| 1,242 | 26 | 330 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
基于2000-2013年海关数据与各省份五年规划数据,本文考察了重点产业政策对出口再分配的影响机制。研究发现,政府对特定行业的支持会引致产品维度不同类型企业间的出口再分配;产品市场获得支持会吸引潜在出口商参与出口、争夺市场份额,也会吸引在位出口商将部分业务转移到获得政策支持的行业、进行业务试探;同时,市场竞争的加剧也会加速淘汰竞争力较差的中小企业,促进产品维度新旧企业的更新换代。进一步,本文通过对比不同类型企业的出口动态,考察了重点产业政策对企业出口平均单价与产品质量的影响,发现政府对特定行业的支持会降低出口市场的准入门槛,导致更多的低价低质企业进入市场。可见,适度的政策支持有助于产品市场内企业的更新换代,激发市场活力;但政策的制定必须兼顾企业更新换代过程中的质量攀升机制,才能充分发挥其对出口再分配的优化作用,推动对外贸易的可持续发展。
Abstract：Based on China's customs trade data from 2000 to 2013,and the Five-Year Plans of each province,this paper investigates the impact of key industries policy on export reallocation and its mechanism.Empirical analysis shows that government support for certain industries will lead to export reallocation among different types of enterprises in product dimension. Product markets with policy support can attract more potential exporters for market share,and induce exporters to transfer to the supported industries. At the same time,the market competition can also accelerate the demise of small and unproductive enterprises,and promote the supersession of enterprises in product market. Moreover,comparing the export dynamic for different types of enterprises,this paper examines the impact of key industries policy on export average price and product quality,which finds the policy support reduces the barriers to entry of export market,bringing more low-price and lowquality enterprises into the market. On the whole, although moderate policy support can promote the supersession of enterprises and improve market vitality,the government should also consider the mechanism of quality upgrading in this process,so as to ensure the sustainable development of foreign trade and optimize the process of export reallocation.
[1]蔡庆丰，田霖．产业政策与企业跨行业并购:市场导向还是政策套利[J]．中国工业经济，2019(1):81-99.
[2]陈钊，熊瑞祥．比较优势与产业政策效果———来自出口加工区准实验的证据[J]．管理世界，2015(8):67-80.
[3]关爱萍．经济集聚、税收竞争与地区间产业转移[J]．宏观经济研究，2018(4):48-53,67.
[4]郭杰，王宇澄，曾博涵．国家产业政策、地方政府行为与实际税率———理论分析和经验证据[J]．金融研究，2019(4):56-74.
[5]毛其淋，盛斌．贸易自由化，企业异质性与出口动态———来自中国微观企业数据的证据[J]．管理世界，2013(3):48-68.
[6]钱学锋，王胜，陈勇兵．中国的多产品出口企业及其产品范围事实与解释[J]．管理世界，2013(1):9-27,66.
[7]宋凌云，王贤彬．重点产业政策、资源重置与产业生产率[J]．管理世界，2013(12):63-77.
[8]王凤荣，苗妙．税收竞争、区域环境与资本跨区流动———基于企业异地并购视角的实证研究[J]．经济研究，2015,50(2):16-30.
[9]杨继东，罗路宝．产业政策、地区竞争与资源空间配置扭曲[J]．中国工业经济，2018(12):5-22.
[10]杨兴全，尹兴强，孟庆玺．谁更趋多元化经营:产业政策支持企业抑或非支持企业?[J]．经济研究，2018(9):133-150.
[11]余壮雄，董洁妙．企业出口行业边际的扩张与收缩[J]．世界经济，2020,43(2):167-192.
[12]余壮雄，米银霞，董洁妙．中国制造业企业跨行业转移的机制与效率[J]．经济学报，2019(1):29-61.
[13]张杰，郑文平．政府补贴如何影响中国企业出口的二元边际[J]．世界经济，2015(6):22-48.
[14]张莉，朱光顺，李世刚，等．市场环境、重点产业政策与企业生产率差异[J]．管理世界，2019(3):114-126.
[15]Aghion P,Cai J,Dewatripont M,et al. Industrial Policy and Competition[J]. American Economic Journal:Macroeconomics,2015,7(4):1-32.
