中国地区工业生产绩效:结构差异、制度冲击及动态表现

本文利用省级面板数据研究转型过程中中国地区工业生产绩效的动态表现。基于Kumbhakar(2000)的方法,我们将TFP增长分解为四个因素的变化。结果发现:(1)自1988年以来各地区工业部门的TFP增长率都出现了增长的趋势,其首要推动力在于技术进步率的不断提高;(2)与此同时,技术效率和要素配置效率出现了恶化,而规模效率则从恶化走向了改善。(3)上世纪90年代末的国企改革对各地区的工业生产绩效的构成造成了普遍的冲击,而民营化程度较高的东部地区受到的冲击最小。(4)通过分析绩效差异的源泉,我们进一步确认90年代末国企改革的制度性冲击促成了工业规模效率的提高,却导致了要素配置效率的短期下降,而劳动力教育水平和非国有经济比重的提高,则有助于促进工业技术进步、改善配置效率。伴随着制度变革的经济整体转型正从多个向度重构着中国地区工业化的版图。     

中国服务业分行业生产率变迁及异质性考察

本文采用全国两次经济普查后的修订数据,引入"技术不会遗忘"假定,运用序列DEA-Malmquist生产率指数法测算了1990—2010年中国服务业细分行业的全要素生产率(TFP)、技术进步、纯技术效率与规模效率增长率。结果表明,中国服务业总体及细分行业的TFP均处于上升通道,在上世纪90年代,服务业TFP增长的主导因素是技术效率改进,进入21世纪后,则主要是技术进步提高,且技术效率改进已开始由以纯技术效率为主转向以规模效率为主,但服务业发展的粗放型特征仍然明显。同时,中国服务业TFP增长表现出了较大的行业异质性;与工业(制造业)行业对比,服务业TFP增长是滞后的。2010年与1991年相比,TFP及技术效率增长的行业间异质程度有所下降,而技术进步却有进一步拉大的迹象。可能的内在机制是现代信息技术对不同服务业企业资源配置的异质影响,以及中国服务业体制改革的渐进式道路。     

How R&;D investments influence TFP growth: Evidence from China’s large and medium-sized industrial enterprises

This paper investigates the potential channels through which R&D may influence TFP growth using industry-level panel data of China’s large and medium-sized industrial enterprises over the period of 2000–2007. Comparing with existing literature, we provide a closer look of the relationship between R&D and TFP growth by decomposing TFP growth into efficiency change and technical change components using Malmquist productivity index and distinguishing between upstream R&D spillovers and downstream R&D spillovers. We find TFP grow slightly during 2000–2007, and R&D investment indeed serves as an engine of productivity growth just as endogenous growth theories argued, which is largely because R&D accelerates technical progress even it also results in enlarging technical inefficiency. However, we find a robust negative effect of downstream R&D spillovers on TFP growth, the effects of upstream is positive but not statistically significant. In addition, we do not find the positive effects of human capital on TFP as endogenous growth theories indicated, but find human capital severs as “assimilation device” for R&D spillovers both in promoting TFP growth and increasing technical efficiency even the effects on technical progress is adverse.     

What determines the productivity growth? Evidence from Chinese renewable energy firms by using Bayesian stochastic frontier approach

This paper examines the determinants of the total factor productivity (TFP) growth of Chinese renewable energy firms from 2011 to 2016, using a Bayesian stochastic frontier approach. Employing the “Bauer–Kumbhakar” decomposition method, the TFP growth is decomposed into the technology part and the market part. The empirical results reveal that the TFP improvement of Chinese renewable energy firms is mainly due to technical progress, followed by technical efficiency change. With regard to the market part, the misallocation of production factors has hindered the TFP growth. Our findings also indicate that only for large firms, the TFP growth can benefit from the scale economy effect. Compared with non‐state‐owned firms, state‐owned firms suffer much lower allocative efficiency.     

Trade and market selection: Evidence from manufacturing plants in Colombia

We examine the link between trade liberalization and aggregate productivity, with a focus on improved market selection resulting from a reduction in trade barriers and in the dispersion of these barriers across producers. Our analysis exploits tariff changes across sectors after the Colombian trade reform. An additional advantage of our analysis is that our TFP measure does not include demand and price effects. We find that reduced trade protection makes plant survival depend more closely on productivity. Using a dynamic simulation, we find that enhanced selection increases aggregate productivity substantially. Trade liberalization also increases productivity of incumbent plants and improves the allocation of activity. We find larger effects on allocative efficiency with our TFP measure than with a traditional measure including price effects.     

