环境规制视角下产业结构对全要素生产率影响的实证研究

发布时间：2018-04-05 15:31

本文选题：环境规制　切入点：产业结构　出处：《江西财经大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：本文首先介绍了国内外相关研究及概念界定,并在此基础上进行了机理研究,探讨了环境规制、产业结构与全要素生产率在机制和数理上的关系。其次以产业结构影响全要素生产率的机理机制为背景,根据我国1998-2015年各省面板数据,构建面板模型,从横向和纵向两个维度,分析产业结构对全要素生产率及其组成部分的作用效应。实证结果显示产业结构对全要素生产率及其分解项的作用系数为正,即产业结构的调整升级有利于提高全要素生产率。全要素生产率受产业结构高级化的影响显著大于合理化所产生的影响,这意味着产业结构的升级更能带动全要素生产率的增长。从各分解项上看,产业结构合理化、高级化对技术效率的作用系数大于其对配置效率和规模效率的影响,这说明产业结构的调整升级更多地促进了技术效率的提升。地方干预对全要素生产率及其分解项的作用关系为负,地区人均生产总值和人力资本对全要素生产率及其分解项的作用系数为正,即减轻地方干预强度、提高地区人均生产总值、注重对人才培养的投入比重均能有效刺激全要素生产率的增加。然后利用环境规制约束下产业结构对全要素生产率的影响机理,基于我国1998-2015年省际面板数据,构建面板门槛模型,将环境规制分为正式与非正式,比较在这两种不同的规制约束手段下,产业结构对全要素生产率作用路径及作用效应的差异,依据门槛区间,研究我国各省规制资源配置状况,并找出异质原因。实证结果显示,受正式规制的约束,产业结构合理化、高级化对全要素生产率呈抑制作用,但受非正式规制约束的产业结构合理化、高级化,对全要素生产率却呈促进作用,即不同的规制约束手段,产业结构对全要素生产率的影响具有差异性。正式规制存在单一门槛,低水平的正式规制不利于产业结构促进全要素生产率,当正式规制跨越门槛限制之后,产业结构带动全要素生产率,即正式规制下产业结构与全要素生产率呈“U”型关系。非正式规制存在双重门槛,产业结构合理化在非正式规制位于门槛值之间时,对全要素生产率的刺激效应最大,而全要素生产率,在产业结构高级化随非正式规制水平提高的过程中,受到的正向影响逐步激增,即总体上看,受非正式规制的约束,产业结构利于全要素生产率,综合正式、非正式规制的区间效应,发现存在最优规制区间,在此区间内,影响效应最优。依据最优门槛区间,将我国各省规制资源配置状况划分成一个“双优”组,两个“单优”组和一个“双非优”组,具体探究各省规制资源配置状况差异的原因。最后依据实证研究结果,给出具有可借鉴性的对策建议。
[Abstract]:This paper first introduces the related research and concept definition at home and abroad, and on the basis of this, studies the mechanism of environmental regulation, industrial structure and total factor productivity in the mechanism and mathematical relationship.Secondly, based on the mechanism and mechanism of industrial structure influencing total factor productivity, according to the provincial panel data from 1998 to 2015, the panel model is constructed from the horizontal and vertical dimensions.This paper analyzes the effect of industrial structure on total factor productivity and its components.The empirical results show that the effect of industrial structure on total factor productivity and its decomposition is positive, that is, the adjustment and upgrading of industrial structure is conducive to the improvement of total factor productivity.Total factor productivity (TFP) is significantly more affected by higher industrial structure than by rationalization, which means that the upgrading of industrial structure can promote the growth of TFP.From the point of view of various decomposition items, the effect coefficient of rationalization and upgrading of industrial structure on technical efficiency is greater than that on allocation efficiency and scale efficiency, which indicates that the adjustment and upgrading of industrial structure promote the improvement of technical efficiency.The effect of local intervention on total factor productivity and its decomposition is negative, and the coefficient of per capita GDP and human capital on total factor productivity and its decomposition is positive, that is, to reduce the intensity of local intervention.Increasing regional per capita GDP and paying attention to the proportion of personnel training can effectively stimulate the increase of total factor productivity.Then, based on the provincial panel data from 1998 to 2015, a panel threshold model is constructed to classify environmental regulation into formal and informal, using the mechanism of the impact of industrial structure on total factor productivity under the constraint of environmental regulation, and based on the inter-provincial panel data from 1998 to 2015 in China.In this paper, we compare the difference of the path and effect of industrial structure to total factor productivity under these two different regulatory constraints. According to the threshold interval, we study the allocation of regulatory resources in each province of China, and find out the heterogeneity reasons.The empirical results show that under the restriction of formal regulation, the rationalization of industrial structure and the upgrading of industrial structure inhibit the total factor productivity, but the rationalization and upgrading of the industrial structure restricted by informal regulation promote the total factor productivity.In other words, the influence of industrial structure on total factor productivity is different with different means of regulation.Formal regulation has a single threshold, low level of formal regulation is not conducive to industrial structure to promote total factor productivity.That is, under formal regulation, the relationship between industrial structure and total factor productivity is "U".There is a double threshold in informal regulation. When informal regulation lies between the thresholds, the stimulating effect of informal regulation on total factor productivity is the greatest, and total factor productivity is the most important.In the process of upgrading the industrial structure with the improvement of informal regulation level, the positive influence of the industrial structure has been increased gradually, that is, in general, the industrial structure is conducive to the total factor productivity, which is formalized by the informal regulation.The interval effect of informal regulation shows that there is an optimal regulation interval in which the influence effect is optimal.According to the optimal threshold interval, the regulation resource allocation in each province of China is divided into a "double optimal" group, two "single optimal" groups and a "double non-optimal" group. The reasons for the differences in the regulation resource allocation in each province are discussed in detail.Finally, according to the results of empirical research, some countermeasures and suggestions are given.
【学位授予单位】：江西财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：X22;F121.3;F224

【参考文献】