金融一體化是中國“一帶一路”倡議五大合作優先發展領域之一，但這個話題似乎仍未得到應有的探討。相反，大部分針對“一帶一路”的分析都重點關注“一帶一路”倡議橫跨從中國到歐洲和非洲65個國家的雄心勃勃的基礎設施建設投資目標。這不無道理：巨額投資的確吸引眼球，而《金融時報》就認為，這一“巨型事業”將花費數十萬億美元進行融資。另一個主導“一帶一路”倡議相關報道的主題是，“一帶一路”如何意在通過為中國過剩產能提供出口和為中國產品創造新市場，幫助推動中國經濟增長。還有很多人密切關注“一帶一路”倡議蘊含的更廣泛的地緣政治目標。

這些都是切題且重要的議題，但 “一帶一路”倡議最重要、最持久的影響或許在於，它會在進一步推動地區金融一體化上取得顯著成就。如果我們將金融一體化定義為增強資本的跨境流動性，那麼我們能否找到跡象顯示中國的新絲綢之路將成為通向這一目標的路徑呢?

為了回答這個問題，三份文件對我們格外有幫助。第一個是2015年3月發佈的《推動共建絲綢之路經濟帶和21世紀海上絲綢之路的願景與行動》，這份文件為習近平2013年秋首次提出的絲綢之路概念提供了初始的框架思路。文件稱，“資金融通是'一帶一路'建設的重要支撐”，並列舉了金融領域的一系列措施，包括設立跨境經濟合作區、發展債券市場、進行監管協調、推進亞投行和絲路基金等新機構的籌建運營、開展信用評級合作等。這些措施一旦落實，將有助於降低針對跨境金融交易的監管壁壘，同時跨境證券投資、外國直接投資和跨境銀行活動都有望增長。換句話說，我們將看到“一帶一路”沿線出現更多、更自由的資本流動。

兩年後，北京主辦了吸引全球30位領導人參加的“一帶一路”國際合作高峰論壇，論壇發佈了一份聯合公報，引用了很多2015年《願景與行動》文件中的重點項目。2017年5月發佈的聯合公報還包含了“加強金融設施互聯互通”，“通過推動支付系統合作和普惠金融等途徑，促進金融市場相互開放和互聯互通”等內容。通過這些方式，“一帶一路”倡議清除金融一體化障礙的領域得到了擴大。

“一帶一路”高峰論壇還核准了《“一帶一路”融資指導原則》，它由包括來自英國、瑞士、俄羅斯、馬來西亞和泰國財長在內的27國財政部長共同簽署。這份文件呼籲“本地與區域金融市場的有序開放”，“逐步擴大銀行、保險和證券等市場准入”，同時深化跨境金融監管合作。這些措施將有望促進資本的跨境流動。

聯合公報、指導原則和願景聲明並非具有法律約束力的協議。但“一帶一路”倡議正在為各國提供新的機遇，或許更為重要的是，新機構的（如坐擁1240億美元的絲路基金）建立能為推動“一帶一路”國家間金融一體化提供切實可見的動力。或許在發展本地和區域債券市場上，我們能看到最立竿見影的效果。例如，為回應北京“一帶一路”倡議優先發展的決定，中國幾大銀行都開始研髮針對內地和國外市場的新產品，包括專門在本地區使用的標準化債券。這些針對“一帶一路”倡議基礎設施投資的市場開拓活動能為養老金和保險投資者提供亟需的長期投資工具，同時由於與銀行融資相比成本較低，這些投資工具還填補了一項重要空缺，尤其當基礎設施建設項目進行到運營階段時。國際清算銀行的一份報告顯示，在發達經濟體中，債券在基礎設施建設債務融資中的比例不到10%-20%，而在新興市場地區中這一比例更低。中國正在開發的這些新型債券或許是朝這個方向邁出的重要一步。只要“一帶一路”倡議項目獲得成功（在很多“一帶一路”沿線國家，這些項目都面臨相當大的政治和經濟風險），它們就會成為促使其他市場參與者加入的引線，令它們自如地進入這個亟需融資的領域。

中國自身的經濟和內政問題，其他“一帶一路”沿線國家政治和經濟狀況，中國與鄰國和世界其他國家的關係等因素，都有可能讓絲綢之路繞遠路或成為死胡同。“一帶一路”倡議下金融一體化的崇高願景有可能永遠無法實現。然而，或許“一帶一路”倡議這個概念本身帶來的動能就足夠為新投資工具、新市場行為、新市場准入創造機會，而這些可以獲得持久的效果，並帶來收益，很多人都將這種收益歸結為良好的金融市場一體化的成果。或許我們應當更多關注當下正在採取的措施，這不僅僅是為了鼓勵良性發展，也是為了理解這一倡議將對全球經濟體系產生什麼影響。“一帶一路”倡議或許是人民幣增強影響力、成為全球貨幣的一個途徑，又或許它將開創新金融基礎設施提供服務的路徑，這些路徑與現行體系並存運行。畢竟，正如習近平主席5月所說的：“金融是現代經濟的血液。血脈通，增長才有力。”

