我国社会性财政支出的效果评价
|
摘要
财政支出效果的评价是近几年公共经济学研究领域的一个热门课题，已有大量相关成果问世。但现有研究多数是从总量角度考察财政支出对国民收入和私人部门的影响，忽视了财政支出的结构性影响。财政支出本身是由多种性质的支出构成的，各组成部分的支出目标和支出领域不同，对应的支出效果也必然不同，有必要对财政支出的单个组成部分进行分析评价。
社会性财政支出（简称为社会性支出）作为财政支出的重要组成，不仅对经济增长有着积极的作用，而且有助于实现社会的公正及稳定，是提高社会福利条件和改善民生必不可少的条件。当前我国政府已意识到强化社会性支出的重要性，不断优化财政支出结构，加大对社会保障、医疗卫生、科技教育等社会事业领域的投入，试图扭转公共服务提供不足的现状。但我国社会性支出的支出效果究竟如何，是否实现了政府的财政职能目标，能否促进经济增长与社会公平的良性互动，对此问题的研究还几乎是一项空白，至今还没有学者对此进行过全面系统的评价，还未形成一个成熟的社会性支出效果评价框架。基于此，本文以社会性支出作为研究对象，对我国政府社会性支出的效果进行评价，以期明确社会性支出的改革方向，形成更加合理的财政支出结构，进而推动我国经济效率的提高，促进社会主义和谐社会的构建。
要评价社会性支出的效果，首先需要建立评价框架体系。本文在对社会性支出及其效果评价标准的相关理论进行梳理的基础上，根据政府财政支出的职能，将“效率”与“公平”作为社会性支出效果的评价标准和准则，进而构建了一个多层次、多角度的评价框架体系。效率方面，以其是否能促进社会财富增长，能否提高经济增长水平为依据。公平方面，不同于以往研究简单的将收入差距作为衡量收入分配公平的指标，仅对社会性支出的结果公平进行评价，本文根据收入分配的环节，将社会性支出的公平标准划分为起点公平和结果公平两个方面，首次对社会性支出的起点公平性进行了评价。另外，鉴于城乡领域收入分配不公的严重性，以社会性支出调节城乡收入分配的效果为例，说明其是否有助于实现社会公平。其中，将社会性支出起点公平的标准界定为社会性支出所形成的基本公共服务在城乡间的差异，如果城乡基本公共服务水平的差距呈收敛趋势，就表明社会性支出对城乡收入分配起点公平有着良好的调节效果。社会性支出结果公平的标准为其是否有助于改善城乡间过大的收入差距，如果社会性支出能使城乡居民的收入差距得以缩小，则说明其有助于城乡收入分配结果公平的实现。
在社会性支出起点公平性的评价方面，本文以“社会性财政资金投入→形成基本公共服务→居民收入分配起点公平”的逻辑为出发点，采用产出类指标构建了反映城乡基本公共服务水平的指标体系，并合成了相应指数，在此基础上，分别对我国城乡基本公共服务水平进行了β收敛及δ收敛检验，发现我国城乡基本公共服务水平的差距存在δ收敛和绝对β收敛，在控制地区影响后，也存在相对β收敛，收敛速度从大到小依次为东部、中部及西部。社会性支出有明显成效，起到了为城乡居民创造收入分配起点公平的作用。
在社会性支出结果公平性的评价方面，为解决变量内生性问题，本文利用系统GMM方法分别估计了未考虑起点公平和考虑起点公平两种情况下，社会性支出总体规模及结构对城乡收入差距的影响，结果表明，社会性支出总体规模在调节城乡收入分配结果公平上的效果较明显，可有效降低城乡收入差距扩大的程度，从支出结构来看，社会性支出中的购买性支出能够较好的改善城乡收入分配格局，有助于实现城乡收入分配的结果公平。但转移性支出未能缩小城乡收入差距，并有可能起到相反的作用，使城乡收入差距进一步恶化。
在社会性支出的效率评价方面，以往研究都将社会性支出与经济增长间的关系设定为单调的线性关系，而两者间可能存在着非线性关系，本文基于相关理论基础，首次利用面板平滑转换模型在非线性的框架下考察了社会性支出的效率，并对其中最优的社会性支出规模进行了估计。结果显示，社会性支出对经济增长的影响具有双门槛特征，社会性支出占GDP比重的最优规模为5%至17%之间。当支出规模低于5%或高于17%时，社会性支出的增加会导致经济增长水平的下降，社会性支出不具有效率。而支出规模在5%至17%之间时，社会性支出对经济增长具有显著的促进作用，在宏观上有效率。目前，我国社会性支出位于最优规模范围内，社会性支出具有效率。
进一步，因以往研究都没有考虑到效率与公平间的互动关系，且忽视了变量的内生性问题，为使评价更加全面，本文将社会性支出、经济效率、社会公平纳入到统一的分析框架中，在考虑了效率与公平互动关系的背景下对社会性支出的效果进行了综合评价，对以往研究做了有益补充。因结果公平作为收入分配公平与否最直接和最集中的反映，这里的公平我们将其界定为收入分配的结果公平，主要由城乡收入差距来体现。通过建立联立方程模型，利用2SLS估计法对参数进行估计后，得出结论，在考虑了效率和公平互动关系后，社会性支出总体规模对经济增长的激励轨迹呈U型，对城乡收入差距有显著的缩小作用，社会性支出的支出效果良好，实现了效率与公平的双重目标。从支出结构来看，购买性支出对经济增长的影响是显著非线性的，并呈U型，对城乡收入差距的影响显著为负，购买性支出的综合支出效果良好。转移性支出则对经济增长无显著影响，与城乡收入差距正向相关，但不显著，转移性支出未能实现其财政职能。
最后，结合实证分析得出的基本结论，本文从加大社会性支出的比重、实现基本公共服务均等化、扩大购买性支出规模、调整转移性支出的投入方向这四个方面提出了相关政策建议，以为我国社会性财政政策的优化提供参考依据。
Evaluation of the effect of social expenditure has become a hot topic and anumber of related results have been published in the field of public economicsresearch in recent years. However, most of the existing research considers the effectsof fiscal expenditure to national income and private sector from the prospect of thegross, and which ignores the structural impact of fiscal expenditure. Expenditure is acombination of a variety of expenditure. The different components of expenditurehave the different targets and areas so that they respectively have the differentexpending effects. Therefore, it is necessary to make analysis and evaluation for theindividual components of financial expenditure.
As an important part of the fiscal expenditure, social expenditure is an essentialcondition of improving the social welfare and People's livelihood. China'sgovernment realizes the importance of strengthening social expenditure, to constantlyoptimize the structure of fiscal expenditure, to increase investment in social security,health care, education of science and technology, and other field of socialundertakings, and to attempt to change the current situation where public serviceprovision is insufficient. However, there is currently no research about the effects ofpresent social expenditure, whether to implement the government's fiscal functions,whether to promote positive interaction between economic growth and social equity.So far no scholars have conducted a comprehensive system of evaluation, and amature framework to evaluate social spending has not yet formed. Based on these, inthis paper, we take the social fiscal expenditure as research object, to evaluate theeffectiveness of government social expenditure in China, in order to identify reformdirection of social expenditure, forming more reasonable financial expenditurestructure, furthermore, promoting increased economic efficiency in China and topromote the construction of socialist harmonious society.
To evaluate the effect of social spending, the first thing is to establish anevaluation frame work system. In this paper, we initially found the theory of socialexpenditure and its effect evaluation criteria, and define the related concepts.According to the government functions of the financial expenditure, in this paper,"efficiency" and "equity" are taken as the standards and guidelines for evaluation ofsocial expenditure. Further, a multi-level and multi-angle evaluation framework of system has been built. In the aspect of efficiency, whether social expenditure isefficient, depends on the basis of whether it can promote growth of social wealth andraise the level of economic growth. In the aspect of justice, this paper is unlike theprevious researches which just simply regard the income gap as a measure of justiceand only evaluate the social expenditure in result justice. In the light of the incomedistribution aspects, the fair criterions of social expenditure is divided into two partsas beginning justice and result justice, and in the first time make an evaluation ofbeginningjustice. Additionally, for the seriousness of the income’s inequitabledistribution, we take social expenditure adjustment of income distribution effects asan example, to whether the social expenditure contributes to the achievement of socialequity. The criterion of social expenditure beginningjustice is defined as differencebetween the basic public services in urban and that in rural, formed by socialexpenditure. If the gap between urban and rural basic public service shows thetendency of convergence, it indicates that social expenditure has a good effect on thebeginningjustice of the urban-rural income distribution. The criterion of the socialexpenditure result justice is defined as whether it helped to improve the excessiveincome gap between urban and rural areas. If social expenditure narrows the incomegap between urban and rural residents, then social expenditure has a great help to therealization of the urban and rural result justice income distributions.
In the evaluation of social expenditure to the beginningjustice in this paper, tobegin with the logical starting point as “social financial funds inputs→formed basicpublic service→residents income distribution beginning fair”, we use outputs classindicators to build indicators system which reflects urban and rural basic publicservice level, and synthesis the corresponding index. Based on this, we take the β andδ convergence test on the urban and rural basic public service respectively. We noticethat in our country, the gap between the urban and rural basic public service levelexists the δ convergence and absolute β convergence. There also exists relative βconvergence after controlling regional effect. From large to small, the convergencerates are followed by Eastern, Central and Western. The social expenditure has aremarkable effect, playing a role for the urban and rural residents’ income distributionbeginningjustice.
In the evaluation of social expenditure to the result justice in this paper, forsolving the problem of endogenous variable, we use system GMM method to estimatetwo situations as follows: considering beginningjustice and not consideringbeginningjustice respectively, the overall scale of the social expenditure and the influence of structure on the income gap between the urban and rural areas. The resultindicates that, the overall scale of the social expenditure has remarkable effect on theurban and rural income distribution results justice and effectively reduces theexpansion of the income gap between the urban and rural areas. From expenditurestructure, purchase expenditure of social expenditure is able to improve the urban andrural income distribution pattern, which has a great help to the outcome of theurban-rural income distribution result justice. However transfer spending has failed tonarrow the income gap between the urban and rural areas, and may have the adverseeffect, furthermore to deteriorate the urban-rural income gap.
