主题：【原创】“全球竞争力报告”的全面解析（一） -- 陈经

从下面WEF自己的解释来看，宏观经济已经是历年最好的评分了，排名全球第六。增长高通账低储蓄率高，在中国经济史上都是最好的时期。但是微观企业与政府的运作层面，WEF的专家们相当不喜欢。专家们推崇的是一种企业与社会自主良好运行的模式，也是西方社会的运作传统模式，法规、传统、权力制衡等等是社会运行的粘合剂。中国的中心驱动模式，我认为虽然毛病不少，但也不至于被WEF说得那么差，还是可以干成不少事的。专家们一看，政府居然插手管经济到了这种程度，差﹔企业居然是这样按潜规则运行的，更差﹔所以在“机构运作环境”这一项就给了个80的超级落后排名，跌了20位。实际上，这是削足适履，干事不用西方的方法，就觉得一定差。也许中国的企业与政府搞经济的方式与竞争力最强的那些国家相比是有些差距，但在全球就做事能力与成效而言，已经可能算是相当可以的。WEF在宏观经济上给的高分以及微观经济上给的超低分，本身就是一种矛盾。这等于年年自己打自己嘴巴。凭什幺一个年年微观经济越来越差的低手做出来的成绩却是宏观经济越来越好的高手？

http://www.weforum.org/en/fp/gcr_2006-07_highlights/index.htm

China’s ranking has fallen from 48 to 54, characterized by a heterogeneous performance. On the positive side, China’s buoyant growth rates coupled with low inflation, one of the highest savings rates in the world and manageable levels of public debt have boosted China’s ranking on the macroeconomy pillar of the GCI to 6th place – an excellent result. However, a number of structural weaknesses need to be addressed, including in the largely state-controlled banking sector. Levels of financial intermediation are low and the state has had to intervene from time to time to mitigate the adverse effects of a large, non-performing loan portfolio. China has low penetration rates for the latest technologies (mobile telephones, Internet, personal computers), and secondary and tertiary school enrolment rates are still low by international standards. By far the most worrisome development is a marked drop in the quality of the institutional environment, as witnessed by the steep fall in rankings from 60 to 80 in 2006, with poor results across all 15 institutional indicators, and spanning both public and private institutions.