“一带一路”沿线国家政治-经济-社会风险综合评估及防控

doi:10.11821/dlyj020181321

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

开展“一带一路”沿线国家的风险评估对“五通”目标的实现和“走出去”战略具有重要意义。基于政治、经济和社会三个维度18个指标构建评价体系,对“一带一路”沿线74个国家的综合风险进行评估和排序,运用空间自相关、冷热点分析等剖析了2001—2016年不同风险的时空演变特征,并提出风险防控建议。结果表明：① 2001—2016年,“一带一路”沿线国家综合风险整体呈下降趋势,政治风险变化幅度较小,经济风险经历了“下降-上升-再下降-再上升”的演变过程,社会风险总体呈下降趋势,综合风险波动剧烈的国家主要集中在西亚、欧洲和东南亚;② 2001—2016年,“一带一路”沿线国家政治、经济、社会风险均存在显著的集聚性和区域差异性,高危险和较危险等级国家主要分布在北非、中亚、西亚、南亚和东南亚;③ 政治、经济和社会3个风险子系统存在较显著的相关性,政治风险高的国家往往伴随着较高的经济和社会风险;④ 中国对“一带一路”部分国家的投资存在投资量大与风险等级高并存的“投资悖论”现象。未来应从政府和企业两个层面共同努力,建立动态评级和预警机制,做好风险防控,逐步打造“一带一路”利益共同体、责任共同体和命运共同体。

关键词: 一带一路, 政治风险, 经济风险, 社会风险, 对外投资, 时空演变, 风险防控

Abstract:

Assessing and preventing national risks along the Belt and Road are of great importance to the realization of the “Five Connectivity” goal and “Go Global” strategy. China had signed cooperation documents with more than 120 countries and 29 international organizations on jointly constructing the Belt and Road by March 2019. However, most regions along the Belt and Road are developing countries and emerging economies, with immature market economic system and relatively backward infrastructure. Some countries are suffering from a lack of stable political situation, high governance efficiency, complete legal systems and ideal trade patterns. Moreover, religious and refugee issues in some of these countries are prominent, which pose many potential risks to foreign investment, business exchanges, outbound tourism, cultural and scientific exchanges, etc. In this study, by choosing 18 indicators from the dimensions of politics, economy and society, an evaluation system was established to rank the overall risk of 74 countries along the Belt and Road. We analyzed the spatial-temporal evolution of different risks during 2001-2016 by Moran's I and hotspot analysis, and put forward suggestions for risk prevention and control. The results demonstrate that: (1) From 2001 to 2016, the overall risk of 74 countries along the Belt and Road shows a downward trend, of which the change to political risk is relatively small, economic risk experienced a fluctuation of "down-up-down-up", and social risk generally shows a downward trend. The overall risks are very volatile in some countries particularly in West Asia, Europe and Southeast Asia; (2) The political, economic and social risks of 74 countries along the Belt and Road show significant spatial agglomeration and regional differences during 2001-2016. The countries with high risk levels are mainly distributed in North Africa, Central Asia, West Asia, South Asia and Southeast Asia; (3) The political, economic and social risk subsystems are significantly correlated with each other, and countries with high political risk are often accompanied by high economic and social risks; and (4) There is an "investment paradox" in some countries, namely, large amount of investment and high risk level coexist in the Belt and Road region. As such, the governments and enterprises should make joint efforts to establish dynamic rating and early warning mechanism to prevent and control risks. We should better align our policies with existing regional strategies such as the Eurasian Economic Union, the Bright Road of Kazakhstan, and the Mongolian Grassland Road, establish the mechanism of offshore financial risk control, participate more actively in the formulation and application of international and regional rules, and pay more attention to corporate social responsibility. By doing so, we will gradually achieve a Belt and Road community with shared interests, shared responsibilities and shared future.

Key words: the Belt and Road Initiative, political risk, economic risk, social risk, outward foreign investment, spatial-temporal evolution, risk prevention and control

刘海猛, 胡森林, 方恺, 何光强, 马海涛, 崔学刚. “一带一路”沿线国家政治-经济-社会风险综合评估及防控[J]. 地理研究, 2019, 38(12): 2966-2984.

