缅甸颁布新政，农业投资能否实现零突破？

□ 文/吕俊芬

缅甸颁布新政，农业投资能否实现零突破？

□ 文/吕俊芬

不久前，缅甸投资委员会（MIC）公布了十大优先投资领域，农业及相关服务、农产品增值行业排在首项。2017年4月起施行的新《缅甸投资法》，内容上更是参考了国际投资准则以及缅甸与部分国家签订的双边投资条约，新法中包含的所有保护及权利条款适用于所有的“投资者”，包括在缅投资的外国人、缅甸公民、依照适用法律依法注册成立的企业实体、分支机构等，应用水平较之前更高。根据新法，对于规模较小、类型较常规、但又需要申请土地长期使用权的项目而言，审批流程在结构上得以简化；对类型不同、地域不同的投资项目，根据项目所在地区的发达程度给予3～7年的免税期；项目获取的利润如在一年内投资在同一项目或其他同类项目中，可享受所得税减免政策。

素有“亚洲粮仓”、“稻米之国”美誉的缅甸，发展农业具有得天独厚的优势。根据联合国粮食及农业组织的统计，农业占缅甸国内生产总值的37.8%，占出口总收入的25%至30%，消耗了70%的劳动力。然而，缅甸《联邦日报》2016年12月曾报道：据缅甸投资委秘书长吴昂奈乌表示，在新政府执政的9个月中，缅甸农业领域没有任何外资进入，显示为“零”。

如今一系列投资新政，能否激活缅甸农业对外资的吸引力呢？

缅甸农业投资领域欢迎先进技术进入

基建滞后制约农业发展

从新《缅甸投资法》来看，外资进入时相对简化的审批手续、各类免税优惠等，都显现出缅甸政府希望与外国企业做长期生意的愿望。然而缅甸一些商界人士却表示，农业领域外资进入少的主要原因是交通和电力领域发展不足。

赴缅投资农业的中国企业家对缅甸发展滞后的基建设施也深有体会。“我们最早的基地连牛棚都没有，我们就睡在路上和拖拉机上。基地没有电，就用小发动机发电，不过电压不稳，只能提供照明。”2013年，中国企业家郑山洪带领公司团队初来缅甸投资创业开垦桑蚕基地，就吃尽苦头。基地的艰苦条件直接导致了该团队技术人员的流失。2012年，中国企业家周宜军将中国杂交水稻引进缅甸种植，面临的困难是田里用水有时会紧缺一两个月。

中国腾冲商人李明近年来曾在缅甸开展替代种植的农业项目，面积达3万多亩，主要种植香蕉、橡胶等。根据中缅替代种植的相关协议，李明能拿到一定的返销配额。他认为，在缅甸投资农业，最重要的就是农产品返销回国的渠道是否畅通。与李明一同入缅做生意的“香蕉客”张德立介绍，他运售香蕉的路上要经过3座二战时期修建的铁桥才能到达中缅猴桥口岸，这些铁桥承重不过十几吨，28吨左右的卡车无法通过，只能用小车倒车的方式行进。一辆大卡车需要小车倒3次，每次费用5000元，耗时3天左右。张德立算了笔账，从猴桥口岸，每车的最终运费在7万元人民币上下。由于路途耽搁，大量香蕉运出后腐烂，原本一箱可卖40元，最后只能卖10～20元。

缅甸合伙人Mark Livingston说：“缅甸没有良好的铁路、公路设施，大容量的仓储设施和港口仍在发展之中，实际上开放农业的关键推动力应该是交通运输部门。如果你生产再多的更高品质的作物，却不能快速地将它们推向市场，什么用都没有。”

各领域合力互补“引资入农”

事实上，缅甸政府已将基建升级提上日程。据《缅甸环球新光报》2017年4月报道：缅甸交通与通讯部提出要发展国内五个重要铁路段，并将其作为一项总体规划下的关键优先项目，先进行初阶升级，这5个铁路段分别是仰光—曼德勒、曼德勒—密支那、仰光—毛淡棉、仰光—卑谬、以及仰光环城铁路，覆盖了缅甸全国80%的铁路里程。目前，包含有初级工程、铁路路堤和排水系统建设的仰光环城铁路项目正在实施，预计于2020～2021财年完成。而在2017年5月举行的首届中缅智库高端论坛上，中缅双方就电力合作发展、推进中缅跨境输电线路项目一事进行了磋商。

另外，包括基础设施建设在内，缅甸其他领域也释放出了吸引外资的优惠政策。缅甸媒体《声音》2016年曾报道：缅甸原来主要在农业、工业生产和基础设施建设3个领域给予外资优惠政策，本届政府在此基础上又增加了中小型企业、旅游业、国内生产技术转让、培养熟练技术人员、对欠发达地区的投资等5个方面的内容。外资在上述8个领域给予优惠政策，因为这8个领域都是缅甸国家发展需要的。

这些外资优惠领域，对农业领域的外资吸引或可形成互补。缅甸劳动力成本低廉，土地流转租金便宜，对外国企业家入缅投资有相当的吸引力。但若要做长期生意，外资企业家们更愿意考虑以生产技术立足。

将中国杂交水稻引进缅甸种植的周宜军，和团队一起对杂交稻种植技术“入乡随俗”进行多次改良。2015年，其品种为“CNR902”的杂交水稻受到了缅甸200多名科研人员的一致肯定，它既抗病虫害，也能抗干旱，结实率较高。在缅甸政府的推动下，缅甸农民对种子进行了试用，水稻种子新品种试验示范推广取得成功。周宜军介绍，目前团队培训了一批缅甸的技术人员，他们将是新成立的有机大米豆类杂粮生产基地的主要力量。如今，周宜军的公司有着集农作物种子“育繁推一体化”、全程农机化推广与服务、粮食加工仓储贸易物流3大核心业务为一体的农业全产业链，已在为水稻新品种从缅甸“走出去”铺路。

农资市场充满新商机

而在开放市场方面，缅甸农业领域为吸引外资进入创造了各类商机并提供金融服务。

据缅甸商务部发布的2017年第36号公告称，6月12日起，允许外资企业在缅甸从事化肥、种子、农药等5类商品的贸易。

缅甸稻米协会日前已向计划与财政部递交报告，将在全国建立33个农业服务中心。该协会秘书长吴耶明昂透露，建立农业服务中心计划共需要4亿美元的资金，计划先申请3亿美元国际优惠贷款（低息贷款），其余1亿美元由私人领域投资的方式来解决。据悉，农业服务中心将提供农业生产机械设备和化肥、农药等物资服务，并对农民进行现代化农业技术培训。

关于金融服务，缅甸央行行长温多表示，当本土银行不能满足缅甸进出口商的贸易融资需求时，缅甸央行将允许外资银行开展贸易融资服务，开设自己的贸易账户。

在基建的同期跟进下，从政策层面的新法规章到农资、农技市场的开放开发，可以看到，缅甸农业领域吸引外资的新时代或将到来。MIC总书记胡永宁表示：“农业在2017财政年度具有吸引外国直接投资的特殊潜力，因为我们已经创造了更好的激励措施和投资环境来吸引外国直接投资”。

·作者单位：河南省濮阳市通达公路工程有限公司

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