我国高新技术产业贸易竞争力分析

近年来,我国高新技术产品出口在制成品出口中的比重不断增加,由此引发对我国高新技术产业贸易竞争力及比较优势的思考。本文通过对比传统贸易理论和内生比较优势理论,利用贸易竞争力指数和“显示”比较优势指数对我国高新技术产业的国际竞争力进行了测算,并运用战略性贸易政策对我国发展高新技术产业提供了政策支持。     

国际贸易理论之简评

国际贸易理论随着国际贸易的发展而不断深化,国际贸易不仅源于各自的比较优势,而且更多地源于一国的竞争优势和贸易政策的战略性运用。通过对比较优势理论、竞争优势理论和战略性贸易政策理论的比较和分析,认为一国需在战略性贸易政策框架下,要善于把比较优势发展和提升为竞争优势.同时主动培植、创造和放大竞争优势。     

中国与东盟农产品贸易竞争和贸易互补实证分析

本文运用贸易相对竞争指数、出口相似性指数和贸易互补指数,测算了中国与东盟主要国家农产品的贸易竞争和互补关系。结果显示,中国与东盟在农产品贸易上以竞争为主,且出口相似程度较高;中国农产品比较优势和双方贸易互补性也逐年下降。在此基础上,分析了造成这一现象的原因并提出相应的政策建议。     

基于比较优势的中美制成品贸易形态研究

比较优势原则是国际贸易的经典理论,中美制成品贸易基本符合比较优势的原则,同时由于中美两国方面的原因,中美制成品贸易有着其自身的特点。本文回顾比较优势理论的发展,介绍中美制成品贸易的演进及变迁,分别从中国方面与美国方面对中美制成品贸易顺差进行分析,并提出合理调整两国贸易政策的对策与建议。     

中国旅游服务贸易竞争力研究

旅游服务贸易作为中国最大的贸易逆差项引起了学者们的广泛关注。本文从旅游服务贸易总体分析入手,通过分析旅游服务贸易出口的构成,借助贸易竞争优势指数和显示性比较优势指数这两个指标对中国2001年～2018年旅游服务贸易的国际竞争力进行测算,通过与七个旅游服务出口额较高的国家对比,结果发现中国旅游服务贸易的竞争力偏弱且有下降的趋势,进而给出中国旅游服务业发展的建议。     

战略性贸易政策的本质在于创造竞争优势

全球化条件下的市场竞争实质上是国与国之间的竞争.国际贸易已不仅源于各自的相对优势,贸易优势将更多地来源于一国的经济实力、经济规模以及贸易政策的战略性运用等.本文通过对比较优势与竞争优势差异的分析,强调战略性贸易政策应以创造、培植和发挥竞争优势为出发点.     

中国与东盟国家的贸易互补性研究

文章使用显示比较优势指数和贸易互补性指数对中国与东盟之间的贸易情况进行了分析,指出中国与东盟在各类产品上的比较优势所在,并测算出中国与东盟国家之间整体的互补性。     

中国与东盟贸易互补和贸易竞争分析

研究表明中国与东盟在相互贸易以及对第三方贸易的趋同性越来越明显,反映了双方在产业传递和国际分工调整中的相似过程,说明我国在一个比较长的时间内出口贸易竞争将比较激烈。本文从贸易互补和贸易竞争两个角度测算了中国与东盟的贸易互补性和中国与东盟国家在本自由贸易区之外市场上的出口相对竞争优势。     

中国贸易产业的经济距离及比较优势分析

经济距离是测度国家间可量化的政策成本、运输费用和难以量化的信息、监管等贸易壁垒的探索性方法。本文利用2009年世界投入产出数据,以传统贸易理论为支撑,从生产成本角度测算出中国与9个贸易伙伴国的经济距离和各国16个贸易产业的比较优势。研究显示,中国与欧盟之间的经济距离小于中国同美、日的距离,中欧贸易便利程度较高;劳动密集型产业的劳动力成本优势迅速下降;中美贸易结构的强互补性伴随着贸易摩擦的不断升级;中国优势产业的比较优势与日本相似,而劣势产业的生产成本远高于日本。因此,强化贸易关系,利用产品差异和技术优势挤入高端制造业市场,转变粗放型增长方式,是缩小中国贸易产业的经济距离、提升国际竞争力的重要策略。     

环境规制对中国对外贸易竞争力的影响研究 ——基于中国省际面板数据的实证检验

基于全球经济失衡与中国贸易收支持续顺差的事实,欧美国家继"人民币汇率操纵论"之后又抛出"中国环境威胁论",认为中国贸易竞争力源于宽松的环境规制政策。本文使用面板数据方法对中国区域环境规制对贸易竞争力的影响进行了实证检验,结果显示中国区域贸易竞争力并非源于"宽松环境规制"。欧美国家提出的"中国环境威胁论"及相应的"碳排放边界调节税"只不过是单边贸易保护主义的借口。     