In the evaluation of social expenditure to the efficiency, there is a linear relationbetween social expenditure and economic growth in the previous studies. However,a nonlinear relationship may exist between them. In this paper, based on the relevantbasic theory, we use panel smooth transition to study the efficiency of socialexpenditure within the framework of the nonlinear model, and estimate the optimalmodel of social expenditure. Result indicates that social expenditure has the doublethreshold feature impact on economic growth when social expenditure accounts for aproportion from5%to17%of the GDP optimal scales. When the expenditure scales isless than5%or greater than17%, the increase in social expenditure will result in thedecrease of the economic growth level and the social expenditure is not efficient.When the social expenditure scales is between5%and17%, social expenditure has asignificant role in promoting economic growth, generally efficient. Currently, withinthe context of social expenditure in China is within the optimal scales and socialexpenditure works efficiently.
Additionally, previous studies have neglected the context of the interactionbetween efficiency and equity and the endogenous variable. In order to make theevaluation more comprehensive, a unified analysis framework included the socialexpenditure, economic efficiency and social equity has been built. In the context ofthe interaction between efficiency and equity, we comprehensively evaluate theeffectiveness of social expenditure. Because results justice is considered as the mostdirect and most concentrated reflection of whether income distribution is fair, wedefined the justice as result justice of the income distribution. The results justice isprimarily represented by the urban-rural income gap. Through the establishment ofsimultaneous equations model, we draw a conclusion after estimating the parametersby using2SLS estimation method. In light of the fact that the interaction betweenefficiency and fairness is considered, the trajectory of the fact that overall scales of social expenditure stimulate the economic growth is u-shaped. The overall scales ofsocial expenditure significantly reduce the urban-rural income gap, and the socialexpenditure works well, achieving the dual objectives of efficiency and fairness. Fromthe expenditure structure, the impact that the purchase expenditure has on economicgrowth is significantly non-linear and u-shaped. Based on the significantly negativeimpact on the urban-rural income gap, the purchase expenditure from the integratedexpenditure has a good effect. For the transfer expenditure, there is no significantimpact on economic growth. Because the transfer expenditure has no influence to theurban-rural income gap but has been positive correlated with it, transfer expenditurefail to achieve its financial function.
Finally, combined with the empirical analysis, we draw the basic conclusion: inthis paper, in order to provide a basis for the optimization of fiscal policy on societyin China, we propose the suggestion and related policies in the following four aspects:increasing share of social expenditure, achieving equalization of basic public services,expanding the scale of purchase expenditure, adjusting the input direction of transferspending.
社会性财政支出（简称为社会性支出）作为财政支出的重要组成，不仅对经济增长有着积极的作用，而且有助于实现社会的公正及稳定，是提高社会福利条件和改善民生必不可少的条件。当前我国政府已意识到强化社会性支出的重要性，不断优化财政支出结构，加大对社会保障、医疗卫生、科技教育等社会事业领域的投入，试图扭转公共服务提供不足的现状。但我国社会性支出的支出效果究竟如何，是否实现了政府的财政职能目标，能否促进经济增长与社会公平的良性互动，对此问题的研究还几乎是一项空白，至今还没有学者对此进行过全面系统的评价，还未形成一个成熟的社会性支出效果评价框架。基于此，本文以社会性支出作为研究对象，对我国政府社会性支出的效果进行评价，以期明确社会性支出的改革方向，形成更加合理的财政支出结构，进而推动我国经济效率的提高，促进社会主义和谐社会的构建。
要评价社会性支出的效果，首先需要建立评价框架体系。本文在对社会性支出及其效果评价标准的相关理论进行梳理的基础上，根据政府财政支出的职能，将“效率”与“公平”作为社会性支出效果的评价标准和准则，进而构建了一个多层次、多角度的评价框架体系。效率方面，以其是否能促进社会财富增长，能否提高经济增长水平为依据。公平方面，不同于以往研究简单的将收入差距作为衡量收入分配公平的指标，仅对社会性支出的结果公平进行评价，本文根据收入分配的环节，将社会性支出的公平标准划分为起点公平和结果公平两个方面，首次对社会性支出的起点公平性进行了评价。另外，鉴于城乡领域收入分配不公的严重性，以社会性支出调节城乡收入分配的效果为例，说明其是否有助于实现社会公平。其中，将社会性支出起点公平的标准界定为社会性支出所形成的基本公共服务在城乡间的差异，如果城乡基本公共服务水平的差距呈收敛趋势，就表明社会性支出对城乡收入分配起点公平有着良好的调节效果。社会性支出结果公平的标准为其是否有助于改善城乡间过大的收入差距，如果社会性支出能使城乡居民的收入差距得以缩小，则说明其有助于城乡收入分配结果公平的实现。
在社会性支出起点公平性的评价方面，本文以“社会性财政资金投入→形成基本公共服务→居民收入分配起点公平”的逻辑为出发点，采用产出类指标构建了反映城乡基本公共服务水平的指标体系，并合成了相应指数，在此基础上，分别对我国城乡基本公共服务水平进行了β收敛及δ收敛检验，发现我国城乡基本公共服务水平的差距存在δ收敛和绝对β收敛，在控制地区影响后，也存在相对β收敛，收敛速度从大到小依次为东部、中部及西部。社会性支出有明显成效，起到了为城乡居民创造收入分配起点公平的作用。
在社会性支出结果公平性的评价方面，为解决变量内生性问题，本文利用系统GMM方法分别估计了未考虑起点公平和考虑起点公平两种情况下，社会性支出总体规模及结构对城乡收入差距的影响，结果表明，社会性支出总体规模在调节城乡收入分配结果公平上的效果较明显，可有效降低城乡收入差距扩大的程度，从支出结构来看，社会性支出中的购买性支出能够较好的改善城乡收入分配格局，有助于实现城乡收入分配的结果公平。但转移性支出未能缩小城乡收入差距，并有可能起到相反的作用，使城乡收入差距进一步恶化。
在社会性支出的效率评价方面，以往研究都将社会性支出与经济增长间的关系设定为单调的线性关系，而两者间可能存在着非线性关系，本文基于相关理论基础，首次利用面板平滑转换模型在非线性的框架下考察了社会性支出的效率，并对其中最优的社会性支出规模进行了估计。结果显示，社会性支出对经济增长的影响具有双门槛特征，社会性支出占GDP比重的最优规模为5%至17%之间。当支出规模低于5%或高于17%时，社会性支出的增加会导致经济增长水平的下降，社会性支出不具有效率。而支出规模在5%至17%之间时，社会性支出对经济增长具有显著的促进作用，在宏观上有效率。目前，我国社会性支出位于最优规模范围内，社会性支出具有效率。
进一步，因以往研究都没有考虑到效率与公平间的互动关系，且忽视了变量的内生性问题，为使评价更加全面，本文将社会性支出、经济效率、社会公平纳入到统一的分析框架中，在考虑了效率与公平互动关系的背景下对社会性支出的效果进行了综合评价，对以往研究做了有益补充。因结果公平作为收入分配公平与否最直接和最集中的反映，这里的公平我们将其界定为收入分配的结果公平，主要由城乡收入差距来体现。通过建立联立方程模型，利用2SLS估计法对参数进行估计后，得出结论，在考虑了效率和公平互动关系后，社会性支出总体规模对经济增长的激励轨迹呈U型，对城乡收入差距有显著的缩小作用，社会性支出的支出效果良好，实现了效率与公平的双重目标。从支出结构来看，购买性支出对经济增长的影响是显著非线性的，并呈U型，对城乡收入差距的影响显著为负，购买性支出的综合支出效果良好。转移性支出则对经济增长无显著影响，与城乡收入差距正向相关，但不显著，转移性支出未能实现其财政职能。
最后，结合实证分析得出的基本结论，本文从加大社会性支出的比重、实现基本公共服务均等化、扩大购买性支出规模、调整转移性支出的投入方向这四个方面提出了相关政策建议，以为我国社会性财政政策的优化提供参考依据。
Evaluation of the effect of social expenditure has become a hot topic and anumber of related results have been published in the field of public economicsresearch in recent years. However, most of the existing research considers the effectsof fiscal expenditure to national income and private sector from the prospect of thegross, and which ignores the structural impact of fiscal expenditure. Expenditure is acombination of a variety of expenditure. The different components of expenditurehave the different targets and areas so that they respectively have the differentexpending effects. Therefore, it is necessary to make analysis and evaluation for theindividual components of financial expenditure.
As an important part of the fiscal expenditure, social expenditure is an essentialcondition of improving the social welfare and People's livelihood. China'sgovernment realizes the importance of strengthening social expenditure, to constantlyoptimize the structure of fiscal expenditure, to increase investment in social security,health care, education of science and technology, and other field of socialundertakings, and to attempt to change the current situation where public serviceprovision is insufficient. However, there is currently no research about the effects ofpresent social expenditure, whether to implement the government's fiscal functions,whether to promote positive interaction between economic growth and social equity.So far no scholars have conducted a comprehensive system of evaluation, and amature framework to evaluate social spending has not yet formed. Based on these, inthis paper, we take the social fiscal expenditure as research object, to evaluate theeffectiveness of government social expenditure in China, in order to identify reformdirection of social expenditure, forming more reasonable financial expenditurestructure, furthermore, promoting increased economic efficiency in China and topromote the construction of socialist harmonious society.
