“招商引资”优惠政策、异质型FDI进入与技术溢出效应

发布时间：2018-06-04 10:54

本文选题：跨国公司 + 出口平台型FDI生产率悖论　；参考：《南开大学》2013年博士论文

【摘要】：国际间的技术外溢一直被认为是发展中国家技术进步的主要来源之一(Grossman和Helpman,1991),有经验研究表明FDI进入会给东道国带来显著的技术溢出效应(Javorcik,2004; Blalock和Gertler,2007),但是这一证据主要来自对发达国家的经验研究,而对发展中国家的FDI溢出实证研究却不支持这一观点。对比FDI技术溢出在发达国家和发展中国家两种不同的表现,可以发现,除了二者的技术差距、人力资本等东道国本身的消化吸收能力存在差异外,FDI在两类国家本身就存在差异：投资发展中国家跨国公司享有更大的优惠政策,且投资方式以出口平台型FDI为主。以中国为例,纵观外商直接投资在中国的发展,可以发现两个明显的特征：一是外商投资企业享有各种优惠政策,即所谓的“超国民待遇”；二是外商直接投资与加工贸易紧密相连,形成所谓的出口平台型FDI。按照新新贸易理论的思想,过度的优惠政策将会降低FDI进入东道国的生产率门槛,同时,优惠政策对低技术水平的出口平台型FDI更具吸引力,这也将改变FDI进入东道国的构成。因此,中国各级政府引资竞争中的一系列“超国民待遇”优惠政策以及加工贸易方式的出口导向型发展战略,既是外商直接投资企业在中国得以蓬勃发展的重要原因,也是FDI技术溢出、“市场换技术”分析中不应忽视的两大关键因素。现有FDI技术溢出研究文献基本上都沿袭了传统的将FDI视为外生的、同质的,强调的是东道国的消化吸收能力,少有考虑东道国政策对异质型FDI进入中国的市场选择及其技术溢出效果影响的研究。本文从异质型FDI这一新的视角将新新贸易理论思想首次引入FDI技术溢出效应研究,通过拓展新新贸易理论,构造了一个生产率异质性企业在出口、出口平台型FDI与市场型FDI间自我选择的模型,以研究东道国的优惠政策对异质型FDI质量与技术溢出效应的影响。第三章拓展了HMY模型和Yeaple模型,将新新贸易理论对FDI的研究从水平型FDI扩展到所有FDI类型。具体地,我们构造了一个生产率异质性企业在出口、出口平台型FDI与市场型FDI间自我选择的模型,首次从理论上分析了异质型FDI生产率进入门槛及其溢出效应差异。第三章的模型表明,东道国税收减免等FDI激励政策降低了外资进入的生产率门槛,在吸引更多外资的同时却牺牲了外资质量,进而弱化了FDI技术溢出效应。此外,东道国出口退税政策、母国效应以及运输技术的发展等因素降低了FDI返销母国或第三国的运输成本,在一定条件下将导致出口平台型FDI进入东道国的生产率门槛低于市场型FDI的进入门槛。而对于一定规模的FDI市场份额,其溢出效应是企业生产率的增函数,因此,较之于市场型FDI,生产率较低的出口平台型FDI的技术溢出效应更弱。基于中国工业企业的大样本微观数据,第四章、第五章、第六章和第七章分别进行了相应的经验检验。第四章的研究表明,FDI企业中确实均存在出口生产率悖论,即出口企业生产率低于内销企业。这与第三章理论模型部分的结论相符。第四章进一步反过来考察FDI企业进入中国市场是否存在自我选择效应。统计发现,完全出口的FDI中,每年约有20%-27%的比例进入中国市场；而回归结果表明,生产率与沉淀成本是决定FDI企业进入中国市场的关键因素,FDI企业进入中国市场存在自我选择效应。第六章则对出口平台型FDI与市场型FDI的技术溢出效果差异进行检验,结果发现,虽然出口平台型FDI与市场型FDI的技术溢出效应均为负,但前者的技术溢出效果更弱。这一结论基本不因内资企业的行业类型以及外商资本是否来自港澳台地区而改变。在第三章理论分析与第四章和第六章经验分析的基础上,第五章与第七章对“招商引资”优惠政策的实施效果进行检验。结果发现,一方面,无论是出口平台型FDI还是市场型FDI,税收优惠均降低了其生产率并弱化了其技术溢出,这说明,东道国的税收优惠降低了跨国公司子公司的边际成本,这降低了两种类型的FDI进入的生产率门槛,从而不利于其技术溢出；另一方面,税收优惠对出口平台型FDI和市场型FDI技术溢出的影响存在差异,对前者技术溢出效应的阻碍作用更为明显。这是东道国招商引资过程中值得注意的地方。
[Abstract]:International technological spillover has been considered as one of the main sources of technological progress in developing countries (Grossman and Helpman, 1991). Empirical studies have shown that FDI entry will bring significant technical spillovers to host countries (Javorcik, 2004; Blalock and Gertler, 2007), but this evidence mainly comes from the experience of developed countries. The empirical study of FDI spillovers in developing countries does not support this view. Compared to the two different manifestations of FDI technology spillovers in developed and developing countries, it is found that, in addition to the differences in the technological gap between the two and the host countries, such as human capital, there are differences in the FDI itself in the two countries: Investment The multinational corporations in developing countries enjoy greater preferential policies, and the investment mode is dominated by export platform type FDI. Taking China as an example, looking at the development of foreign direct investment in China, two obvious characteristics can be found: first, foreign invested enterprises enjoy a variety of preferential policies, that is, the so-called "super national treatment", and the two is foreign direct investment. It is closely linked with the processing trade, forming the so-called export platform type FDI. in accordance with the new theory of trade theory. Excessive preferential policies will reduce the productivity threshold of FDI entering the host country. At the same time, the preferential policy is more attractive to the low technology level export platform type FDI, which will also change the composition of FDI into the host country. Therefore, China A series of preferential policies of "super national treatment" and the export oriented development strategy of processing trade are the important reasons for the flourishing development of foreign direct investment enterprises in China. It is also the two key factor that should not be ignored in the analysis of FDI technology spillover and the analysis of "market exchange technology".
