在民粹主義與貿易保護年代尋求解答經濟不平等的第三條路：內聚式資本主義的丹麥方程式

Answering Economic Inequality Other Than With Populism and Protectionism: The Danish Formula of Inclusive Capitalism

自2014年歐洲民粹極右派政黨首度在歐美政治中興起，2016年英國公投決定脫離歐盟、2016至2017年美國與許多歐盟國家令人意外的大選結果顯示，西方民主國家經歷了許多重大政治現象的轉變。這些事件呈現出一共同特色—即是皆為經濟上感到弱勢與被拋棄的勞工階級選民主導了投票的結果。貿易保護主義與民粹國家優先主義成為此類選民面對不斷上升的經濟不公所選擇的答案。儘管各方決策菁英皆呼籲以內聚式資本主義/內聚性成長模式以解答經濟不公，但迄今仍未見任何整體性、實務性的政策配套組合與提案。本文的目的即在將內聚性資本主義從靜態性的期待轉變為系統性的政策行動方案，透過運用內聚性發展指標（IDI）為分析架構，對指標性國家—丹麥，進行案例研究。
本文研究發現，在七項政策指標中，丹麥表現的最好的是那些攸關經濟行為者機會平等的領域：優質的公立教育、公立醫療與積極型勞動市場政策，以及清廉的政府治理、對企業友善的法令與稅賦措施。前者攸關個人從幼童到成年時期的能力發展，後者則攸關從企業創造到企業營運的市場競爭環境，尤其是對小型企業而言。政府治理是此一政策生態系的關鍵，它作為勞工與企業雙方最大的投資者與賦能者，置於驅動體系的中心位置。其獨特的決策思維—將經濟政策亦視為是社會政策、將社會政策亦視為是經濟政策，調和、兼顧了經濟成長與分配正義，內聚性資本主義因此得以實踐在民眾的日常生活中。丹麥的政策方程式顯示：並非是資本主義亟需改革，而是決定政府治理方向的主流意識形態—新經濟自由主義，方為亟待反省與革新的對象。

Western democracies have experienced vast changes in recent years, starting from the rise of populist right parties in the European Parliament election in 2014, Brexit in the referendum in 2016, to a number of unexpected general election results in the US and the EU. One common characteristic of these unexpected events was that it was the left-behind and economically disadvantaged voters who delivered such results. Trade protectionism and populist nationalism were their answers to ever-growing economic inequality. While political and business elites appealed to inclusive capitalism to address the economic inequality, no holistic, realistic policy combination was ever proposed.
This paper is an attempt to translate inclusive capitalism from aspiration to systematic policy actions by employing an Inclusive Development Index (IDI) to the study of an indicative country-Denmark. It was found that those areas which Denmark has been performing well in were areas surrounding acquired equal opportunities: quality public education, health and active labor market policies for developing personal capability from childhood to adulthood; uncorrupted public services and business-friendly legal and tax regimes for facilitating market competition from business creation to operation, especially for small businesses. Governance was key to the functioning of this self-producing policy eco-system, centrally staged as a big investor and enabler for both labor and capital. The distinctive thinking underpinning policy-making- treating economic policies as social policies and vice versa, reconciled economic growth and distributive justice simultaneously, resulting in inclusive capitalism in day-to-day realities. The Danish formula has shown that it was not capitalism that needed to reform, it was the prevailing liberalist orthodoxy that guided governance that was in desperate need of overhaul.