To evaluate the effect of social spending, the first thing is to establish anevaluation frame work system. In this paper, we initially found the theory of socialexpenditure and its effect evaluation criteria, and define the related concepts.According to the government functions of the financial expenditure, in this paper,"efficiency" and "equity" are taken as the standards and guidelines for evaluation ofsocial expenditure. Further, a multi-level and multi-angle evaluation framework of system has been built. In the aspect of efficiency, whether social expenditure isefficient, depends on the basis of whether it can promote growth of social wealth andraise the level of economic growth. In the aspect of justice, this paper is unlike theprevious researches which just simply regard the income gap as a measure of justiceand only evaluate the social expenditure in result justice. In the light of the incomedistribution aspects, the fair criterions of social expenditure is divided into two partsas beginning justice and result justice, and in the first time make an evaluation ofbeginningjustice. Additionally, for the seriousness of the income’s inequitabledistribution, we take social expenditure adjustment of income distribution effects asan example, to whether the social expenditure contributes to the achievement of socialequity. The criterion of social expenditure beginningjustice is defined as differencebetween the basic public services in urban and that in rural, formed by socialexpenditure. If the gap between urban and rural basic public service shows thetendency of convergence, it indicates that social expenditure has a good effect on thebeginningjustice of the urban-rural income distribution. The criterion of the socialexpenditure result justice is defined as whether it helped to improve the excessiveincome gap between urban and rural areas. If social expenditure narrows the incomegap between urban and rural residents, then social expenditure has a great help to therealization of the urban and rural result justice income distributions.
In the evaluation of social expenditure to the beginningjustice in this paper, tobegin with the logical starting point as “social financial funds inputs→formed basicpublic service→residents income distribution beginning fair”, we use outputs classindicators to build indicators system which reflects urban and rural basic publicservice level, and synthesis the corresponding index. Based on this, we take the β andδ convergence test on the urban and rural basic public service respectively. We noticethat in our country, the gap between the urban and rural basic public service levelexists the δ convergence and absolute β convergence. There also exists relative βconvergence after controlling regional effect. From large to small, the convergencerates are followed by Eastern, Central and Western. The social expenditure has aremarkable effect, playing a role for the urban and rural residents’ income distributionbeginningjustice.
In the evaluation of social expenditure to the result justice in this paper, forsolving the problem of endogenous variable, we use system GMM method to estimatetwo situations as follows: considering beginningjustice and not consideringbeginningjustice respectively, the overall scale of the social expenditure and the influence of structure on the income gap between the urban and rural areas. The resultindicates that, the overall scale of the social expenditure has remarkable effect on theurban and rural income distribution results justice and effectively reduces theexpansion of the income gap between the urban and rural areas. From expenditurestructure, purchase expenditure of social expenditure is able to improve the urban andrural income distribution pattern, which has a great help to the outcome of theurban-rural income distribution result justice. However transfer spending has failed tonarrow the income gap between the urban and rural areas, and may have the adverseeffect, furthermore to deteriorate the urban-rural income gap.
In the evaluation of social expenditure to the efficiency, there is a linear relationbetween social expenditure and economic growth in the previous studies. However,a nonlinear relationship may exist between them. In this paper, based on the relevantbasic theory, we use panel smooth transition to study the efficiency of socialexpenditure within the framework of the nonlinear model, and estimate the optimalmodel of social expenditure. Result indicates that social expenditure has the doublethreshold feature impact on economic growth when social expenditure accounts for aproportion from5%to17%of the GDP optimal scales. When the expenditure scales isless than5%or greater than17%, the increase in social expenditure will result in thedecrease of the economic growth level and the social expenditure is not efficient.When the social expenditure scales is between5%and17%, social expenditure has asignificant role in promoting economic growth, generally efficient. Currently, withinthe context of social expenditure in China is within the optimal scales and socialexpenditure works efficiently.
Additionally, previous studies have neglected the context of the interactionbetween efficiency and equity and the endogenous variable. In order to make theevaluation more comprehensive, a unified analysis framework included the socialexpenditure, economic efficiency and social equity has been built. In the context ofthe interaction between efficiency and equity, we comprehensively evaluate theeffectiveness of social expenditure. Because results justice is considered as the mostdirect and most concentrated reflection of whether income distribution is fair, wedefined the justice as result justice of the income distribution. The results justice isprimarily represented by the urban-rural income gap. Through the establishment ofsimultaneous equations model, we draw a conclusion after estimating the parametersby using2SLS estimation method. In light of the fact that the interaction betweenefficiency and fairness is considered, the trajectory of the fact that overall scales of social expenditure stimulate the economic growth is u-shaped. The overall scales ofsocial expenditure significantly reduce the urban-rural income gap, and the socialexpenditure works well, achieving the dual objectives of efficiency and fairness. Fromthe expenditure structure, the impact that the purchase expenditure has on economicgrowth is significantly non-linear and u-shaped. Based on the significantly negativeimpact on the urban-rural income gap, the purchase expenditure from the integratedexpenditure has a good effect. For the transfer expenditure, there is no significantimpact on economic growth. Because the transfer expenditure has no influence to theurban-rural income gap but has been positive correlated with it, transfer expenditurefail to achieve its financial function.
Finally, combined with the empirical analysis, we draw the basic conclusion: inthis paper, in order to provide a basis for the optimization of fiscal policy on societyin China, we propose the suggestion and related policies in the following four aspects:increasing share of social expenditure, achieving equalization of basic public services,expanding the scale of purchase expenditure, adjusting the input direction of transferspending.
引文
①资料来源于国家财政部网站，http://www.mof.gov.cn/zhuantihuigu/2007ysbg/bjzl/200805/t20080519_25727.html
①资料来源于统计局网站http://www.mof.gov.cn/zhuantihuigu/2007ysbg/zjjd/200805/t20080519_25812.html
①资料来源于财政部财政科学研究所http://www.crifs.org.cn/crifs/html/default/caijingyaowen/_content/12_10/08/1349659731033.html
①资料来源于第一财经日报http://msn.ent.ynet.com/view.jsp?oid=76462533
①引自陈燕.公平与效率[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2007.
①资料来源：中国经济导报http://www.ceh.com.cn/ceh/llpd/2011/6/18/80968.shtml
①资料来源于中国改革论坛http://www.chinareform.org.cn/society/income/Forward/201008/t20100820_40725.htm
①资料来源于http://finance.sina.com.cn/roll/20110110/08519226188.shtml
①资料来源于http://finance.sina.com.cn/economist/jingjixueren/20070818/00363894380.shtml
①资料来源于http://news.sohu.com/20050222/n224379479.shtml
①资料来源于国家统计局网站http://www.stats.gov.cn/was40/gjtjj_detail.jsp?channelid=33728&record=984；网易财经（原载于中国经济周刊）http://money.163.com/11/0920/01/7EBV0K7800252G50.html
①资料来源于http://finance.ifeng.com/news/macro/20121120/7321042.shtml
①资料来源于http://www.21cbh.com/HTML/2013-2-23/xMNjUxXzYyNDkxMg.html
①资料来源于http://finance.people.com.cn/GB/n/2013/0221/c1004-20554390.html
①资料来源于http://www.afinance.cn/new/xwpl/201112/404735.html
①该文结论为我国政府的最优规模是政府消费支出占GDP比重的17.5%,而根据统计口径，社会性支出应大致等于消费性支出扣除国防费和行政管理费等服务性支出后再加上政府转移性支出的总额。根据《2011年统计年鉴》计算整理，我国服务性支出占GDP比重为3.3%，转移性支出占比为2.6%，因此最优社会性支出规模为16.8%。
②资料来源于中国社科院《中国财政政策报告》http://epaper.21cbh.com/html/2010-09/14/content_130443.htm
①资料来源于郑州晚报,2011年2月23日,http://finance.ifeng.com/news/20110223/3459955.shtml
