| 5,065 | 166 | 89 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
全球价值链背景下兴起的增加值贸易核算理论因能消除传统贸易的"统计幻象"、准确核算各国参与国际分工的贸易利得而受到越来越多的关注。本文从贸易价值增值的视角,梳理了以国家间投入产出模型为基础的增加值贸易核算的研究成果。按照文献的发展脉络与逻辑关系,对垂直专业化的测量及其发展、增加值贸易与贸易增加值核算理念的差异、以及它们与传统总值贸易核算的区别与内在关联等方面进行了概括与总结。
Abstract：The rise of the accounting theory for trade in value added in the context of global value chains attracts more and more attention recently due to the fact that this accounting method can eliminate the"statistical illusion"of traditional trade effectively and account trade gains of countries participating in the international division of labor accurately. From the perspective of trade in value added,this paper provides a survey of recent findings on trade accounting in value added based on inter-country input-output model,especially focuses on the measurement and development of vertical specialization,the differences between accounting of trade in value added and that of value added in trade,as well as the differences and connections between trade accounting in value added and trade accounting in gross value.
[1]Arndt S,Kierzkowski H.Fragmentation:New Production Patterns in the World Economy[M].Oxford,Oxford University Press,2001.
[2]Davis J.Corporate Innovation will not Save Us in a Shareholder Value Economy,paper presented at the conference,US corporations in the recovery and beyond.New York,NY:New School of Social Research,2010,April 23.
[3]Daudin G,Rifflart C,Schweisguth D.Who produces for whom in the world economy[J].Canadian Journal of Economics,2011(44):1403-1437.
[4]Dean,et al.How Vertically Specialized is Chinese Trade[J].Review of International Economics,2011(19):609-625.
[5]Ferrantino,et al.Evasion behaviors of exporters and importers:Evidence from the US-China trade data discrepancy[J].Journal of International Economics,2012(86):141-157.
[6]Hummels D,Ishii J,K Yi.The Nature and Growth of Vertical Specialization in World Trade[J].Journal of International Economics,2001(54):75-96.
[7]Johnson,Robert C,Guillermo Noguera.Accounting for intermediates:Production sharing and trade in value added[J].Journal of International Economics,2012(86):224-236.
[8]Judith Dean,K C Fung,Zhi Wang.Measuring Vertical Specialization:The Case of China[J].Review of International Economics,2011(19):609-625.
[9]Koopman,et al.Give Credit Where Credit Is Due:Tracing Value Added in Global Production Chains,NBER Working Paper,2010,No.16426.
[10]Koopman,et al.How Much of Chinese Exports is Really Made In China?Assessing Domestic Value-Added When Processing Trade is Pervasive,NBER Working Paper,2008,No.14109.
[11]Koopman,et al.The Value-added Structure of Gross Exports and Global Production Network.Paper for Presentation at the 15th Annual Conference on Global Economic Analysis,2012.
[12]Koopman,et al.Tracing Value-added and Double Counting in Gross Exports[J].American Economics Review,2013,forthcoming.
[13]OECD,WTO.Trade in Value-Added:Concepts,Methodologies and Challenges,2011.
[14]Stehrer,Robert.Trade in value added and the value added in trade,Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies Working Paper,2012.
[15]Tsigas,et al.How a Global Inter-Country Input-Output Table with Processing Trade Account Can be constructed from GTAP Database.Paper for Presentation at the 15th GTAP Conference on Global Economic Analysis,2012.
[16]Wang,et al.Value Chains in East Asian Production Networks,USITC Working Paper,2009,No.2009-10-C,October.
1这里Johnson和Noguera(2012)给出的关于增加值出口的定义被KWW(2013)沿用,本文在第三部分“有关增加值贸易核算方法”中会进一步说明。
1他们在文中提到,来自世界投入产出表的数据允许他们放松HIY的第一个假设。该研究中使用的主要数据来源是亚洲国际投入产出表(AIO)。
2事实上,这里VAS表示的应该是该国最终产品中国内或国外增加值份额,而不是该国出口中的国内或国外增加值份额。KPWW(2010)在构建垂直专业化的测量方法时对此进行了相关说明,认为尽管VAS表示的是该国最终产品中国内或国外增加值份额,但同时也是该国出口中的国内或国外增加值份额的问题,因为包含在产品中的增加值并不依赖于产品如何使用,即在同一部门中增加值份额在最终产品和中间产品中是相匹配的。
3尽管HIY(2001)定义了VS1,但却没有给出测量方法。
1VS、VS1、VS1*具体是哪些成分的线性组合将会在本文第四部分“增加值贸易与总值贸易核算的比较”中做进一步说明。
2为了保持与上文符号的一致性,这里我们仍采用Y代表最终产品,Robert Stehrer(2012)采用f代表最终产品。另外,与上文不同,为了与Ti VA、VAi T等指标区别,这里代表国别的指标用上标表示。
3这里是为了计算国家1对其他国家的增加值的出口,因此不必考虑国外增加值的多少,最好的方式就是假定国外的增加值都为0,同时,我们考虑是国家1对外的出口,因此不用考虑内销和国外对国家1的出口,最好的方式就是假定这些量都为0。对计算国家1从其他国家进口的增加值,处理方法类似。
1式(8)中应该右乘的是最终产品向量,这里右乘的是出口和进口向量,Robert Stehrer(2012)假设包含在最终产品中的增加值份额和进出口产品中的增加值份额是一样的。
2更详细的关系见本文第四部分“增加值贸易与总值贸易核算的比较”。
3在Daudin、Rifflart和Schweisguth(2011)中,式(10)中写的是VS1,而不是VS1*,这里笔者推测可能是原作者书写错误。
1 这里,t12TiVA,X=(V10 0)(B11B12B13B21B22B23B31B32B33)(0+Y12+0 0+Y22+0 0+Y32+0)=V1B12Y12+V1B22Y22+V1B13Y32,t12Ti VA,M=(0 V20)(B11B12B13B21B22B23B31B32B33)(Y11+0+0Y21+0+0Y31+0+0)=V2B21Y11+V2B22Y21+V2B23Y31,t12TiVA,Net=t12TiVA,X-t12TiVA,M,t12VAiT,Net=(V1V2V3)(B11B12B13B21B22B23B31B32B33)(t12-t210)=V1(B11t12-B12t12)+V2(B21t12-B22t21)+V3(B31t12-B32t21)事实上,在理论上二者也并不必然相等。
2与Daudin、Rifflart和Schweisguth(2011)不同,为了与测量垂直专业化的核心思想保持一致,KWW(2013)将(4)+(5)+(6)定义为VS1*。
基本信息:
DOI：10.19343/j.cnki.11-1302/c.2015.03.009
中图分类号:F746
引用信息:
[1]潘文卿,王丰国,李根强.全球价值链背景下增加值贸易核算理论综述[J].统计研究,2015,32(03):69-75.DOI:10.19343/j.cnki.11-1302/c.2015.03.009.
基金信息:
国家自然科学基金项目“后金融危机时期中国区域经济的空间结构与区域发展”(71173132);; 清华大学自主科研计划项目“全球价值链:中国贸易增值分解与国内价值延伸”(Z04-1);; 清华大学文化传承创新基金项目“中国区域经济发展:差异、空间关联与相互作用”(2012WHYX010)资助
2015-03-15
2015-03-15