环境规制对比较优势的影响

在古典和新古典贸易理论中,一国的贸易模式取决于该国的比较优势.本文的研究结果表明,发达国家环境规制的严格化使得发展中国家重度污染密集型产业的比较优势得到相对的强化,而对中、轻度污染产业的影响则依据产业的不同而不同.文章还以我国纺织服装业为例作了进一步分析.最后,作者从环境规制的完善、产业结构调整及环境成本内在化几个方面提出了政策建议.     

环境规制对我国贸易比较优势的影响

发达国家日益复杂和严格的环境规制措施,对我国许多行业产品的出口造成了极大的影响。文章选取1991—1992年、1995—1996年、1999—2000年、2002—2003年和2005—2006年五个时段六个污染密集程度不同产业的RCA指数,实证分析环境规制对不同产业出口贸易的影响,得出结论:我国重度污染密集型产业的比较优势相比发达国家整体上获得了加强;中度污染密集型产业RCA指数的变化趋势因产业而异,但大多在21世纪都有程度不同的提高;而轻度污染密集型产业RCA指数却持续在下降。因此,文章在制定高效的环境规制政策、优化出口产品结构和鼓励出口企业进行环境技术创新等方面提出了政策建议。     

环境规制会影响污染密集型行业出口贸易吗?——基于中国面板数据和贸易引力模型的分析

本文使用2002—2010年面板数据,在扩展的引力模型基础上,采用固定效应向量分解估计方法(FEVD),实证分析了环境规制对我国五类污染密集型商品出口贸易比较优势的影响。结果发现,严格的内生环境规制可以显著提升五类污染密集型行业的出口比较优势;但用环境规制强度(ERS)和CO2排放强度分别测量的外生环境规制对五类污染密集型行业出口比较优势的影响不完全一致,同时外生环境规制二次项显示,外生环境规制对造纸和纸制品业以及化学原料和制品加工业这两个行业商品出口的影响呈U型,而对其余三个污染密集型行业,外生环境规制对其商品出口的影响为倒U型,与前两个行业相反。因此,从长期来看,提高环境规制水平会降低本国污染密集型行业出口竞争力的担忧是不必要的,相反,适度地提高环境规制水平有利于污染密集型行业出口竞争力的形成。     

污染较轻行业产品国际贸易格局研究--基于社会网络分析方法

根据“污染避难所”假说，环境规制的严格程度会影响一个国家的贸易优势，从而影响其世界贸易格局。本文采用了2013年34个国家的样本，从污染较轻行业产品出口的角度出发，运用社会网络分析方法，分析在当前世界范围内实施日益严格的环境规制制度的背景下，世界各国参与污染较轻行业产品贸易格局的状况，探索现代世界贸易体系的变化趋势。结果表明：中国、美国和西欧等国家处于污染较轻行业贸易的核心区域；土耳其、巴拿马和哥伦比亚等国家处于污染较轻行业贸易的边缘区域；巴西和南非等国家处于污染较轻行业贸易的半边缘区域。随着对环境质量重视程度的不断提升，各国迎来了污染较轻行业的发展机遇，各国应根据目前所处的贸易格局中的地位，调整国家发展战略，从而抓住从边缘区域跃升至核心区域的重要契机。     

环境规制对中国对外贸易影响的实证分析

中国与其他国家之间环境规制的差异对贸易会产生一定的影响。当环境规制相对变得更严时，“环境规制的成本贸易效应”发生作用，中国会进口更多的污染密集型产品；当环境规制变得相对较松时，中国会向发达国家出口更多的污染密集型产品。然而，由于世界各国都有加强环境管制的趋势，再加上“波特假设”的存在以及“环境规制的创新贸易效应”发挥作用，适当的加强环境管制虽然可能会增加污染密集型产品的进口，但是也能够有效地促进本国商品的出口，从而带来收益。     

