中国全要素生产率估算与分析【ppt】.ppt

内容提要1.生产率概念的由来2.全要素生产率的估算与拆分3.全要素生产率与企业改革4.全要素生产率与可持续经济增长5.中国省际全要素生产率增长变化的实证分析6.前苏联和亚洲四小龙的案例7.影响全要素生产率增长的因素8.中国经济增长模式的转变一、生产率概念的由来一、生产率概念的由来: (1) 投入产出率投入产出率wTotal factor productivity is the average product of all inputs, it is the ratio of the output to an index of inputs. Let the index of inputs be denoted as X. Then total factor productivity (TFP) is TFP=y/XwDifferentiating both sides logarithmically with respect to time gives以成本份额加权平均If defineNotice 以成本在产值中的比重加权： Divisia index(2) 生产函数与技术进步生产函数与技术进步A stable relationship between output, inputs, and time exists:Rate of technical change is defined as:Divisia indexes and rate of technical changeTotal differentiation ofwith respect to time yieldsDividing through by y givesUnder profit maximization, output elassticity equals inputShares in total revenue:orDivisia input index应用实例：技术进步与总量生产函数 (Solow, 1957)增长核算公式Technical change is a shift in the production function (3) 管理（技术）效率与全要素生产率管理（技术）效率与全要素生产率wFarrell (1957)技术效率度量w一般化的Farrell技术效率度量 (Førsund & Hjalmarsson, 1979)w数据包络分析(DEA)模型nCCR 模型 （Charnes, Cooper, & Rhodes, 1978）nBCC 模型（Banker, Charnes, & Cooper, 1984）nADD 模型 （Charnes, et al, 1985）DEA模型与回归模型的比较The CCR ratio model (input oriented, 1978) The linear transformation of the CCR ratiofor a representativesolutionThe dual to the linear transformationEnvelopment surface for the input-oriented CCR modelThe Output-Oriented CCR modelSuporting hyperplane for the output-oriented CCR modelRestrictions on parameters in DEAwCRS: no restrictionswVRS:wNonincreasing returns to scale (NIRS):CRS, NIRS, and VRSGeneral statistics about the DEA bibliography database (Tavaresa, 2002).DEA publications number by type.DEA publications number by yearAuthor statistics二、全要素生产率的估算与拆分w增长核算法 (Devisia Index)w生产函数估算法n平均生产函数法（技术进步）n前沿生产函数法（技术效率）wMalmquist 指数法拆分(panel data)n技术进步n技术效率改善n规模效率变化技术效率、距离函数、 DEA、和Malmquist生产率指数之间的关系wTechnical efficiency (Farrell, 1957)wTechnical progress (Sollow, 1957)wDistance function (Shephard, 1970)wDEA (Charnes, Cooper, & Rhodes, 1978).wTFP decomposition (Nishimizu & Page, 1982)wMalmquist index (Caves, et. al, 1982)wMalmquist TFP index decomposition (Färe et al, 1994)Technical Efficiency(1957)Technical Progress(1957)Distance Function(1970)DEA(1978)TörnqvistIndex(1976)Geometric Mean of MalmquistIndexes (1982)MalmquistIndex(1982)TFP Decomposition(1982)Malmquist TFPIndex decomposition(1992,1994)Devisia indexFarrell measureShephardCCRDiewertCCDNishimizu & PageFäre et al(FGNZ)CCDPanel dataStochastic frontierDeterministicparametric frontierTimetrenda road mapMalmquist 生产率指数的定义Malmquist 生产率指数的拆分The Malmquist output-based index of total factor productivity and output distance functions生产率拆分的几何意义经验估算的实施（线性规划）模型 1经验估算的实施（线性规划）模型 2三、全要素生产率与企业改革（Zheng, Liu, & Bigsten, 