LIU Haimeng, HU Senlin, FANG Kai, HE Guangqiang, MA Haitao, CUI Xuegang. A comprehensive assessment of political, economic and social risks and their prevention for the countries along the Belt and Road[J]. GEOGRAPHICAL RESEARCH, 2019, 38(12): 2966-2984.

图/表 16

表1

表2

表3

表4

图1

图2

表5

图3

图4

表6

图5

图6

图7

图8

图9

图10

参考文献 48

[1]	国家信息中心. “一带一路”大数据报告: 2018. 北京: 商务印书馆, 2018.
	[ National Information Center. The Belt and Road Big Data Annual Report: 2018. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 2018.]
[2]	陈发虎, 安成邦, 董广辉 , 等. 丝绸之路与泛第三极地区人类活动、环境变化和丝路文明兴衰. 中国科学院院刊, 2017,32(9):967-975.
	[ Chen Fahu, An Chengbang, Dong Guanghui , et al. Human activities, environmental changes, and rise and decline of Silk Road civilization in Pan-Third Pole Region. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2017,32(9):967-975.]
[3]	Liu H, Fang C, Miao Y , et al. Spatio-temporal evolution of population and urbanization in the countries along the Belt and Road 1950-2050. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2018,28(7):919-936. doi: 10.1007/s11442-018-1513-x
[4]	Huang Y P . Understanding China's Belt & Road Initiative: Motivation, framework and assessment. China Economic Review, 2016,40:314-321. doi: 10.1111/cobi.13317 pmid: 30900273
[5]	张锐连, 施国庆 . “一带一路”倡议下海外投资社会风险管控研究. 理论月刊, 2017, ( 2):135-143.
	[ Zhang Ruilian, Shi Guoqing . Research on social risk control of overseas investment under the Belt and Road Initiative. Theory Monthly, 2017, ( 2):135-143.]
[6]	周强, 杨宇, 刘毅 , 等. 中国“一带一路”地缘政治研究进展与展望. 世界地理研究, 2018,27(3):1-10.
	[ Zhou Qiang, Yang Yu, Liu Yi , et al. A review of the Belt and Road Initiative studies from the perspective of geopolitics. World Regional Studies, 2018,27(3):1-10.]
[7]	王永中, 李曦晨 . 中国对一带一路沿线国家投资风险评估. 开放导报, 2015, ( 4):30-34.
	[ Wang Yongzhong, Li Xichen . China's evaluation of investment risks in countries along "One Belt, One Road". China Opening Journal, 2015, ( 4):30-34.]
[8]	李福胜 . 国家风险: 分析·评估·监控. 北京: 社会科学文献出版社, 2006.
	[ Li Fusheng. Country Risk: Analysis, Assessment & Monitoring. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press, 2006.]
[9]	柳钦火, 吴俊君, 李丽 , 等. “一带一路”区域可持续发展生态环境遥感监测. 遥感学报, 2018,22(4):686-708.
	[ Liu Qinhuo, Wu Junjun, Li Li , et al. Ecological environment monitoring for sustainable development goals in the Belt and Road region. Journal of Remote Sensing, 2018,22(4):686-708.]
[10]	吴绍洪, 刘路路, 刘燕华 , 等. “一带一路”陆域地理格局与环境变化风险. 地理学报, 2018,73(7):1214-1225. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201807003
	[ Wu Shaohong, Liu Lulu, Liu Yanhua , et al. Geographical patterns and environmental change risks in terrestrial areas of the Belt and Road. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2018,73(7):1214-1225.] doi: 10.11821/dlxb201807003
[11]	崔鹏, 胡凯衡, 陈华勇 , 等. 丝绸之路经济带自然灾害与重大工程风险. 科学通报, 2018,63(11):989-997.
	[ Cui Peng, Hu Kaiheng, Chen Huayong , et al. Risks along the Silk Road Economic Belt owing to natural hazards and construction of major project. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2018,63(11):989-997.]
[12]	Tracy E F, Shvarts E, Simonov E , et al. China's new Eurasian ambitions: The environmental risks of the Silk Road Economic Belt. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 2017,58(1):56-88. doi: 10.1080/15387216.2017.1295876
[13]	World Economic Forum. The Global Risk Report 2018. .
[14]	张明, 王碧珺 . 中国海外投资国家风险评级报告: 2018. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社, 2018.
	[ Zhang Ming, Wang Bijun. Country- risk Rating of Overseas Investment from China: 2018. Beijing: China Social Science Press, 2018.]
[15]	胡俊超, 王丹丹 . “一带一路”沿线国家国别风险研究. 经济问题, 2016, ( 5):1-6.
	[ Hu Junchao, Wang Dandan . Research on country risk along with B&R. On Economic Problems, 2016, ( 5):1-6.]
[16]	赵敏燕, 董锁成, 王喆 , 等. “一带一路”沿线国家安全形势评估及对策. 中国科学院院刊, 2016, ( 6):689-696.
	[ Zhao Minyan, Dong Suocheng, Wang Zhe , et al. Assessment of countries' security situation along the Belt and Road and countermeasures. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2016, ( 6):689-696.]
[17]	宋长青, 葛岳静, 刘云刚 , 等. 从地缘关系视角解析“一带一路”的行动路径. 地理研究, 2018,37(1):3-19. doi: 10.11821/dlyj201801001
	[ Song Changqing, Ge Yuejing, Liu Yungang , et al. Under taking research on Belt and Road Initiative from the geo-relation perspective. Geographical Research, 2018,37(1):3-19.] doi: 10.11821/dlyj201801001
[18]	余莹 . 我国对外基础设施投资模式与政治风险管控: 基于“一带一路”地缘政治的视角. 经济问题, 2015, ( 12):8-14.
	[ Yu Ying . The mode of Chinese external foreign infrastructure investment and regulation on political risk: From the perspective of One Belt and One Road geopolitics. On Economic Problems, 2015, ( 12):8-14.]
[19]	Duan F, Ji Q, Liu B Y , et al. Energy investment risk assessment for nations along China's Belt & Road Initiative. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018,170:535-547. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.152
[20]	Yuan J H, Zeng Y R, Guo X X , et al. Electric power investment risk assessment for Belt and Road Initiative nations. Sustainability, 2018,10(9):3119. doi: 10.3390/su10093119
[21]	陆大道, 江东, 董锁成 , 等. 科学认识“一带一路”. 北京: 科学出版社, 2017.
	[ Lu Dadao, Jiang Dong, Dong Suocheng , et al. Scientific Understanding of the Belt and Road Initiative. Beijing: Science Press, 2017.]
[22]	刘卫东 . “一带一路”战略的科学内涵与科学问题. 地理科学进展, 2015,34(5):538-544. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2015.05.001
	[ Liu Weidong . Scientific understanding of the Belt and Road Initiative of China and related research themes. Progress in Geography, 2015,34(5):538-544.] doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2015.05.001
[23]	王琛 . 国家风险评价指标体系对比研究. 经济与管理研究, 2008, ( 6):51-55.
	[ Wang Chen . Comparative study on the national risk evaluation index system. Research on Economics and Management, 2008, ( 6):51-55.]
