企业的性质：诺奖得主科斯经典原文翻译及解读3

罗纳德·哈里·科斯（Ronald H.  Coase），著名经济学家，新制度经济学鼻祖。科斯因发现并阐明了交易成本和产权在经济组织和制度结构中的重要性及其在经济活动中的作用而获得1991年诺贝尔经济学奖。科斯在其1937年发表的文章《企业的性质》一文中，首次创造性地提出了“交易费用”的概念，并以此来解释企业存在的原因以及企业扩展的边界问题。该篇文章也成为新制度经济学的开山之作。笔者打算通过几篇博文的内容来对《企业的性质》进行详细解读，本文是系列中的第三篇。

III
The problem which has been investigated in the previous section has not been entirely neglected by economists and it is now necessary to consider why the reasons given above for the emergence of a firm in a specialized exchange economy are to be preferred to the other explanations which have been offered.

It is sometimes said that the reason for the existence of a firm is to be found in the division of labor This is the view of Professor Usher, a view which has been adopted and expanded by Mr. Maurice Dobb. The firm becomes "the result of an increasing complexity of the division of labour… The growth of this economic differentiation creates the need for some integrating force without which differentiation would collapse into chaos; and it is as the integrating force in a differentiated economy that industrial forms are chiefly significant."34 The answer to this argument is an obvious one. The "integrating force in a differentiated economy" already exists in the form of the price mechanism. It is perhaps the main achievement of economic science that it has shown that there is no reason to suppose that specialization must lead to chaos.35 The reason given by Mr. Maurice Dobb is therefore inadmissible. What has to be explained is why one integrating force (the entrepreneur) should be substituted for another integrating force (the price mechanism).

【译文】

前一节中所考察的问题并没有被经济学家们所完全忽视。现在需要考虑的是，为什么上述关于企业在专业化交换经济中出现的原因比其他已有的解释更可取。

①有人说，企业存在的原因可以从劳动分工中发现。②这是厄舍教授的观点，这一观点已被③莫里斯•多布先生接受和扩展。企业是“劳动分工日益复杂的结果……经济分工程度的增长需要一定的一体化力量，没有一体化力量，分工将导致混乱；而且正是因为在分工经济中存在一体化力量，产业形式才富有意义。”④这一答案的结论是明显的。“分工经济中的一体化力量”已经以价格机制的形式存在了。经济科学的主要功绩或许是它已表明没有理由认为专业化必然导致混乱。莫里斯·多布先生给出的原因因此是站不佳脚的。必须说明的是，为什么一种一体化力量（企业家）会替代另一种一体化力量（价格机制）。

The most interesting reasons (and probably the most widely accepted) which have been given to explain this fact are those to be found in Professor Knight's Risk, Uncertainty and Profit. His views will be examined in some detail.

Professor Knight starts with a system in which there is no uncertainty: “acting as individuals under absolute freedom but without collusion men are supposed to have organised economic life with the primary and secondary division of labour, the use of capital, etc., developed to the point familiar in present-day America. The principal fact which calls for the exercise of the imagination is the internal organization of the productive groups or establishments. With uncertainty entirely absent, every individual being in possession of perfect knowledge of the situation,there would be no occasion for anything of the nature of responsible management or control of productive activity. Even marketing transactions in any realistic sense would not be found. The flow of raw materials and productive services to the consumer would be entirely automatic.”36

Professor Knight says that we can imagine this adjustment as being "the result of a long process of experimentation worked out by trial-and-error methods alone," while it is not necessary "to imagine every worker doing exactly the right thing at the right time in a sort of 'pre-established harmony' with the work of others. There might be managers, superintendents, etc., for the purpose of co-ordinating the activities of individuals," though these managers would be performing a purely routine function, "without responsibility of any sort."37

【译文】

在奈特教授的《风险、不确定性和利润》一书中可以找到已有的说明这一事实的最有意思的（也可能是最广为接受的）理由。他的观点将详细说明如下。⑤奈特教授从不存在不确定性的体制开始说明：“个体在绝对自由而没有合谋人的情形下的行动，应该是通过劳动的一级和二级分工及资本的使用等来组织经济生活，这在今天的美国已发展到广为人知的程度。能唤起人们想象力的基本事实是生产团体和行政机构的内部组织。当不确定性完全不存在时，每个个人都能够掌握有关势态的全部知识，任何责任管理的性质和对生产活动的控制就都没有必要了。甚至任何现实意义上的市场交易也将不复存在。未经加工的原材料和生产服务流向消费者将完全是自动的。”

奈特教授说，我们可以想象这种协调是“单靠试错法发挥作用的长期实践过程的结果，”没有必要“去想象每个工人处于与他人的工作有关的‘事先建立起的和谐’气氛中在恰当的时间里准确无误地做着恰当的工作。那里或许有旨在协调个人活动的管理者和监督者等”这些管理者仅承担单纯的日常职能，“没有任何性质的责任。”

Professor Knight then continues: “With the introduction of uncertainty-the fact of ignorance and the necessity of acting upon opinion rather than knowledge-into this Eden-like situation, its character is entirely changed. . . . With uncertainty present doing things, the actual execution of activity, becomes in a real sense a secondary part of life; the primary problem or function is deciding what to do and how to do it.” This fact of uncertainty brings about the two most important characteristics of social organization.

