Tiêu chuẩn kinh tế của vay mượn nước ngoài

Cản trở chính trong ở các quốc gia đang phát triển là thiếu hụt vốn bao gồm vốn bao gồm vốn con người, công nghệ và kỹ năng quản lý. Mức độ phát triển ở các quốc gia này sẽ rất chậm nếu sự thiếu hụt này càng lớn. Các khoản nợ nước ngoài thường có nhiều điều khoản và khoản mục. Bài viết này không thể tính đến các khoản mục đó để làm cho mô hình giản đơn hơn. Có ba khía cạnh cần phải chú ý của tất cả hợp đồng vay: lãi suất của các khoản...
Nội dung trích xuất từ tài liệu:
Tiêu chuẩn kinh tế của vay mượn nước ngoài 1 Tiêu chuẩn kinh tế của vay mượn nước ngoài Nguyễn Hoàng Bảo Khoa Kinh Tế Phát Triển Cản trở chính trong ở các quốc gia đang phát triển là thiếu hụt vốn bao gồm vốn bao gồm vốn con người, công nghệ và kỹ năng quản lý. Mức độ phát triển ở các quốc gia này sẽ rất chậ m nếu sự thiếu hụt này càng lớn. Các khoả n nợ nước ngoài thường có nhiều điều khoản và khoản mục. Bài viết này không thể tính đến các khoả n mục đó để làm cho mô hình giản đơn hơn. Có ba khía cạnh cần phải chú ý của tất cả hợp đồng vay: lãi suất của các khoả n vay; số năm mà các khoả n thanh toán nợ bắt đầu chi trả (độ trễ thanh toán); và số năm mà khoản nợ được trả hết (giai đoạn thanh toán). Để đơn giả n vấn đề chúng ta giả định các khoản hoàn trả nợ được thực hiện với số tiền như nhau. Người ta chú ý đến sự khác biệt giữa các khoản nợ These aspects are in themselves very important and crucial, but they cannot be accounted for in a general treatment like the one to be presented here as the differ from country to country and project to project. It should be noted in this connection that the difference between the loans for financing essential and unavoidable consumption goods like wheat and rice and capital goods is not as great as it appears in as much as the import of these essential goods releases domestic funds for capital accumulation. We shall, therefore, treat all foreign loans as leading directly or indirectly to capital formation, and most of the loans presently contracted are in fact meant directly for capital formation. One point, however, must be remembered that the capital that is borrowed from abroad does not begin to yield output from the very moment it is contracted. There is a gestation lag. This lag differs from project to project which may vary from half or one year to four or five years depending upon the nature of the project and whether it is light or heavy industry project. A general discussion of the following type will have to be based on an average period of gestation lag. The yield of foreign capital can be derived on the basis of assumptions about production function (fixed capital output ratio and a production function including labor as well as capital). In case of the second alternative we have the choice to treat the borrowed capital along with all existing capital and labor or to combine it with the incremental amounts of labor and capital in that period. Further some consideration to technical progress can also be given. We shall here confine our attention to the case of fixed capital coefficients only without introducing considerations of technical progress. Finally, the economic criteria for the foreign loan have to be specified. No doubt, any foreign capital if economically utilized will increase domestic production and if the output is measured in net t erms, this increase will be permanent. This will lead to a permanent increase in consumption according to the marginal propensity to consume of the participants in production. At the same time the rate of savings may also increase. But it is one side of the picture. Foreign loans, if they are not free grants, carry interest rates and have to be repaid. It is just possible that the terms and conditions of loans are such that their long–term effects upon the economy is adverse. It is obviously that the use of foreign capital will lead to an increase in consumption in the immediate future. But 2 whether it leads to a net addition to savings over what it would have been otherwise, is not sure. The total annual debt charges might be more than the savings accruing from the investment of foreign capital. However, it may be objected that once the debt has been retired, the possible adverse effect mentioned just above, will not be relevant, and the net advantages of the investment of foreign capital will be reaped in perpetuity thereafter. This argument is not wholly sound; if the total annual debt charges exceed the savings accruing from the foreign capital invested during the whole or a major part of the period of the retirement loan, then the depressing effect of the accumulated net reduction in savings may outweigh the expansionary effect of the apparent net additions in savings after the debt retirement. This calls for an analysis of the problem and the following simple model is an attempt in this direction. We tackle the problem by employing a constant gross capital coefficient . Let the foreign capital borrowed be Km, then the output per year is Km/. For the sake of simplicity, we shall further assume that the life of capital created is equal to the period of repayment. Let the over–all marginal propensity to consume be c, then the total savings resulting from the investment of foreign capital is Km(1 – c)/. Let us to begin with suppose that there is no gestation lag and that the repayment of loan starts from the very first year in equal installments and that the rate of interest including other charges connected with the loan is r. Then the total payment to the foreign country in the first year is (Km.r+Km/t), where t is the number of years in which the debt has to be retired. In the second year, the total payment will be [Km(1–1/t).r+Km/t], and similarly in the nth year it will be:  n 1  Km n  1, 2,..., t  K m 1  r t t  The residual for capital formation in a year n during period debt retirement is:  n 1 1 Km Sn  K m 1  c   K m 1  ...