论比较优势的成本基础——从生产成本向“全成本”的拓展

贸易理论的历史演进表明,比较优势是一国参与国际分工和贸易的基本动因。古典、新古典和新贸易理论分别从劳动生产率、要素禀赋、生产规模等不同视角论证了基于生产成本的比较优势,进而可表达为"相对生产成本不等式"。随着制度、生态环境、"可持续性"等要素在国际贸易中日趋重要,使用制度要素所形成的交易成本、使用生态环境要素所形成的环境成本、耗费"可持续性"要素所形成的代际成本也逐步成为比较优势的成本基础。于是,可将使用或耗费广义要素的代价理解为"全成本",它构成了一国参与国际分工和贸易的比较优势的基础。     

环境规制对我国制造业出口贸易竞争力影响的实证分析

按照污染强度不同,本文将中国16个制造业部门划分为重度、中度和轻度污染三大类,就环境规制对三类企业1996～2010年出口贸易竞争力的非线性关系进行了检验,并力图从促进出口贸易竞争力的角度找出不同产业最优规制水平的拐点.研究结果显示,重度、中度和轻度污染产业环境规制强度与三者出口贸易竞争力的关系均呈“U”形,相对于重度、中度污染产业而言,轻度污染产业能够更早突破“U”形拐点,而且目前大多数制造业尚处于各自拐点的左侧.     

环境所有权、贸易结构变迁与污染分布——基于超边际经济学框架的分析

文章引入环境所有权概念,运用新兴古典经济学的超边际分析方法,研究了贸易结构变迁与相应的污染分布和转移,旨在揭示大国污染效应、工业化路径的环境效应、贸易结构变迁的环境所有权因素以及环保政策失效的原因。研究推导出不同国家间环境所有权模糊程度和交易效率变化对贸易结构变迁与污染分布变化的作用机理。研究命题可用于解释现实贸易发展中存在的环境污染现象。     

长三角地区环境规制的污染集聚空间效应

文章利用长三角41个城市的数据,计算污染地理集聚指数、环境规制强度和产业转移指数,采用空间杜宾模型,考察环境规制的污染集聚空间效应.结果 表明,环境规制及其与产业转移的交互作用可以减缓本地城市的污染集聚,而相邻城市的环境规制和污染集聚会加剧本地城市的污染集聚.城市区位异质性分析发现,中心城市以显著的概率降低污染集聚,外围城市以显著的概率提高污染集聚.由此,可以采取统一法治框架,防止以邻为壑;构建生态补偿机制,优化环境资源配置;融合环境规制与产业转移,抑制污染集聚等措施,实现"生态环境共保联治".     

环境规制、污染外部性与产业空间分布演化研究

近年来,中国经济快速增长引发的生态环境问题日益凸显,污染外部性呈现时空演化的特征,由此环境规制水平也不断提高。由于不同地区环境规制差异及其本身随时间的变化,以及区域、企业应对环境规制的能力和措施差异,这会导致区域及企业竞争力改变,改变生产要素的流动机制,引发产业空间分布演化,大量污染性产业如化工、冶金及印染等由环境规制强度高的地区以招商引资为主要形式引进环境强度低的地区,进而带来环境时空维度的污染转移,这一现状正是形成我国部分地区生态环境问题得以解决,而整体形势却见效甚微的根源所在。文章在数据统计、资料查找与文献研究的基础上,首先分析我国污染外部性、环境规制与产业空间分布演化的时空演变特征,以理论研究和数据分析为切入点构建污染外部性、环境规制与产业空间分布演化三者机理关系;然后基于统计指标进行实证分析,并运用LLC检验、Fisher-ADF检验、Fisher-PP检验等多种方法进行检验,研究表明环境规制是造成具有污染负外部性的产业空间演化的重要成因;最后提出法律措施等政策建议。     

Do environmental regulations influence the competitiveness of pollution-intensive products?