2003)w六百多家国有企业（1980-1994）w采用Malmquist指数法拆分生产率w样本企业的技术效率普遍较低（50-70%）w尽管生产率增长显著，但以技术进步为主w大型国企技术进步率明显高于其他企业w最佳实践企业多位于沿海地区w工资激励和职工学历对生产率有促进作用Model Selection ProcessDeterminants of technical efficiency and best practice (Zheng, Liu, & Bigsten, 2003)Determinants of productivity growth, efficiency change, and technical progressProbability of productivity growth, efficiency change, and technical progress四、全要素生产率与可持续经济增长wSolow增长模型显示在推动人均GDP增长的两个要素，资本和生产率之间，资本驱动型的增长是不可持续的。

也就是说，在资本劳动比达到一定水平后，人均GDP的增长会出现停滞尽管进一步增加储蓄率可以打破这一停滞，但经过一个时期后仍会在另一个人均GDP水平上出现新的停滞这是由于在此类模型中人们通常假定资本的边际产出率递减更为主要的是储蓄率不可能无限地增加而由不断地提高生产率来带动的增长则是可持续性的这是因为从理论上讲生产率的提高可以是无限的The Solow-Swan 经济增长模型 （with technical change）人均资本装备率的动态方程稳态人均收入取决于技术进步率(TFP)集约型与粗放式增长模式的区别A few clarifications on the concept of TFP(G)wTFP growth occurs when technology progresses and efficiency improves. The former is usually a long-run concept in the context of growth theory, and the latter can be a short-run phenomenon.wA high TFP growth is not necessarily profitable.wTFP growth should not be used as a target in economic planning, but might be estimated for forecasting purpose.wA high TFP growth may not be always desirable, but one should be definately worried with a sustained period of low or negative growth in TFP.五、中国省际全要素生产率的实证分析w改革时期的省际数据（改革时期的省际数据（1979-2001））wMalmquist指数法指数法w1978－－95年间为省际年间为省际TFP高增长期高增长期（（4.6%））n技术进步为主技术进步为主w1996－－01年期出现省际年期出现省际TFP低增长期低增长期（（0.6%））n技术进步速度减慢、技术效率有所下降技术进步速度减慢、技术效率有所下降总体经济效率：工业中存在的问题总体经济效率：工业中存在的问题wPolicy burdenswSub-optimal scale in productionwLimited capacity to innovatewWeak financial disciplinewSheltered firms vs. Less favored firms总体经济效率：金融系统存在的问题总体经济效率：金融系统存在的问题wCredit is insufficiently allocatedwLack of external disciplinewIt is still mostly state ownedwLarge proportion of Non-performing loanswA vicious circle: SOEfinancial sectorSOEfinancial sector总体经济效率：省际生产的政治经济因素总体经济效率：省际生产的政治经济因素wTwenty years of economic reform in the PRC have resulted in a fragmented internal market with fiefdoms controlled by local officials whose economic and political ties to protected industry resemble those of the Latin American economies of past decades. (Young, 2000)The “Discovery” of Recent Productivity Slow Down(Source：：Hu & Zheng，，State of the Nation Reprot, 2004) Unit：：% 1952-781978-951995-20012003Population2.01.40.90.6GDP4.79.88.29.1 GDP per capita2.78.47.38.5Employment2.62.61.20.9Labor Productivity2.17.27.08.2Capital Stock11.59.311.815.8Human Capital4.12.22.82.8Capital Productivity-6.80.5-3.6-6.7Capital per capita8.96.710.614.9TFPa-1.94.64(47.3)2.28(27.8)1.11(12.2)TFPb 3.95(40.3)1.30(15.9)0.27(3.0)TFPc 3.26(33.3)0.32(3.9)-1.12TFP Growth and its Components during Different PeriodsPeriodsTFP GrowthTechnical Efficiency ChangeTechnical