1、外文翻译 原文 Trade Liberalization and the Restructuring of Tamil Nadus Leather Sector Material Source: Paper prepared for the Center for International Development, Harvard University, and the Government of Tamil Nadu, India Author: Meenu Tewari The leather and leather goods industry worldwide has emerged
2、 as an unexpected site where complex battles over the apparent trade-offs between trade liberalization, economic growth and the environmental consequences of this growth have played out in the past decade. As an industry with production technologies that generate some of the most polluting chemical
3、effluents, the leather sector has emerged as a battleground for current environmental debates. The challenge has been to find ways in which firms and governments can internalize the negative externalities generated by environmentally damaging effluents that have long polluted the groundwater, stream
4、s and rivers in sites where leather-processing is concentrated and to do so without impeding the industrys growth or eliminating the jobs that it generates。 Two features of the global leather industry have influenced how this debate has played out on the ground. First, the policy structure and state
5、 of technology in the industry is increasingly bi-modal worldwidewith advanced industrial economies employing capital and chemically intensive tanning processes and technologies that require large minimum efficient scales to function effectively. By contrast, the defining feature of the industry in
6、many developing countries (like India) is that it is dominated by small firms and has till recently been characterized by a range of labor-intensive technologies focused on the export of semi-finished leather, skins and hides。 The second key feature of the leather sector is the dramatic regulatory s
7、hifts in the industry. In the past fifteen years, even as demand for leather has increased, leather processing technologies have come under greater regulatory scrutiny by governments and consumer advocacy groups in industrial economies. Increasingly stringent restrictions on polluting technologies a
8、nd management of polluting effluents has pushed leather firms in industrial economies to shift the most polluting phases of the production processwet processingto developing countries where the policy environment has been far less regulated till now. At first the pressures that led leather processin
9、g firms to seek overseas capacity and locations led to rapid growth of tanning capacity in developing countries. But in recent years with the rise of new environmental practices such as eco-labeling and the ban by major leather importers of carcinogenic chemicals such as PCPs and azo dyes, developin
10、g countries have been forced to make costly changes to their production processes to meet stringent new quality standards. Firms in different developing countries have responded to these demands in a variety if ways. But one common theme that runs across the cases is that the policy pressure that th
11、is scrutiny has brought to bear on firms has pushed them toward more value-added segments of production, instead of focusing primarily on the export of semi-finished leather. A related pressure on firms is the rise of concern over labor standards. As we will see below, firms in India and Tamil Nadu
12、are finding that this issue is forcing them to reorganize their work structure. The leather sector is Indias sixth largest foreign exchange earner and a major employer. In 1999 India exported about $1618 million worth of leather and leather goods (including footwear, footwear components, leather gar
13、ments, handbags and other leather goods, and saddlery and harness), and the sector employs about 2.5 million people nationwide -directly and indirectly (Ramasami interview, June 2001). The current global market share of Indias leather industry as a whole is 4.5% (CLRI 1998). Within India, Tamil Nadu
14、 is the nations premier leather producer, with 70% of the countrys estimated leather tanning capacity of 225 million processed pieces annually (CII-PriceWaterhouse 2000), and a 66% share in the nations total leather exports. Of all exports from Southern India, over 90% come from Tamil Nadu (Pillai,
15、2000). The state has over 9000 registered small and medium firms in the leather sector (“from top to bottom”), about 70 large scale firms and about 40 composite firms (or firms that area vertically integrated with their own tanneries and finished goods production) Council for Leather Exports, 2000.
16、Spatially, the industry is marked by distinct agglomerations near river basinsa feature that adds to the negative externalities associated with environmentally damaging effects of effluents generated by the industry that contaminate local water-tables. In Tamil Nadu most of the tanneries (or firms t
17、hat process leather and skins) are concentrated in a handful of locations dominated by the Palar valley in Vellore district and the Cauvery river basin. Finished leather and leather goods production is centered in and around Chennai, the states coastal capital。 In the past fifteen years, this indust
18、ry has changed significantly, moving away from the production of semi-finished leather to the production and export of finished leather and value added leather products (we return to the policy drivers of this shift below). In 1999, of the US$ 638 million worth of leather exported from Tamil Nadu, U
19、S$ 471 million, - 74% - was in finished leather products, mainly footwear components, footwear, and leather garments. In this period, Tamil Nadu had a 42% share in Indias leather footwear exports and a national share of 72% in the export of footwear components such as lasts and shoe-upper and so on.