【译文】

奈特教授接着说：“把不确定性，无知的事实和只靠判断而不靠知识进行行动的必要性，导入伊甸园式的情形中，其特征会完全改观……伴随着不确定性的存在而行事，行动的实际执行在现实意义上变成生活的次要部分了，而首要的问题和职能是决定做什么和怎样去做。”   ⑥不确定性的事实带来了有关社会组织的两个最重要的特征。

In the first place, goods are produced for a market, on the basis of entirely impersonal prediction of wants, not for the satisfaction of the wants of the producers themselves. The producer takes the responsibility of forecasting the consumers' wants. In the second place, the work of forecasting and at the same time a large part of the technological direction and control of production are still further concentrated upon a very narrow class of the producers, and we meet with a new economic functionary, the entrepreneur. . . . When uncertainty is present and the task of deciding what to do and how to do it takes the ascendancy over that of execution the internal organization of the productive groups is no longer a matter of indifference or a mechanical detail. Centralisation of this deciding and controlling function is imperative, a process of "cephalisation" is inevitable.39

The most fundamental change is: “the system under which the confident and venturesome assume the risk or insure the doubtful and timid by guaranteeing to the latter a specified income in return for an assignment of the actual results… With human nature as we know it it would be impracticable or very unusual for one man to guarantee to another a definite result of the latter's actions without being given power to direct his work. And on the other hand the second party would not place himself under the direction of the first without such a guarantee…The result of this manifold specialisation of function is the enterprise and wage system of industry. Its existence in the world is the direct result of the fact of uncertainty.”40

【译文】

“第一，物品是为市场而生产的，其基础是完全非个人的需求预测，而不是为满足生产者自己的需要。生产者承担了预测消费者需求的责任。第二，预测工作和与此同时的对生产的技术指导和控制的大部分会进一步集中在一小部分生产者那里，由此出现了新的经济工作人员——企业家。……当存在不确定性时，决定做什么和怎么做的任务相对于其实施处于支配地位，生产团体的内部组织不再是无关紧要的事情和机械性的细节。决策和控制功能的集中化是亟需的，一个‘头领化’的过程不可避免。”

最根本的变化是：“在这种体制下，自信者和冒险家承担风险或保证动摇者和胆小鬼获得一定的收入，以此作为对实际结果进行分配的交换……出于人类的天性，我们知道，一个人保证另一个人行动的特定结果而没有赋予其支配他人工作的权力是不现实的和非常罕见的。另一方面，没有这样的保证，后者不会将自己置于前者的指挥之下……功能的多层次专业化的结果是企业和产业的工资制度，它在世界上的存在是不确定性这一事实的直接结果。”

These quotations give the essence of Professor Knight's theory. The fact of uncertainty means that people have to forecast future wants. Therefore, you get a special class springing up who direct the activities of others to whom they give guaranteed wages. It acts because good judgment is generally associated with confidence in one's judgment.41

Professor Knight would appear to leave himself open to criticism on several grounds. First of all, as he himself points out, the fact that certain people have better judgment or better knowledge does not mean that they can only get an income from it by themselves actively taking part in production. They can sell advice or knowledge. Every business buys the services of a host of advisers. We can imagine a system where ah advice or knowledge was bought as required. Again, it is possible to get a reward from better knowledge or judgment not by actively taking part in production but by making contracts with people who are producing. A merchant buying for future delivery represents an example of this. But this merely illustrates the point that it is quite possible to give a guaranteed reward providing that certain acts are performed without directing the performance of those acts. Professor Knight says that "with human nature as we know it, it would be impracticable or very unusual for one man to guarantee to another a definite result of the latter's actions without being given power to direct his work." This is surely incorrect. A large proportion of jobs are done to contract, that is, the contractor is guaranteed a certain sum providing he performs certain acts. But this does not involve any direction. It does mean, however, that the system of relative prices has been changed and that there will be a new arrangement of the factors of production.42 The fact that Professor Knight mentions that the "second party would not place himself under the direction of the first without such a guarantee" is irrelevant to the problem we are considering. Finally, it seems important to notice that even in. the case of an economic system where there is no uncertainty Professor Knight considers that there would be co-ordinators, though they would perform only a routine function. He immediately adds that they would be "without responsibility of any sort," which raises the question by whom are they paid and why? It seems that nowhere does Professor Knight give a reason why the price mechanism should be superseded.

