CAFTA背景下中国边界地区一体化效应
摘要
20世纪90年代初以来,世界经济掀起了区域经济一体化的浪潮,各种形式和规模的区域经济一体化组织如雨后春笋般产生,深刻地影响着各区域以及世界经济的发展。中国作为正在崛起的经济大国,也积极参与到区域经济一体化的建设中,并发挥了重要的作用。
区域经济一体化虽然只是一种次优的政策,但是它对联盟内成员国经济发展的刺激和促进作用非常显著。事实上,一体化对成员国的影响不仅仅作用于国家整体经济和社会,还会对国家内部地区也带来重要影响,特别是位于国家边界线附近的边界地区。边界地区在一体化条件下拥有着非边界地区无法比拟的区位优势：位于一体化市场中心、临近原来的外国市场、进入外国市场的准入度高、贸易交易成本低等等。因此,一体化对边界地区的影响效应就尤为剧烈和突出。在这样的假设前提下,本文以中国-东盟自由贸易区为背景,对边界地区的一体化效应进行了探讨和检验。
边界地区一体化效应的研究在国内外文献中并不多见,而且尚未形成完整成熟的研究体系。因此,本文首先对国内外相关文献进行了梳理,确定了边界地区一体化效应研究的理论基础：贸易理论为边界地区一体化效应研究提供了要素流动动力源的解释,认为一体化削减了贸易壁垒、促进了要素的跨国界流动并影响专业化生产的模式,而边界地区因为进入外国市场的准入成本较低,因此会成为自然的生产基地；区位理论为边界地区一体化效应研究解决了空间结构的问题。贸易理论一直将国家看成是均质的一个点,国家内部不存在地区差别,因此也就不存在空间结构问题。事实上,国家内部地区之间是有差别的。区位理论为国家内部地区的空间结构加以了区分,并且认为一个国家的经济活动通常会向中心地区集聚,从而造成边界地区处于离国家经济中心区域最远的沙漠地带,因此通常是最落后地区；新经济地理学结合了贸易理论和区位理论对边界地区一体化效应研究的贡献,认为一体化之前处于国家外围地区的边界地区随着一体化的推进,因其与邻国的贸易距离短、运输成本低、外国市场准入成本低、位置处于一体化市场的中心等优势,可能诱发新的经济中心在边界地区产生。此外,新经济地理学的三地区模型将运输成本等非关税壁垒作为变量纳入到模型中,可以作为边界地区一体化效应研究的标准模型。
在梳理了边界地区一体化效应研究的理论基础之后,本文总结了边界地区一体化效应研究的范围指向。鉴于现有文献对边界地区一体化效应研究的内容指向不统一,本文在总结国内外学者的研究之后提出边界地区一体化效应研究的内容指向应该包含三方面：边界效应变化、市场潜力变化、产业结构变化。上述三个综合指标基本涵盖目前国内外文献所指向的大部分边界地区一体化效应内容。此外,针对上述三个一体化效应指标,本文建议使用引力方程测度边界效应变化；用三地区NEG模型测度市场潜力效应变化；用偏离份额分析法测度产业结构变化,从而建立起了一套系统的评价边界地区—体化效应的体系。
最后,本文以中国-东盟自由贸易区的一体化形式为背景,选取1990年至2011年的经济数据,分别采用引力方程、三地区NEG模型以及偏离份额分析法,对CAFTA边界地区的边界效应变化、市场潜力变化、产业结构变化三个方面的一体化效应进行了统计和实证检验。检验结果表明,中国边界地区的-体化效应总体比较明显,边界地区在CAFTA的推进过程中边界效应明显降低、市场潜力显著提高、产业结构得以优化,并且,边界地区的大部分指标都高于非边界地区。此外通过进一步对广西和云南两个边界地区主要经济指标的对比研究还表明,CAFTA的一体化效应对不同边界地区的影响是有区别的,比如对广西对外贸易增长的影响力大于对云南对外贸易增长的影响力、对云南对外直接投资的影响大于广西、对广西就业率增长的效果明显低于云南等等。这些差异有可能是两个边界地区自然资源禀赋条件差异造成,也有可能是边界地区政府政策导向差异造成,还有可能是CAFTA体制自身的特点造成,这些现象值得做进一步的研究。
Since the early1990's, contributed to a tide of integration of world economy, various forms and scale of integration organizations have sprung up and profoundly affect both the regional and the world economy development. As a rising economic power, China is also actively involved in the construction of regional economic integration, and plays an important role in the process.
Although the Regional Economic Integration is just a sub-optimal policy, it has significantly stimulated and promoted its members'economic development. In fact, the influences of integration on the member countries are not only the acts on the whole national economic and society, but also on the regions within a nation, especially the border region near to the national border.
Under the background of Regional Economic Intagration, Border regions possess incomparable advantages compared to Non-border regions:located in the center of the integrated market, close to the foreign markets, easier access to foreign markets, lower transaction costs, and so on.Therefore, the impact of integration on border regions is particularly prominent. With these assumptions, this paper probes into the research of integrated effects of border regions.
The research literature of integrated effects in border regioins is not abundant enough and has not formed a complete and perfect research system yet, neither in China, nor in abroad. Therefore, this paper firstly reviewed the related literature and defined the theoretical basis of regional integration effect for border regions:trade theory provides the explanation of factor movement for the research of integrated effects in border regions. It believes that integration will reduce trade barriers and promote the cross-border movements of production factors. By that, the production mode will be influenced and changed. During this process, the border regions,will become natural production basis due to its lower access costs to foreign market; Location theory figure out the spatial structure issue for the study of integrated effect in border region. Trade theories never involed in the spatial structure issue because it consider country as a homogeneous a point. It means that there are no regional differences within a country at all. But in fact, differences do exist among the internal parts of a country. Location theory distinguished spatial structure for the internal parts and argued that a nation's economic activities will normally gather to the central region rather than the border region, which resulting in the border region to be "desert region", where the economy is least developed and the location is most remote from the central part; New Economic Geography theory combined the contributions from Trade Theory and Location Theory, and believed that the border regions located in the remote periphery before regional economic integration will probably be motivated as a new economical center of the integrated market, due to its special advantages such as the shortest trade distance with neighboring countries, lower transportation cost, lower access cost to foreign market, central geographical location of the integrated market. In addition, the three-area new economic geography model has incorporated the transportation cost and other non-tariff barriers as variables into the model, and can be used as a bench model for border region's integration effect research.
