全要素生产率中的加成定价与规模报酬效应

研究目标：考察经典方法估计全要素生产率时是否因加成定价或规模报酬效应而出现估计偏差。研究方法：基于放松完全竞争和规模报酬不变假设的增长核算框架估计全要素生产率,并在分别估计加成定价率和规模报酬率基础上对古典索洛余值进行分解。研究发现：加成定价效应是造成古典索洛余值与全要素生产率偏差的重要原因;富有弹性的劳动力市场可以降低全要素生产率受到经济冲击的影响。研究创新：基于扩展后的增长核算框架估计了中国、韩国、日本和美国的全要素生产率,分析古典索洛余值是否存在估计偏差以及偏差的主要来源。研究价值：分离新古典索洛余值中的加成定价和规模效应,可以有效降低经验研究中全要素生产率的估计偏差。     

全要素生产率提升新型城镇化质量的路径研究——以湖南省为例

通过构建新型城镇化质量评价指标体系,分析了湖南省全要素生产率对新型城镇化质量提升的影响路径,研究结果显示:第一,全要素生产率通过影响经济增长速度以及增长效益对城镇化经济发展水平产生影响,进而影响新型城镇化质量水平。第二,全要素生产率提升所代表的质量贡献意味着较少的能源消耗生产更多的产出,同时造成较少的污染排放。第三,全要素生产率代表"绿色工业革命"既能够提高居民经济收入又能实现环境质量改善,从而提升居民的生活满意度。     

全要素生产率研究方法述评

全要素生产率作为反映经济增长质量的重要指标,近年来引起了国内外学者的广泛关注。目前测算全要素生产率的方法大致分为两类：参数方法和非参数方法,它们的区别在于是否需要假设具体的生产函数形式。文章以上述分类方法为基础,对全要素生产率的研究方法进行了详细论述,并总结了不同方法在测算中的优势和不足,同时对相关研究文献进行了简要评述。最后,对我国全要素生产率的研究方向进行了探讨。     

土地财政、城市产出效率与全要素生产率增长差异

在国有土地使用权大量出让、财政收入快速增长的背景下,考量城市面积的快速扩张对经济增长的贡献及建设用地利用效率的高低具有重要意义。土地是经济发展中的重要生产要素,由于土地位置的固定性使得不同地区采取不同的土地财政政策,这致使城市产出效率和全要素生产率增长存在较大差异。因此对Solow模型进行扩展,使用我国1999—2009年数据,运用Malmquist指数分析方法对城市产出效率进行了实证研究。结果表明:全国各省市全要素生产率虽都呈现出上涨的趋势,但每个省市都存在土地使用效率不高问题。通过区域划分估算全国各省市全要素生产率增长情况,并使用分位数回归法分析各地区不同的增长方式,并针对土地财政、城市产出效率与全要素生产率增长差异间存在的问题提出政策建议。     

要素重置、经济增长与区域非平衡发展

研究目标：要素错配对经济增长和区域非均衡发展的影响。研究方法：运用提出的测算框架将经济增长分解为部门全要素生产率、要素禀赋和资源配置效率,并通过构建反事实框架重点探讨要素错配如何影响区域经济的非平衡发展。研究发现：2000~2013年要素再配置仅能解释中国经济增长的9.2%,中国经济增长主要依赖于要素积累和部门全要素生产率;部门全要素生产率、要素错配和要素禀赋分别可以解释区域非平衡发展的56.5%、30.7%和12.8%;要素完全有效配置将使得人均真实收入年均增加31.4%,但提升空间趋于缩小。研究创新：拓展传统经济增长分解方法并构建反事实框架研究要素错配的经济效应。研究价值：有助于深入理解要素配置在经济增长和区域非平衡发展中的重要性。     

我国货物运输业全要素生产率的增长特征及影响因素分析

提高全要素生产率是转变经济增长方式以及提升降级增长效率的有效途径和显著标志。在我国货物运输业进入新的发展阶段的背景下,要实现我国货物运输业的高质量发展,需要提升我国货物运输行业的全要素生产率。本文将从我国货物运输业出发,对全要素生产率的增长特征以及影响因素进行简要分析。     

新常态下中国经济长期增长与短期波动的动态解析

以强可持续为视角,基于柯布道格拉斯生产函数,将金融结构、产业结构、政府干预和对外开放程度通过全要素生产率纳入经济增长核算框架,并结合物质资本、人力资本、能源消耗和环境损耗,对中国1981—2014年间经济的长期增长与短期波动进行动态解析。研究发现,金融结构与经济增长呈“U”型关系,产业结构和对外开放与经济增长呈倒“U”型关系;物质资本和能源消耗依旧是中国经济增长的重要推动力,而人力资本和全要素生产率贡献较小,环境损耗不利于经济增长;虽然全要素生产率对经济增长的贡献较小,但却是经济波动的重要来源。     