【译文】

这些引语表明了奈特教授的理论的实质。不确定性的存在意味着人们不得不预测未来的需要。因此出现了一个特殊阶层，他们向他人支付有保证的工资，并以此控制他人的行动。因为良好的判断力通常与一个人对其判断力的自信心相联系，所以这个特殊阶层起着作用。

⑦奈特教授似乎给自己留下了几个需要商榷的题目。首先，正如他自己指出的，某些人具有较好的判断力和知识这一事实并不意味着他们只能从亲自参加生产中获得收入。他们可以出卖建议和知识。每－个企业都买下了一大帮顾问的劳务。我们可以想象－个所有的建议和知识都是按需购买的体制。其次，通过与正在进行生产的人缔结契约而不是主动地参加生产也能以较好的知识和判断力获得报酬。商人购买期货即为一例。但这只不过说明，给予完成的某些行为以报酬保证而没有去指挥这些行为的完成，是完全可能的。⑧奈特教授说“基于人类的天性，我们知道，一个人保证另一个人行动的特定结果而没有赋予其支配他人工作的权力是不现实的和非常罕见的，”这显然是不正确的。大部分工作是根据契约去做的，就是说，契约保证给缔约人的某些行为以一定的收益。但这并没包含任何支配。然而，这确实意味着相对价格制度发生了变化，并将出现生产要素的重新安排。奈特教授提到的“没有这样的保证，后者不会将自己置于前者的指挥之下”这一事实与我们正在考察的问题无关。最后，值得注意的是，奈特教授认为“即使在不存在不确定性的经济体制中，仍存在协调者，尽管他们仅承担日常工作的职能。⑨奈特教授迅速补充说他们将“没有任何性质的责任”，于是问题出现了：谁给他们报酬？，为什么？奈特教授似乎从末说明价格机制被替代的原因。

【注解】11：

①科斯在这里继续讨论企业存在的原因，他主要归纳了厄舍教授、莫里斯·多布先生和奈特教授三人关于企业存在分析的不同观点。

②厄舍教授关于企业存在的观点是：劳动分工

③莫里斯·多布关于企业存在的观点是：“劳动分工日益复杂的结果……”莫里斯·多布推进了厄舍教授的理论在于“经济分工程度的增长需要一定的一体化力量，没有一体化力量，分工将导致混乱；而且正是因为在分工经济中存在一体化力量，产业形式才富有意义。”

④科斯针对厄舍教授和莫里斯·多布关于企业存在的观点进行了反驳，他讲到莫里斯·多布的“分工经济中的一体化力量”在现实世界中已经转变为价格机制的形式而存在。那么，“分工经济中的一体化力量”能够保证分工不会混乱，价格机制这种形式就会导致社会分工混乱吗？显然不是。

⑤奈特教授关于企业存在的观点是：在完全自由经济体制下，任何企业的存在都是因为“劳动的一级和二级分工及资本的使用”这个原因。如果“当不确定性完全不存在时”，企业也就不会存在。在现实社会中到处都存在“不确定性”，正因为这种不确定性的存在，所以，才导致企业的存在。

劳动分工：组织生产的一种方法，让每个劳动力专门从事生产过程的某一部分。劳动专业化能导致更高的总产出，因为劳动者可以更熟练地完成某些加工任务，而且还能引人更专业化的机器设备来完成精度更高的工作。

⑥奈特教授关于企业特征的观点是：企业存在两种特征，其一，企业对消费者需求的预测；其二，决策和控制功能的集中化。为了降低“不确定性”对企业造成的风险，企业必须由一个富有能力的人员来组织企业内部的分工和协调。

⑦科斯指出奈特教授没有完全解决的课题有两个，第一，企业是否需要建立咨询顾问体制的问题；第二，企业是否可以从内部挖掘这类咨询顾问人员的问题。

⑧科斯指出奈特教授关于企业存在和企业组织的观点是：奈特教授认为只有契约以及在契约中明确个人的权利和报酬。

⑨关于企业的性质是价格机制被取代的科斯观点，在奈特教授关于企业的性质论述中没有得到体现提出了质疑。

【评注】

Part 3：阐明企业的本质

• 文章的第三部分主要是对已有研究文献（主要是对奈特教授《风险、不确定性和利润》一书的相关论点）的述评，并指出，奈特教授实际上并没有指出价格机制会被替代的原因。

• 企业的基本特征

              - 劳动分工不是企业的特征
              - “不确定性”也不能用来说明企业特征
              - “企业对消费者需求的预测”和“决策和控制功能的集中化”也不能代表企业的特征。
              - “只有契约以及在契约中明确个人的权利和报酬”同样不是企业的特征
              - 企业的特征就是“价格机制被企业取代”

（未完，待续...）