Last week, Jack Ma called for a new “e-WTO” with the aim of helping small businesses get on the Internet, as the best hope in the fight against poverty. This appeal came after Alibaba’s largest ever “Singles Day” a week earlier, with almost US$14.3bn of merchandise sold in 24 hours. Alibaba’s social media accounts even reported that Premier Li Keqiang called CEO Jack Ma to wish him a successful day. “Singles Day” is now the world’s largest shopping day,dwarfing even the United States’ “Black Friday.”

不久前，马云(Jack Ma)呼吁建立一个新的、旨在帮助小企业利用互联网的“电子世贸组织”(e-WTO)，并将此作为消除贫困的最大希望所在。马云发出此番呼吁一周之前，阿里巴巴(Alibaba)在“光棍节”(Singles Day)当天24小时内销售了创历史新高的近143亿美元的商品。阿里巴巴的社交媒体账户甚至宣称，中国总理李克强也致电马云，预祝“双十一”取得成功。“光棍节”如今已成为世界规模最大的购物狂欢节，甚至连美国的“黑色星期五”(Black Friday)都相形见绌。

These are the latest manifestations of a worrying obsession with e-commerce and the Internet in Asia’s largest economies. In March, Beijing announced its new “Internet Plus” plan to expand Internet connectivity. Premier Li, when describing it, brought up the “mobile Internet”, “cloud computing”, “big data”, “intelligent manufacturing” and the “Internet of Things,” in a manner similar to business leaders in America. Nor is this digital obsession restricted to China. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s meeting with Mark Zuckerberg at Facebook’s headquarters received as much, if not more, media attention as his address on sustainable development to the United Nations days earlier.From the almost breathless manner in which business leaders use words like “innovation”, “the sharing economy” and “maker spaces”, it can sometimes be hard to distinguish real analysis from wild speculation when talking about the Internet and e-commerce. The assertion is that digital expansion would allow countries to skip entire stages of development, such as investing in real infrastructure, preventing life-threatening pollution, managing resources carefully, and installing value systems in an increasingly ethically-challenged world. What the focus on e-commerce actually represents is the continued inability of the developing world to free itself from Western ideas about models for economic growth and definitions of modernity.

这是亚洲大型经济体令人担忧地醉心于电子商务和互联网的最新表现。今年3月，中国政府宣布了新的“互联网+”(Internet Plus)计划，目的是扩大网络连通性。在描绘这一计划时，李克强总理以近似于美国商界领袖的方式提及了“移动互联网”、“云计算”、“大数据”、“智能制造”以及“物联网”等概念。这种对数字化的痴迷并不仅限于中国。印度总理纳伦德拉莫迪(Narendra Modi)在Facebook总部与马克丠克伯格(Mark Zuckerberg)的会面，受到的媒体关注与他在联合国就可持续发展议题发表演讲时一样多——如果不是更多的话。在谈到互联网与电子商务时，从商业领袖嘴里不停冒出的“创新”、“分享经济”和“创客空间”中，有时很难分辨出是真正的分析还是疯狂的投机。有断言称，数字化扩张将使各国能够将一些发展阶段完全跳过——如对实体基础设施进行投资，防止危及生存的污染，审慎管理资源以及在道德日益遭到挑战的世界确立价值体系。对电子商务的关注实际上体现出，发展中国家一直不能摆脱西方关于经济增长模式的理念及对现代性的定义。

The claim that the Internet will fundamentally transform development is unproven and untested. What is clear is that the Internet makes consumption easier, faster and more expansive than ever before. Analysts have thus looked to e-commerce and China’s Internet giants to help “save” China’s economic model from slowing down.