[24]	李媛, 汪伟, 刘丹丹 . 基于ICRG的中国海外投资国家风险评价方法. 沈阳工业大学学报: 社会科学版, 2015,8(4):304-311.
	[ Li Yuan, Wang Wei, Liu Dandan . Country risk evaluation methods of overseas investment of China based on ICRG. Journal of Shenyang University of Technology: Social Science Edition, 2015,8(4):304-311.]
[25]	杨理智, 张韧 . “21世纪海上丝绸之路”地缘环境分析与风险区划. 军事运筹与系统工程, 2016,30(1):5-11.
	[ Yang Lizhi, Zhang Ren . Geoenvironmental analysis and risk zoning of "21st Century Maritime Silk Road". Military Operations Research and Systems Engineering, 2016,30(1):5-11.]
[26]	谢洪礼 . 国内外经济、金融风险评价指标体系简评. 统计研究, 2000, ( 1):23-27.
	[ Xie Hongli . A brief evaluation of the economic and financial risk assessment index systems. Statistical Research, 2000, ( 1):23-27.]
[27]	李兵, 颜晓晨 . 中国与“一带一路”沿线国家双边贸易的新比较优势: 公共安全的视角. 经济研究, 2018,53(1):183-197.
	[ Li Bing, Yan Xiaochen . China's new comparative advantage of trading with Belt and Road countries: Public security perspectives. Economic Research, 2018,53(1):183-197.]
[28]	孟醒, 董有德 . 社会政治风险与我国企业对外直接投资的区位选择. 国际贸易问题, 2015, ( 4):106-115.
	[ Meng Xing, Dong Youde . Social and political risks and location choices of China's outward foreign direct investment. International Trade Issues, 2015, ( 4):106-115.]
[29]	马海涛, 孙湛 . “丝绸之路经济带”中亚石油资源开发对中国的保障程度与风险防控建议. 中国科学院院刊, 2018,33(6):594-600.
	[ Ma Haitao, Sun Zhan . Protection level and risk prevention of oil resources development in Central Asia for China. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2018,33(6):594-600.]
[30]	Huntington S P . The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003. doi: 10.1177/0272989X19889356 pmid: 31865849
[31]	黎绍凯, 张广来 . 我国对“一带一路”沿线国家直接投资布局与优化选择: 兼顾投资动机与风险规避. 经济问题探索, 2018, ( 9):111-124.
	[ Li Shaokai, Zhang Guanglai . China's direct investment layout and optimization options for "One Belt and One Road": Taking into account investment motivation and risk aversion. Inquiry into Economic Issues, 2018, ( 9):111-124.]
[32]	郑蕾, 刘志高 . 中国对“一带一路”沿线直接投资空间格局. 地理科学进展, 2015,34(5):563-570. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2015.05.004
	[ Zheng Lei, Liu Zhigao . Spatial pattern of Chinese outward direct investment in the Belt and Road Initiative area. Progress in Geography, 2015,34(5):563-570.] doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2015.05.004
[33]	马昀 . “一带一路”建设中的风险管控问题. 政治经济学评论, 2015,6(4):189-203.
	[ Ma Yun . The risk control of constructing the Belt and Road Initiative. China Review of Political Economy, 2015,6(4):189-203.]
[34]	张述存 . “一带一路”战略下优化中国对外直接投资布局的思路与对策. 管理世界, 2017, ( 4):1-9.
	[ Zhang Shucun . Thoughts and measures of optimizing China's OFDI layout under the Belt and Road Initiative. Management World, 2017,( 4):1-9.]
[35]	宗芳宇, 路江涌, 武常岐 . 双边投资协定、制度环境和企业对外直接投资区位选择. 经济研究, 2012,47(5):71-82.
	[ Zong Fangyu, Lu Jiangyong, Wu Changqi . Bilateral investment treaties, institutional environment and outward FDI location choices of firms. Economic Research, 2012,47(5):71-82.]
[36]	马忠民, 潘越 . “一带一路”背景下中国对外投资风险控制策略研究. 经济论坛, 2017, ( 12):137-139.
	[ Ma Zhongmin, Pan Yue . Research on risk control strategy of China's overseas investment under the background of the Belt and Road Initiative. Economic Forum, 2017, ( 12):137-139.]
[37]	曹文炼 . 携手投资第三方市场, 推进“一带一路”建设. 华夏时报, 2018 -01-08(40).
	[ Cao Wenlian . Jointly invest in the third-party market and promote the construction of the Belt and Road". China Times, 2018 -01-08(40).]
[38]	滕堂伟, 胡森林 . 跨国集群网络与丝绸之路经济带建设新模式. 兰州大学学报: 社会科学版, 2016,44(4):81-89.
	[ Teng Tangwei, Hu Senlin . New modes for multinational clusters networks and the Silk Road Economic Belt construction. Journal of Lanzhou University: Social Sciences, 2016,44(4):81-89.]
[39]	方创琳 . “一带一路”背景下中国图们江区域城市国际经济合作战略与格局. 东北亚经济研究, 2017,1(1):5-14.
	[ Fang Chuanglin . The strategy and pattern of international economic cooperation in Tumen River Area of China under the background of "the Belt and Road". Northeast Asia Economic Research, 2017,1(1):5-14.]
[40]	刘海猛, 方创琳, 任宇飞 . 丝绸之路经济带中国-哈萨克斯坦国际合作示范区物流业发展与跨境电商平台建设. 干旱区地理, 2016,39(5):951-958.
	[ Liu Haimeng, Fang Chuanglin, Ren Yufei . Logistics industry and cross-border electric business of Sino-Kazakhstan cooperation demonstration zone in Silk Road Economic Belt. Arid Land Geography, 2016,39(5):951-958.]
[41]	龙永图 . 一带一路, 中国企业怎样走出去?. 商业观察, 2016, ( 10):12.
	[ Long Yongtu . One Belt One Road Initiative, how do China's companies go global?. Business Observation, 2016, ( 10):12.]
[42]	中国商务部国际贸易经济合作研究院. 中国企业海外可持续发展报告: 2017. , 2018-11-15.
	[ Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation. Report on the Sustainable Development of Chinese Enterprises Overseas: 2017. , 2018-11-15.]
[43]	李原, 汪红驹 . “一带一路”沿线国家投资风险研究. 河北经贸大学学报, 2018,39(4):45-55.
	[ Li Yuan, Wang Hongju . Research on investment risk in countries along the "The Belt and Road" line. Journal of Hebei University of Economics and Business, 2018,39(4):45-55.]
[44]	孙焱林, 覃飞 . “一带一路”倡议降低了企业对外直接投资风险吗. 国际贸易问题, 2018, ( 8):66-79.
	[ Sun Yanlin, Qin Fei . Does "Belt and Road" initiative reduce firm-level foreign direct investment risk. Journal of International Trade, 2018, ( 8):66-79.]
[45]	Du J L, Zhang Y F . Does One Belt One Road Initiative promote Chinese overseas direct investment?. China Economic Review, 2018,47:189-205. doi: 10.1016/j.chieco.2017.05.010
[46]	Liu W D, Dunford M, Gao B Y . A discursive construction of the Belt and Road Initiative: From neo-liberal to inclusive globalization. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2018,28(9):1199-1214. doi: 10.1007/s11442-018-1520-y
[47]	Huadong G . Steps to the digital Silk Road. Nature, 2018,554:25-27. doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-01303-y pmid: 29388956
[48]	Kang L, Peng F, Zhu Y , et al. Harmony in diversity: Can the One Belt One Road Initiative promote China's outward foreign direct investment?. Sustainability, 2018,10(9):3264. doi: 10.3390/su10093264