①资料来源：http://finance.sina.com.cn/review/mspl/20130423/025915240648.shtml
①资料来源：财政部财政科学研究所http://www.crifs.org.cn/crifs/html/default/caizhengshihua/_content/12_04/26/1335417931322.html
[1] Robert L. Boyd. Government involvement in the economy and the distributionof income: A cross-national study. Population Research and Policy Review,1988,(7):223-238
[2] Barro, Robert J. Government Spending in a Simple Model of EndogenousGrowth. Journal of Political Economy,1990,(98):103-126
[3] Galor, O.,J.Zeria.Income Distribution and Macroeconomics.Review ofEconomic Studies,1993,(60):35-52
[4] Benedict Clements. Income Distribution and Social Expenditure in Brazil.http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=882659,1997-07
[5] Farre, A.E.Education and Income Distribution. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.202.3905&rep=rep1&type=pdf,2000-08
[6] Kevin Sylwester. Can education expenditures reduce income inequality?.Economics of Education Review,2002,(21):43-52
[7] Lei Zhang.Income Distribution and Political Economy of Allocation of PublicEducation Spending.http://www-siepr.stanford.edu/papers/pdf/02-25.pdf,2002-11
[8] Gregorio,Lee.Education and Income Inequality: New Evidence fromCross-Country Data.Review of Income and Wealth,2002,(3):395-416
[9] James R Dunn, Bill Burgess,Nancy A Ross.Income distribution, publicservices expenditures, and all cause mortality in US states. Journal ofEpidemiology&Community Health,2005,(59):768-774
[10] Mukaramah, Zakariah, Mohamed. Public Expenditure Impact on IncomeDistribution in Malaysia. http://dipse.unicas.it/wb2008/papers/Harun.pdf,2008
[11] Leonel Muinelo, Oriol Roca-Sagalés.Economic Growth and Inequality: TheRole of Fiscal Policies. http://www3.udg.edu/fcee/greco01/PagDeprtment/Papers%20Seminaris/Leonel-paper.pdf,2011
[12] García-Pe alosa, C., S. J. Turnovsky.Growth, Inequality, and Fiscal Policywith Endogenous Labor Supply: What are the Relevant Tradeoffs?.Journal ofMoney, Credit and Banking,2007,(39):369-394
[13] Jorge, Blanca, Violeta.The Impact of Tax and Expenditure Policies on IncomeDistribution: Evidence from a Large Panel of Countries. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2188608,2012-04
[14]李秉强.我国财政对城乡收入差距影响的实证分析.太原理工大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(1):5-8
[15]王莉.财政支出公平效应的测度.统计与决策,2007,(7):116-117
[16]孟勇.财政支出对居民收入差距形成的计量分析.财政研究,2009,(8):61-65
[17]蔡忠雁.地方财政支出结构与地方城乡收入差距关系的研究——基于聚类分析的视角.吉林工商学院学报,2009,(4):29-32
[18]王艺明,蔡翔.财政支出结构与城乡收入差距——基于东、中、西部地区省级面板数据的经验分析.财经科学,2010,(8):49-57
[19]莫亚琳,张志超.我国西部地区增加财政支出对社会收入分配的影响——基于动态面板数据计量的实证分析.经济体制改革,2010,(6):116-120
[20]李吉雄.强化我国财政的收入再分配职能作用问题研究:[江西财经大学博士学位论文].南昌:江西财经大学,2010,87-90
[21]陈安平,杜金沛.中国的财政支出与城乡收入差距.统计研究,2010,(11):34-39
[22]秦海林,李志勇.二元财政政策影响城乡差距的实证分析.中央财经大学学报,2011,(9):7-12
[23]金双华.财政支出水平对地区收入差距作用的统计评价.统计研究,2011,(2):39-44
[24]邓旋.财政支出规模、结构与城乡收入不平等——基于中国省级面板数据的实证分析.经济评论,2011,(4):63-69
[25]张义博,刘文忻.人口流动、财政支出结构与城乡收入差距.中国农村经济,2012,(1):16-30
[26]廖信林.财政支出、城市化对城乡收入差距的作用机理及动态分析.软科学,2012,(4):33-38
[27]刘晓凤.财政教育支出、财政总支出与基尼系数的脉冲响应分析——以湖北省义务教育为例[J].兰州学刊,2012,(5):195-201
[28] Garcia-Mil, T, Therese J.McGuire. Do Interregional Transfers Improved theEconomic Performance of Poor Regions? The Case of Spain.http://www.cesruc.org/uploads/soft/130221/1-130221113A9.pdf,2006-12-27
[29]黄祖辉,王敏,万广华.我国居民收入不平等问题:基于转移性收入角度的分析.管理世界,2003,(3):70-75
[30]杜鹏.转移性收入对收入差距的影响——以东北地区城镇居民为例.中国软科学,2004,(10):108-112
[31]张明喜.转移支付与我国地区收入差距的收敛分析.财经论丛,2006,(5):24-28
[32]匡导球.我国财政转移支付存在的问题及改革取向.财政研究,2006,(9):32-33
[33]张万强.转移性收入视角下的政府转移支付对居民收入差距的影响——以辽宁为例.社会科学辑刊,2009,(5):82-86
[34]杨天宇.中国居民收入再分配过程中的“逆向转移”问题研究.统计研究,2009,(4):19-25
[35]苏素,宋云河.中国各地区城乡收入差距及其影响因素研究.技术经济,2010,(12):107-112
[36]周晓东.财政转移性支出调节收入分配作用及对策分析.现代经济信息,2012,(2):203-208
[37] Kathy Lindert, Emmanuel Skoufias&Joseph Shapiro. Redistributing Incometo the Poor and the Rich: Public Transfers in Latin America and the Caribbean.http://siteresources.worldbank.org/SOCIALPROTECTION/Resources/SP-Discussion-papers/Safety-Nets-DP/0605.pdf,2006-08
[38] Kinam Kim, Peter J.Lambert.Redistributive Effect of U.S. Taxes and PublicTransfers,1994-2004. https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/3869,2007-02-06
[39] Marc Frenette, David A. Green, Kevin Milligan.The Impact of Taxes andTransfers on Canadian Income Inequality. http://faculty.arts.ubc. ca/kmilligan/research/papers/tax-transfer-inequality.pdf,2009-08
[40] Samir Cury Sr, Allexandro E, Isabela Callegari. The Impacts of IncomeTransfer Programs on Income Distribution and Poverty in Brazil: AnIntegrated Microsimulation and Computable General Equilibrium Analysis.http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1734788,2010-11-4
[41] Andrew Sharpe, Evan Capeluck.The Impact of Redistribution on IncomeInequality in Canada and the Provinces,1981-2010. http://ideas.repec.org/p/sls/resrep/1208.html,2012-09
[42]胡日东,王卓.收人分配差距、消费需求与转移支付的实证研究.数量经济技术经济研究,2002,(4):29-32
[43]吴栋,赵西亮.论政府在调节居民收入差距中的作用.经济体制改革,2005,(4):41-44
[44]张跃,王天龙.中国地区间收入差距问题的模型分析.北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2005,(5):101-106
[45]刘丽.转移支付与“二元”社会结构下“城乡差距”的缩小.见:行政管理体制改革的法律问题——中国法学会行政法学研究会2006年年会论文集.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2006
[46]张惠玲.我国财政转移性支出对调节收入分配的作用分析.统计与决策,2007,(6):88-90
[47] Ram Rati.Government Size and Economic Growth: A New Framework andSome Evidence from Cross-Section and Time-Series Data.AmericanEconomic Review,1986,(76):191-203
[48] D.Aschauer. Is Public Expenditure Productive.Journal of MonetaryEconomics,1989,(23):177-200
[49] Aghion, Bolton. A trickle-down Theory of Growth and Development.Reviewof Economic Studies,1997,(64):151-172
[50] Aghion, Garcia.Inequality and Economic Growth: the Perspective of the NewGrowth Theories. Journal of Economic Literature,1999,(4):1615-1660
[51] John Loizides, George Vamvoukas. Government expenditure and EconomicGrowth: Evidence from trivariate causality testing. Journal of AppliedEconomics,2005,(1):125-152
[52] Atsushilimi. Decentralization and Economic Growth Revisited: An EmpiricalNote.Journal of Urban Economic Growth,2005,57(3):449-461
[53] Konstantinos, Pantelis Kammasb.Tax-spending policies and economic growth:Theoretical predictions and evidence from the OECD. European Journal ofPolitical Economy,2007,(23):885-902
[54] Niloy Bose, M. Emranul Haque, Denis R. Osborn. Public expenditure andeconomic growth: A disaggegated analysis for developing countries. TheManchester School,2007,(75):533-556
[55] Moreno-Dodson, Blanca.Assessing the Impact of Public Spending on Growth:An Empirical Analysis for seven fast Growing Countries. https://www.econbiz.de/Record/assessing-the-impact-of-public-spending-on-growth-an-empirical-analysis-for-seven-fast-growing-countries-moreno-dodson-blanca/10003746157,2008-07
[56] Nikos.Fiscal Policy and Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence from EUCountries. http://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/19174.html,2009-09
[57]刘晓红.财政支出对经济增长的作用机制及其检验.财政研究,2006,(12):35-37
[58]董直庆,滕建洲.我国财政与经济增长关系:基于Bootstrap仿真方法的实证检验.数量经济技术经济研究,2007,(1):13-21
[59]王莉.我国经济增长与财政支出绩效分析.北京工商大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(4):25-28
[60]朱柏铭,祝燕君.财政支出与经济增长关系研究——基于中国1978~2005年数据的验证.技术经济与管理研究,2008,(3):59-63
[61]叶小榕,刘燕等.财政支出与经济增长的关系研究:基于1978～2007年中国省际面板数据的实证分析.西部财会,2009,(2):4-6
[62]黎友焕,王凯.改革开放30年财政支出与中国经济增长——基于省级面板数据的实证分析.华东经济管理,2010,(1):63-67
[63]蒋亚萍.我国财政支出与经济增长的关系——基于VAR模型的实证检验.经济论坛,2010,(12):23-25
[64]王康扬.地方政府财政行为对GDP增长影响的实证分析——基于我国省级行政区域的面板数据.淮阴工学院学报,2012,(6):25-27
[65]蔡之兵,周俭初.财政支出结构,空间溢出与经济增长——来自四种空间权重矩阵的证据.中国区域经济,2012,(5):1-13
[66]王倩.政府支出相机抉择效应的实证分析.经济与管理评论,2012,(4):72-80
[67]巩崇一.对财政支出与经济增长关系的研究.经营管理者,2013,(4):121
[68] Barro R J, Sala-i-Martin X, Blanchard O J, et al. Convergence across statesand regions. Brookings papers on economic activity,1991,107-182
[69] R.Levine, D.Renelt.A Sensitivity Analysis of Cross-Country GrowthRegressions.American Economic Review,1992,(82):942-963
[70] Engen E M, Skinner J. Fiscal policy and economic growth. http://www.nber.org/papers/w4223,1992-12
[71] Easterly W, Rebelo S. Fiscal policy and economic growth. Journal ofmonetary economics,1993,32(3):417-458
[72] Nelson M A, Singh R D. The deficit-growth connection: Some recentevidence from developing countries. Economic Development and CulturalChange,1994,43(1):167-191
[73] Devrarajian.S, Swaroop.V, H. Zou. The Composition of Public Expenditureand Economic Growth. Journal of Public Economics,1996,(67):221-240
[74] Greiner A. Fiscal Policy in a Two-Country Endogenous Growth Model.Review of Economics,2000,(3),222-236
[75] Dar A A, AmirKhalkhali S. Government size, factor accumulation, andeconomic growth: evidence from OECD countries. Journal of policy modeling,2002,24(7):679-692
[76] Abu-Bader S, Abu-Qarn A S. Government expenditures, military spending andeconomic growth: causality evidence from Egypt, Israel, and Syria. Journal ofPolicy Modeling,2003,25(6):567-583