城镇化与全要素生产率提升关系实证研究

在对城镇化、经济增长、全要素生产率以及它们彼此的关系进行文献梳理和理论研究的基础上,采用数据包络分析方法对我国1999-2013年31个省区市的全要素生产率进行了测算;运用2013年31个省区市代表城镇化水平的数据,对1999-2013年全要素生产率的平均值进行了相关和回归分析。结果显示:城镇化水平与全要素生产率呈现高度的正相关关系,城镇化水平每增加1%,可推动全要素生产率提升0.06%以上,说明城镇化的进程对全要素生产率的提升有很大的促进作用。因此,要深刻认识城镇化对我国经济社会发展的重要作用,通过大力推动城镇化来提升全要素生产率水平,促进我国经济健康、持续、稳定发展。     

科技与广西经济增长

全要素生产率对经济增长的贡献率大小反映了一个地区的经济发达程度和可持续发展的能力。通过选取广西1991～2009年《广西统计年鉴》相关数据对广西科技与经济增长进行了全要素生产率的实证研究,研究发现,科技经费使用额对经济增长的贡献率较大。     

环境规制能否倒逼企业全要素生产率提升?北大核心

本文实证考察了环境规制对企业全要素生产率的影响。研究结果表明:环境规制对企业全要素生产率具有显著的促进作用,企业技术创新是中介因素,并且其影响具有持续性。随着企业全要素生产率水平的提升,环境规制对企业全要素生产率的促进作用逐渐减弱。异质性分析发现:在经济增长目标较低的城市、中心城市、非国有企业以及创新水平较低的企业,环境规制对全要素生产率具有显著的促进作用。基于此,政府应树立绿色发展理念,灵活地实施环境规制政策,实现企业发展与环境保护的双赢。     

改革开放以来中国经济增长动力转换的时空特征

基于中国1978~2012年的省级面板数据,采用检验后的超越对数生产函数的随机前沿模型,利用两套资本存量核算方法,对中国经济增长动力的来源及其时空特征进行分析,并对2008年金融危机的4万亿元投资政策进行了效率评价。研究结果表明,中国属于典型的投资主导型经济,资本投入是中国经济增长持续稳定的最主要来源,TFP贡献率呈现逐年下降的趋势;中国经济增长动力由改革开放初期的资本、劳动力和TFP三驾马车平衡拉动,形成了现阶段的资本投入与TFP反向角力态势;区域经济差距主要源于资本投入与TFP双重差异,但TFP差异是最重要因素;4万亿元经济刺激政策下中国经济复苏属于典型的“投资主导型复苏”,是以牺牲中国生产率为代价的,TFP在2008年后呈现断崖式下降,平均拉低中国TFP达0.23~0.32个百分点。     

Comparisons of agricultural productivity growth in China and India

We measure and compare agricultural total factor productivity (TFP) growth and its components (efficiency and technical change) in China and India and test the TFP series for the existence of structural breaks relating the evolution of TFP to policy milestones. Our results show that agricultural TFP growth accelerates in China after 1979 and in India after 1974, although China’s agricultural sector clearly outperforms India’s. The main explanation of these differentials is that agricultural growth in China benefited from more fundamental institutional and policy reforms in agriculture than India. There is some evidence that the transformation of industry in China was also important for agricultural TFP growth. Manufacture growth absorbed labor and reduced employment in agriculture, creating incentives for capital investment and technical change that kept output per worker in agriculture growing at high rates. Fewer changes in agricultural policies and in the dynamics of manufacturing in India resulted in slower growth in agricultural productivity, despite policy changes that accelerated economic growth in recent years.     

Corporate cash holdings and total factor productivity – A global analysis

Studies concerning total factor productivity (TFP) have investigated the effect of TFP on economic growth from a country-level perspective, which is a critical issue in the macroeconomics field. Few studies have examined how corporate financial decisions influence TFP from a firm-level perspective. Specifically, no extant studies have investigated how cash holdings affect firm productivity. This study utilizes data for firms in 65 countries during 1993–2017 to investigate the effect of cash holdings on TFP from a corporate perspective. The findings show that firms with higher cash holdings can enhance TFP. The results hold after considering endogenous problems, financial constraints, financial crises, corporate governance, institutional quality, and financial development as well as various robustness tests. Furthermore, we examine whether firms consistently invest their cash holdings into research and development (R&D) expenditures enhances firm productivity. The evidence indicates that higher cash holdings lead to steady increases in R&D expenditure, which improves firms’ TFP.     

Productivity,Technology and Economic Growth: What is the Relationship?