互联网将从根本上改变发展模式的断言既未经证实，也未经检验。当下明显的是，互联网使消费变得比以往任何时候更容易、更快、更无所不包。因此，分析师们开始指望电子商务以及中国的互联网巨头帮助“拯救”中国的经济模式免于陷入增长放缓。

However, this is the last thing China and other developing countries need. The reality is that e-commerce reduces the private costs of consumption, but little, if anything, to reduce its overall social cost. Now, billions of locally-produced products have a massive carbon footprint, as they transported across large distances to faraway customers at a time when we need to be reducing our carbon emissions. In addition, internet retail relies on a growing global addiction to wasteful impulse-buying as driver of its business model —“Singles Day” and “Cyber Monday” are testament to that.

但是，这是中国及其他发展中国家最不需要做的事。现实情况是，电子商务降低了消费行为的私人成本，但很少、甚至根本没有减少消费的整体社会成本。如今，正当我们需要减少碳排放之际，数十亿计地方制造的产品在跨越千里送到遥远的消费者手中的同时也产生了巨大的碳足迹。此外，网络零售依靠全球越来越着迷于浪费性冲动购物作为此种商业模式的推动力——“双十一”和“网络星期一”(Cyber Monday)即为证明。

Thus, e-commerce increases the divergence between what the individual pays and what society suffers. If one accepts that our economic model thrives on under-pricing goods and services to promote relentless consumption by externalising its true cost (such as greenhouse gases and carbon emissions), then e-commerce, by making goods cheaper, worsens the economy’s market failure. This will only lead to greater costs being placed on the majority due to the external costs central to underpriced consumption. The institutions society depends upon to draw the balance between consumption, protection and conservation—be they governments, watchdogs or international agencies—are put under enormous pressure as production and consumption become far easier and faster through the Internet.

因此，电子商务加剧了个人支出与社会成本之间的不平衡。如果人们接受并认为，我们的经济模式要依靠定价偏低的商品与服务实现繁荣，而后者又通过将自身真实成本（如温室气体和碳排放）外部化来推动疯狂消费，那么电子商务就通过降低商品价格加剧了市场经济失灵。这只会让大多数人被迫承担更大的成本，因为价格偏低的消费的核心就是造成外部成本。随着互联网使得生产与消费变得更便捷、更迅速，社会所依赖的在消费、环境保护与节约之间保持平衡的机构——不论是政府、监管机构，还是国际机构——均面临巨大压力。

The truth is that the ability to access Facebook or Alibaba is simply not a priority for a majority that has yet to fulfil their basic needs. How would “the Internet of Things” lead to real development outcomes for the global poor? How would the majority gain access to the rights of life—food, water, sanitation, healthcare, education—through e-commerce?

事实是，能够访问Facebook或阿里巴巴对于大多数仍未满足自身基本需求的人而言根本不重要。“物联网”如何为全球贫困人口带来真正的发展成果？多数人又如何通过电子商务获得包括食物、水、卫生、医疗、教育在内的生命权？

Hoping that the Internet, by supposedly unleashing consumption and entrepreneurship, will help the poor is merely another example of wishful economic thinking: where helping those at the top would hopefully trickle down to the poor. Even in the United States, with its decade-long head start in digital connectivity, it has yet to be seen how e-commerce helps the lives of the unemployed and the working classes—if anything, it has taken jobs away. Part of the savings from e-commerce has come at the expense of labour, by providing fewer jobs with less job security and fewer benefits than traditional employment. This is not a model to be repeated in the developing world where millions are looking for a decent job and still lack secure access to basic needs as well as the social safety nets meant to be provided by the state.

期待互联网——通过所谓释放消费和创业精神——能帮助穷人只是又一种一厢情愿的经济思维：顶层富人受益的同时可能向穷人下渗一些好处。即使在数字化连接领域领先了10年的美国，也尚未看到电子商务对失业者和工薪阶层的生活有什么帮助——如果说有什么影响的话，也是夺走了就业机会。电子商务带来的部分收益是以牺牲劳动者权益为代价的，因为其提供的工作岗位比起传统就业更少，工作保障和收入也更少。这并非发展中世界应该效仿的模式，发展中国家仍有数以百万计的人口正在寻找体面的工作，仍缺乏满足基本需求的有保障途径，而且本应由国家提供的社会保障网也不完善。

To be fair to China, Beijing has yet to reveal the full details of the “Internet Plus” plan or its significance in its future development program. Over the next five years, China is currently predicted to spend about Rmb2tn, or $313bn, on the Internet — a large amount, to be sure, but dwarfed by the Rmb17tn, or $2.6tn, that China will spend on environmental protection.