The existing research literature on FDI technology spillovers has basically followed the traditional FDI as an exogenous and homogeneous, emphasizing the digestion and absorption capacity of the host country, and less consideration of the influence of the host country policy on the market choice of heterogeneous FDI entering China and the effect of its technological spillover. The FDI technology spillover effect is first introduced into the theory of easy theory. By expanding the new trade theory, a model of self selection between the productivity heterogeneity enterprise in export, the export platform type FDI and the market type FDI is constructed to study the influence of the preferential policies of the host country on the quality of heterogeneous FDI and the effect of technology spillover.
The third chapter extends the HMY model and the Yeaple model, and extends the new trade theory to the FDI research from the horizontal FDI to all FDI types. Specifically, we construct a model for the self selection between the productivity heterogeneity enterprise in export, the export platform type FDI and the market FDI, and the first analysis of the heterogeneous FDI productivity entry. The model of the third chapter shows that the FDI incentive policy of the host country's tax reduction and other incentives reduces the productivity threshold of foreign investment, at the same time it has sacrificed the quality of foreign capital while attracting more foreign investment, and then weakened the FDI technology spillover effect. In addition, the export tax rebate policy, the home country effect and the development of transportation technology in the host country. The other factors reduce the transportation cost of FDI return home country or third country. Under certain conditions, the productivity threshold of the export platform type FDI will be lower than the entry threshold of the market type FDI. For a certain scale of FDI market share, the spillover effect is an increasing function of the enterprise productivity, so the productivity is compared to the market FDI, productivity. The technology spillover effect of the lower export platform FDI is even weaker.
Based on the large sample microdata of Chinese industrial enterprises, the fourth chapter, the fifth chapter, the sixth chapter and the seventh chapter respectively carry out the corresponding empirical test. The study of the fourth chapter shows that the export productivity paradox does exist in the FDI enterprise, that is, the productivity of the export enterprise is lower than the domestic enterprise. This is in accordance with the conclusion of the theoretical model of the third chapters. Fourth The chapter further examines whether there is a self selection effect on the entry of FDI enterprises into the Chinese market. It is found that the proportion of 20%-27% in the total export FDI enters the Chinese market every year; and the regression results show that the productivity and the cost of precipitation are the key factors to determine the entry of FDI enterprises into the Chinese market, and FDI enterprises enter the Chinese market. In the sixth chapter, the sixth chapter examines the difference between the export platform type and the market type FDI. The results show that the technical spillover effect of the export platform type FDI and the market type FDI is negative, but the former is less effective in technology spillover. This conclusion is basically not due to the industry type and foreign capital of domestic enterprises. Whether or not it is from Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan.
On the basis of the third chapter theoretical analysis and the empirical analysis of the fourth and the sixth chapters, the fifth and the seventh chapters test the implementation effect of the preferential policy for "investment investment". The results show that, on the one hand, both the export platform type FDI or the market type FDI, the tax preference reduces its productivity and weakens its technology spillover. The host country's tax incentives reduce the marginal cost of the multinational subsidiary companies, which reduces the productivity threshold of the two types of FDI entry, which is unfavorable to its technical spillover; on the other hand, the impact of tax incentives on the export platform type FDI and market FDI technology spillovers is different, and is more impeded by the former technology spillover effect. Obviously, this is a noteworthy place in host country's investment promotion process.
【学位授予单位】：南开大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：F832.6;F276.7

【参考文献】