Comparative Advantage and the Gains from Financial Trade: A Reappraisal

Emerging market crises have suggested that a national benefit‐cost assessment of external financial liberalisation could well prove unfavourable. This paper re‐examines the principle of comparative advantage in its application to financial trade to seek guidance on measures that might permit a fuller realisation of the potential benefits involved. Drawing a parallel with Balasubramanyam's work on the gains from FDI and international migration we distinguish between those arising in financial trade from the net transfer of capital, and those deriving from the contemporaneous exchange of financial claims or services of equivalent value. In the first interpretation a country's comparative advantage is manifested by its role in ‘intertemporal’ trade (as a borrower or lender). Our alternative emphasis is on the contractual risk‐return characteristics of the financial claims exchanged. This perspective is applied firstly to portfolio diversification gains arising from further international stock market integration. Secondly, price risk management for developing countries in international primary commodity trade is discussed. Both applications imply the need for significant institutional development but could realise approximately contemporaneous gains reminiscent both of those involved in merchandise trade and in the skills and product (or service) flows that Balasubramanyam has emphasised in relation to FDI and international migration.     

Should Chinese Renminbi be Blamed for Its Trade Surplus? A Structural VAR Approach

During the recent years, the Renminbi (RMB) exchange rate issue has been at the centre of ongoing debate over the source of global current account imbalance, especially with the United States. The objective of this study is to contribute to the current discussion by providing some new evidence on China’s exchange rate policy and the impacts of RMB devaluation/revaluation on China’s trade balance using a structural vector autoregression (VAR) approach. The results indicate that the dynamic effect of exchange rate on China’s trade balance is still very limited and China’s balance of trade is mainly determined by the world demand and its trade performance, with the latter being a result of its successfully maintained comparative advantage.     

Myth,Sin and Redemption in Capital Account Liberalisation

The Fund's argument that capital account liberalisation in developing countries might appeal for justification to the recognised gains from free trade in goods and services was seriously undermined by the Asian financial crisis. Perhaps the most remarkable critique in view of his pre‐eminence in the development of international trade theory and policy was a short paper by Jagdish Bhagwati in which the Fund's parallel was described as a ‘myth’. Taking up the argument he advanced, this article explores further the underlying weakness of the Fund's case. Jagdish emphasised the discrepancy between the nebulous long‐term benefits from capital flow liberalisation and the painful consequences of the crises that they had recently occasioned. The relevance of the ‘original sin’ hypothesis in determining the magnitude of these costs is therefore discussed here with attention drawn to country inability to borrow readily in their own currencies as a reason for their acute exposure to exchange rate speculation. ‘Redemption’ for borrowers is then sought through an identification of sources of genuine comparative advantage in financial trade. Net flows of finance are not required for the realisation of these gains and a final section argues that there should be no presumption that net transfers improve welfare – just as Jagdish claimed.     

Carbon policy and the structure of global trade

Alternative perspectives on the structure of international trade have important implications for the evaluation of climate policy. In this paper, we assess climate policy in the context of three important alternative trade formulations. First is a Heckscher‐Ohlin model based on trade in homogeneous products, which establishes the traditional neoclassical view on comparative advantage. Second is an Armington model based on regionally differentiated goods, which is a popular specification for numerical simulations of trade policy. Third is a Melitz model based on monopolistic competition and firm heterogeneity. This heterogeneous‐firms framework is adopted in many contemporary theoretic and empirical investigations in international trade. As we show in this paper, the three alternative trade formulations have important implications for the assessment of climate policy with respect to competitive effects for energy‐intensive production (and hence carbon leakage) as well as the transmission of policy burdens across countries.     

增加值贸易视角下中国比较优势动态演变研究

利用WIOD数据库及KWW分解框架对1995~2011年中国总出口额进行分解,得到35个部门出口增加值。在此基础上,从两种统计方式对比角度,测算分析了中国总体及不同行业的增加值比较优势(VRCA)与贸易总额比较优势(TRCA),同时与美国进行对比。研究结果表明,在增加值贸易统计方式下,中国总体对外贸易表现为比较劣势,制造业部门VRCA较为明显但长期呈下降趋势,服务业VRCA呈上升趋势,1995~2011年间部分部门的比较优势出现逆转。相对于VRCA,TRCA对中国总体对外贸易真实比较优势高估了约12.94%,制造业部门的比较优势高估程度更大;从行业分类来看,中国低技术制造业及劳动密集型服务业的比较优势更为显著。从中美对比来看,美国总体VRCA与中国水平相当,但其优势部门集中于中高技术制造业与知识密集型服务业;总额统计方式低估了美国总体尤其是服务业部门的真实比较优势。     