系统层	子系统层	指标名称	指标含义	单位	指标方向	数据来源
综合风险	政治风险	腐败控制	反映政府腐败程度,数值越小腐败越严重	指数	负	全球治理指数（WB-WGI）
		政治稳定	反映政权稳定性,数值越大越稳定	指数	负	全球治理指数（WB-WGI）
		政府效力	反映公共政策和制度的执行力	指数	负	全球治理指数（WB-WGI）
		管制质量	政府对市场的治理和促进能力	指数	负	全球治理指数（WB-WGI）
		法制程度	反映对社会规则的信任和遵守程度	指数	负	全球治理指数（WB-WGI）
		公民参与	反映公民参政与言论自由程度	指数	负	全球治理指数（WB-WGI）
	经济风险	人均GDP	反映一国经济发展水平	美元	负	世界银行和OECD数据库
		GDP增长率	反映一国经济增长活力	%	负	世界银行和OECD数据库
		债务指数	政府总债务/GDP,衡量政府负债水平	指数	正	世界经济展望（IMF-WEO）
		通货膨胀率	反映一国物价水平变动	%	正	世界经济展望（IMF-WEO）
		财政平衡指数	（财政收入-财政支出）/GDP,衡量财政实力	指数	负	国际货币基金组织（IMF）
		贸易开放度	进出口总额/GDP,衡量贸易依赖度和开放度	指数	负	世界发展指数（WDI）
	社会风险	失业率	反映就业情况	%	正	国际劳工组织（ILO）
		高等教育入学率	反映教育水平	%	负	联合国教科文组织
		预期寿命	反映医疗水平	年	负	世界发展指数（WDI）
		犯罪指数	每十万人被谋杀数,反映社会治安状况	%	正	联合国毒品和犯罪办公室
		恐怖袭击事件数	反映恐怖主义形势	个	正	全球恐怖主义数据库(GTD)
		基尼系数	反映社会贫富差距	指数	正	世界银行、美国中情局

