tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2755700415043205247.post8841838121902017599..comments2023-03-28T08:18:07.711-07:00Comments on ChinaBizGov: In praise of public-private partnershipG. E. Anderson ---http://www.blogger.com/profile/11194863913108812712noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2755700415043205247.post-20743753574502668412012-07-24T10:23:22.785-07:002012-07-24T10:23:22.785-07:00Thanks, David.
It's interesting that you woul...Thanks, David.<br /><br />It's interesting that you would mention Amory Lovins. I just finished a book he coauthored, "Natural Capitalism."<br /><br />Until now I haven't really done any work on alternative energy in China except to the extent that it overlapped with my work on the auto industry. However, my research on autos and future demand for transportation fuel in Asia has opened my eyes to the lack of sustainability of our Western way of life which China unfortunately seems determined to follow.G. E. Anderson ---https://www.blogger.com/profile/11194863913108812712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2755700415043205247.post-10291246941847716072012-07-24T09:48:29.811-07:002012-07-24T09:48:29.811-07:00Just found out about your work through the Sinica ...Just found out about your work through the Sinica Podcast. I really enjoyed this post discussing the role of private and public enterprise in industry and innovations. Your ideas seem to be on the same wavelength as Amory Lovins at Rocky Mountain Institute.Have you done any work on Alternative Energy in China?Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02266911109972250869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2755700415043205247.post-90077698023918857232012-06-24T18:42:34.255-07:002012-06-24T18:42:34.255-07:00SpaceX dragon Vs. China Inc.SpaceX dragon Vs. China Inc.Bohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15128324833198291933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2755700415043205247.post-62029400290615270842012-06-08T10:37:35.114-07:002012-06-08T10:37:35.114-07:00Thanks for your comments, Chris. I agree that Chi...Thanks for your comments, Chris. I agree that China is wasting opportunity by not embracing its private sector as a source of innovation. The SOEs will never accomplish more than to copy whatever they see their foreign competitors doing. Of course, as long as China is able to successfully stack the deck against foreign multinationals, the SOEs will have a chance to succeed in China's very big domestic market. I think it is probably time that other countries began to demand reciprocity with China. For example, if foreign automakers continue to be forced into joint ventures with Chinese automakers as the price for entering China's market, then Chinese automakers should expect the same treatment when they go abroad.G. E. Anderson ---https://www.blogger.com/profile/11194863913108812712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2755700415043205247.post-2611052051845490312012-06-07T22:44:30.161-07:002012-06-07T22:44:30.161-07:00China has tended to limit PPP's to relationshi...China has tended to limit PPP's to relationships between it's own SOEs and China's banks. India on the other hand has opened them up, requiring some USD500 billion in infrastructure spending in the next 3 years, Indian PPP's are part Government funded and part coming from the private sector, typcially on a 50-50 basis. The difference in India is that the Indians will allow foreign investors to come in and for them to raise money from Indian banks to do so. More on that here: http://www.india-briefing.com/news/india-frontrunner-ppp-race-5422.html/Chris Devonshire-Ellishttp://www.india-briefing.com/chris-devonshire-ellis.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2755700415043205247.post-25441761964814635362012-05-31T11:31:07.452-07:002012-05-31T11:31:07.452-07:00You make a good point: both the public and the pr...You make a good point: both the public and the private sides of these partnerships need to be willing participants. In both the US and China examples you give, one side or the other is unwilling, or worse, unaware, of their role in the "partnership." :)G. E. Anderson ---https://www.blogger.com/profile/11194863913108812712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2755700415043205247.post-7537322589951736532012-05-31T11:18:58.586-07:002012-05-31T11:18:58.586-07:00China isn't doomed so much as the party, which...China isn't doomed so much as the party, which has a very limited bag of tricks. As for private-public partnership, the important question to ask is the motivation of the different parties? Wall St. has come up with a very bad system which uses bank deposits to fund bankers' gambling, with the bankers pocketing the profits, while the taxpayers get stuck with the losses. The party in China has come up with a system where corrupt party members can use public assets to make money, and depositing their ill-gotten gains overseas.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com