我国贸易战略选择与“贫困化增长”

本文对“贫困化增长”的涵义和模型进行论述,从“贫困化增长”的前提条件、贸易条件以及国际竞争力角度论证了我国的出口贸易中劳动密集型产品的扩张可能导致“贫困化增长”,并分析其原因。从扶植战略性产业、改造传统产业、引进优质FDI三方面探讨了我国如何把比较优势转化为竞争优势,以规避“贫困化增长”。     

What's the Point of Reciprocal Trade Negotiations? Exports,Imports, and Gains from Trade

This paper explains why trade‐policy makers may prefer reciprocal trade negotiations (RTN) to unilateral tariff reductions (UTR) for economic reasons. It answers puzzles like ‘Why WTO reciprocity?’ and strengthens the unnecessarily weak case made for the WTO by those who downplay or dismiss benefits from foreign tariff reductions (FTR). RTN is superior to UTR because it provides economic benefits that UTR cannot – namely, FTR benefits which are clearer than potentially important UTR benefits: Whereas each policy offers efficiency gains, any terms‐of‐trade effect of UTR generally detracts from these gains, while any terms‐of‐trade effect of FTR is typically beneficial (especially for a small price‐taking country) with this benefit augmenting FTR's efficiency gains. Moreover, benefits from reductions in foreign barriers may come from several sources; they are not solely the result of terms‐of‐trade improvement – or economies of scale (the two benefits already noted in the literature, though often dismissed). For example, with foreign NTB elimination, possible home benefits are shown even with rising costs and terms‐of‐trade deterioration. RTN is also superior to UTR because, by eliminating protection in either NTB or tariff form, RTN provides an escape from not only a terms‐of‐trade prisoners’ dilemma, but many other previously unrecognised prisoners’ dilemmas, including one in international rent transfers, and several others with no economies‐of‐scale or terms‐of‐trade motivation. Of course, if superior RTN is not an option, UTR may well be desirable. If reciprocity is an option, but only in a narrower CU or FTA form, such reciprocity may still be superior to UTR, or it may be inferior; theory cannot unambiguously rank these.     

The true meaning of David Ricardo’s four magic numbers

The four numbers in David Ricardo’s example of comparative advantage have been traditionally interpreted as unit labor coefficients in the production of wine and cloth in UK and Portugal. A recent interpretation suggests that they represent instead the labor needed to produce the amounts of wine and cloth actually traded. Ricardo’s four numbers are shown to yield each country’s gains from trade by simply subtracting two of the numbers from the other two. Since the numbers also indicate each country’s comparative advantage, Ricardo established a close connection between comparative advantage and the gains from trade.     

中美农产品贸易收益核算及贸易摩擦的影响分析

在全球生产分割的背景下,海关统计数据由于包含大量重复计算的成分,并不能真实反映一国某部门的贸易收益情况。文章通过构建跨国投入产出模型,定义增加值出口为衡量双边贸易收益的指标,从增加值出口变化趋势、行业分布情况及贸易收益的实现方式,分别剖析2000~2014年中美两国农产品各部门的增加值出口情况。发现中美农产品双边贸易的盈余方实为中国,农产品行业的大量增加值隐藏在本国的其他部门中出口。中国市场对美国农业经济的拉动作用在提升,两国农产品行业实现收益的方式不同,中国越来越趋向于附加值含量低的粗加工中间品出口。两国农产品贸易关系紧密,对第三国市场的依赖不断下降,中美贸易摩擦对两国农产品行业的收益都将造成较大的冲击。     

中国出口技术复杂度真的赶上发达国家了吗

使用HS(1992)六位数分类商品贸易数据,从"出口重叠指数"、出口商品"相对平均单位价值"、不同技术层面上的出口商品"相对平均单位价值"三个方面,以部分发达国家为比较对象,实证考察了中国出口技术复杂度变动趋势。结果发现,与现有大多研究结论不同:中国出口技术复杂度与发达国家相比,尚存一定差距,特别是在高技术密集型出口产品领域,差距较大,而目前对发达国家的追赶上,主要表现在中等技术密集型产品领域。中国出口品的"专业化"既没有与发达国家"趋同",其技术复杂度也未赶上发达国家,中国出口增长不会导致发达国家所谓"工资收入不平等"和"贸易条件恶化";立足现实比较优势,顺应国际分工发展大势,应是未来一段时间内中国进一步提升出口技术复杂度的出发点。