[77] Mo P H. Government Expenditures and Economic Growth: The Supply andDemand Sides. Fiscal Studies,2007,28(4):497-522
[78]郭庆旺,吕冰洋,张德勇.财政支出结构与经济增长.经济理论与经济管理,2003,(11):5-12
[79]庄子银,邹薇.公共支出能否促进经济增长:中国的经验分析.管理世界,2003,(7):4-12
[80]孟淑芳.政府支出和经济增长的理论与实证分析.经济论坛,2004,(10):83-84
[81]顾严.我国财政支出对宏观经济的影响——基于“巴罗法则”的视角.中央财政大学学报,2006,(11):1-5
[82]严成樑,龚六堂.财政支出、税收与长期经济增长.经济研究,2009,(6):4-15
[83]陈亮.财政支出结构对经济增长的长期效应论析.中国城市经济,2011,(9):124-125
[84]王珺威,吴武清,陈暮紫.财政收支和经济增长关系的实证分析.新疆财经,2011,(3):50-58
[85]刘洪,金林.基于半参数模型的财政支出与经济增长关系研究.财政研究,2012,(10):65-68
[86] Ghali, K.Government Spending and Economic Growth in Saudi Arabia.Journal of Economic Development,1997,(22):165-172
[87] Barro,R.J. Government Spending in a Simple Model of EndogenousGrowth.Journal of political Economy,1990,(5):103-117
[88] J Agell. On the benefits from rigid labor markets: norms, market failures, andsocial insurance. The Economic Journal,1999,(2):143-164
[89] Hulten&Schwab. Public Capital Formation and the Growth of RegionalManufacturing Industries. National Tax Journal,1992,(44):121-134
[90] Munnell.A. Policy Watch: Infrastructure Investment and Economic Growth.Journal of Economic Perspective,1992,(6):189-198
[91] Gramlich.E. Infrastructure Investment: A Review Essay. Journal of EconomicLiterature,1994,(32):1176-1196
[92] SM.Miller, FS.Russek. Fiscal structures and economic growth: internationalevidence. Economic Inquiry,1997,(6):603-613
[93] Agel,l Jonas, Henry Ohlsson,Peter Skogman Thoursie. Growth Effects ofGovernment Expenditure and Taxation in Rich Countries: A Comment:European Economic Review,2006,(50):211-218
[94] Varoudakis Aristomene. Public Finance, Governance, and Growth inTransition Economies: Empirical Evidence From1992-2004. http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/book/10.1596/1813-9450-4255，2009-06
[95] Niloybose, MEmranulhaque, Deniser. Osborn. Public Expenditure andEconomic Growth: A Disaggregated Analysis for Developing Countries. TheManchester School,2007,(9):533-556
[96]汪东华.转型期我国财政支出规模与经济增长关系研究.求索,2006,(10):40-41,219
[97]陈建宝,戴平生.我国财政支出对经济增长的乘数效应分析.厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,(5):26-32
[98]张颖熙.地方财政支出规模与地方经济增长的关系研究——基于29个省份面板数据分析.中国经济问题,2008,(2):26-31
[99]杨友才,赖敏晖.我国最优政府财政支出规模——基于门槛回归的分析.经济科学,2009,(2):34-44
[100]李刚,顾雯.经济增长中的政府功效和区域贫困化问题研究——基于中国1038个县(县级市)统计数据的实证分析.南京财经大学学报,2010,(1):1-8
[101]严成樑,王弟海,龚六堂.政府财政政策对经济增长的影响——基于一个资本积累与创新相互作用模型的分析.南开经济研究,2010,(1):51-65
[102]赵天奕.民生财政与经济增长:1978-2010年——基于非线性STR模型的实证分析.经济研究参考,2012,(58):10-17
[103]汪柱旺,于瀚尧.财政支出与社会物质资本形成及经济增长关系的实证研究.当代财经,2012,(12):47-54
[104]余跃.我国财政收支与经济增长关系的实证研究.西部财会,2012,(3):10-15
[105]陈思霞.福利性公共支出与长期经济增长——基于分布滞后模型和动态广义矩的实证研究.湖北经济学院学报,2013,(1):63-71
[106]阎坤,王进杰.公共支出理论前沿.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004,91-102
[107]中国经济增长与宏观稳定课题组.增长失衡与政府责任——基于社会性支出角度的分析.经济研究,2006,(10):4-17
[108]周金刚.构建我国公共财政支出框架的研究:[南京农业大学硕士学位论文].南京:南京农业大学,2007,18-19
[109]娄峥嵘.我国公共服务财政支出效率研究.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2011,15-18
[110]魏云.我国现阶段财政社会性支出问题研究:[中国海洋大学硕士学位论文].山东:中国海洋大学,2012,7-8
[111]徐进.我国经济增长中的财政社会性支出研究:[复旦大学博士学位论文].上海:复旦大学,2008,4-5
[112]杨宝剑.最优经济增长的地方财政支出结构优化研究.财经论丛,2012,(2):26-31
[113]卫兴华,张宇主编.公平与效率的新选择.北京:经济科学出版社,2007,16-93
[114]曾国安,胡晶晶,李少伟.公平及其与效率的关系:研究进展与思考.税务与经济,2009,(3):1-8
[115]张帆.基本公共服务均等化衡量指标分析.财政监督,2011,(13):50-52
[116]安体富,任强.中国公共服务均等化水平指标体系的构建——基于地区差别视角的量化分析.财贸经济,2008,(6):79-82
[117]李升.农村社会养老保险覆盖率的影响因素分析——基于山东省的实证检验.经济论坛,2010,(2):9-12
[118]卢现祥,李晓敏,卢青.湖北省城乡公共服务均等化:现状、问题与对策.学习与实践,2009,(11):35-42
[119] Barro,R.,X.Sala-I-Martin.Convergence.Journal of Political Economy,1992,(31):223-251
[120]豆建民,刘欣.中国区域基本公共服务水平的收敛性及其影响因素分析.财经研究,2011,(10):37-47
[121]宋艳菊.中国区域经济增长差异的收敛性分析:[西北大学硕士学位论文].西北:西北大学,2006,42-44
[122]冉光和等.财政金融政策与城乡协调发展.北京:科学出版社,2009,65-66
[123] Blundell, Richard&Stephen Bond. Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictionsin Dynamic Panel Data Models.Journal of Econometrics,1998,87(1):115-143
[124]金双华.财政支出与社会公平关系分析.统计研究,2006,(3):67-71
[125]刘叔申,吕凯波.财政支出结构、产业结构和城乡居民收入差距——基于1978—2006年省级面板数据的研究.经济问题,2011,(11):42-45
[126]徐倩,李放.财政社会保障支出与中国城乡收入差距——理论分析与计量检验.上海经济研究,2012,(11):81-88
[127]林毅夫,刘明兴.中国的经济增长收敛与收入分配.世界经济,2003,(8):3-14
[128]陈迅,童华建.城市化与城乡收入差距变动的实证研究——基于1985年-2003年中国数据.生产力研究,2007,(10):64-66
[129]程开明,李金昌.城市偏向、城市化与城乡收入差距的作用机制及动态分析.数量经济技术经济研究,2007,(7):116-125
[130] Cashin, P.Government Spending, Taxes and Economic Growth.IMF StaffPaper,1995,42(2):237-269
[131] Baldacci, Emnuele.Social Spending, Human Capital and Growth inDeveloping Countries: Implications for Achieving the MDGs. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1089656,2004-12
[132] Shaista Alam, Abida Sultana. Does Social Expenditures promote economicgrowth? A multivariate panel cointegration analysis for Asiancountries.European Journal of social sciences,2010,(14):44-54
[133] Mohsen Mehrara, Maysam Musai.The causality between health expenditureand economic growth in Iran. International Journal of Economics andResearch,2011,2(4):13-19
[134]钞小静,任保平.中国公共支出结构对经济增长影响的实证分析:1978-2004.经济评论,2007,(5):33-41
[135]王春元.我国政府财政支出结构与经济增长关系实证分析.财经研究,2009,(6):120-130
[136]郑雅卓.论教育与经济增长的互推效应——基于1990—2010年的经验数据.江西社会科学,2012,(6):195-198
[137] Castronova, Edward. Inequality and Income: The Mediating Effects of SocialSpending and Risk.Economics of Transition,2001,9(2):395-415
[138] De Grauwe, Paul, Magdalena. Globalization and Social Spending.PacificEconomic Review,2005,10(1):105-123
[139]刘俊英.公共支出结构与经济增长关系的实证分析.经济问题,2008,(1):35-37
[140]李运祥.基于动态系统的我国公共财政支出结构绩效分析.财经问题研究,2010,(9):73-77
[141] Persson, T., Tabellini, G. Is Inequality Harmful for Growth?.AmericanEconomic Review,1994,84(3):600-621
[142] Arjona, Roman, Ladaique etal. Growth, Inequality and SocialProtection.Canadian Public Policy,2003,(29):119-139
[143]付文林,沈坤荣.中国公共支出的规模与结构及其增长效应.经济科学,2006,(1):20-29
[144] Folster, Henrekson.Growth effects of government expenditure and taxation inrich countries.European Economic Review,2001,45(8):1501-1520
[145]张峁,徐蓓蓓,江栋.地方财政支出对经济增长影响的空间计量分析—辽宁省为例.科学决策,2010,(5):50-57
[146] Wonhyuk Cho. Empirical Analysis of the Relation between Social Spendingand Economic Growth: Developing Countries and OECD Members:[A Thesisfor the Degree of Master].Seoul: Seoul National University,2005,39-40
[147]张望.财政支出结构、人力资本积累与经济增长.产业经济研究,2011,(2):77-86
[148] Blank, R.Social Protection Versus Economic Flexibility: Is There a Trade-off.Chicago: University Of Chicago Press,1994,1-20
[149] Rodrik, Dani.Where did all the growth go? External shocks, Social conflict,and growth collapse.Journal of Economic Growth,1999,(4):385-412
[150]曾国安,胡伟业,胡晶晶.国民收入再分配公平与初次分配公平差异的比较.江汉论坛,2009,(1):51-55
[151] Feldstein, Martin S.Social security and saving: New time seriesevidence.National Tax Journal,1996,49(2):151-164
[152] Bruce E. Hansen. Threshold effects in non-dynamic panels: Estimation,testing, and inference.Journal of Econometrics,1999,93(2):345-368
[153] Gonzalez A., Terasvirta T., Dijk van D. Panel Smooth Transition RegressionModels. http://swopec.hhs.se/hastef/papers/hastef0604.pdf,2005-08-17
[154]范子英,张军.中国如何在平衡中牺牲了效率:转移支付的视角.世界经济,2010,(11):117-138
[155]寇翔.财政社会性支出对中国经济增长的影响:[中国社会科学院研究生院硕士学位论文].北京:中国社会科学院,2010,28-30
[156]王万珺,陈晓和.国防支出与经济增长均衡关系的理论和实证研究,财经研究,201,1(1):16-26
[157]陈继勇,梁柱.贸易开放与经济增长的内生性研究新进展.经济评论,2011,(6):130-137
[158]李国柱,马树才.政府规模与经济增长—基于中国的经验研究.统计与决策,2007,(2):45-46
[159] Alberto Alesina,Dani Rodrik.Distributive Politics and Economic Growth.TheQuarterly Journal of Economics,1994,109(2):465-490
[160] Bénabou R.Inequality and Grow. http://www.nber.org/papers/w5658.pdf,1996
[161] Enrico Longoni, Filippo Gregorini.Inequality, Political Systems and PublicSpending. http://ideas.repec.org/p/mib/wpaper/159.html,2009-04
[162] Muinelo-Gallo, Oriol.Joint Determinants of Fiscal Policy, Income Inequalityand Economic Growth. Economic Modeling,2013,(30):814-824
[163] Meltzer A.H., Richard S.F.A Rational Theory of the Size of Government.Journal of Political Economy,1981,(89):914-927
[164] Roemer J.E.Why the Poor do not Expropriate the Rich: An Old Argument inNew Garb.Journal of Public Economics,1998,(70):399-424
[165]杨继,刘柯杰.中国财政支出增长的实证分析.上海经济研究,2002,(9):12-17
[166]梅芸.影响财政性民生支出规模的因素分析.发展,2010,(1):79-80
[167]陈任武,李玲,刘穷志.经济增长与社会公平:公共支出的均衡激励机制.经济管理,2010,(4):5-10
[168]常世旺,韩仁月.公众主导还是国家主导:1952-2006年中国财政支出增长影响因素研究.经济评论,2008,(6):9-15
[169]沈坤荣,付文林.中国的财政分权制度与地区经济增长.管理世界,2005,(1):31-39
[170]孙群力.中国地方政府规模影响因素的实证研究.财政研究,2010,(1):38-41
[171]黄菁.环境污染与城市经济增长:基于联立方程的实证分析.财贸研究,2010,(5):8-16
[172]谢涓,李玉双,韩峰.环境规制与经济增长:基于中国省际面板联立方程的分析.经济经纬,2012,(5):1-5
[173]王少平,欧阳志刚.我国城乡收入差距的度量及其对经济增长的效应.经济研究,2007(10):44-55
[174]邓璇.财政支出规模、结构与城乡收入不平等.经济评论,2011,(4):63-69
①资料来源于统计局网站http://www.mof.gov.cn/zhuantihuigu/2007ysbg/zjjd/200805/t20080519_25812.html
①资料来源于财政部财政科学研究所http://www.crifs.org.cn/crifs/html/default/caijingyaowen/_content/12_10/08/1349659731033.html
①资料来源于第一财经日报http://msn.ent.ynet.com/view.jsp?oid=76462533
①引自陈燕.公平与效率[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2007.
