家电下乡政策影响农村居民消费的实证分析

发布时间：2018-01-12 16:19

本文关键词：家电下乡政策影响农村居民消费的实证分析　出处：《清华大学》2013年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：为了扩大农村消费，2007年12月1日，家电下乡政策在山东、河南和四川三省开始实行，并在2008年12月和2009年2月向全国其他省份推广。但该政策是否真的刺激了农村消费以及在多大程度上推动了消费，则值得我们去研究。本文利用山东、江苏、河南和江西四个省份共59个地级市自2005年至2011年的经济数据，建立面板数据模型，去分析家电下乡政策对家电下乡产品的刺激效应、对其他生活消费支出的替代效应和对生活消费总支出的影响。为此，，我们分别选择了居民家庭年人均家庭设备消费支出、扣除家庭设备消费支出之外的其他生活消费支出和生活消费总支出作为被解释变量，选择家电下乡政策实行后的年份为政策虚拟变量，通过增加农村居民年人均纯收入、进出口总额与地区生产总值的比例和6个时间虚拟变量为控制变量，建立3个不同的面板数据计量模型。为了谨慎起见，我们将固定效应模型估计方法、随机效应模型估计方法和一阶差分模型估计方法得到的系数估计值放在一起进行比较。而在进行政策分析时，通常固定效应模型是最具有说服力的，因此我们将主要以固定效应模型的估计值作为主要依据。面板数据的回归结果显示，家电下乡政策对包括家电下乡产品在内的家庭设备的消费有较强的刺激作用，且随着时间的推进，家电下乡政策的刺激效应越来越大。模型的回归结果同样表明家电下乡对除了家庭设备之外的其他生活消费并没有显著的替代效应。最后，家电下乡政策对农村居民人均生活消费总支出也没有显著的影响，其原因则可能是家庭设备只占生活消费总支出中较小的比例，尽管家电下乡政策对家庭设备有明显的刺激作用，但对生活消费总支出的影响并不显著。最后我们认为应该继续推行刺激农村消费的其他政策，并给出了政策建议，即扩大商品补贴范围和延长财政补贴的实行时间，并建议在以后实行财政补贴时应该更全面的去考虑其影响，不仅应该看到直接的刺激效应，还应该看到是否对其他的消费有替代效应。
[Abstract]:In December 1st 2007, in order to expand rural consumption, home appliances policy began to be implemented in Shandong, Henan and Sichuan provinces. In December 2008 and February 2009, it was extended to other provinces across the country. But whether the policy really stimulated rural consumption and to what extent, it was worth studying. Based on the economic data of 59 prefecture-level cities in Shandong, Jiangsu, Henan and Jiangxi provinces from 2005 to 2011, a panel data model is established. To analyze the stimulus effect of household appliances policy to rural products, the alternative effect on other consumer expenditure and the impact on the total expenditure of living consumption. We chose household annual household equipment consumption expenditure per capita, deducting household equipment consumption expenditure other than household equipment consumption expenditure and total living consumption expenditure as the explained variables. Choosing the year after the implementation of the policy of household appliances to go to the countryside as the policy virtual variable, by increasing the annual per capita net income of rural residents, the ratio of the total import and export to the regional GDP and the six time virtual variables as the control variable. Three different panel data measurement models are established. In order to be cautious, we will estimate the fixed effect model. The coefficients estimated by the stochastic effect model estimation method and the first-order difference model estimation method are compared together, but in the policy analysis, the fixed effect model is usually the most persuasive. Therefore, we mainly take the fixed effect model as the main basis. The regression results of panel data show that the policy of home appliances going to rural areas has a strong stimulating effect on the consumption of household equipment, including household appliances products, and with the development of time. The regression results of the model also show that there is no significant alternative effect on household appliances in rural areas other than household equipment. Finally. The household appliances policy has no significant impact on the total expenditure of rural residents' per capita living consumption, which may be due to the fact that household equipment only accounts for a small proportion of the total expenditure of household consumption. Although the policy of home appliances to rural areas has obvious stimulating effect on household equipment, it has no significant effect on the total expenditure of household consumption. Finally, we believe that we should continue to promote other policies to stimulate rural consumption, and give policy recommendations, that is, expand the scope of commodity subsidies and extend the duration of fiscal subsidies. It is suggested that the effects of fiscal subsidies should be considered more comprehensively in the future, not only to see the direct stimulus effect, but also to see whether there is a substitute effect on other consumption.
【学位授予单位】：清华大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：F323.8;F426.6

【参考文献】