中美产品特征对产业升级作用机制的比较研究——基于产品空间理论视角
|
摘要
基于产品空间理论视角,选取1962-2013年中美出口贸易数据,从微观产品特征视角对比分析了中美两国产品特征对产业升级的作用机制。研究表明:产品特征在产业升级与发展过程中发挥双重作用机制,即产业升级与发展不仅取决于现有产品积累的要素禀赋,还受到产品本身技术复杂性的影响。在产业升级与发展过程中,中国主要依赖产品密度(DEN),即依赖于既有产品积累的要素禀赋实现渐进式发展,很难实现跨越式发展,而美国在产业升级与发展过程中,产品密度(DEN)与产品技术复杂性(PCI)同时发挥了积极的双重作用并促进新竞争优势形成。进一步研究表明,密度(DEN)和产品复杂度指数(PCI)在不同产业升级过程中的作用机制存在差异。通过对比研究中国改革开放前后两个阶段发现,随着生产要素禀赋积累以及产品技术复杂性提高,产业升级的支撑作用增强,抑制作用减弱,但是引领作用不足。
with the economic development of China, how to adjust the industrial structure and digest the overcapacity has become a heated topic for scholars.As the supply side structural reforms have been put forward, more and more attention has been taken on them.Based on the product space theory, we focus on the dual effect of product features on the industrial upgrade between China and America and test the relationship between RCA and density, as well as the relationship between RCA and product complexity index(PCI) by using the global product trade database to explore the dual effect of product features on the industrial upgrade.The empirical research shows that China have more revealed competitive products with low PCI, which inhibits the development of industrial upgrade.Conversely, the industrial structure of America is of more competitive products with high PCI, which promotes the industrial upgrade in a comparative-advantage-defying way.What's more, the dual effect of product feature varies in different industries in different countries, including the direction and the power of the effect.Further, we analyze the difference of the dual effect of product features in two stages: before the opening and reform and after the opening and reform.There is no doubt that China have more paths to get industrial upgrade with the increasing of production factor endowments and the PCI is bigger.While it's not enough at all.Because the path of upgrading is comparative-advantage-following strategies, and the low CPI also inhibits the upgrading of the industrial structure.Therefore, China should develop more powerful industries to increase the production factor endowments and the PCI to gain more upgrading abilities in the future.
with the economic development of China, how to adjust the industrial structure and digest the overcapacity has become a heated topic for scholars.As the supply side structural reforms have been put forward, more and more attention has been taken on them.Based on the product space theory, we focus on the dual effect of product features on the industrial upgrade between China and America and test the relationship between RCA and density, as well as the relationship between RCA and product complexity index(PCI) by using the global product trade database to explore the dual effect of product features on the industrial upgrade.The empirical research shows that China have more revealed competitive products with low PCI, which inhibits the development of industrial upgrade.Conversely, the industrial structure of America is of more competitive products with high PCI, which promotes the industrial upgrade in a comparative-advantage-defying way.What's more, the dual effect of product feature varies in different industries in different countries, including the direction and the power of the effect.Further, we analyze the difference of the dual effect of product features in two stages: before the opening and reform and after the opening and reform.There is no doubt that China have more paths to get industrial upgrade with the increasing of production factor endowments and the PCI is bigger.While it's not enough at all.Because the path of upgrading is comparative-advantage-following strategies, and the low CPI also inhibits the upgrading of the industrial structure.Therefore, China should develop more powerful industries to increase the production factor endowments and the PCI to gain more upgrading abilities in the future.
引文
[1] 吴敬链,等.供给侧改革—经济转型重塑中国布局[M].北京:中国文史出版社,2016.
[2] AGHION P,HOWITT P.A model of growth through creative destruction[J].Econometrica,1992,60(2):323-351.
[3] GROSSMAN G M,HELPMAN E.Quality ladders and product cycles[M].National Bureau of Economic Research,Inc,1991.
[4] 易信,刘凤良.金融发展、技术创新与产业结构转型——多部门内生增长理论分析框架[J].管理世界,2015(10):24-39.
[5] HAUSMANN R,HWANG J,RODRIK D.What you export matters[J].Journal of economic growth,2007,12(1):1-25.
[6] HIDALGO C A,KLINGER B,BARABáSI A L,et al.The product space conditions the development of nations[J].Science,2007,317(5837):482-487.
[7] 邓向荣,曹红.产业升级路径选择:遵循抑或偏离比较优势——基于产品空间结构的实证分析[J].中国工业经济,2016(2):52-67.