风险排序	腐败控制	政治稳定	政府效力	管制质量	法治程度	公民参与	综合政治风险
1	阿富汗	阿富汗	伊拉克	土库曼斯坦	阿富汗	土库曼斯坦	阿富汗
2	土库曼斯坦	伊拉克	缅甸	缅甸	伊拉克	乌兹别克斯坦	伊拉克
3	伊拉克	巴基斯坦	阿富汗	乌兹别克斯坦	土库曼斯坦	缅甸	缅甸
4	缅甸	也门	土库曼斯坦	利比亚	缅甸	沙特阿拉伯	土库曼斯坦
5	利比亚	尼泊尔	利比亚	阿富汗	乌兹别克斯坦	叙利亚	乌兹别克斯坦
6	塔吉克斯坦	黎巴嫩	也门	伊朗	也门	老挝	也门
7	乌兹别克斯坦	菲律宾	东帝汶	伊拉克	塔吉克斯坦	利比亚	利比亚
8	吉尔吉斯斯坦	孟加拉国	叙利亚	叙利亚	利比亚	白俄罗斯	叙利亚
9	柬埔寨	阿尔及利亚	塔吉克斯坦	白俄罗斯	柬埔寨	伊朗	塔吉克斯坦
10	也门	以色列	白俄罗斯	东帝汶	吉尔吉斯斯坦	越南	巴基斯坦