①资料来源：中国经济导报http://www.ceh.com.cn/ceh/llpd/2011/6/18/80968.shtml
①资料来源于中国改革论坛http://www.chinareform.org.cn/society/income/Forward/201008/t20100820_40725.htm
①资料来源于http://finance.sina.com.cn/roll/20110110/08519226188.shtml
①资料来源于http://finance.sina.com.cn/economist/jingjixueren/20070818/00363894380.shtml
①资料来源于http://news.sohu.com/20050222/n224379479.shtml
①资料来源于国家统计局网站http://www.stats.gov.cn/was40/gjtjj_detail.jsp?channelid=33728&record=984；网易财经（原载于中国经济周刊）http://money.163.com/11/0920/01/7EBV0K7800252G50.html
①资料来源于http://finance.ifeng.com/news/macro/20121120/7321042.shtml
①资料来源于http://www.21cbh.com/HTML/2013-2-23/xMNjUxXzYyNDkxMg.html
①资料来源于http://finance.people.com.cn/GB/n/2013/0221/c1004-20554390.html
①资料来源于http://www.afinance.cn/new/xwpl/201112/404735.html
①该文结论为我国政府的最优规模是政府消费支出占GDP比重的17.5%,而根据统计口径，社会性支出应大致等于消费性支出扣除国防费和行政管理费等服务性支出后再加上政府转移性支出的总额。根据《2011年统计年鉴》计算整理，我国服务性支出占GDP比重为3.3%，转移性支出占比为2.6%，因此最优社会性支出规模为16.8%。
②资料来源于中国社科院《中国财政政策报告》http://epaper.21cbh.com/html/2010-09/14/content_130443.htm
①资料来源于郑州晚报,2011年2月23日,http://finance.ifeng.com/news/20110223/3459955.shtml
①资料来源：http://finance.sina.com.cn/review/mspl/20130423/025915240648.shtml
①资料来源：财政部财政科学研究所http://www.crifs.org.cn/crifs/html/default/caizhengshihua/_content/12_04/26/1335417931322.html
[1] Robert L. Boyd. Government involvement in the economy and the distributionof income: A cross-national study. Population Research and Policy Review,1988,(7):223-238
[2] Barro, Robert J. Government Spending in a Simple Model of EndogenousGrowth. Journal of Political Economy,1990,(98):103-126
[3] Galor, O.,J.Zeria.Income Distribution and Macroeconomics.Review ofEconomic Studies,1993,(60):35-52
[4] Benedict Clements. Income Distribution and Social Expenditure in Brazil.http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=882659,1997-07
[5] Farre, A.E.Education and Income Distribution. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.202.3905&rep=rep1&type=pdf,2000-08
[6] Kevin Sylwester. Can education expenditures reduce income inequality?.Economics of Education Review,2002,(21):43-52
[7] Lei Zhang.Income Distribution and Political Economy of Allocation of PublicEducation Spending.http://www-siepr.stanford.edu/papers/pdf/02-25.pdf,2002-11
[8] Gregorio,Lee.Education and Income Inequality: New Evidence fromCross-Country Data.Review of Income and Wealth,2002,(3):395-416
[9] James R Dunn, Bill Burgess,Nancy A Ross.Income distribution, publicservices expenditures, and all cause mortality in US states. Journal ofEpidemiology&Community Health,2005,(59):768-774
[10] Mukaramah, Zakariah, Mohamed. Public Expenditure Impact on IncomeDistribution in Malaysia. http://dipse.unicas.it/wb2008/papers/Harun.pdf,2008
[11] Leonel Muinelo, Oriol Roca-Sagalés.Economic Growth and Inequality: TheRole of Fiscal Policies. http://www3.udg.edu/fcee/greco01/PagDeprtment/Papers%20Seminaris/Leonel-paper.pdf,2011
[12] García-Pe alosa, C., S. J. Turnovsky.Growth, Inequality, and Fiscal Policywith Endogenous Labor Supply: What are the Relevant Tradeoffs?.Journal ofMoney, Credit and Banking,2007,(39):369-394
[13] Jorge, Blanca, Violeta.The Impact of Tax and Expenditure Policies on IncomeDistribution: Evidence from a Large Panel of Countries. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2188608,2012-04
[14]李秉强.我国财政对城乡收入差距影响的实证分析.太原理工大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(1):5-8
[15]王莉.财政支出公平效应的测度.统计与决策,2007,(7):116-117
[16]孟勇.财政支出对居民收入差距形成的计量分析.财政研究,2009,(8):61-65
[17]蔡忠雁.地方财政支出结构与地方城乡收入差距关系的研究——基于聚类分析的视角.吉林工商学院学报,2009,(4):29-32
[18]王艺明,蔡翔.财政支出结构与城乡收入差距——基于东、中、西部地区省级面板数据的经验分析.财经科学,2010,(8):49-57
[19]莫亚琳,张志超.我国西部地区增加财政支出对社会收入分配的影响——基于动态面板数据计量的实证分析.经济体制改革,2010,(6):116-120
[20]李吉雄.强化我国财政的收入再分配职能作用问题研究:[江西财经大学博士学位论文].南昌:江西财经大学,2010,87-90
[21]陈安平,杜金沛.中国的财政支出与城乡收入差距.统计研究,2010,(11):34-39
[22]秦海林,李志勇.二元财政政策影响城乡差距的实证分析.中央财经大学学报,2011,(9):7-12
[23]金双华.财政支出水平对地区收入差距作用的统计评价.统计研究,2011,(2):39-44
[24]邓旋.财政支出规模、结构与城乡收入不平等——基于中国省级面板数据的实证分析.经济评论,2011,(4):63-69
[25]张义博,刘文忻.人口流动、财政支出结构与城乡收入差距.中国农村经济,2012,(1):16-30
[26]廖信林.财政支出、城市化对城乡收入差距的作用机理及动态分析.软科学,2012,(4):33-38
[27]刘晓凤.财政教育支出、财政总支出与基尼系数的脉冲响应分析——以湖北省义务教育为例[J].兰州学刊,2012,(5):195-201
[28] Garcia-Mil, T, Therese J.McGuire. Do Interregional Transfers Improved theEconomic Performance of Poor Regions? The Case of Spain.http://www.cesruc.org/uploads/soft/130221/1-130221113A9.pdf,2006-12-27
[29]黄祖辉,王敏,万广华.我国居民收入不平等问题:基于转移性收入角度的分析.管理世界,2003,(3):70-75
[30]杜鹏.转移性收入对收入差距的影响——以东北地区城镇居民为例.中国软科学,2004,(10):108-112
[31]张明喜.转移支付与我国地区收入差距的收敛分析.财经论丛,2006,(5):24-28
[32]匡导球.我国财政转移支付存在的问题及改革取向.财政研究,2006,(9):32-33
[33]张万强.转移性收入视角下的政府转移支付对居民收入差距的影响——以辽宁为例.社会科学辑刊,2009,(5):82-86
[34]杨天宇.中国居民收入再分配过程中的“逆向转移”问题研究.统计研究,2009,(4):19-25
[35]苏素,宋云河.中国各地区城乡收入差距及其影响因素研究.技术经济,2010,(12):107-112
[36]周晓东.财政转移性支出调节收入分配作用及对策分析.现代经济信息,2012,(2):203-208
[37] Kathy Lindert, Emmanuel Skoufias&Joseph Shapiro. Redistributing Incometo the Poor and the Rich: Public Transfers in Latin America and the Caribbean.http://siteresources.worldbank.org/SOCIALPROTECTION/Resources/SP-Discussion-papers/Safety-Nets-DP/0605.pdf,2006-08
[38] Kinam Kim, Peter J.Lambert.Redistributive Effect of U.S. Taxes and PublicTransfers,1994-2004. https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/3869,2007-02-06
[39] Marc Frenette, David A. Green, Kevin Milligan.The Impact of Taxes andTransfers on Canadian Income Inequality. http://faculty.arts.ubc. ca/kmilligan/research/papers/tax-transfer-inequality.pdf,2009-08
[40] Samir Cury Sr, Allexandro E, Isabela Callegari. The Impacts of IncomeTransfer Programs on Income Distribution and Poverty in Brazil: AnIntegrated Microsimulation and Computable General Equilibrium Analysis.http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1734788,2010-11-4
[41] Andrew Sharpe, Evan Capeluck.The Impact of Redistribution on IncomeInequality in Canada and the Provinces,1981-2010. http://ideas.repec.org/p/sls/resrep/1208.html,2012-09
[42]胡日东,王卓.收人分配差距、消费需求与转移支付的实证研究.数量经济技术经济研究,2002,(4):29-32
[43]吴栋,赵西亮.论政府在调节居民收入差距中的作用.经济体制改革,2005,(4):41-44
[44]张跃,王天龙.中国地区间收入差距问题的模型分析.北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2005,(5):101-106