[16]Amurgo-Pacheco A,Pierola M D. Patterns of Export Diversification in Developing Countries:Intensive and Extensive Margins[M].The World Bank,2008.
[17]Bernard A B and Jensen J B. Entry,Expansion,and Intensity in the US Export Boom,1987-1992[J]. Review of International Economics,2004,12(4):662-675.
[18]Bernard A B,Jensen J B,Schott P K. Trade Costs,Firms and Productivity[J]. Journal of Monetary Economics,2006,53(5):917-937.
[19]Brandt L,Van Biesebroeck J,Wang L,et al. WTO Accession and Performance of Chinese Manufacturing Firms[J]. American Economic Review,2017,107(9):2784-2820.
[20]Broda C,Greenfield J,Weinstein D. From Groundnuts to Globalization:A Structural Estimate of Trade and Growth[R]. NBER Working Paper,2006.
[21]Chaney T. Distorted Gravity:The Intensive and Extensive Margins of International Trade[J]. American Economic Review,2008,98(4):1707-1721.
[22]Chen D,Li O Z,Xin F. Five-year Plans,China Finance and Their Consequences[J]. China Journal of Accounting Research,2017,10(3):189-230.
[23]Eaton J,Eslava M,Kugler M,et al. Export Dynamics in Colombia:Firm-Level Evidence[R]. NBER Working Paper,2007.
[24]Feng L,Li Z,Swenson D L. Trade Policy Uncertainty and Exports:Evidence from China’s WTO Accession[J]. Journal of International Economics,2017,106:20-36.
[25]Harrison A,Rodríguez-Clare A. Trade,Foreign Investment,and Industrial Policy for Developing Countries[M]. Handbook of Development Economics. Elsevier,2010,5:4039-4214.
[26]Khandelwal A K,Schott P K,Wei S J. Trade Liberalization and Embedded Institutional Reform:Evidence from Chinese Exporters[J]. American Economic Review,2013,103(6):2169-2195.
[27]Li S. A Structural Model of Productivity,Uncertain Demand,and Export Dynamics[J]. Journal of International Economics,2018,115:1-15.
[28]Mayer T,Melitz M J,Ottaviano G I P. Market Size,Competition,and the Product Mix of Exporters[J]. American Economic Review,2014,104(2):495-536.
[29]Sheng L,Yang D T. Expanding Export Variety:The Role of Institutional Reforms in Developing Countries[J]. Journal of Development Economics,2016,118:45-58.
[30]Yu Z,Dong J,Feng Y. The Impacts of the Government Industrial Plans on China’s Exports and Trade Balance[J]. Journal of Contemporary China,2020,29(121):141-158.
(1) http://tao.wto.org/default.aspx或者http://tariffdata.wto.org/ReportersA ndProducts.aspx。
(1)具体的计算为:lnmRERhpt=ln(∑θcchpt*RERct)。其中，θchpt=qchpt/qhpt,q代表t年产品的出口数量，RERct为t年出口国家c所对应的真实汇率。
(1)因篇幅所限，不同政策指标稳健性结果以附表1和附表2展示，见《统计研究》网站所列附件。下同。
(1)因篇幅所限，前瞻性政策稳健性结果以附表3展示。
(2)因篇幅所限，Ⅳ估计结果以附表4展示。
(1)具体而言，先求取各年度各产品的最大值和最小值，然后用各产品单价减去最小值，再对应除以最大值和最小值的差进行标准化调整。
(2)限于篇幅，其余年份结果以附表5展示。
(1)本文使用σ=5或σ=10计算产品质量，结果保持一致，说明本文回归结果较少受到产品替代弹性的影响。
(2)限于篇幅，其余年份结果以附表6展示。
基本信息:
DOI：10.19343/j.cnki.11-1302/c.2021.01.008
中图分类号:F752.62;F124
引用信息:
[1]余壮雄,丁文静,董洁妙.重点产业政策对出口再分配的影响[J].统计研究,2021,38(01):92-104.DOI:10.19343/j.cnki.11-1302/c.2021.01.008.
基金信息:
国家社会科学基金一般项目“全球价值链升级中多层级政府产业政策的效应及其与市场机制的协同研究”(19BJL084)
2021-01-28
2021-01-28
2021-01-28