投资的负面影响，中国将丧失在这个他们正长期押注的地区的正面形象，同时也将损失大量资金。
凯文•P•加拉格尔(Kevin P.Gallagher)是波士顿大学帕迪全球研究学院(Pardee School of Global Studies)全球发展政策教授，该院“全球经济治理计划”(Global Economic Governance Initiative)的负责人之一。他即将出版的著作为《中国三角：拉美的中国热潮以及华盛顿共识的命运》(The China Triangle: Latin America’s China Boom and the Fate of the Washington Consensus)。（中国进出口网）
To many South American leaders, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang’s visit this week couldn’t come at a better time, and from a better country. China has been busy with Latin America, surpassing the United States as South America’s leading export destination outside of the region, according to the China-Latin America Economic Bulletin.
What is more, the ink is barely dry on big loan agreements to Venezuela and Ecuador, or a major China-Latin America cooperation plan signed in January that pledges to increase trade by $500bn and investment by $250bn and to cooperate on science and technology, trade, and environmental protection.
Now it’s the turn of Brazil, Peru, Chile, and Colombia, all destinations on Li’s itinerary. The Chinese are expected start implementing the cooperation plan with new agreements on science, trade, and currency swaps.
Expectations of considerable Chinese investments seem justified by Beijing’s track record of providing more than the World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank combined in loans for Latin American governments, according to the China-Latin America Finance database. There will likely be more of the same for infrastructure projects such as the Twin Ocean Railroad from Peru to Brazil.
According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Latin American growth is expected to dip below one per cent this year, after a disappointing 2014 of 1.4 per cent. That stands in stark contrast to the region’s “China Boom” from 2003 to 2013 when the region grew over 3 per cent per year thanks in large part to Chinese demand for Latin America’s commodities and the subsequent uptick in prices that came along with scarcity and speculation.
Those days are gone. China’s demand has slowed as it rebalances its economy, dampening commodity prices worldwide. With growth sliding, Latin Americans are realising that their governments did not invest much of the proceeds from the China boom. Gross fixed capital formation in the region was a paltry 19.6 per cent, far short of the 25 per cent recommended by the Growth Commission and other bodies for nations needing to develop their economies. Ecuador, Colombia, and Peru were above average though still nowher near 25 per cent, while in Argentina, Brazil, and Venezuela the investment rates were anemic.
According to research by the IMF, although the China-led commodity boom was among the longest and most lucrative in the region’s history, most Latin American countries saved less of these windfalls than they have in past booms. This year’s annual report from the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean adds that Latin American governments also failed to bring in new tax revenue in proportion to the windfalls as well.
It is thus no surprise that the region did little to invest into export competitiveness in sectors other than commodities. Over 78 per cent of Latin American manufacturing exports have lost global market share to their counterparts since 2003.
The China boom also came at significant social and environmental cost that was not properly mitigated. A new study, China in Latin America: Lessons for South-South Cooperation and Sustainable Development, shows how primary commodity exploitation – such as petroleum, copper, iron ore, tin, soybeans and the like – are endemic to environmental degradation.
The recent China-boom thus put increased pressure on the region’s waterways, forests, and other areas that accentuated threats to human health, biodiversity, global climate change, and local livelihoods. According to the report Latin American exports to China – the fastest growing export destination over the past decade – were close to twice as greenhouse gas intensive and ten times as water intensive than overall economic activity in the region.
So currency swaps and trade talks, science and technology agreements, and finance for infrastructure will be very welcome. Indeed, Latin America faces an annualinfrastructure gap of 6.2 per cent of GDP and the IMF says that infrastructure investment has the highest multiplier impact on the rest of the economy.
China and Latin America would also do well to ensure that equal attention go to risks associated with their economic relationship. That means investing the proceeds of the relationship in competitiveness, as well as in social and environmental protections.
If Latin Americans don’t manage their natural resources correctly, however, their very source of comparative advantage will dwindle, translating into lost growth and elections. If China doesn’t also mitigate the negative impacts of its trade and investment in the region, it will lose its positive image in a region they are making long term bets on–and lose a lot of money as well.
Kevin P. Gallagher is a professor of global development policy at Boston University’s Pardee School of Global Studies wher he co-directs the Global Economic Governance Initiative. His forthcoming book is The China Triangle: Latin America’s China Boom and the Fate of the Washington Consensus.
