摘要 本文借鉴Hsieh and Klenow(2009)的理论框架,采用2010—2018年中国上市工业企业数据,使用双重差分方法,考察“一带一路”建设对要素配置效率的影响。结果表明,从平均意义上看,“一带一路”建设显著改善了位于重点对接省份企业的劳动配置效率,但对资本配置效率的作用尚不明显。机制分析结果表明,“一带一路”建设主要通过深化重点对接省份的开放水平,尤其是促进它们的双向直接投资规模,改善劳动要素配置效率。进一步研究发现,要素流动表现出“劳动往高处走,资本往低处流”的特征,导致劳动和资本的配置效率出现“分野”:在重点对接“一带一路”的省份,劳动生产率高的企业配置了更多的劳动要素,劳动配置效率得以改善;但由于市场资源配置能力尚未得到充分释放,资本生产率高的企业在资本要素获取上还未体现出明显优势。
Summary:
China put forward the Belt & Road Initiative in 2013, which not only established a new approach to cooperation with the international community but also created new opportunities for China to open up and promote economic transformation. To realize the Belt & Road Initiative, it is important to improve domestic factor allocation efficiency and to accelerate “dual circulation” development. The research question is whether the Belt & Road Initiative can improve factor allocation efficiency. Previous studies have evaluated the impact of the Belt & Road Initiative from different angles, such as opening up, China's international reputation, financial constraints, and R&D, among others. However, there has been a lack of empirical analysis from the perspective of factor allocation efficiency. Referring to the framework of Hsieh and Klenow(2009), this paper relies on data from listed industrial enterprises in China from 2010 to 2018 and uses the difference-in-differences method to study the impact of the Belt & Road Initiative on factor allocation efficiency. The estimation results show that the Belt & Road Initiative significantly improved the labor allocation efficiency of enterprises in key provinces but had no significant impact on capital allocation efficiency. The results of the extended analyses show that the Belt & Road Initiative improved labor allocation efficiency mainly by increasing the openness of key provinces, and especially by promoting their FDI and OFDI. The results of further studies confirm the adage that “labor goes high and capital flows low”: in the key provinces, enterprises with higher labor productivity have more labor factors and their labor allocation efficiency is improved. However, as the market's ability to allocate resources has not been fully realized, enterprises with higher capital productivity do not have more capital factors, and capital allocation efficiency thus has no significant improvement effect. Improving factor allocation efficiency is vital for resolving the deep-seated problems of the Chinese economy, and the Belt & Road Initiative represents a major opportunity to do so. Based on the results of this study, we propose four policy suggestions. The first is to reinforce the positive role of the Belt & Road Initiative on the Chinese economy. While engaging in production capacity cooperation with partner countries along the Belt & Road, it is also necessary to improve domestic resource allocation efficiency and establish a new development pattern. Second, relevant regions should participate in the Belt & Road Initiative according to their own comparative advantages and should resort to globalization to resolve the difficulties and challenges of economic development. Third, relevant regions and industries should remove institutional barriers and allow the market to dictate resource allocation. It is necessary to let the market and globalization jointly promote efficient resource allocation. Fourth, the government should accelerate capital market reform, eliminate ownership and scale discrimination, facilitate enterprises' financing channels, and fulfill the potential of the Belt & Road Initiative for improving resource allocation efficiency.
罗长远, 曾帅. “一带一路”建设对要素配置效率的影响——基于中国上市工业企业的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 505(7): 154-170.
LUO Changyuan, ZENG Shuai. The Impact of the Belt & Road Initiative on Factor Allocation Efficiency: Evidence from Listed Industrial Enterprises in China. Journal of Financial Research, 2022, 505(7): 154-170.
Angrist, J. D. and J. S. Pischke. 2008. “Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion”, Princeton University Press.
[23]
Bau, N. and A. Matray. 2020. “Misallocation and Capital Market Integration: Evidence from India”, NBER Working Paper, No.27955.
[24]
Bertrand, M., E. Duflo, and S. Mullainathan. 2004. “How Much should We Trust Differences-in-differences Estimates”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(1): 249～275.
[25]
Brandt, L., T. Tombe, and X. Zhu. 2013. “Factor Market Distortions across Time, Space and Sectors in China”, Review of Economic Dynamics, 16(1): 39～58.
[26]
Broda, C. and D. E. Weinstein. 2006. “Globalization and the Gains from Variety”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2): 541～585.
[27]
de Soyres, F., A. Mulabdic, S. Murray, N. Rocha and M. Ruta. 2019. “How Much will the Belt and Road Initiative Reduce Trade Costs”, International Economics, 159: 151～164.
[28]
Ding, S., W. Jiang, and P. Sun. 2016. “Importan t Competition, Dynamic Resource Allocation and Productivity Dispersion: Micro-Level Evidence from China”, Oxford Economic Papers, 68(4): 994～1015.
[29]
Du, J. and Y. Zhang. 2018. “Does One Belt One Road Initiative Promote Chinese Overseas Direct Investment.” China Economic Review, 47: 189～205.
[30]
Fungacova, Z., A. Shamshur, and L. Weill. 2017. “Does Bank Competition Reduce Cost of Credit？ Cross-country Evidence from Europe”, Journal of Banking & Finance, 83: 104～120.
[31]
Gentzkow, M. 2006. “Television and Voter Turnout”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(3): 931～972.
[32]
Hsieh, C. T. and P. J. Klenow. 2009. “Misallocation and Manufacturing TFP in China and India”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(4): 1403～1448.
[33]
Li, P., Y. Lu, and J. Wang. 2016. “Does Flattening Government Improve Economic Performance？ Evidence from China”, Journal of Development Economics, 123: 18～37.
[34]
Luo, C., Q. Chai, and H. Chen. 2019. “‘Going Global' and FDI Inflows in China: ‘One Belt & One Road' Initiative as a Quasi-natural Experiment”, The World Economy, 42(6): 1654～1672.
[35]
Pavcnik, N. 2002. “Trade Liberalization, Exit, and Productivity Improvements: Evidence from Chilean Plants”, The Review of Economic Studies, 69(1): 245～276.