After reviewed the theoretical basis of integration effect on border regions, this paper summarizes the concrete research contents of integration effect on border regions. In consideration of the ambiguous definitions giving out by existing literature for the research contents of integration effect on border regions, this paper argued that the contents of the border region's integration effect should include three comprehensive indexes:the border effect change, the market potential change, and the industrial structure change.The aboved indexes have covered most of the contents defined by existing literature, both at home and in abroad. Furthermore, in corresponding to these three integration effect indexes, this paper suggests using gravity equation to measure border effect change, using three-area NEG model to measure market potential change, and shift share analysis to measure the industrial structure change.
Based on the background of the integration form of China-ASEAN Free Trade Area, selected its member's economic data from1990to2011, adopted the gravity equation, three-region NEG model and shift share analysis, this paper statistically and empirically tested the integration effects of CAFTA on border regions, specifically the effects of border effect change, market potential change, and industrial structure change. The results show that the overall integration effect of China's border regions is more noticeable:border region's border effect decreased, market potential increased and industrial structure improved significantly during the process of CAFTA progradation. Most of the indicators in the border regions were higher than that of the non-border regions. In addition, the further comparative study of two border regions, namely Guangxi and Yunnan, shows that the integrated effect of CAFTA is also different among border regions. For example, the influence of CAFTA on Guangxi's foreign trade growth is greater than that on Yunnan province. However, the influences on Yunnan's Foreign Direct Investment growth and employment growth are both greater than that on guangxi. These differences are likely to be caused by the different natural resource endowment in two border regions, or the different policies that the two border region governments oriented. It is also possible that the characteristics of CAFTA itself made the differences. These phenomenons are worth to do further research.
区域经济一体化虽然只是一种次优的政策,但是它对联盟内成员国经济发展的刺激和促进作用非常显著。事实上,一体化对成员国的影响不仅仅作用于国家整体经济和社会,还会对国家内部地区也带来重要影响,特别是位于国家边界线附近的边界地区。边界地区在一体化条件下拥有着非边界地区无法比拟的区位优势：位于一体化市场中心、临近原来的外国市场、进入外国市场的准入度高、贸易交易成本低等等。因此,一体化对边界地区的影响效应就尤为剧烈和突出。在这样的假设前提下,本文以中国-东盟自由贸易区为背景,对边界地区的一体化效应进行了探讨和检验。
边界地区一体化效应的研究在国内外文献中并不多见,而且尚未形成完整成熟的研究体系。因此,本文首先对国内外相关文献进行了梳理,确定了边界地区一体化效应研究的理论基础：贸易理论为边界地区一体化效应研究提供了要素流动动力源的解释,认为一体化削减了贸易壁垒、促进了要素的跨国界流动并影响专业化生产的模式,而边界地区因为进入外国市场的准入成本较低,因此会成为自然的生产基地；区位理论为边界地区一体化效应研究解决了空间结构的问题。贸易理论一直将国家看成是均质的一个点,国家内部不存在地区差别,因此也就不存在空间结构问题。事实上,国家内部地区之间是有差别的。区位理论为国家内部地区的空间结构加以了区分,并且认为一个国家的经济活动通常会向中心地区集聚,从而造成边界地区处于离国家经济中心区域最远的沙漠地带,因此通常是最落后地区；新经济地理学结合了贸易理论和区位理论对边界地区一体化效应研究的贡献,认为一体化之前处于国家外围地区的边界地区随着一体化的推进,因其与邻国的贸易距离短、运输成本低、外国市场准入成本低、位置处于一体化市场的中心等优势,可能诱发新的经济中心在边界地区产生。此外,新经济地理学的三地区模型将运输成本等非关税壁垒作为变量纳入到模型中,可以作为边界地区一体化效应研究的标准模型。
在梳理了边界地区一体化效应研究的理论基础之后,本文总结了边界地区一体化效应研究的范围指向。鉴于现有文献对边界地区一体化效应研究的内容指向不统一,本文在总结国内外学者的研究之后提出边界地区一体化效应研究的内容指向应该包含三方面：边界效应变化、市场潜力变化、产业结构变化。上述三个综合指标基本涵盖目前国内外文献所指向的大部分边界地区一体化效应内容。此外,针对上述三个一体化效应指标,本文建议使用引力方程测度边界效应变化；用三地区NEG模型测度市场潜力效应变化；用偏离份额分析法测度产业结构变化,从而建立起了一套系统的评价边界地区—体化效应的体系。
最后,本文以中国-东盟自由贸易区的一体化形式为背景,选取1990年至2011年的经济数据,分别采用引力方程、三地区NEG模型以及偏离份额分析法,对CAFTA边界地区的边界效应变化、市场潜力变化、产业结构变化三个方面的一体化效应进行了统计和实证检验。检验结果表明,中国边界地区的-体化效应总体比较明显,边界地区在CAFTA的推进过程中边界效应明显降低、市场潜力显著提高、产业结构得以优化,并且,边界地区的大部分指标都高于非边界地区。此外通过进一步对广西和云南两个边界地区主要经济指标的对比研究还表明,CAFTA的一体化效应对不同边界地区的影响是有区别的,比如对广西对外贸易增长的影响力大于对云南对外贸易增长的影响力、对云南对外直接投资的影响大于广西、对广西就业率增长的效果明显低于云南等等。这些差异有可能是两个边界地区自然资源禀赋条件差异造成,也有可能是边界地区政府政策导向差异造成,还有可能是CAFTA体制自身的特点造成,这些现象值得做进一步的研究。
Since the early1990's, contributed to a tide of integration of world economy, various forms and scale of integration organizations have sprung up and profoundly affect both the regional and the world economy development. As a rising economic power, China is also actively involved in the construction of regional economic integration, and plays an important role in the process.