According to “Pollution Haven Effect”, in order to circumvent stringent environment standards, polluting industries in developed countries will be chosen to locate into developing countries; another way is that developed countries increase imports of pollution-intensive products instead of producing by their own, both of which can contribute to the changes of comparative advantages in the past 30 years. Since 1990s, many scholars have paid special attention on whether environmental regulations affect the trade patterns or not, but the conclusions are ambiguous. This paper, based on the Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek (HOV) model and using 95 and 42 countries sample data in year of 2005, is an empirical analysis which shows that: (1) according to the estimated results based on the “environmental governance” index calculated by CIESIN, environmental regulations do not change the comparative advantages of five types of pollutionintensive goods; (2) On the other hand, when the per capita income is considered as an endogenous indicator of environmental regulation, environmental regulation will significantly promote the comparative advantages in chemical products, iron and steel products and paper products, though environmental regulations do not take any influence on non-metallic minerals products and non-ferrous metals products. I think that appropriate level of environmental regulation can promote a comparative advantage in pollution-intensive goods.     

Is bioenergy trade good for the environment?

We analyze the impacts of bioenergy trade on greenhouse gas emissions using a two-good, three-factor model. Bioenergy is an agricultural good used as a substitute for fossil fuels in industry. Governments tax domestic pollution without international coordination. We assume that northern countries have higher labor productivity than southern ones and that agriculture is less pollution intensive than industry (after taxation). We show that whereas southern countries impose a lower tax rate than northern ones, they do not necessary have a competitive advantage in industry, and that compared to autarky, trade liberalization either increases or decreases worldwide emissions depending on regional comparative advantages.     

Environmental regulation and trade pattern：a case of China

As a growing number of countries, including both developed and developing countries, have in recent yearstaken environmental regulation at different levels, a question of great concern has been raised： can the regulation alterthe existing trade volume and trade pattern, and ultimately drive pollution-intensive industries to countries with low-levelregulations or even those without regulations at all？ Starting from the three different propositions concerning therelationship between environmental regulation and trade pattern, this paper applies cointegration analysis and errorcorrection model to empirically testing the relationship between environmental regulation and trade in China during theperiod of 1985-2005. Our empirical results indicate that in the short run the collection of pollution discharge fees bearsa positive impact on the export share of clean products of total exports. Thus, higher pollution discharge fees raise theratio of clean products exports to total exports. This further indicates that more stringent environmental regulationpromotes the exports of clean products. In the long run pollution discharge fees are positively correlated with the exportshare of clean products but negatively associated with their import share. Such correlations imply that environmentalregulation tends to facilitate the international specialization in line with comparative advantages.     

企业创新网络:一种新型的技术创新模式

企业创新网络是一种适应知识经济社会和技术创新的新型组织形式。它作为相关企业知识交互作用的创新平台,为企业应对复杂的技术创新提供了条件。文章讨论了企业创新网络的产生和发展、网络交互作用特征和企业创新网络模式,并且认为我国企业创新网络的构建在于企业间相关资源要素的集成和区域企业集群竞争力提高。     

国际贸易利益分配的比较优势论

以比较优势为基础的国际贸易利益在发达国家和发展中国家之间的分配并不平衡,发达国家依靠绝对成本优势,以较少的资源换取了发展中国家较多的资源,占有了更多的"产品利益"和正的"成本利益"。而发展中国家在"产品利益"不断下降的情况下,"成本利益"始终是一负值。此外,发达国家还利用了世界的比较优势和发展中国家的汇率过度贬值抬升了贸易利益。因此,从静态来看,以比较优势为基础的国际分工和贸易势必拉大发达国家和发展中国家之间的经济差距。     

Water on Fire: Gains from Electricity Trade

In light of the ongoing liberalization of electricity trade in the Nordic countries, and perhaps in Northern Europe, we argue that gains from electricity trade may be different from those traditionally associated with comparative advantages and economies of scale. In particular, we consider gains arising from the exploitation of technological complementarities between hydro and thermal systems. Our theoretical framework highlights essential features of the two systems and allows for an analysis of effects of trade. We study three trading regimes, which may arise either endogenously or because of trade regulations: day–night power exchange, seasonal energy banking and unbalanced trade. The analysis suggests that gradual trade liberalization may be costly.     

