□ 文/呂俊芬

緬甸頒布新政，農(nóng)業(yè)投資能否實現(xiàn)零突破？

□ 文/呂俊芬

不久前，緬甸投資委員會（MIC）公布了十大優(yōu)先投資領(lǐng)域，農(nóng)業(yè)及相關(guān)服務、農(nóng)產(chǎn)品增值行業(yè)排在首項。2017年4月起施行的新《緬甸投資法》，內(nèi)容上更是參考了國際投資準則以及緬甸與部分國家簽訂的雙邊投資條約，新法中包含的所有保護及權(quán)利條款適用于所有的“投資者”，包括在緬投資的外國人、緬甸公民、依照適用法律依法注冊成立的企業(yè)實體、分支機構(gòu)等，應用水平較之前更高。根據(jù)新法，對于規(guī)模較小、類型較常規(guī)、但又需要申請土地長期使用權(quán)的項目而言，審批流程在結(jié)構(gòu)上得以簡化；對類型不同、地域不同的投資項目，根據(jù)項目所在地區(qū)的發(fā)達程度給予3～7年的免稅期；項目獲取的利潤如在一年內(nèi)投資在同一項目或其他同類項目中，可享受所得稅減免政策。

素有“亞洲糧倉”、“稻米之國”美譽的緬甸，發(fā)展農(nóng)業(yè)具有得天獨厚的優(yōu)勢。根據(jù)聯(lián)合國糧食及農(nóng)業(yè)組織的統(tǒng)計，農(nóng)業(yè)占緬甸國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值的37.8%，占出口總收入的25%至30%，消耗了70%的勞動力。然而，緬甸《聯(lián)邦日報》2016年12月曾報道：據(jù)緬甸投資委秘書長吳昂奈烏表示，在新政府執(zhí)政的9個月中，緬甸農(nóng)業(yè)領(lǐng)域沒有任何外資進入，顯示為“零”。

如今一系列投資新政，能否激活緬甸農(nóng)業(yè)對外資的吸引力呢？

緬甸農(nóng)業(yè)投資領(lǐng)域歡迎先進技術(shù)進入

基建滯后制約農(nóng)業(yè)發(fā)展

從新《緬甸投資法》來看，外資進入時相對簡化的審批手續(xù)、各類免稅優(yōu)惠等，都顯現(xiàn)出緬甸政府希望與外國企業(yè)做長期生意的愿望。然而緬甸一些商界人士卻表示，農(nóng)業(yè)領(lǐng)域外資進入少的主要原因是交通和電力領(lǐng)域發(fā)展不足。

赴緬投資農(nóng)業(yè)的中國企業(yè)家對緬甸發(fā)展滯后的基建設施也深有體會?！拔覀冏钤绲幕剡B牛棚都沒有，我們就睡在路上和拖拉機上。基地沒有電，就用小發(fā)動機發(fā)電，不過電壓不穩(wěn)，只能提供照明?！?013年，中國企業(yè)家鄭山洪帶領(lǐng)公司團隊初來緬甸投資創(chuàng)業(yè)開墾桑蠶基地，就吃盡苦頭?；氐钠D苦條件直接導致了該團隊技術(shù)人員的流失。2012年，中國企業(yè)家周宜軍將中國雜交水稻引進緬甸種植，面臨的困難是田里用水有時會緊缺一兩個月。

中國騰沖商人李明近年來曾在緬甸開展替代種植的農(nóng)業(yè)項目，面積達3萬多畝，主要種植香蕉、橡膠等。根據(jù)中緬替代種植的相關(guān)協(xié)議，李明能拿到一定的返銷配額。他認為，在緬甸投資農(nóng)業(yè)，最重要的就是農(nóng)產(chǎn)品返銷回國的渠道是否暢通。與李明一同入緬做生意的“香蕉客”張德立介紹，他運售香蕉的路上要經(jīng)過3座二戰(zhàn)時期修建的鐵橋才能到達中緬猴橋口岸，這些鐵橋承重不過十幾噸，28噸左右的卡車無法通過，只能用小車倒車的方式行進。一輛大卡車需要小車倒3次，每次費用5000元，耗時3天左右。張德立算了筆賬，從猴橋口岸，每車的最終運費在7萬元人民幣上下。由于路途耽擱，大量香蕉運出后腐爛，原本一箱可賣40元，最后只能賣10～20元。