公平而言，北京方面尚未透露“互联网+”计划的全部细节或在其未来发展规划中的重要性。目前预计中国未来五年将在互联网领域投入约2万亿元人民币（合3130亿美元）——可以肯定，这是一笔巨额投入，但与中国将在环境保护上支出的17万亿元人民币（约合2.6万亿美元）相比就很小了。

However, the risk remains that Chinawill be distracted by a lop-sided view of the economic benefits of e-commerce. This risk is not limited to China. Prime Minister Modi has called for a national fibre optic network and pledged the construction of hundreds of “smart cities.” These goals seem outlandish given the very real development issues that plague India, such as the lack of consistent and adequate access to adequate sanitation and clean water. Funding the pipes that would carry the latter rather than optic cables would certainly make a great deal of sense, yet it is only the investment in Internet connectivity that attracts the attention and interest of politicians and investors.

然而，风险依然存在：关于电子商务经济效益的片面观点将分散中国决策者的注意力。这种风险不仅存在于中国。印度总理莫迪曾呼吁建立全国光纤网络，并宣称要建设数百个“智能城市”。考虑到困扰印度的众多现实发展问题——如缺乏卫生设施和清洁水的持续充足供应，这些目标显得格格不入。显然，投资于输送清洁水的管道、而非光缆才是极为合理的，然而，只有网络连接方面的投资才能吸引政界人士和投资者的注意与兴趣。

The issues faced by China, Indiaand the developing world have no precedent in human history, and seeking solutions via archaic economic models and technology fads is sheer folly. Their economic development has already led to huge environmental degradation: China’s official news agencies now use the term “doomsday” to describe air pollution.

中印以及整个发展中世界所面临的问题在人类历史上没有先例，通过过时的经济模型和技术风潮寻求解决方案绝对是愚蠢的。这些国家的经济发展已经带来了大范围的环境退化：中国官方新闻机构如今用“世界末日”一词来形容国内的空气污染。

Billions of poor have yet to have their basic needs met, let alone share in prosperity. These are the people that those involved in “maker spaces” or “the sharing economy” conveniently ignore. After all, the poor don’t have anything to share in what so far is an “un-sharing” global economy typified by widening economic disparities. The Internet will surely not solve these problems, and more free-riding consumption is the last thingChina orIndia needs. Using the Internet as a crutch must not distract from the tough work of development.

数十亿计的贫困人口仍未能满足自身的基本需求，更不用说共享繁荣。他们就是被那些参与“创客空间”或“共享经济”的人轻易忽视的群体。毕竟，在迄今仍为“非共享”且发展差距日益扩大的全球经济中，穷人没有什么可供分享。互联网必然无法解决这些问题，更多的搭便车式消费是中国和印度最不需要的。利用互联网作为拐杖不能影响为发展所要付出的艰难努力。

By extension, China and India must have “dreams” that are bigger than the Internet. They need to take the lead in figuring out a new model of development for the 21stCentury that intelligently leverages science and technology, but without being seduced by musings about e-commerce that mask deep structural flaws of current economic models. Resolving those pressing issues should be the real “innovation” that lies at the heart of any development program.

更进一步而言，中国和印度必须有比拥抱互联网更大的“梦想”。他们需要带头为21世纪找到一种新的发展模式——智慧地利用科学技术，同时不能因迷恋掩盖了当前经济模式深层次结构缺陷的电子商务而误入歧途。解决这些紧迫问题才是应该居于所有发展规划核心的真正“创新”。