发展中国家跨国公司的一体化战略研究

本文尝试以建立一个发展中国家跨国公司一体化战略选择的内生模型来研究差异化厂商基于国家间要素禀赋优势、贸易成本、市场容量以及自身技术水平等因素做出的一体化战略选择。并且通过比较静态分析方法,将此研究扩及到贸易自由化对差异化厂商均衡时的一体化战略、平均价格和生产规模,以及整体产业平均技术水平的影响。     

中、日、韩知识密集型服务贸易结构变动及比较优势的实证研究——基于RCA与特化系数等的分析

笔者从进出口总量、贸易结构与贸易竞争力3个角度,应用对称性RCA指数、特化系数等指标,对于21世纪以来中、日、韩知识密集型服务贸易比较优势与贸易结构变化进行了比较分析。研究结果表明:中国知识密集型服务贸易逆差较大,且呈现出扩大的趋势,对知识密集型服务贸易需求急剧增长;在知识密集型服务贸易领域,中国在整体上比较优势弱,与日本、韩国相比,还有很大差距;从分项目的知识密集型服务贸易来看,中国位于知识密集型服务贸易的低端,中国弱势行业多为2国强势行业,中国通讯贸易与韩国通讯贸易在出口上存在竞争。     

中美贸易顺差的结构性成因分析

中国和美国之间的贸易顺差问题似乎已经成为中美关系的一个较大阻碍,理性地分析中关之间贸易顺差的成因已渐显迫切。本文从中美贸易顺差的规模和结构入手,详细分析了造成这一现象的结构性成因,得出中美贸易顺差是以比较优势为基础的正常的国际贸易不平衡的结论,从而两国应该以正确且双赢的态度来看待和处理这一问题。文章认为,要素禀赋理论肯定了各国发挥比较优势所能给自己所带来的福利的改善。中美的贸易顺差,从长远来看,它不仅有利于中国充分发挥其劳动丰裕国的优势,增进就业并推动中国经济的腾飞,同时有利于美国将其国内有限的资源应用到效率更高的其他行业当中去,促进产业结构升级和经济增长。这也意味着,两国应该正视并充分肯定这一现象,毕竟贸易不平衡是经济发展的结果而非原因,同时也需要两国拿出合作共赢的姿态尽早尽快地放松政策管制,以免给正常的双赢贸易带来扭曲。     

THE EXPORT PERFORMANCE OF U.S. AND SWEDISH MULTINATIONALS

While the U.S. and Sweden both lost more than 20 percent of their shares of world and developed countries' exports of manufactures between the mid-1960s and mid-1980s, the export shares of their multinational firms stayed fairly stable or even increased. The multinationals raised the proportion of their worldwide exports that they supplied from their overseas affiliates. These developments suggest that the declines in the trade shares of the US. and Sweden were not due mainly to deterioration in the innovativeness or inventiveness of American and Swedish firms, their management ability or their technological capabilities, but rather to economic developments in the firms' home countries.
The finding that firms have done better as exporters than their home countries is strengthened when we look at different industry groups. In both the U.S. and Sweden, and in all industry groups, with one exception, the multinationals' export shares increased relative to those of their home countries. The margins were often wide, and were mostly larger for Swedish firms than for U.S. firms.
Part of the explanation for the growth of each country's exports and those of its multinationals is the initial composition of exports, or the comparative advantages of the countries and their firms. These were skewed, in the mid-1960s, to industries that were to enjoy rapid growth in the next decade or so. Despite these initial comparative advantages, the exports of both countries fell far behind world export growth.
The comparative advantages of both countries' multinationals were even more biased toward fast-growth industries than those of the countries. That fact partly accounted for the better export performance of the multinationals relative to their home countries, but the multinationals outperformed their countries within each industry as well as for manufacturing as a whole.