緬甸合伙人Mark Livingston說：“緬甸沒有良好的鐵路、公路設施，大容量的倉儲設施和港口仍在發(fā)展之中，實際上開放農(nóng)業(yè)的關(guān)鍵推動力應該是交通運輸部門。如果你生產(chǎn)再多的更高品質(zhì)的作物，卻不能快速地將它們推向市場，什么用都沒有。”

各領(lǐng)域合力互補“引資入農(nóng)”

事實上，緬甸政府已將基建升級提上日程。據(jù)《緬甸環(huán)球新光報》2017年4月報道：緬甸交通與通訊部提出要發(fā)展國內(nèi)五個重要鐵路段，并將其作為一項總體規(guī)劃下的關(guān)鍵優(yōu)先項目，先進行初階升級，這5個鐵路段分別是仰光—曼德勒、曼德勒—密支那、仰光—毛淡棉、仰光—卑謬、以及仰光環(huán)城鐵路，覆蓋了緬甸全國80%的鐵路里程。目前，包含有初級工程、鐵路路堤和排水系統(tǒng)建設的仰光環(huán)城鐵路項目正在實施，預計于2020～2021財年完成。而在2017年5月舉行的首屆中緬智庫高端論壇上，中緬雙方就電力合作發(fā)展、推進中緬跨境輸電線路項目一事進行了磋商。

另外，包括基礎設施建設在內(nèi)，緬甸其他領(lǐng)域也釋放出了吸引外資的優(yōu)惠政策。緬甸媒體《聲音》2016年曾報道：緬甸原來主要在農(nóng)業(yè)、工業(yè)生產(chǎn)和基礎設施建設3個領(lǐng)域給予外資優(yōu)惠政策，本屆政府在此基礎上又增加了中小型企業(yè)、旅游業(yè)、國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)讓、培養(yǎng)熟練技術(shù)人員、對欠發(fā)達地區(qū)的投資等5個方面的內(nèi)容。外資在上述8個領(lǐng)域給予優(yōu)惠政策，因為這8個領(lǐng)域都是緬甸國家發(fā)展需要的。

這些外資優(yōu)惠領(lǐng)域，對農(nóng)業(yè)領(lǐng)域的外資吸引或可形成互補。緬甸勞動力成本低廉，土地流轉(zhuǎn)租金便宜，對外國企業(yè)家入緬投資有相當?shù)奈?。但若要做長期生意，外資企業(yè)家們更愿意考慮以生產(chǎn)技術(shù)立足。

將中國雜交水稻引進緬甸種植的周宜軍，和團隊一起對雜交稻種植技術(shù)“入鄉(xiāng)隨俗”進行多次改良。2015年，其品種為“CNR902”的雜交水稻受到了緬甸200多名科研人員的一致肯定，它既抗病蟲害，也能抗干旱，結(jié)實率較高。在緬甸政府的推動下，緬甸農(nóng)民對種子進行了試用，水稻種子新品種試驗示范推廣取得成功。周宜軍介紹，目前團隊培訓了一批緬甸的技術(shù)人員，他們將是新成立的有機大米豆類雜糧生產(chǎn)基地的主要力量。如今，周宜軍的公司有著集農(nóng)作物種子“育繁推一體化”、全程農(nóng)機化推廣與服務、糧食加工倉儲貿(mào)易物流3大核心業(yè)務為一體的農(nóng)業(yè)全產(chǎn)業(yè)鏈，已在為水稻新品種從緬甸“走出去”鋪路。