20、 Tamil Nadu (mainly Chennai) also accounted for 31% of the nations export of leather garments, and 15% of the countrys export of leather goods such as wallets and bags (Council for Leather Exports, 2000). The government adopted these recommendations and implemented a number of policies to move the i
21、ndustry toward the export of finished goods. For example, it imposed an export tax on the export of semi-finished leather. To get exporters to increase their capacity to produce finished leather and products, the government instituted in 1973, as part of the first stage of a modernization program th
22、at lasted up to the 1980s, numerous incentives and support programs. These included: (1) a cash compensatory scheme to compensate Indian exporters for the export disadvantages they faced vis-vis their competitors abroad (South Korean Taiwan, Latin America)with respect to high interest rates, high in
23、come tax and taxes on imports. (2) The government also provided an air- freight subsidy of 15-22% on leather exports, excise duty exemption for exports of final products, and a duty drawback scheme that paid back firms excise and customs duties paid on the import of raw materials (such as components
24、, packaging materials and so on) used in the manufacture and export of finished products (UNDP Study 1999). （ 3) Simultaneously, in part to overcome the inability of small tanneries to derive scale economies, the government also adopted a licensing procedure that allowed large and medium sized tanne
25、ries to set up (and register with DGTD, a section of the ministry of industry) on the condition that they export 95% of their production of finished leather. Other firms registered as large exporting housing responsible for the export of leather products, but with ties to a network of small tannerie
26、s. And finally (4) to facilitate this modernization, the Indian government provided financial assistance (from banks) to the leather industry, and allowed the import of chemicals, machinery and technology for the production of finished leather。 译文 贸易自由化和 泰米尔纳德邦的皮革业重组 资料来源 : 国际发展中心，哈佛大学和泰米尔纳德邦， 6 月 4