Although the Regional Economic Integration is just a sub-optimal policy, it has significantly stimulated and promoted its members'economic development. In fact, the influences of integration on the member countries are not only the acts on the whole national economic and society, but also on the regions within a nation, especially the border region near to the national border.
Under the background of Regional Economic Intagration, Border regions possess incomparable advantages compared to Non-border regions:located in the center of the integrated market, close to the foreign markets, easier access to foreign markets, lower transaction costs, and so on.Therefore, the impact of integration on border regions is particularly prominent. With these assumptions, this paper probes into the research of integrated effects of border regions.
The research literature of integrated effects in border regioins is not abundant enough and has not formed a complete and perfect research system yet, neither in China, nor in abroad. Therefore, this paper firstly reviewed the related literature and defined the theoretical basis of regional integration effect for border regions:trade theory provides the explanation of factor movement for the research of integrated effects in border regions. It believes that integration will reduce trade barriers and promote the cross-border movements of production factors. By that, the production mode will be influenced and changed. During this process, the border regions,will become natural production basis due to its lower access costs to foreign market; Location theory figure out the spatial structure issue for the study of integrated effect in border region. Trade theories never involed in the spatial structure issue because it consider country as a homogeneous a point. It means that there are no regional differences within a country at all. But in fact, differences do exist among the internal parts of a country. Location theory distinguished spatial structure for the internal parts and argued that a nation's economic activities will normally gather to the central region rather than the border region, which resulting in the border region to be "desert region", where the economy is least developed and the location is most remote from the central part; New Economic Geography theory combined the contributions from Trade Theory and Location Theory, and believed that the border regions located in the remote periphery before regional economic integration will probably be motivated as a new economical center of the integrated market, due to its special advantages such as the shortest trade distance with neighboring countries, lower transportation cost, lower access cost to foreign market, central geographical location of the integrated market. In addition, the three-area new economic geography model has incorporated the transportation cost and other non-tariff barriers as variables into the model, and can be used as a bench model for border region's integration effect research.
After reviewed the theoretical basis of integration effect on border regions, this paper summarizes the concrete research contents of integration effect on border regions. In consideration of the ambiguous definitions giving out by existing literature for the research contents of integration effect on border regions, this paper argued that the contents of the border region's integration effect should include three comprehensive indexes:the border effect change, the market potential change, and the industrial structure change.The aboved indexes have covered most of the contents defined by existing literature, both at home and in abroad. Furthermore, in corresponding to these three integration effect indexes, this paper suggests using gravity equation to measure border effect change, using three-area NEG model to measure market potential change, and shift share analysis to measure the industrial structure change.
Based on the background of the integration form of China-ASEAN Free Trade Area, selected its member's economic data from1990to2011, adopted the gravity equation, three-region NEG model and shift share analysis, this paper statistically and empirically tested the integration effects of CAFTA on border regions, specifically the effects of border effect change, market potential change, and industrial structure change. The results show that the overall integration effect of China's border regions is more noticeable:border region's border effect decreased, market potential increased and industrial structure improved significantly during the process of CAFTA progradation. Most of the indicators in the border regions were higher than that of the non-border regions. In addition, the further comparative study of two border regions, namely Guangxi and Yunnan, shows that the integrated effect of CAFTA is also different among border regions. For example, the influence of CAFTA on Guangxi's foreign trade growth is greater than that on Yunnan province. However, the influences on Yunnan's Foreign Direct Investment growth and employment growth are both greater than that on guangxi. These differences are likely to be caused by the different natural resource endowment in two border regions, or the different policies that the two border region governments oriented. It is also possible that the characteristics of CAFTA itself made the differences. These phenomenons are worth to do further research.
引文
[1]曹宏苓.一般均衡分析在自由贸易区研究中的应用[J].国际经济探索,2005,(11)：4—7.
[2]陈汉林、涂艳.中国-东盟自由贸易区下中国的静态贸易效应——基于引力模型的实证分析[J].国际经贸探索,2007,(9)：59—63.
[3]陈雯.中国-东盟自由贸易区的贸易效应研究——基于引力模型“单国模式”的实证分析[J].国际贸易问题,2009,(7)：61-66
[4]陈喜强.论CAFTA进程中粤桂琼滇产业结构与就业结构协调[J].改革与战略,2009,(8)：89-92.
[5]范爱军、曹庆林.中国对东盟地区的贸易流量分析——基于引力模型的研究[J].亚太经济,2008,(3)：38—43.
[6]范爱军、李菲菲.山东省对东盟贸易流量研究——基于引力模型的实证分析[J].东岳论丛,2011,(2)：138—142.
[7]冯邦彦、段晋苑.边界效应与港深跨境区域合作[J].特区经济,2007,(1)：30-33
[8]关玉春.宁夏产业结构演进实证分析——基于偏离份额分析模型[J].西北民族大学学报,2007,(3)：48-52
[9]郭晓磊、吴国.中国-东盟自由贸易区的驱动机制分析[J].世界经济研究,2007,(1)：68—73.
[10]韩民春、顾婧.WTO框架下建立CAFTA的静态与动态效应分析[J].国际贸易问题,2010,(5)：38—46.
[11]胡超.突破边界效应：城市化与边境民族地区外向型经济发展——以中越边境为例[J].国际经贸探索,2009,(8)：15-20.