ProgressMeanStdMeanStdMeanStd1979-19901.04940.01390.99020.01121.06050.00651991-20011.01850.02150.99690.01311.02160.01591979-19951.04630.01280.99320.01131.05420.00591996-20011.00600.02560.99360.01381.01240.01721979-19841.07650.01910.98470.01391.09380.01001985-19901.02220.01720.99580.01621.02720.00841991-19951.03720.02341.00200.02251.03540.01661996*-20011.00600.02560.99360.01381.01240.0172Best Practice Provinces over Time (1979-2001)YearBest Practice ProvincesYearBest Practice Provinces1979SH1991SH, ZJ, GD1980SH, ZJ1992SH, ZJ, GD1981SH, ZJ1993SH, ZJ, GD1982SH, ZJ1994SH, ZJ, FJ, GD1983SH, ZJ1995SH, ZJ, FJ, GD1984SH, ZJ1996SH, JS, FJ1985SH, ZJ1997SH, JS, FJ1986SH, ZJ1998SH, JS, FJ1987SH, ZJ1999SH, JS, AH, FJ1988SH, ZJ2000SH, JS, AH, FJ1989SH, GD2001SH, JS, AH, FJ1990SH, ZJ, GD  Shifts of frontiers and changes in the distribution of capital-labor ratiosRegional Efficiency distribution in China (1979)Regional Efficiency distribution in China(1990)Regional Efficiency distribution in China(2001)六、前苏联和亚洲四小龙的案例：六、前苏联和亚洲四小龙的案例：粗放型增长方式与衰退性经济危机粗放型增长方式与衰退性经济危机 w粗放经营的最严重后果是社会生产效率低并不断下降，使整个粗放经营的最严重后果是社会生产效率低并不断下降，使整个国民经济变成一种国民经济变成一种“耗费型耗费型”经济。

戈尔巴乔夫承认，经济戈尔巴乔夫承认，“就工就工业生产效率来说，苏联比美国落后业生产效率来说，苏联比美国落后3/53/5，就农业生产效率来说，，就农业生产效率来说，苏联比美国落后苏联比美国落后4/54/5 这就是说，苏联的工业生产效率只及这就是说，苏联的工业生产效率只及美国的美国的40%40%，农业生产效率只及美国的，农业生产效率只及美国的20%20%w苏联解体前的苏联解体前的3030年，社会生产效率的重要指标年，社会生产效率的重要指标────基金产值率基金产值率明显下降，明显下降，19601960年每卢布固定生产基金生产的国民收入为年每卢布固定生产基金生产的国民收入为7272戈戈比，比，19881988年降为年降为3636戈比，下降戈比，下降50%50%投资效率也呈现同样的趋势，投资效率也呈现同样的趋势，每卢布基本建设投资的工业产值增长额，每卢布基本建设投资的工业产值增长额，19611961－－19651965年为年为1.041.04卢布，卢布，19711971－－19751975年降为年降为8383戈比，戈比，19811981－－19851985年又降为年又降为4444戈比w这些数字表明，在苏联要获得同样的产出，这些数字表明，在苏联要获得同样的产出，8080年代比年代比6060年代需年代需要加倍的投入才能达到，社会生产的单位增长须靠投资的加倍要加倍的投入才能达到，社会生产的单位增长须靠投资的加倍增长来维持。

这种不断扩大的倍增的耗费是任何经济都承受不增长来维持这种不断扩大的倍增的耗费是任何经济都承受不起的，总有一天当投资不能相应加倍增长时，或投资减少时，起的，总有一天当投资不能相应加倍增长时，或投资减少时，生产就会减速、停滞以至负增长生产就会减速、停滞以至负增长摘自《摘自《超级大国的崩溃超级大国的崩溃────苏联解体原因探析》作者：许新等苏联解体原因探析》作者：许新等 1. Soviet Economic Growth: 1928-1985 (Ofer, 1987)Growth records compared (annual growth rates)Explaining growth in Soviet Union (1928-85)wSoviet growth is generated by high rises in inputs and declining growth of overall input productivity.wDuring the entire period inputs grew at 3.2% and contributed 76% of total GNP growth.wFactor productivity grew 1.1% a year, acccounting for only 24% of total growth.wThe relative contribution of inputs to growth grew to 80 percent in the postwar period and became its sole component from 1970 on, when productivity completely stagnated or even retreated.Extensive growth and productivitywThe pattern of Soviet growth is called extensive growth in the Soviet and Western literature. wIts main characteristic is in generating growth mostly through the expansion of inputs and only marginally through rises in productivity.wEmphasis on input growth has been a stratgic decision of Soviet