[45]刘丽.转移支付与“二元”社会结构下“城乡差距”的缩小.见:行政管理体制改革的法律问题——中国法学会行政法学研究会2006年年会论文集.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2006
[46]张惠玲.我国财政转移性支出对调节收入分配的作用分析.统计与决策,2007,(6):88-90
[47] Ram Rati.Government Size and Economic Growth: A New Framework andSome Evidence from Cross-Section and Time-Series Data.AmericanEconomic Review,1986,(76):191-203
[48] D.Aschauer. Is Public Expenditure Productive.Journal of MonetaryEconomics,1989,(23):177-200
[49] Aghion, Bolton. A trickle-down Theory of Growth and Development.Reviewof Economic Studies,1997,(64):151-172
[50] Aghion, Garcia.Inequality and Economic Growth: the Perspective of the NewGrowth Theories. Journal of Economic Literature,1999,(4):1615-1660
[51] John Loizides, George Vamvoukas. Government expenditure and EconomicGrowth: Evidence from trivariate causality testing. Journal of AppliedEconomics,2005,(1):125-152
[52] Atsushilimi. Decentralization and Economic Growth Revisited: An EmpiricalNote.Journal of Urban Economic Growth,2005,57(3):449-461
[53] Konstantinos, Pantelis Kammasb.Tax-spending policies and economic growth:Theoretical predictions and evidence from the OECD. European Journal ofPolitical Economy,2007,(23):885-902
[54] Niloy Bose, M. Emranul Haque, Denis R. Osborn. Public expenditure andeconomic growth: A disaggegated analysis for developing countries. TheManchester School,2007,(75):533-556
[55] Moreno-Dodson, Blanca.Assessing the Impact of Public Spending on Growth:An Empirical Analysis for seven fast Growing Countries. https://www.econbiz.de/Record/assessing-the-impact-of-public-spending-on-growth-an-empirical-analysis-for-seven-fast-growing-countries-moreno-dodson-blanca/10003746157,2008-07
[56] Nikos.Fiscal Policy and Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence from EUCountries. http://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/19174.html,2009-09
[57]刘晓红.财政支出对经济增长的作用机制及其检验.财政研究,2006,(12):35-37
[58]董直庆,滕建洲.我国财政与经济增长关系:基于Bootstrap仿真方法的实证检验.数量经济技术经济研究,2007,(1):13-21
[59]王莉.我国经济增长与财政支出绩效分析.北京工商大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(4):25-28
[60]朱柏铭,祝燕君.财政支出与经济增长关系研究——基于中国1978~2005年数据的验证.技术经济与管理研究,2008,(3):59-63
[61]叶小榕,刘燕等.财政支出与经济增长的关系研究:基于1978～2007年中国省际面板数据的实证分析.西部财会,2009,(2):4-6
[62]黎友焕,王凯.改革开放30年财政支出与中国经济增长——基于省级面板数据的实证分析.华东经济管理,2010,(1):63-67
[63]蒋亚萍.我国财政支出与经济增长的关系——基于VAR模型的实证检验.经济论坛,2010,(12):23-25
[64]王康扬.地方政府财政行为对GDP增长影响的实证分析——基于我国省级行政区域的面板数据.淮阴工学院学报,2012,(6):25-27
[65]蔡之兵,周俭初.财政支出结构,空间溢出与经济增长——来自四种空间权重矩阵的证据.中国区域经济,2012,(5):1-13
[66]王倩.政府支出相机抉择效应的实证分析.经济与管理评论,2012,(4):72-80
[67]巩崇一.对财政支出与经济增长关系的研究.经营管理者,2013,(4):121
[68] Barro R J, Sala-i-Martin X, Blanchard O J, et al. Convergence across statesand regions. Brookings papers on economic activity,1991,107-182
[69] R.Levine, D.Renelt.A Sensitivity Analysis of Cross-Country GrowthRegressions.American Economic Review,1992,(82):942-963
[70] Engen E M, Skinner J. Fiscal policy and economic growth. http://www.nber.org/papers/w4223,1992-12
[71] Easterly W, Rebelo S. Fiscal policy and economic growth. Journal ofmonetary economics,1993,32(3):417-458
[72] Nelson M A, Singh R D. The deficit-growth connection: Some recentevidence from developing countries. Economic Development and CulturalChange,1994,43(1):167-191
[73] Devrarajian.S, Swaroop.V, H. Zou. The Composition of Public Expenditureand Economic Growth. Journal of Public Economics,1996,(67):221-240
[74] Greiner A. Fiscal Policy in a Two-Country Endogenous Growth Model.Review of Economics,2000,(3),222-236
[75] Dar A A, AmirKhalkhali S. Government size, factor accumulation, andeconomic growth: evidence from OECD countries. Journal of policy modeling,2002,24(7):679-692
[76] Abu-Bader S, Abu-Qarn A S. Government expenditures, military spending andeconomic growth: causality evidence from Egypt, Israel, and Syria. Journal ofPolicy Modeling,2003,25(6):567-583
[77] Mo P H. Government Expenditures and Economic Growth: The Supply andDemand Sides. Fiscal Studies,2007,28(4):497-522
[78]郭庆旺,吕冰洋,张德勇.财政支出结构与经济增长.经济理论与经济管理,2003,(11):5-12
[79]庄子银,邹薇.公共支出能否促进经济增长:中国的经验分析.管理世界,2003,(7):4-12
[80]孟淑芳.政府支出和经济增长的理论与实证分析.经济论坛,2004,(10):83-84
[81]顾严.我国财政支出对宏观经济的影响——基于“巴罗法则”的视角.中央财政大学学报,2006,(11):1-5
[82]严成樑,龚六堂.财政支出、税收与长期经济增长.经济研究,2009,(6):4-15
[83]陈亮.财政支出结构对经济增长的长期效应论析.中国城市经济,2011,(9):124-125
[84]王珺威,吴武清,陈暮紫.财政收支和经济增长关系的实证分析.新疆财经,2011,(3):50-58
[85]刘洪,金林.基于半参数模型的财政支出与经济增长关系研究.财政研究,2012,(10):65-68
[86] Ghali, K.Government Spending and Economic Growth in Saudi Arabia.Journal of Economic Development,1997,(22):165-172
[87] Barro,R.J. Government Spending in a Simple Model of EndogenousGrowth.Journal of political Economy,1990,(5):103-117
[88] J Agell. On the benefits from rigid labor markets: norms, market failures, andsocial insurance. The Economic Journal,1999,(2):143-164
[89] Hulten&Schwab. Public Capital Formation and the Growth of RegionalManufacturing Industries. National Tax Journal,1992,(44):121-134
[90] Munnell.A. Policy Watch: Infrastructure Investment and Economic Growth.Journal of Economic Perspective,1992,(6):189-198
[91] Gramlich.E. Infrastructure Investment: A Review Essay. Journal of EconomicLiterature,1994,(32):1176-1196
[92] SM.Miller, FS.Russek. Fiscal structures and economic growth: internationalevidence. Economic Inquiry,1997,(6):603-613
[93] Agel,l Jonas, Henry Ohlsson,Peter Skogman Thoursie. Growth Effects ofGovernment Expenditure and Taxation in Rich Countries: A Comment:European Economic Review,2006,(50):211-218
[94] Varoudakis Aristomene. Public Finance, Governance, and Growth inTransition Economies: Empirical Evidence From1992-2004. http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/book/10.1596/1813-9450-4255，2009-06
[95] Niloybose, MEmranulhaque, Deniser. Osborn. Public Expenditure andEconomic Growth: A Disaggregated Analysis for Developing Countries. TheManchester School,2007,(9):533-556
[96]汪东华.转型期我国财政支出规模与经济增长关系研究.求索,2006,(10):40-41,219
[97]陈建宝,戴平生.我国财政支出对经济增长的乘数效应分析.厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,(5):26-32
[98]张颖熙.地方财政支出规模与地方经济增长的关系研究——基于29个省份面板数据分析.中国经济问题,2008,(2):26-31
[99]杨友才,赖敏晖.我国最优政府财政支出规模——基于门槛回归的分析.经济科学,2009,(2):34-44
[100]李刚,顾雯.经济增长中的政府功效和区域贫困化问题研究——基于中国1038个县(县级市)统计数据的实证分析.南京财经大学学报,2010,(1):1-8