[12]金熠、陈钊、陆铭.中国的地区工业集聚：经济地理、新经济地理与政策[J].经济研究2006,(4)：79-89
[13]郎永峰.区域贸易协定、FDI与内生经济增长——中国东盟FTA的经验证据[J].国际商务研究,2010,(1)：48-55
[14]朗永峰、尹翔硕.中国-东盟FTA贸易效应实证研究[J].世界经济研究,2009, (9)：76-80
[15]李红、方冬莉.中国—东盟自贸区边境效应实证分析：以滇桂对越进出口为例[J].世界地理研究,2011,(9)：27—33.
[16]黎鹏.地缘经济区合作开发及其实践策略调整-以中国东盟合作开发地缘经济区的实证分析为例[J].经济地理,2006,(3)：186—191.
[17]李铁立,边界效应与跨边界次区域经济合作研究[D].长春：东北师范大学博士论文,2004
[18]李铁立.西方边境区经济发展及边境区经济合作评述[J].国际经贸探索,2005,(6)：8-12
[19]李铁立、姜怀宇.次区域经济合作机制研究：一个边界效应的分析框架[J].东北亚论坛,2005,(5)：90—94.
[20]梁双陆.国际区域经济一体化进程中的边界效应研究综述[J].思想战线,2008,(2)：109—114.
[21]梁双陆.边疆经济学：国际区域经济一体化与和中国边疆经济发展[M].北京：人民出版社,2009
[22]林桂军、黄灿.出口产业向中西部地区转移了吗—基于省际面板数据的经验分析[J].国际贸易问题,2013,(12)：3—14.
[23]刘芳.云南在中国-东盟自由贸易区(CAFTA)建设中的机遇与挑战[J].云南财贸学院学报,2004,(8)：80—83.
[24]刘玉郑、黄伟生.北部湾经济圈与中国-东盟自由贸易区的建设[J].东南亚纵横,2007,(12)：28—32.
[25]聂元贞、孔秋丽CAFTA与我国西部地区经济发展的实证分析[J].湖南财经高等专科学校学报,2010,(10)
[26]庞卫东.中国与东盟贸易互补性与竞争性分析：2002-2009年[J].东南亚纵横,2011,(5)：30-35.
[27]彭朝荣、施晓东、李雄.跨国界民族在转化边界“屏蔽效应”中的作用[J].商业现代化,2008,(9)：16-17.
[28]仇焕广、杨军、黄季煜.建立中国-东盟自由贸易区对我国农产品贸易和区域农业发展的影响[J].管理世界,2007,(9)：56-61
[29]施锦.在CAFTA条件下广西及周边地区的分工现状问题[J].工业技术经济,2007,(10)：59—61
[30]孙玉红.双重比较优势与竞争型FTA的获益者和受损者-CAFTA的启动与双方的利益分配[J].世界经济研究,2006,(1)：17-22.
[31]汤建中.边界效应与跨国经济合作的地域模式—以东亚地区为例[J].人文地理,2002,(1)：?
[32]藤田昌九等著梁琪译.空间经济学：城市、区域与国际贸易[M]北京：中国人民大学出版社,2005
[33]屠年松、洪文.云南与东盟商品贸易互补性研究[J].经济问题探索,2010,(5)：101—104.
[34]王道俊.建立CAFTA对于中国-东盟贸易产生的效应[J].管理世界,2007,(9)：56—61.
[35]王国刚等.基于偏离份额法的新疆工业结构与竞争力研究[J].干旱区地理,2010,(9)：817-824
[36]王亮、刘卫东.西方经济地理学对国家边界及其效应的研究进展[J].地理科学进展,2010,(5)：601—608.
[37]王素芹NAFTA与CAFTA的对比分析[J].经济经纬,2005,(3)：46-48
[38]王修志、谭艳斌CAFTA框架下中国-东盟相互投资的新发展与推进策略[J].国际经贸探索,2008,(6)：21-24
[39]韦海鸣.我国西南地区与东盟对外贸易的发展与挑战[J].国际贸易问题,2008,(2)：52—58.
[40]吴思敏、詹正华.基于引力模型的中国东盟自由贸易区研究[J].特区经济,2006,(11)：338-339
[41]武晓辉CAFTA建立前后中国与环北部湾东盟诸国贸易关系研究[J].广西经济,2009,(7)：26-27.
[42]谢杰、汪连海CAFTA、ACFTA自贸区与WTO贸易自由化的比较研究[J].统计研究,2008,(7)：32—40.
[43]杨汝万,胡天新,边界效应的转变和边境城市化——以深圳为例[C]叶舜赞等一国两制模式的区域一体化研究北京：辞学出版社,1999：104-111
[44]杨林、陈喜强.论CAFTA进程中我国周边省份产业结构调整策略[J].统计与决策,2010,(2)：70—73.
[45]袁晓玲等.动态偏离份额分析法在区域经济中的应用[J].经济经纬,2008,(1)：55-58
[46]张帆.建立中国-东盟自由贸易区贸易与投资效应分析[J].国际经贸探索,2002,(5)：63—66.
[47]张继林.中国-东盟自由贸易区的区域比较优势及投资策略分析[J].东岳论丛,2007,(9)：59-63.
[48]张荐华、陈铁军.欧美国家边境地区的一体化效应及其启示[J].财贸经济,2004,(2)：80-85
[49]张建中.后危机时代中国与东盟的外贸发展趋势及贸易政策选择[J].国际贸易问题,2011,(5)：60—68.
[50]张娟.欧盟商品市场一体化的实证研究：基于边界效应的视角[博士学位论文].上海：复旦大学,2008
[51]张丽艳.中国-东盟自由贸易区协定及其对广西经贸的影响[J].广西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2005,(7)：62—67.