農(nóng)資市場充滿新商機

而在開放市場方面，緬甸農(nóng)業(yè)領(lǐng)域為吸引外資進入創(chuàng)造了各類商機并提供金融服務。

據(jù)緬甸商務部發(fā)布的2017年第36號公告稱，6月12日起，允許外資企業(yè)在緬甸從事化肥、種子、農(nóng)藥等5類商品的貿(mào)易。

緬甸稻米協(xié)會日前已向計劃與財政部遞交報告，將在全國建立33個農(nóng)業(yè)服務中心。該協(xié)會秘書長吳耶明昂透露，建立農(nóng)業(yè)服務中心計劃共需要4億美元的資金，計劃先申請3億美元國際優(yōu)惠貸款（低息貸款），其余1億美元由私人領(lǐng)域投資的方式來解決。據(jù)悉，農(nóng)業(yè)服務中心將提供農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)機械設備和化肥、農(nóng)藥等物資服務，并對農(nóng)民進行現(xiàn)代化農(nóng)業(yè)技術(shù)培訓。

關(guān)于金融服務，緬甸央行行長溫多表示，當本土銀行不能滿足緬甸進出口商的貿(mào)易融資需求時，緬甸央行將允許外資銀行開展貿(mào)易融資服務，開設自己的貿(mào)易賬戶。

在基建的同期跟進下，從政策層面的新法規(guī)章到農(nóng)資、農(nóng)技市場的開放開發(fā)，可以看到，緬甸農(nóng)業(yè)領(lǐng)域吸引外資的新時代或?qū)⒌絹?。MIC總書記胡永寧表示：“農(nóng)業(yè)在2017財政年度具有吸引外國直接投資的特殊潛力，因為我們已經(jīng)創(chuàng)造了更好的激勵措施和投資環(huán)境來吸引外國直接投資”。

·作者單位：河南省濮陽市通達公路工程有限公司

ASEAN is a success in many ways. Since the regional bloc was founded 50 years ago, the number of member nations has doubled.The region has also long been peaceful and prosperous, thanks to the absence of inter-regional conflicts and impressive economic growth.

Since 1993, total trade by ASEAN countries grew more than six times to US$ 2.5 trillion from US$ 400 billion. Poverty has declined in the tenmember ASEAN countries. Fewer of the region’s 600 million people live in poverty or have low incomes. Gradually,but assuredly, each country is seeing its people transition from poor to lowincome and to middle-income levels.

Countries such as Singapore are among the world’s wealthiest. Others such as Vietnam are the fastest-growing, while Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines and Malaysia are firmly planted as robust middle-income economies.ASEAN leaders established the ASEAN Vision 2020 to create a prosperous and peaceful region. An important part of this vision was to heighten economic growth, deepen intra-regional trade ties and allow the free movement of people,goods, services and investment capital in a common market, within ASEAN. But ASEAN has not achieved such a vision to date.

Regional economic integration and Intra-ASEAN trade ties remain weak

Today, intra-ASEAN trade ties remain weak. With the exception of Laos,ASEAN countries’ trade with economies outside of ASEAN still outpaces intra-ASEAN trade by a factor of three.By comparison, intra-NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement)trade surpassed extra-NAFTA trade levels in just five years after NAFTA’s implementation.

Even the region’s most open economy,Singapore, derives just a quarter of its trade with other ASEAN states.Vietnam has rapidly become immersed in international markets. But only 13 per cent of ASEAN’s trade is intra-ASEAN trade. One of the stated policy goals of the ASEAN is to improve intra-ASEAN trade ties, but this has not happened.

Trade within ASEAN has not been as attractive to each ASEAN country compared to external trade. In a way,this means that economic connections between ASEAN countries have not deepened. Such connections provide stimuli to improve the international competitiveness of their companies.Low levels of trade mean that ASEAN countries rely more strongly for developing growth on economic giants such as the US and China, than on ASEAN countries. There is much room for market forces to lead to greater intra-ASEAN trade ties, provided ASEAN policy makers do their job and reduce tariff and non-tariff barriers.

The conventional wisdom that ASEAN countries are in different stages of development and require protection within ASEAN is wrong. Low-income and high-income countries can and do benefit from trade with each other. Firms and countries always compete with each other. But competition is not a bad thing.Competition is the breeding ground for economic growth. That ASEAN has not deepened intra-regional trade ties means that opportunities have been lost.