policy makers from the beginning.wthe relatively small contribution of productivity growth, is clearly an undesirable and unintended outcoome.2. The East Asian productivity debate(Krugman, 1994)wThe newly industrializing countries of Asia, like the Soviet Union of the 1950s, have achieved rapid growth in large part through an astonishing mobilization of resources. wOnce one accounts for the role of rapidly growing inputs in thse countries’ growth, one finds little left to explain. wAsian growth, like that of the Soviet Union in its high-growth era, seems to be driven by extraordinary growth in inputs like labor and capital rather than by gains in efficiency.The East Asian cases (Young, 1995)Hong Kong (1961-1991)Singapore (1966-1990)TFP growth: South Korea (1960-1990)TFP growth: Taiwan (1966-1990)Young’s conclusionwOnce one accounts for the dramatic rise in factor inputs, one arrives at estimated total factor productivity growth rates that are closely approximated by the historical performance of many of the OECD and Latin American economies. wWhile the growth of output and manufacturing exports in the newly industrializing countries of East Asia is virtually unprecedented, the growth of total factor productivity in these economies is not.3. China (World Bank, 1997)Three features of China’s rapid growth wThe first is its regional dimentionwThe second is the sharp cyclical pattern of economic growth.wThe third noteworth feature of China’s growth since 1978 is its reliance on productivity growth.China 2020 (World Bank, 1997)wRelative to other rapidly growing Asian economies, China’s growth has been less dependent on volume increases in inputs of capital and labor. Consider, for example,, growth in the stock of pysical capital. In most countries growth in capital inputs exceeds GDP growth, often by a substantial margin. In China the reverse occurred, suggesting that factors other than capital accumulation have been important determinants of GDP growth.Accounting for China’s growthYoung (2003) wAccepting all the numbers the statisticians of the PRC produce, but making systematic adjustments using their own data, I show that one can a)wReduce the growth rate during the reform period to levels previously experienced by other rapidly growing economies, so that b)wOnce one takes into account rising labor force participation, the transfer of labor out of agriculture, and improvements in educational attainment, TFP growth in the non-agricultural economy is found to be 1.4% per year; a respectable performance, but by no means extraordinary. (Young, 2003)Chinese growth rates, 1978-1998Source: Young (2003)Total factor productivity change in China’s farming sector: 1952-1989 (Wen, 1993)wFive studies were involvednTang (1982)nLin (1990)nHayami & Ruttan (1985)nWiens (1982)nWong (1986)wFactor shares & TFP estimates were compared.China’s agriculture (Wen 1993)Productivity in Chinese industry (1980-1996)(Jeffeson, et al, 2000)wLong-term productivity increase, with growth rates declining during the 1990’s.wProductivity outcomes outside the state and collective sectors are modest, with sharholding enterprises suffering productivity declines.Average annual growth of TFP (1980-1996)胡鞍钢：近年来“资本深化”加速w在1995-2001年间，中国GDP年增长率为8.2%，低于1978-1995年的增长率（9.8%）；w人均GDP增长率为7.3%，也低于1978-1995年期间的水平（8.4%）；w劳动生产率年增长率为7.0%，略低于前一时期（7.2%）；资本存量增长率为11.8%，明显高于前一时期（9.3%）；w就业增长为1.2%，更是低于前一时期（2.4%）；w人力资本（指15岁以上人口受教育年限）为2.8%，略高于前一时期（为2.2%）；w资本生产率为负增长（-3.6%），而前一时期为0.5%；w人均劳动力占资本存量年增长率为10.6%，为建国以来最高、最快，说明“资本深化”过程加速。

张军：过度投资和过度竞争导致低效率w中国经济在经历了20世纪80年代的增长和1992-1994年的超常规增长之后，资本形成中所累积的一系列低效率问题就开始显露端倪导致这个结果出现的主要原因是那个众所周知的过度投资和过度竞争的混合型转轨体制由于过度的投资和过度的竞争，企业的技术选择显示出资本替代劳动的偏差，使技术路径逐步偏离了要素的自然结构，资本-劳动比率持续上升，加快了资本的深化过程，导致了投资收益率的持续而显著的恶化w认为中国改革期间导致了国内市场分割，地区经济生产已经背离了自身的比较优势（Yang2000)China’s productivity slowdownEvidence from provincial data (1979-2001): TFP growth and its componentsSource: Zheng & Hu (2004), Means are weighted averages七、影响全要素生产率增长的因素七、影响全要素生产率增长的因素wPhysical capitalwHuman capitalwLabor force reallocationwEconomic reformwOpennesswSocial capitalwInfrastructurewFinancewResearch and DevelopmentwFDIwPublic healthwIndustrial structurewOwnership structurewEnvironmental policywGovernment efficiency八、中国经济增长模式的转变w今后中国要加快经济增长模式的转变，关键问题不在于是否实现高增长，而在于实现什么样的高增长？即高质量高增长模式，这包括：由低效率、高增长转向高效率、高增长；由不公平高增长转向公平高增长；由低就业高增长转向高就业高增长；由不可持续高增长转向可持续高增长（胡鞍钢，2002）。

吴敬琏：中国经济片面重型化有危险w以“重化工”为主导的经济增长在现阶段的中国出现得不合时宜w面对石油与电力的极度缺乏，以“重化工”为主导的粗放型增长不会长期有效地解决就业问题，相反，只会引起全国性的能源损耗w霍夫曼理论，这个主张发展重化工业的１９世纪时期的粗放增长型理论并不适合中国w中国的二度重化工业走向不是市场调节的结果，而是各地政府调节的结果国务院发展研究中心2004年11月）林毅夫：目前的重工业热不符合中国国情业热不符合中国国情w中国经济近两年来加速重工业化并不像许多人以为的那样，是中国经济发展到了某个阶段，产业升级自然带来的结果w产业结构当然会不断升级，但这一轮重工业化应该讲还是有点走进了岔路w目前这一轮重工业热不符合中国经济与社会发展的需要中国劳动力过剩，应当更关注劳动密集型而不是资本密集型产业的发展w现在的情况却是，没有比较优势的重化工业得到政府银行支持，许多有竞争力的劳动密集型中小企业却无法取得银行贷款w据统计，重工业每1亿人民币的投资可创造5000个就业机会，轻工业同样的投入却能创造出三倍的就业岗位w而且重工业需要的是专业技术产业工人，无法吸纳中国数以亿计教育水平较低的农村劳动力。

w中国的现实是劳动力便宜，资本昂贵，现阶段大力发展没有优势的资本密集型产业，结果很可能是银行坏账大量增加而资本密集型大企业容易取得贷款也说明，目前以四大国有银行为主的银行体系不利于鼓励劳动密集型企业发展，中国更多地需要中小型银行给这些中小企业服务 （经济参考报2004年12月22日）马凯：转变经济增长方式w从这次宏观调控的实践来看，经济结构不合理、增长方式粗放，是造成投资盲目扩张、煤电油运紧张等问题的深层次重要原因，加快经济结构调整、转变经济增长方式已刻不容缓w明年国家发展和改革委员会将按照走新型工业化道路的要求，大力推进经济结构的战略性调整和经济增长方式的根本性转变，实现又快又好的发展使用使用时，直接，直接删除本除本页！！精品精品课件，你件，你值得得拥有有！精品精品课件，你件，你值得得拥有有！使用使用时，直接，直接删除本除本页！！精品精品课件，你件，你值得得拥有有！精品精品课件，你件，你值得得拥有有！使用使用时，直接，直接删除本除本页！！精品精品课件，你件，你值得得拥有有！精品精品课件，你件，你值得得拥有有！四项具体措施（马凯）w积极推进工业结构调整将抓紧发布和实施钢铁、电解铝、水泥、化肥等行业产业政策和规划。

支持大型钢铁企业联合重组和建立精品钢材生产基地w大力发展高技术产业发展改革委将把提高自主创新能力作为推进结构调整的中心环节w加快发展服务业将抓紧制定并组织实施加快我国服务业发展与改革实施意见，深化服务业各领域的产业分工，引导服务业向专业化方向发展w大力推进资源节约明年的当务之急是要落实好《节能中长期专项规划》和全国循环经济工作会议提出的各项措施 （中华工商时报2004年12月10日）。