[52]赵金彦等.1978-2008年广西产业结构演进的偏离份额分析[J].广东农业科学,2010,(3)：320-324
[53]赵伟、张萃.市场一体化与中国制造业区域集聚变化趋势研究[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2009,(2)：?
[54]赵永亮、徐勇.制度因素与贸易的边界效应[J].国际贸易问题,2007,(9)：15-21
[55]赵玉焕、王帅.中国-东盟自由贸易区投资效应研究[J].北京理工大学学报(社会科学版),2011,(4)：13—17.
[56]赵雨霖、林光华.中国与东盟10国双边农产品贸易流量与贸易潜力的分析——基于贸易引力模型的研究[J].国际贸易问题,2008,(12)：69—77.
[57]周曙东、催奇峰.中国-东盟自由贸易区的建立对中国进出口贸易的影响——基于GTAP模型的模拟分析[J].国际贸易问题,2010,(3)：54-59.
[58]朱晓军、张娟、赵珏.欧盟商品市场一体化的影响因素分析：基于边界效 应的视角[J].世界经济研究,2008,(10)：78—86.
[59]朱宇兵CAFTA贸易互补性和竞争性转变对广西对外贸易的影响[J].东南亚纵横,2008,(5)：40—44.
[60]Anderson,Michael A. and Smith,Stephen S.,1999a."Canadian Provinces in World Trade:Engagement and Detachment." Canadian Journal of Economics Review 32(1):22-38-.1999b. "Do National Borders Really Matter? Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Reconsidered." Review of International Economics 7(2)219-27
[61]Baier,S.L.,and Bergstrand,J.,2007, "Do Free Trade Agreements Actually Increase Member Countries Trade, " Journal of International Economics,71:72-95
[62]Balassa, B.,1967, Trade Liberalization among Industrial Countries. New York: McGraw-Hill.
[63]Baldwin, R.,1989, "The Growth Effects of 1992" Economic Policy,4:247-281
[64]Barjak, F., Heimpold, G.,1999, Development Problems and Policies at the German Border with Poland-Regional Aspects of Trade and Investment, Discussion Paper, No.101, Institute for Economic Research, Halle
[65]Barff, R.A. and Knight, P.L.,1988, "Dynamic Shift Share Analysis," Growth and Change,19(2):1-10
[66]Braakmann, N.,& Vogel, A.,2010. "The impact of the 2004 EU enlargement on the performance of service enterprises in the Germany's eastern border region," Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 146(1):75-89.
[67]Brulhart, M.,Crozet,and P.Koening,2004, "Enlargement and the EU Periphery: the Impact of Changing Market Potential," The World Economy,27:853-875.
[68]Bruns, B., and Miggelbrink, J.,2012, Subverting Borders:Doing Research on Smuggling and Small-Scale Trade.
[69]Chamberlin, E.H.,1933, The Theory of Monopolistic Competition:A Re-Orientation of the Theory of Value, 7th ed. Mass:Harvard Univ. Press.
[70]Chang,W., and Winters, A.,2002, "How Regional Trade Blocs Affect Excluded Countries:The Price Effects of MERCOSUR," The American Economic Review, Vol.92,pp889-904.
[71]Chirathivat,S.,2002,"ASEAN-China Free Trade Area:Background, Implication, and Future Development," Journal of Asian Economics,5:671-686
[72]Christaller,W.(1933). Central Places in Southern Germany. London:Prentice Hall 1966.
[73]Clausing,K.,2001, "Trade Creation and Trade diversion in the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement," Canadian Journal of Economics,34:678-96
[74]Corden, W.M.,1972, "Economies of Scale and Customs Union Theory," The Journal of Political Economy, pp:465-75
[75]Dixit, A.K., and Stiglitz,J.E.,1977, "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity", The American Economic Review,67:297-308
[76]Donna, H., and Wilson, T.M.,2001, Borders, Frontiers of Identity, Nation and State. Oxford:Berg
[77]Dunn, E.S.,1960, A Statistical and Analytical Technique for Regional Analysis: Papers of the Regional Science Association [C]. (6),98-112
[78]Elizondo, P., and Krugman, P.,1996 "The Policy and the Third World Metropolis," Journal of Development Economics,49:137-150
[79]Engel, D.,1999. Der EinfluB der Grenznahe auf die Standortwahl von Unternehmen:Eine theoretischeAnalyse und empirische Befunde fur Ostdeutschland, in:Zentrum fur EuropaischeWirtschaftsforschung, Discussion Paper, No.99-18.
[80]Fthergill, S. and Gudgin, G.,1979, "In Defense of Shift-Share," Urban Studies, 17:193-210
[81]Fuchs, Victor R.1962., "Statistical Explanation of the Relative Shift of Manufacturing Among Regions of the United States" Papers of the Regional Science Association.8:1-5
[82]Giersch, H.,1949/50. "Economic Union between Nations and the Location of Industries", in:The Review of Economic Studies,17:87-97.
[83]Grinols, E.L.,1984. "The Thorn in the Lion's Paw:Has Britain Paid Too Much for Common Market Membership?" Journal of International Economics 16:271-93
[84]Graham, F.,1923. "The Theory of International Balance Re-Examed" Quart.J.Econ.,38:54-86
[85]Guo, R.,1996. Border-Regional Economics, Heidelberg
[86]Hansen, Niles.,1977. The Economic Development of Border Regions, Growth and Change 11:2-8.
[87]Hanson,G.,1996 Increasing returns, trade, and the regional structure of wages. NBER working paper 6429
[88]Hanson,G.,1998. Market potential, increasing returns, and geographic concentration, Mimeograph:University of Texas
[89]Heigl, F.,1978. Ansatze einer Theorie der Grenze, Schriftenreihe der Osterreichischen Gesellschaft fur Raumforschung und Raumplanung, Band 26.