27、 日， 2001 年 作者： Meenu Tewari 在过去的十年中，皮革及皮革制品产业在全球范围内异军突起，期间伴随着围绕贸易自由化，经济增长和环境污染产生等敏感问题而产生了一系列复杂的争端。作为一个向外界排放污染严重的化工污水的制造产业，皮革业已经成为一个当前环境争论的战场。目前的挑战是要找到方法，使企业和政府可以内部解决对环境有破坏的废水所产生的负面效应，特别是一些皮革加工集中的地方的地下水、小溪、河流一直受到污染 这样做不会阻碍这个行业的发展，也不会降低就业率。 全球皮革行业的两个特点影响了这次争论该怎样发展。首先，在这个行业中的政策结构和国家技术日益全球化 以最小的投入而获得最大的
28、有效功能就需要我们雇佣先进工业经济体的资本和高超的化学制革技术。相比之下，在许多发展中国家（像印度）的行业特色是以小企业为主，他们已掌握了一系列劳动密集型产品的技术，并且，专注于半成品皮革、皮和皮革的出口。 皮革行业第二个主要特征是行业监管的巨大变化。在过去的 15 年，虽然皮革的需求有所增长，但是皮革加工技术在产业经济中已受到政府和消费者权益保护团体更加严格的监管和审查，在工业经济中，对 污染排放技术和废水管理日益严格的限制使皮革企业要转换掉生产过程中最为污染的那个阶段 湿处理 对于发展中国家而言，至今对于环境方面的政策的监管还是很少的。起初的压力致使皮革加工企业寻求海外的生产能力和地理位置
29、，从而导致了发展中国家的制革技术的急速发展。但今年来，随着新的的环保政策的兴起，比如说生态标签和禁令，使皮革进口商更加困难重重。发展中国家不得不使用昂贵的费用来改变他们的生产工艺以满足新的严格的质量标准。在发展中国家的不同企业，对于这些要求，他们的反应方式是不同的。但有一个共同主题是贯穿这个案件的，就 是这个政策迫使厂商生产附加值高的部分，而不是侧重于以半成品皮革出口为主。一个和企业有关的压力是劳工标准的出现。正如我们所看到的，在印度和泰米尔纳德邦公司发现，这一问题正迫使他们重新组织他们的工作结构。 皮革行业是印度第六大外汇来源和就业率较高的一个行业， 在 1999 年 ,印度出口 了价值 1
30、6 亿 1800 万 美元的 皮革 和 皮革 制品（ 包括鞋类、鞋类部件 、 皮革 服装、手袋 、马具皮制品 和其他 皮革 制品），而且，皮革这个行业直接或是间接的雇佣了全国 2500 万的劳动力（ 2001 年 6 月 Ramasami 采访 时所说的）。目前，印度的整个皮革 行业占了全球市场份额的 4.5%(CLRI 1998)。在印度，泰米尔纳德邦是全国首屈一指的皮革生产商，在全国预计可达到的年产 2.55 亿件皮革制品中，该公司占到 70%(印度工业联合会 Waterhouse， 2000), 这其中，其皮革出口占了全国出口额的 66%。在这些皮革出口中，所有来自印度南部的出口 ， 9
31、0%超过了来自泰米尔纳德邦 （ Pillai， 2000） 。 这个国家已有 9000 多个皮革部门和中小型公司注册，大约有 70 个大型企业和 40 个合资企业 (或者说是那些同皮革制制造厂和皮革成品商进行纵向联合的企业 )（ 皮革 出 口委员会， 2000） 。 从空间上说， 该行业的特点是独特的群傍河 流域 这个特征增加了由本行业产生的废水污染了当地的水源环境的负面影响。在泰米尔纳德邦德大部分制革厂（或是加工皮革与毛皮的公司）都集中在一个由在韦洛尔区山谷和高韦里河流域组成的地方。所以，印度的成品革和皮革制品的生产都以金奈这个沿海城市为中心或是它的周边地区。 在过去的 15 年中，这个行业
32、已经发生了重大变化，从半成品的皮革生产和出口向完成品的皮革生产和出口转变，并且增加其附加值（我们恢复到这种政策转变的驱动下）。在 1991 年，美国 6.38 亿美元价值的 皮革是从泰米尔纳德邦出口的，其中的 74%是完成品皮革制品，价值 4.71 亿美元，主要是鞋类部件，鞋类和皮革服装。在此期间，泰米尔纳德邦分别占皮革鞋类出口份额的 42 和诸如鞋楦，鞋面等鞋类部件出口份额的 72%。 比如，是鞋跟之类的零部件。泰米尔纳德邦 （主要是金奈）就占了全国 31%的皮革服装出口，和 15的皮革制品出口 主要是皮包和钱包 （ 皮革出口理事会， 2000）。 政府采纳了一些建议，并实施了一些走向皮革制
33、成品出口的政策。比如：征收半成品皮革出口的出口税。为了增强出口商生产皮革成品及其制成品的能力，政府在 1973 年实行了众多的优惠和支持计划，它作为现代化计划的第一阶段并且一直持续到 1980 年代。这些包括： （ 1） 现金补偿计划，补偿印度出口商在面对海外竞争者时的出口弱点（韩国、台湾、拉丁美洲） 关于高利率、高收入税及进口税。 （ 2） 政府还提供了关于皮革产品出口 15-22 空运补贴，对于出口制成品免征消费税；还有这样一个退税计划，退还企业消费税和企业进口原材料时的进口关税（如元器件，包装材料等），这些原材料是用于制造和出口制成品的。 （ 3） 同时，在某种程度上，为了克服小型制革厂无法获得规模经济，政府还采取了许可程序，允许 大、中型制革厂在自身情况可以的条件下，其出口的 95 的产品是成品革。 （ 4） 最后，为了促进这一现代化， 印度政府对皮革工业给予资助（来自银行），而且，允许为生产成品皮革而进口化学品、机械和技术。