[101]严成樑,王弟海,龚六堂.政府财政政策对经济增长的影响——基于一个资本积累与创新相互作用模型的分析.南开经济研究,2010,(1):51-65
[102]赵天奕.民生财政与经济增长:1978-2010年——基于非线性STR模型的实证分析.经济研究参考,2012,(58):10-17
[103]汪柱旺,于瀚尧.财政支出与社会物质资本形成及经济增长关系的实证研究.当代财经,2012,(12):47-54
[104]余跃.我国财政收支与经济增长关系的实证研究.西部财会,2012,(3):10-15
[105]陈思霞.福利性公共支出与长期经济增长——基于分布滞后模型和动态广义矩的实证研究.湖北经济学院学报,2013,(1):63-71
[106]阎坤,王进杰.公共支出理论前沿.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004,91-102
[107]中国经济增长与宏观稳定课题组.增长失衡与政府责任——基于社会性支出角度的分析.经济研究,2006,(10):4-17
[108]周金刚.构建我国公共财政支出框架的研究:[南京农业大学硕士学位论文].南京:南京农业大学,2007,18-19
[109]娄峥嵘.我国公共服务财政支出效率研究.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2011,15-18
[110]魏云.我国现阶段财政社会性支出问题研究:[中国海洋大学硕士学位论文].山东:中国海洋大学,2012,7-8
[111]徐进.我国经济增长中的财政社会性支出研究:[复旦大学博士学位论文].上海:复旦大学,2008,4-5
[112]杨宝剑.最优经济增长的地方财政支出结构优化研究.财经论丛,2012,(2):26-31
[113]卫兴华,张宇主编.公平与效率的新选择.北京:经济科学出版社,2007,16-93
[114]曾国安,胡晶晶,李少伟.公平及其与效率的关系:研究进展与思考.税务与经济,2009,(3):1-8
[115]张帆.基本公共服务均等化衡量指标分析.财政监督,2011,(13):50-52
[116]安体富,任强.中国公共服务均等化水平指标体系的构建——基于地区差别视角的量化分析.财贸经济,2008,(6):79-82
[117]李升.农村社会养老保险覆盖率的影响因素分析——基于山东省的实证检验.经济论坛,2010,(2):9-12
[118]卢现祥,李晓敏,卢青.湖北省城乡公共服务均等化:现状、问题与对策.学习与实践,2009,(11):35-42
[119] Barro,R.,X.Sala-I-Martin.Convergence.Journal of Political Economy,1992,(31):223-251
[120]豆建民,刘欣.中国区域基本公共服务水平的收敛性及其影响因素分析.财经研究,2011,(10):37-47
[121]宋艳菊.中国区域经济增长差异的收敛性分析:[西北大学硕士学位论文].西北:西北大学,2006,42-44
[122]冉光和等.财政金融政策与城乡协调发展.北京:科学出版社,2009,65-66
[123] Blundell, Richard&Stephen Bond. Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictionsin Dynamic Panel Data Models.Journal of Econometrics,1998,87(1):115-143
[124]金双华.财政支出与社会公平关系分析.统计研究,2006,(3):67-71
[125]刘叔申,吕凯波.财政支出结构、产业结构和城乡居民收入差距——基于1978—2006年省级面板数据的研究.经济问题,2011,(11):42-45
[126]徐倩,李放.财政社会保障支出与中国城乡收入差距——理论分析与计量检验.上海经济研究,2012,(11):81-88
[127]林毅夫,刘明兴.中国的经济增长收敛与收入分配.世界经济,2003,(8):3-14
[128]陈迅,童华建.城市化与城乡收入差距变动的实证研究——基于1985年-2003年中国数据.生产力研究,2007,(10):64-66
[129]程开明,李金昌.城市偏向、城市化与城乡收入差距的作用机制及动态分析.数量经济技术经济研究,2007,(7):116-125
[130] Cashin, P.Government Spending, Taxes and Economic Growth.IMF StaffPaper,1995,42(2):237-269
[131] Baldacci, Emnuele.Social Spending, Human Capital and Growth inDeveloping Countries: Implications for Achieving the MDGs. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1089656,2004-12
[132] Shaista Alam, Abida Sultana. Does Social Expenditures promote economicgrowth? A multivariate panel cointegration analysis for Asiancountries.European Journal of social sciences,2010,(14):44-54
[133] Mohsen Mehrara, Maysam Musai.The causality between health expenditureand economic growth in Iran. International Journal of Economics andResearch,2011,2(4):13-19
[134]钞小静,任保平.中国公共支出结构对经济增长影响的实证分析:1978-2004.经济评论,2007,(5):33-41
[135]王春元.我国政府财政支出结构与经济增长关系实证分析.财经研究,2009,(6):120-130
[136]郑雅卓.论教育与经济增长的互推效应——基于1990—2010年的经验数据.江西社会科学,2012,(6):195-198
[137] Castronova, Edward. Inequality and Income: The Mediating Effects of SocialSpending and Risk.Economics of Transition,2001,9(2):395-415
[138] De Grauwe, Paul, Magdalena. Globalization and Social Spending.PacificEconomic Review,2005,10(1):105-123
[139]刘俊英.公共支出结构与经济增长关系的实证分析.经济问题,2008,(1):35-37
[140]李运祥.基于动态系统的我国公共财政支出结构绩效分析.财经问题研究,2010,(9):73-77
[141] Persson, T., Tabellini, G. Is Inequality Harmful for Growth?.AmericanEconomic Review,1994,84(3):600-621
[142] Arjona, Roman, Ladaique etal. Growth, Inequality and SocialProtection.Canadian Public Policy,2003,(29):119-139
[143]付文林,沈坤荣.中国公共支出的规模与结构及其增长效应.经济科学,2006,(1):20-29
[144] Folster, Henrekson.Growth effects of government expenditure and taxation inrich countries.European Economic Review,2001,45(8):1501-1520
[145]张峁,徐蓓蓓,江栋.地方财政支出对经济增长影响的空间计量分析—辽宁省为例.科学决策,2010,(5):50-57
[146] Wonhyuk Cho. Empirical Analysis of the Relation between Social Spendingand Economic Growth: Developing Countries and OECD Members:[A Thesisfor the Degree of Master].Seoul: Seoul National University,2005,39-40
[147]张望.财政支出结构、人力资本积累与经济增长.产业经济研究,2011,(2):77-86
[148] Blank, R.Social Protection Versus Economic Flexibility: Is There a Trade-off.Chicago: University Of Chicago Press,1994,1-20
[149] Rodrik, Dani.Where did all the growth go? External shocks, Social conflict,and growth collapse.Journal of Economic Growth,1999,(4):385-412
[150]曾国安,胡伟业,胡晶晶.国民收入再分配公平与初次分配公平差异的比较.江汉论坛,2009,(1):51-55
[151] Feldstein, Martin S.Social security and saving: New time seriesevidence.National Tax Journal,1996,49(2):151-164
[152] Bruce E. Hansen. Threshold effects in non-dynamic panels: Estimation,testing, and inference.Journal of Econometrics,1999,93(2):345-368
[153] Gonzalez A., Terasvirta T., Dijk van D. Panel Smooth Transition RegressionModels. http://swopec.hhs.se/hastef/papers/hastef0604.pdf,2005-08-17
[154]范子英,张军.中国如何在平衡中牺牲了效率:转移支付的视角.世界经济,2010,(11):117-138
[155]寇翔.财政社会性支出对中国经济增长的影响:[中国社会科学院研究生院硕士学位论文].北京:中国社会科学院,2010,28-30
[156]王万珺,陈晓和.国防支出与经济增长均衡关系的理论和实证研究,财经研究,201,1(1):16-26
[157]陈继勇,梁柱.贸易开放与经济增长的内生性研究新进展.经济评论,2011,(6):130-137
[158]李国柱,马树才.政府规模与经济增长—基于中国的经验研究.统计与决策,2007,(2):45-46
[159] Alberto Alesina,Dani Rodrik.Distributive Politics and Economic Growth.TheQuarterly Journal of Economics,1994,109(2):465-490
[160] Bénabou R.Inequality and Grow. http://www.nber.org/papers/w5658.pdf,1996
[161] Enrico Longoni, Filippo Gregorini.Inequality, Political Systems and PublicSpending. http://ideas.repec.org/p/mib/wpaper/159.html,2009-04
[162] Muinelo-Gallo, Oriol.Joint Determinants of Fiscal Policy, Income Inequalityand Economic Growth. Economic Modeling,2013,(30):814-824
[163] Meltzer A.H., Richard S.F.A Rational Theory of the Size of Government.Journal of Political Economy,1981,(89):914-927
[164] Roemer J.E.Why the Poor do not Expropriate the Rich: An Old Argument inNew Garb.Journal of Public Economics,1998,(70):399-424
[165]杨继,刘柯杰.中国财政支出增长的实证分析.上海经济研究,2002,(9):12-17
[166]梅芸.影响财政性民生支出规模的因素分析.发展,2010,(1):79-80
[167]陈任武,李玲,刘穷志.经济增长与社会公平:公共支出的均衡激励机制.经济管理,2010,(4):5-10
[168]常世旺,韩仁月.公众主导还是国家主导:1952-2006年中国财政支出增长影响因素研究.经济评论,2008,(6):9-15
[169]沈坤荣,付文林.中国的财政分权制度与地区经济增长.管理世界,2005,(1):31-39
[170]孙群力.中国地方政府规模影响因素的实证研究.财政研究,2010,(1):38-41
[171]黄菁.环境污染与城市经济增长:基于联立方程的实证分析.财贸研究,2010,(5):8-16
[172]谢涓,李玉双,韩峰.环境规制与经济增长:基于中国省际面板联立方程的分析.经济经纬,2012,(5):1-5
[173]王少平,欧阳志刚.我国城乡收入差距的度量及其对经济增长的效应.经济研究,2007(10):44-55
[174]邓璇.财政支出规模、结构与城乡收入不平等.经济评论,2011,(4):63-69