[90]Heimpold, G.,2000. Consequences of an opening border for the regional policy in a border region-the case of the German border with Poland, Discussion Paper, No.25, Institute for Economic Research, Halle.
[91]Helliwell, Jhon F.,1998. How Much Do National Borders Matter? Washington, D.C.:Brooking Institution Press
[92]Herzog, Lawrence A.,1991, "International Boundary Cities:The Debate on Transfrontier Planning in Two Border Regions" [J] Natural Resources Journal, 31:587-608
[93]Hoover, E.M.,1963. The Location of Economic Activity,2nd edition, McGraw-Hill.
[94]Kemp,M.,and Wan,H.,1976, "An Elementary Proposition Concerning the Formation of Custom Unions," Journal of International Economics
[95]Krishna,P.,and Panagariya,A.,2002, "On Necessarily Welfare-Enhancing Free Trade Areas." Journal of Internatrional Economics 57:353-67
[96]Krugman,P.,1991. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography,". Journal of Political Economy,99:483-499.
[97]Krugman,P.,1993, "On the Number and Location of Cities," [J] European Economic Review 37:293-298
[98]Lancaster, K.J.,1979, Variety, Equity, and Efficienty. NY:Columbia Univ. Press.
[99]Losch,A.,1940, The Economics of Location. CT:Yale University Press,1954.
[100]Magee,C.,2008, "New Measures of Trade Creation and Trade Diversion, Journal of International Economics,75:340-362
[101]McCallum, John.1995. "National Borders Matter." American Economic Review 85:615-23
[102]Nitsch, V.,2000. "National borders and international trade:evidence from the European Union," Canadian Journal of Economics,22(4):1091-1105.
[103]Ohlin, B.,1933,1967. Interregional and International Trade, Harvard University Press, Cambridge,Massachusetts.
[104]Ohmae, K.,1990, The Border World:Power and Strategy in the Interlinked Economy. London:William Collins & Co.
[105]Rauch, James E.,1991 "Comparative Advantage, Geographic Advantage and the Volume of Trade," [J] Economic Journal,101:1230-44
[106]Romalis,J.,2007,NAFTA's and CUSFTA's effects on International Trade,Review of Economics and Statistics,89(3),pp416-435.
[107]Samulson,Paul A.,1952, "The Transfer Problem and Transport Costs:The Terms of Trade When Impediments are Absent." Economic Journals 62:278-304
[108]Scotchmer, S., and Thisse, J.F.,1992, "Space and Competition:A Puzzle" Annual of Regional Science 26:269-286
[109]Spence,M.,1976, "Product Selection, Fixed Costs and Monopolistic Competition". Review of Economic Studies,37:341-359
[110]Stilwell, F.J.B.,1969, "Regional Growth and Structural Adaption," Urban Studies 6:162-178
[111]Trefler,D.,2004, "The Long and the Short of the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement," American Economic Review,94:870-895
[112]Van Houtum,H.,2000. "Introduction:Current Issues and Debates on Borders and Border Regions in European Regional Science," in:M. Velde (eds) Borders, Regions and People, European Research in Regional science, No.10, Pion, London, pp.1-11.
[113]Venables, A.J.,1996. "Equilibrium Locations of Vertically Linked Industries,' in:International Economic Review,37(2):341-359.
[114]Viner,J.,1950,The Customs Unions Issue, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, New York.
[115]Wei,Shang-jin. "Intra-national Versus Inter-national Trade:How Stubborn are Nations in Global Inregration?" National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No.5531, April 1996
[116]Wilson, T.M., and Donna, H.,1998, Border Identities, Nation and State at International Frontiers. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press
[117]Yeats,A.,1998,"Does MERCOSUR's Trade Performance Raise Concerns about the Effects of Regional Trade Agreements?" The world Bank Economic Review,Vol.12,(1),pp1-28
[2]陈汉林、涂艳.中国-东盟自由贸易区下中国的静态贸易效应——基于引力模型的实证分析[J].国际经贸探索,2007,(9)：59—63.
[3]陈雯.中国-东盟自由贸易区的贸易效应研究——基于引力模型“单国模式”的实证分析[J].国际贸易问题,2009,(7)：61-66
[4]陈喜强.论CAFTA进程中粤桂琼滇产业结构与就业结构协调[J].改革与战略,2009,(8)：89-92.
[5]范爱军、曹庆林.中国对东盟地区的贸易流量分析——基于引力模型的研究[J].亚太经济,2008,(3)：38—43.
[6]范爱军、李菲菲.山东省对东盟贸易流量研究——基于引力模型的实证分析[J].东岳论丛,2011,(2)：138—142.
[7]冯邦彦、段晋苑.边界效应与港深跨境区域合作[J].特区经济,2007,(1)：30-33
[8]关玉春.宁夏产业结构演进实证分析——基于偏离份额分析模型[J].西北民族大学学报,2007,(3)：48-52
[9]郭晓磊、吴国.中国-东盟自由贸易区的驱动机制分析[J].世界经济研究,2007,(1)：68—73.
[10]韩民春、顾婧.WTO框架下建立CAFTA的静态与动态效应分析[J].国际贸易问题,2010,(5)：38—46.
[11]胡超.突破边界效应：城市化与边境民族地区外向型经济发展——以中越边境为例[J].国际经贸探索,2009,(8)：15-20.
[12]金熠、陈钊、陆铭.中国的地区工业集聚：经济地理、新经济地理与政策[J].经济研究2006,(4)：79-89
[13]郎永峰.区域贸易协定、FDI与内生经济增长——中国东盟FTA的经验证据[J].国际商务研究,2010,(1)：48-55
[14]朗永峰、尹翔硕.中国-东盟FTA贸易效应实证研究[J].世界经济研究,2009, (9)：76-80
[15]李红、方冬莉.中国—东盟自贸区边境效应实证分析：以滇桂对越进出口为例[J].世界地理研究,2011,(9)：27—33.