China burst onto the world’s economic stage in the 1990s. Very quickly, China became the business world’s new darling where international trade blossomed and foreign direct investment grew at staggering rates. China established vast production networks that rightfully could have been built in ASEAN, had the world’s investment community seen the ASEAN as a single economic entity.

While China’s economic growth has led to wage growth, creating higher costs of domestic production, new opportunities have arisen to re-capture those industries that migrated wholesale to China. Regional production networks can and will shift out of eastern China.But will they shift to China’s interior, to India or to ASEAN countries? An open,competitive and integrated ASEAN stands a great chance of attracting new industries.

But for this happen, steps must be taken to achieve the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) — the long-awaited initiative to integrate the region’s diverse economies into a single market. A single market balances opportunities and power. ASEAN as a single market is a much more formidable economic entity whose policies matter more internally and more in external negotiations with other large economic units such as China and the European Union.

A workshop on the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) 2025 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) was held in Davao on February 7, 2017.

Yet there seems to be little sign of action in the most recent round of talks.Instead, talks centred on indefinite and ambiguous promises of integration and cooperation. Press releases seem to focus significantly on security issues.But it is unfortunate because it leaves unanswered questions on how ASEAN’s economic integration is coming along.ASEAN’s leaders have called for economic integration many times, but concrete action to show progress has not followed. Progress will boost investors’confidence and attract more businesses to the region. But this has not happened.

Focus on other areas of cooperation

ASEAN leaders’ rhetoric about the creation of the AEC is impressive. The reality is less so. ASEAN leaders often claim success for the bloc because member states are growing well but the region is not living up to its true potential. The policies and policy makers in ASEAN are satisficing. They have not been acting to maximise opportunities for growth in terms of furthering economic trade and linkages with each other.

The reality for most ASEAN countries is that economic growth comes from bilateral FTAs, extra-ASEAN investment and domestic policy initiatives. This may be a result of the lack of economic integration, but it might also be the reason why economic integration within ASEAN has appeared lacklustre.External trading partners know the reality that ASEAN is not a common market. Instead, policy makers should acknowledge that the AEC is primarily a forum for stabilising relations between member states. They should concede that the AEC unites member states on a political front when faced with challenges from large regional rivals such as China or India. They should reassert that the AEC encourages peace and mutual understanding across countries with pronounced societal and cultural differences.

Establish clear goals and signposts to guide economic integration

Nobody expects the AEC to emerge overnight. But nobody expects the AEC to emerge if ASEAN meetings conclude primarily with vision statements and general guidelines for development.

Instead, if the AEC is to lead to regional economic integration and be the precursor to the RCEP that it must be, then policy makers must guide and measure integration with tangible metrics. Individual politicians can dance around rhetoric. But once clear goals and signposts are established, countries and indeed ASEAN as a group will have to act as they said they will act.

ASEAN leaders need to establish clear metrics to measure the overall health of ASEAN’s economic integration and external trade and investments. Definitive steps must be taken to facilitate trade and eliminate tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade. Cross-border investment must be liberalised. National champions must be exposed to more competition.Small- and medium-sized enterprises must venture beyond their own borders.Infrastructure must be improved to better intra-ASEAN logistics. These are highbrow expectations but if ASEAN aims high and is willing to work towards such goals, progress on economic integration can be forthcoming.

When subsequent rounds of talks occur, leaders can evaluate whether the formation of the AEC is on track.Instead of releasing statements on very broad economic aggregates, leaders can refer to these specific measurable items to defend statements of ASEAN successes.

The twice annual ASEAN leaders’summits are expensive. Massive amounts of manpower need to be mobilised for coordination and security. Legions of aides need to plan the summit and travel to it. The precious and irreplaceable time of leaders is consumed by these summits.

Given these costs and given the hopes embedded in the summits, the people of ASEAN can reasonably expect more from the talks. If ASEAN is serious in pursuing regional integration, then it’s time to get down to the nuts and bolts to make it happen.

· Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

Is ASEAN’s Economic Integration Still a Work in Progress?

By Andrew Delios