A substantial breakthrough has been made to crack the monopolies
in China's service sector and boost the efficiency of the market
players. The change came with the State Council's new guideline
promoting the development of the service sector.
The guideline calls for encouraging competition and investment
in telecommunications, railways and airlines.
Monopolies do severe damage to the economy. They can manipulate
prices for higher profits, hurting the public.
Since the basic service sectors, including transportation,
telecommunications and information technology, involve huge
start-up and equipment investments, they are susceptible to the
control of monopoly players. In China's fledgling market, a natural
solution is for the State to make the investment and entrust the
business to management of its choice.
Admittedly, such a mode has its advantages, but these advantages
do not justify the limits on sector access.
First of all, the limits or even bans on market access to other
players have directly led to shortages in basic services. The
railways in China have been run by the State for decades. Supply
has fallen far behind demand despite rapid development of the
railways in recent years.
Analysts estimate that a total investment of 2 trillion yuan
(US$256.4 billion) is needed for railway construction between now
and 2020. The State and the banks cannot possibly support such
rocketing growth.
If access limits for railway investors and managers are lifted,
investors would be ready to put their money on the tracks. The
long-criticized telecommunication service suppliers set sky-high
prices for international phone calls, so few consumers call out of
the country. Many ask their contacts to call from other countries
with relatively low international charges.
A consequence of the monopolies is that Chinese have to pay
fairly high charges from their modest incomes. Meanwhile, the
telecommunication suppliers in other countries have greater profits
from the full usage of their equipment while a good portion of the
Chinese telecommunication suppliers' equipment goes unused.
The monopoly players frequently give poor service. Their
dominant position and monopoly profits may discourage them from
innovations.
Since basic services play a key role in the economy with their
support for other sectors, it has been well accepted by the
authorities, academia and the public that efforts must be made to
expand the development of basic service as an important part of
stimulating economic growth.
As to the methods of propelling the development of basic
services, most of which are controlled by monopolies, there are two
options.
The first is to raise service prices. The monopoly players would
be better rewarded and would have a greater chance to earmark part
of the profits for research and development. This would ultimately
benefit the development of the sector.
However, this method does not necessarily guarantee greater
efficiency. It would also damage the public interest because the
higher monopoly profits would be totally at the expense of the
public. Worse, the monopoly players might resort to price hikes
every time they wanted to advance business performance, rather than
seek better solutions.
The second option is to drop the limits on market access.
Intensive competition in a free market would be the strongest
stimulus to service suppliers to improve efficiency and adapt to
customers' needs.
When access limits are dropped and investors of different kinds
are allowed, the thirst for capital for development will be eased.
Competitive players will be able to drive noncompetitive ones out
of the market.
With competition, the public will be able to enjoy services at
fair prices. The players will have to focus on management, research
and development and technological innovation to compete in the
market place.
As a result, easing market access limits is a better solution
for developing basic services.
The authorities obviously understand this. The State Council's
guideline marks an enormous opportunity for expansion of the basic
services.
Yet, supplemental arrangements from the government are
necessary.
The authorities should speed up their reform in
telecommunications, railways, airlines and other basic services to
establish clear lines between the functions of government and
business.
Administrative focus needs to be placed on the necessary rules
and regulations, maintaining market order, ensuring fair
competition and keeping a close watch on the market players.
Administrative institutions should not interfere in the commercial
decisions of the businesses or offer favorable treatment to any
players.
The government also needs to release market information on a
timely and regular base as a guide for investors. This information
can serve as a roadmap for investment in the basic services.
Last, but not the least, legislators should establish an
anti-monopoly law for the country as soon as possible. This will
enable efforts against commercial monopolies and monopoly players
to be backed by law.
The author is a researcher with the Institute of Industrial
Economics under the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
(China Daily April 5, 2007)