[16]黎鹏.地缘经济区合作开发及其实践策略调整-以中国东盟合作开发地缘经济区的实证分析为例[J].经济地理,2006,(3)：186—191.
[17]李铁立,边界效应与跨边界次区域经济合作研究[D].长春：东北师范大学博士论文,2004
[18]李铁立.西方边境区经济发展及边境区经济合作评述[J].国际经贸探索,2005,(6)：8-12
[19]李铁立、姜怀宇.次区域经济合作机制研究：一个边界效应的分析框架[J].东北亚论坛,2005,(5)：90—94.
[20]梁双陆.国际区域经济一体化进程中的边界效应研究综述[J].思想战线,2008,(2)：109—114.
[21]梁双陆.边疆经济学：国际区域经济一体化与和中国边疆经济发展[M].北京：人民出版社,2009
[22]林桂军、黄灿.出口产业向中西部地区转移了吗—基于省际面板数据的经验分析[J].国际贸易问题,2013,(12)：3—14.
[23]刘芳.云南在中国-东盟自由贸易区(CAFTA)建设中的机遇与挑战[J].云南财贸学院学报,2004,(8)：80—83.
[24]刘玉郑、黄伟生.北部湾经济圈与中国-东盟自由贸易区的建设[J].东南亚纵横,2007,(12)：28—32.
[25]聂元贞、孔秋丽CAFTA与我国西部地区经济发展的实证分析[J].湖南财经高等专科学校学报,2010,(10)
[26]庞卫东.中国与东盟贸易互补性与竞争性分析：2002-2009年[J].东南亚纵横,2011,(5)：30-35.
[27]彭朝荣、施晓东、李雄.跨国界民族在转化边界“屏蔽效应”中的作用[J].商业现代化,2008,(9)：16-17.
[28]仇焕广、杨军、黄季煜.建立中国-东盟自由贸易区对我国农产品贸易和区域农业发展的影响[J].管理世界,2007,(9)：56-61
[29]施锦.在CAFTA条件下广西及周边地区的分工现状问题[J].工业技术经济,2007,(10)：59—61
[30]孙玉红.双重比较优势与竞争型FTA的获益者和受损者-CAFTA的启动与双方的利益分配[J].世界经济研究,2006,(1)：17-22.
[31]汤建中.边界效应与跨国经济合作的地域模式—以东亚地区为例[J].人文地理,2002,(1)：?
[32]藤田昌九等著梁琪译.空间经济学：城市、区域与国际贸易[M]北京：中国人民大学出版社,2005
[33]屠年松、洪文.云南与东盟商品贸易互补性研究[J].经济问题探索,2010,(5)：101—104.
[34]王道俊.建立CAFTA对于中国-东盟贸易产生的效应[J].管理世界,2007,(9)：56—61.
[35]王国刚等.基于偏离份额法的新疆工业结构与竞争力研究[J].干旱区地理,2010,(9)：817-824
[36]王亮、刘卫东.西方经济地理学对国家边界及其效应的研究进展[J].地理科学进展,2010,(5)：601—608.
[37]王素芹NAFTA与CAFTA的对比分析[J].经济经纬,2005,(3)：46-48
[38]王修志、谭艳斌CAFTA框架下中国-东盟相互投资的新发展与推进策略[J].国际经贸探索,2008,(6)：21-24
[39]韦海鸣.我国西南地区与东盟对外贸易的发展与挑战[J].国际贸易问题,2008,(2)：52—58.
[40]吴思敏、詹正华.基于引力模型的中国东盟自由贸易区研究[J].特区经济,2006,(11)：338-339
[41]武晓辉CAFTA建立前后中国与环北部湾东盟诸国贸易关系研究[J].广西经济,2009,(7)：26-27.
[42]谢杰、汪连海CAFTA、ACFTA自贸区与WTO贸易自由化的比较研究[J].统计研究,2008,(7)：32—40.
[43]杨汝万,胡天新,边界效应的转变和边境城市化——以深圳为例[C]叶舜赞等一国两制模式的区域一体化研究北京：辞学出版社,1999：104-111
[44]杨林、陈喜强.论CAFTA进程中我国周边省份产业结构调整策略[J].统计与决策,2010,(2)：70—73.
[45]袁晓玲等.动态偏离份额分析法在区域经济中的应用[J].经济经纬,2008,(1)：55-58
[46]张帆.建立中国-东盟自由贸易区贸易与投资效应分析[J].国际经贸探索,2002,(5)：63—66.
[47]张继林.中国-东盟自由贸易区的区域比较优势及投资策略分析[J].东岳论丛,2007,(9)：59-63.
[48]张荐华、陈铁军.欧美国家边境地区的一体化效应及其启示[J].财贸经济,2004,(2)：80-85
[49]张建中.后危机时代中国与东盟的外贸发展趋势及贸易政策选择[J].国际贸易问题,2011,(5)：60—68.
[50]张娟.欧盟商品市场一体化的实证研究：基于边界效应的视角[博士学位论文].上海：复旦大学,2008
[51]张丽艳.中国-东盟自由贸易区协定及其对广西经贸的影响[J].广西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2005,(7)：62—67.
[52]赵金彦等.1978-2008年广西产业结构演进的偏离份额分析[J].广东农业科学,2010,(3)：320-324
[53]赵伟、张萃.市场一体化与中国制造业区域集聚变化趋势研究[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2009,(2)：?
[54]赵永亮、徐勇.制度因素与贸易的边界效应[J].国际贸易问题,2007,(9)：15-21
[55]赵玉焕、王帅.中国-东盟自由贸易区投资效应研究[J].北京理工大学学报(社会科学版),2011,(4)：13—17.