风险排序	人均GDP	GDP增长率	债务指数	通货膨胀率	财政平衡	贸易开放度	综合经济风险
1	阿富汗	希腊	黎巴嫩	白俄罗斯	黎巴嫩	东帝汶	叙利亚
2	尼泊尔	意大利	利比亚	乌兹别克斯坦	利比亚	巴基斯坦	黎巴嫩
3	塔吉克斯坦	利比亚	希腊	土耳其	印度	埃及	埃及
4	缅甸	文莱	伊拉克	伊朗	埃及	印度	伊拉克
5	柬埔寨	德国	意大利	缅甸	马尔代夫	伊朗	希腊
6	孟加拉国	荷兰	阿富汗	叙利亚	希腊	希腊	巴基斯坦
7	吉尔吉斯斯坦	奥地利	叙利亚	土库曼斯坦	斯里兰卡	孟加拉国	缅甸
8	东帝汶	克罗地亚	新加坡	塞尔维亚	约旦	尼泊尔	印度
9	巴基斯坦	塞浦路斯	约旦	乌克兰	巴基斯坦	土耳其	利比亚
10	老挝	也门	缅甸	伊拉克	匈牙利	缅甸	也门

风险排序	失业率	高等教育入学率	预期寿命	每十万人被谋杀数	恐怖袭击	基尼系数	综合社会风险
1	马其顿	阿曼	阿富汗	伊拉克	伊拉克	阿富汗	阿富汗
2	波黑	阿富汗	也门	哈萨克斯坦	阿富汗	马来西亚	伊拉克
3	亚美尼亚	巴基斯坦	老挝	俄罗斯	巴基斯坦	新加坡	也门
4	黑山	不丹	缅甸	蒙古	印度	菲律宾	土库曼斯坦
5	利比亚	土库曼斯坦	柬埔寨	立陶宛	菲律宾	以色列	巴基斯坦
6	塞尔维亚	柬埔寨	巴基斯坦	菲律宾	乌克兰	不丹	泰国
7	伊拉克	孟加拉国	土库曼斯坦	吉尔吉斯斯坦	也门	马其顿	乌兹别克斯坦
8	也门	马尔代夫	东帝汶	老挝	泰国	摩洛哥	不丹
9	阿尔及利亚	也门	印度	巴基斯坦	叙利亚	土库曼斯坦	老挝
10	希腊	尼泊尔	不丹	伊朗	埃及	土耳其	印度