[8] 张亭,刘林青.产品复杂性水平对中日产业升级影响的比较研究——基于产品空间理论的实证分析[J].经济管理,2017(5):115-129.
[9] 张耀辉.产业创新:新经济下的产业升级模式[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2002,19(1):14-17.
[10] 李伟庆,聂献忠.产业升级与自主创新:机理分析与实证研究[J].科学学研究,2015,33(7):1008-1016.
[11] 路风.产业升级与中国经济发展的政策选择[J].文化纵横,2016(4):60-68.
[12] 林毅夫.新结构经济学——重构发展经济学的框架[J].经济学:季刊,2011,10(1):1-32.
[13] 林毅夫.新结构经济学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2014.
[14] HIDALGO C A,HAUSMANN R.The building blocks of economic complexity[J].Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,2009,106(26):10570-10575.
[15] HAUSMANN R,HIDALGO C.Country diversification,product ubiquity,and economic divergence[J].Ssrn Electronic Journal,2011,69(35):78-81.
[16] HAUSMANN,HIDALGO,et al.The atlas of economic complexity:mapping paths to prosperity[M].MIT Press (MA),2011
[17] 张亭,刘林青.中美产业升级路径选择比较研究—基于产品空间理论的分析[J].经济管理,2016(8):18-28.
[18] 张亭,刘林青.中美知识密集型产业发展形态与路径选择的比较研究——基于产品空间理论的实证分析[J].宏观质量研究,2018(1):95-108.
[19] KETELS C.Michael Porter's competitive framework:recent learnings and new research priorities[J].Journal of industrial trade and competitive,2006(6):63-66.
[20] KETELS C.Export competitiveness:reversing the logic[J].Harvard Business Review,2010(6).
[21] PETERSEN M A.Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets[J].Review of Financial Studies,2009,22(1):435-480.
[2] AGHION P,HOWITT P.A model of growth through creative destruction[J].Econometrica,1992,60(2):323-351.
[3] GROSSMAN G M,HELPMAN E.Quality ladders and product cycles[M].National Bureau of Economic Research,Inc,1991.
[4] 易信,刘凤良.金融发展、技术创新与产业结构转型——多部门内生增长理论分析框架[J].管理世界,2015(10):24-39.
[5] HAUSMANN R,HWANG J,RODRIK D.What you export matters[J].Journal of economic growth,2007,12(1):1-25.
[6] HIDALGO C A,KLINGER B,BARABáSI A L,et al.The product space conditions the development of nations[J].Science,2007,317(5837):482-487.
[7] 邓向荣,曹红.产业升级路径选择:遵循抑或偏离比较优势——基于产品空间结构的实证分析[J].中国工业经济,2016(2):52-67.
[8] 张亭,刘林青.产品复杂性水平对中日产业升级影响的比较研究——基于产品空间理论的实证分析[J].经济管理,2017(5):115-129.
[9] 张耀辉.产业创新:新经济下的产业升级模式[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2002,19(1):14-17.
[10] 李伟庆,聂献忠.产业升级与自主创新:机理分析与实证研究[J].科学学研究,2015,33(7):1008-1016.
[11] 路风.产业升级与中国经济发展的政策选择[J].文化纵横,2016(4):60-68.
[12] 林毅夫.新结构经济学——重构发展经济学的框架[J].经济学:季刊,2011,10(1):1-32.
[13] 林毅夫.新结构经济学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2014.
[14] HIDALGO C A,HAUSMANN R.The building blocks of economic complexity[J].Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,2009,106(26):10570-10575.
[15] HAUSMANN R,HIDALGO C.Country diversification,product ubiquity,and economic divergence[J].Ssrn Electronic Journal,2011,69(35):78-81.
[16] HAUSMANN,HIDALGO,et al.The atlas of economic complexity:mapping paths to prosperity[M].MIT Press (MA),2011
[17] 张亭,刘林青.中美产业升级路径选择比较研究—基于产品空间理论的分析[J].经济管理,2016(8):18-28.
[18] 张亭,刘林青.中美知识密集型产业发展形态与路径选择的比较研究——基于产品空间理论的实证分析[J].宏观质量研究,2018(1):95-108.
[19] KETELS C.Michael Porter's competitive framework:recent learnings and new research priorities[J].Journal of industrial trade and competitive,2006(6):63-66.
[20] KETELS C.Export competitiveness:reversing the logic[J].Harvard Business Review,2010(6).
[21] PETERSEN M A.Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets[J].Review of Financial Studies,2009,22(1):435-480.