Productivity and misallocation of energy resources: Evidence from Korea’s manufacturing Sector

This paper analyzes the role of allocative efficiency of energy resources with respect to total factor productivity (TFP) in the Korean manufacturing sector. Using firm-level data for Korea, we extend the framework of Hsieh and Klenow (2009) to measure allocative inefficiency of energy markets as a function of energy price distortions. Our results indicate that between the years 2000 and 2014, intra-industry misallocation has increased. With respect to energy resources, this is truer in the low-oil-price periods than in other periods. An improvement in allocative efficiency could be attained by equalizing total factor revenue productivity across firms within an industry. In reallocating capital, labor, and energy resources, hypothetical TFP increases of 51.3 % and 71.7 % above actual levels in 2000 and 2014, respectively, could have been achieved. The evolution of firm productivity has been shaped by energy (electricity and fuel) market distortion and capital market distortion. Our evidence suggests that government (energy) price intervention is likely to have played an important role in productivity loss and in allocative inefficiency observed in energy markets.     

产业集聚、企业规模与全要素生产率增长——基于长三角制造业行业面板数据的分析

本文首先从理论上分析了产业集聚、企业规模对TFP增长的影响;其次,运用非参数的Malmquist生产率指数方法,测算了1998—2007年我国长三角地区两省一市(江苏、浙江、上海)20个制造业行业的全要素生产率增长及其技术效率和技术进步的变化;最后,用面板数据的计量回归模型对长三角两省一市制造业行业全要素生产率的影响因素进行了实证检验。得出以下结论:长三角地区两省一市制造业行业全要素生产率的增长主要是由技术进步带来的,而技术效率变化指数表现出负增长;产业集聚和企业规模对上海、江苏和浙江制造业行业TFP增长的作用显著,且产业集聚的作用大于企业规模的作用。     

金融发展与全要素生产率增长* ——基于中国省际面板数据的实证分析

本文以2000-2012年中国省际平衡面板数据为样本,从金融规模发展和金融效率发展两个维度衡量金融发展水平,实证检验金融发展与全要素生产率增长的联系以及中间渠道。研究结果发现,2000-2012年中国全要素生产率出现正增长且主要是由技术进步推动的;无论是从金融规模发展角度还是从金融效率发展角度去分析,都证实了金融发展显著地促进了全要素生产率的增长,金融效率发展的全要素生产率增长效应显著地高于金融发展规模的全要素生产率增长效应,且金融发展促进全要素生产率增长的中间渠道是技术进步效应而非技术效率增长效应;通过引入衡量金融发展缺陷程度指标（民间金融发展规模）,证实了中国金融发展体系效率低下。民间金融发展具有TFP增长效应,且民间金融发展TFP增长效应要显著地大于正规金融发展的TFP增长效应。     

我国工业行业全要素生产率变动分析

基于2006—2009年我国工业行业的面板数据,采用非参数Malmquist指数分析法,对我国工业的全要素生产率变动情况进行了实证研究,并将其分解为技术进步、纯技术效率和规模效率。结果表明:2006—2009年我国工业全要素生产率年均增长率仅为4.3%,技术进步年均增长率为1.6%,技术效率年均增长率为2.7%,技术进步已失去其推动全要素生产率增长的主导性优势地位;我国工业发展需注重同时提高技术效率和技术进步水平,否则全要素生产率增长会受到限制。     

Enterprise Productivity and Efficiency: When Is Up Really Down?

A substantial body of literature has documented impressive total factor productivity (TFP) growth in China's state-owned enterprises (SOEs) during the period of China's enterprise reform. Such growth rates have been used to support the view that China's reforms of SOEs have been highly successful. In this paper, we question the validity of using TFP growth rates as a “bottom line” measure of performance. In the spirit of a counterexample, we use a simple model to show that when firms are not profit maximizers for whatever reason, higher productivity may actually lead to greater allocative distortion, lower profits, and lower economic efficiency. On the basis of existing evidence, we argue that these conditions held for many Chinese state enterprises during the reform.J. Comp. Econom.,June 1997,24(3), pp. 265–280. Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts 02167; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1220; and Industrial Relations Center, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, 271 19th Ave. S., Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455.