Financial integration is one of the five areas of cooperation priority for China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), but it seems that this topic has not received the consideration it deserves. Rather, most analysis of the Belt and Road has focused on the BRI's ambitious infrastructure investment goals across 65 countries from China to Europe and Africa. That makes sense: big amounts of money grab attention, and the Financial Times suggests that this “colossal undertaking” could cost tens of trillions of dollars to finance. Another subject that has dominated the BRI headlines is how the Belt and Road is intended to help drive China's economic growth by providing outlets for excess capacity and creating new markets for Chinese products. And many pay close attention to the larger geostrategic goals that the BRI could facilitate.

These are all relevant and important topics, but perhaps the Belt and Road Initiative will have the most significant and lasting impact by making tangible progress towards greater regional financial integration. If we define financial integration as enhancing capital mobility across borders, can we find indications that China's New Silk Road will pave a path in that direction?

To help answer that question, three documents are especially useful. The first is the March 2015 “Vision and Actions on Jointly Building Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road,” which provides the initial framework for the concept that Xi Jinping first floated in fall 2013. It states that “Financial integration is an important underpinning for implementing the Belt and Road Initiative,” and offers a long list of options in the financial space, including cross-border economic cooperation zones, bond market development, regulatory coordination, development of new institutions such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and the Silk Road Fund, and credit rating cooperation. If implemented, these actions would be expected to result in a decrease of regulatory barriers to cross-border financial transactions, while gross cross-border portfolio investment flows, gross foreign direct investment and cross-border banking activity would be expected to increase. In other words, we would see signs of more money moving more freely along the Belt and Road.

Two years on, Beijing hosted 30 world leaders at its Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation, which culminated in a joint communique that references many of the major actions items from that 2015 document. The May 2017 communique also includes “enhancing financial infrastructure connectivity,” and “promoting openness and connectivity among financial markets including through cooperation on payment systems,” thus expanding the areas where the Belt and Road may address barriers to financial integration.

The Belt and Road Forum also produced the “Guiding Principles on Financing the Development of the Belt and Road” that was endorsed by 27 Finance Ministers, including from the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Russia, Malaysia and Thailand. This third document adds calls for “the orderly opening-up of local and regional financial markets” and the “steady expansion of market access of banking, insurance and securities sectors,” as well as strengthening cooperation in cross-border supervision. These are all actions that would be expected to increase capital flows across borders.

Communiques and statements of principle and vision are not binding agreements. But the Belt and Road Initiative is providing new opportunities and perhaps more importantly, new institutions (such as the $124 billion Silk Road Fund) that could foster tangible movement towards financial integration amongst the BRI nations. Perhaps the more immediate results will be seen in development of local and regional bond markets. For example, spurred on by their desire to respond to Beijing's prioritization of the BRI, the top Chinese banks are developing new products for the mainland and abroad, including a standardized bond for use specifically in the region. Their market-making activity linked specifically to the infrastructure investment demanded by BRI could offer much-needed long-term investment vehicles for pension and insurance investors and start to fill an important gap as a low-cost alternative to bank financing, especially as the projects move into operational phases. As one Bank for International Settlement report observes, bonds represent less than 10–20% of infrastructure debt financing in advanced economies and often fail to reach those levels emerging market regions. The new bonds China is developing could be an important step forward. As long as the BRI projects prove successful (and there are considerable political and economic risks for projects in many BRI countries), they could be a trigger for other market participants to feel comfortable entering this much-needed financing space.

China's own economic and domestic issues, the political and economic situations in other BRI countries, and China's relations with its neighbors and the rest of the world are just some of the factors that could cause serious detours or dead-ends for this Road. The lofty visions for financial integration under the BRI might never be realized. Yet perhaps the momentum of the BRI concept itself might be enough to create opportunities for new instruments, new market practices, and new market access that endure and stimulate the benefits that many attribute to well-integrated financial markets. And perhaps we should be paying more attention to the steps that are being taken, not only to encourage the positive developments, but also to understand the implications for the global economic system. The Belt and Road might be a route along which the renminbi increases its weight as a global currency, or it might create pathways served by new financial infrastructures that operate in parallel to existing systems. After all, as President Xi Jinping said last May: “Finance is the lifeblood of modern economy. Only when the blood circulates smoothly can one grow.”