The relationship between productivity, technology and economic growth has been debated extensively in the endogenous growth, growth accounting, New Economy and policy literature. This paper briefly surveys the literature on total factor productivity (TFP) calculations – the various techniques and problems associated with it. We argue that TFP is not a measure of technological change and only under ideal conditions does it measure the supernormal profits associated with technological change. The critical driving force of economic growth is not the super normal profits that technological change generates but rather the continuous creation of opportunities for further technological development. Six illustrations of when TFP fails to correctly measure these super normal profits are provided. A version Carlaw and Lipsey's (2003b) model of endogenous general purpose technology‐ driven growth is then utilized to make some progress toward answering Prescott's (1998) call for a theory of TFP. The model is used to simulate artificial data and connect theoretical assumptions of returns to scale and resource costs to the conditions under which TFP miss‐measures the actual growth of technological knowledge.     

基于DEA的绿色经济增长核算:以中国地区工业为例

本文构建基于DEA的绿色经济增长核算模型,将考虑非期望产出的劳动生产率变化分解为技术效率变化、技术进步和资本深化。中国地区工业的经验分析表明,与发展水平无关且省际差异大的技术无效率普遍存在;各省工业增长的首要源泉是资本深化,其次是技术进步主导的全要素生产率进步;各省工业劳动生产率增长差异主要源于资本深化差异,其次是技术效率变化差异主导的全要素生产率进步差异;如不考虑非期望产出,会低估资本深化对经济增长的贡献,高估技术进步的贡献,而技术效率变化的贡献可能被高估、低估或无影响。     

Information technology and U.S. productivity growth: evidence from a prototype industry production account

The rapid productivity growth in the US during the Information Age, prior to the dot-com bust in 2000, and the large contribution of the IT producing sector, is well known. Less known are the sources of the surprisingly rapid TFP growth during the slow growth period after 2000. We construct an account of US economic growth by aggregating over detailed industries using a new data set based on the NAICS classification. We find that, post 2000, TFP originating from the IT-Producing sector decelerated relative to the IT boom, but still accounted for 40% of aggregate productivity growth. This deceleration was counterbalanced by the contribution from IT-Using sectors, which buoyed aggregate TFP growth to almost the same rate as the 1995–2000 period. For aggregate GDP, the contributions to the growth rate of 2.8% during 2000–2007 were: capital input (1.7% points), labor input (0.4) and TFP (0.7).     

Spillovers,Linkages and Technical Change

Using US input–output data for the period 1958–87, I find strong evidence that industry total factor productivity (TFP) growth is significantly related to the TFP performance of the supplying sectors, with an elasticity of almost 60%. R&D intensity is also found to be a significant determinant of industry TFP growth, with an estimated return of about 10–13% and the return to embodied R&D is estimated at 43%. Direct productivity spillovers, from the technological progress made by supplying sectors, appear to be more important than spillovers from the R&D performed by suppliers. They also play a key role in explaining changes in manufacturing TFP growth over time. Changes in the contribution made by direct productivity spillovers to TFP growth account for almost half of the slowdown in TFP growth in manufacturing from 1958–67 to 1967–77, and for 20% of the TFP growth recovery in this sector from 1967–77 to 1977–87. Changes in R&D intensity and embodied R&D are relatively unimportant in explaining movements in manufacturing TFP growth over these three periods.     

The effects of external and internal shocks on total factor productivity

This paper examines structural changes that occur in the total factor productivity (TFP) within countries. It is possible that some episodes of high economic growth or economic decline are associated with permanent productivity shocks; therefore, this research has two objectives. The first one is to estimate the structural changes present in TFP for a sample of 77 countries between 1950 (1960) and 2000. The second one is to identify possible explanations for breaks. Two sources were analyzed: (i) episodes in political and economic history; (ii) changes in international trade – a measure of absorption of technology. The results suggest that about one-third of the TFP time-series present at least one structural break. Downwards breaks are more common, indicating that after a break the TFP has much difficulty to recover. When we investigated factors related with structural change, developed countries presented a break near the first oil shock while the developing countries’ breaks are more spread along the decades. Thus, external strikes seem to be more relevant for developed countries. However, for each country and break date, it was possible to find an event close to the break date endogenously detected. Last, the relevance of international trade, measured by trade share percentage of GDP, seems to be limited to explain abrupt changes in TFP.     

全要素生产率与区域经济发展不平衡 ——基于资本存量再测算的视角

本文分别从生产函数与资本折旧率选择的角度对全要素生产率进行了理论分析与实际测算,以全国和三大区域为研究对象,讨论经济发展质量与区域经济发展不平衡之间的影响效应。研究发现：第一,中国区域经济发展不平衡与全要素生产率之间存在弱线性反向、强非线性的变动关系,全要素生产率的提升虽能有效缓解区域有效发展不平衡,但这种关系存在一定的阈值效应。第二,二者的影响效应呈现出地域差异性和动态演变性：2012年之前,东部地区经济发展不平衡程度具有逐年递减的态势,中、西部地区存在波动增加的趋势;2012年之后,东部地区经济发展不平衡程度趋于平缓,而中、西部地区呈现逐年递减的态势。总体而言,东部地区经济发展不平衡程度低于中、西部地区,而区域间经济发展质量的差异是引起该现象产生的主要原因。