[56]赵雨霖、林光华.中国与东盟10国双边农产品贸易流量与贸易潜力的分析——基于贸易引力模型的研究[J].国际贸易问题,2008,(12)：69—77.
[57]周曙东、催奇峰.中国-东盟自由贸易区的建立对中国进出口贸易的影响——基于GTAP模型的模拟分析[J].国际贸易问题,2010,(3)：54-59.
[58]朱晓军、张娟、赵珏.欧盟商品市场一体化的影响因素分析：基于边界效 应的视角[J].世界经济研究,2008,(10)：78—86.
[59]朱宇兵CAFTA贸易互补性和竞争性转变对广西对外贸易的影响[J].东南亚纵横,2008,(5)：40—44.
[60]Anderson,Michael A. and Smith,Stephen S.,1999a."Canadian Provinces in World Trade:Engagement and Detachment." Canadian Journal of Economics Review 32(1):22-38-.1999b. "Do National Borders Really Matter? Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Reconsidered." Review of International Economics 7(2)219-27
[61]Baier,S.L.,and Bergstrand,J.,2007, "Do Free Trade Agreements Actually Increase Member Countries Trade, " Journal of International Economics,71:72-95
[62]Balassa, B.,1967, Trade Liberalization among Industrial Countries. New York: McGraw-Hill.
[63]Baldwin, R.,1989, "The Growth Effects of 1992" Economic Policy,4:247-281
[64]Barjak, F., Heimpold, G.,1999, Development Problems and Policies at the German Border with Poland-Regional Aspects of Trade and Investment, Discussion Paper, No.101, Institute for Economic Research, Halle
[65]Barff, R.A. and Knight, P.L.,1988, "Dynamic Shift Share Analysis," Growth and Change,19(2):1-10
[66]Braakmann, N.,& Vogel, A.,2010. "The impact of the 2004 EU enlargement on the performance of service enterprises in the Germany's eastern border region," Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 146(1):75-89.
[67]Brulhart, M.,Crozet,and P.Koening,2004, "Enlargement and the EU Periphery: the Impact of Changing Market Potential," The World Economy,27:853-875.
[68]Bruns, B., and Miggelbrink, J.,2012, Subverting Borders:Doing Research on Smuggling and Small-Scale Trade.
[69]Chamberlin, E.H.,1933, The Theory of Monopolistic Competition:A Re-Orientation of the Theory of Value, 7th ed. Mass:Harvard Univ. Press.
[70]Chang,W., and Winters, A.,2002, "How Regional Trade Blocs Affect Excluded Countries:The Price Effects of MERCOSUR," The American Economic Review, Vol.92,pp889-904.
[71]Chirathivat,S.,2002,"ASEAN-China Free Trade Area:Background, Implication, and Future Development," Journal of Asian Economics,5:671-686
[72]Christaller,W.(1933). Central Places in Southern Germany. London:Prentice Hall 1966.
[73]Clausing,K.,2001, "Trade Creation and Trade diversion in the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement," Canadian Journal of Economics,34:678-96
[74]Corden, W.M.,1972, "Economies of Scale and Customs Union Theory," The Journal of Political Economy, pp:465-75
[75]Dixit, A.K., and Stiglitz,J.E.,1977, "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity", The American Economic Review,67:297-308
[76]Donna, H., and Wilson, T.M.,2001, Borders, Frontiers of Identity, Nation and State. Oxford:Berg
[77]Dunn, E.S.,1960, A Statistical and Analytical Technique for Regional Analysis: Papers of the Regional Science Association [C]. (6),98-112
[78]Elizondo, P., and Krugman, P.,1996 "The Policy and the Third World Metropolis," Journal of Development Economics,49:137-150
[79]Engel, D.,1999. Der EinfluB der Grenznahe auf die Standortwahl von Unternehmen:Eine theoretischeAnalyse und empirische Befunde fur Ostdeutschland, in:Zentrum fur EuropaischeWirtschaftsforschung, Discussion Paper, No.99-18.
[80]Fthergill, S. and Gudgin, G.,1979, "In Defense of Shift-Share," Urban Studies, 17:193-210
[81]Fuchs, Victor R.1962., "Statistical Explanation of the Relative Shift of Manufacturing Among Regions of the United States" Papers of the Regional Science Association.8:1-5
[82]Giersch, H.,1949/50. "Economic Union between Nations and the Location of Industries", in:The Review of Economic Studies,17:87-97.
[83]Grinols, E.L.,1984. "The Thorn in the Lion's Paw:Has Britain Paid Too Much for Common Market Membership?" Journal of International Economics 16:271-93
[84]Graham, F.,1923. "The Theory of International Balance Re-Examed" Quart.J.Econ.,38:54-86
[85]Guo, R.,1996. Border-Regional Economics, Heidelberg
[86]Hansen, Niles.,1977. The Economic Development of Border Regions, Growth and Change 11:2-8.
[87]Hanson,G.,1996 Increasing returns, trade, and the regional structure of wages. NBER working paper 6429
[88]Hanson,G.,1998. Market potential, increasing returns, and geographic concentration, Mimeograph:University of Texas
[89]Heigl, F.,1978. Ansatze einer Theorie der Grenze, Schriftenreihe der Osterreichischen Gesellschaft fur Raumforschung und Raumplanung, Band 26.
[90]Heimpold, G.,2000. Consequences of an opening border for the regional policy in a border region-the case of the German border with Poland, Discussion Paper, No.25, Institute for Economic Research, Halle.
[91]Helliwell, Jhon F.,1998. How Much Do National Borders Matter? Washington, D.C.:Brooking Institution Press
[92]Herzog, Lawrence A.,1991, "International Boundary Cities:The Debate on Transfrontier Planning in Two Border Regions" [J] Natural Resources Journal, 31:587-608
[93]Hoover, E.M.,1963. The Location of Economic Activity,2nd edition, McGraw-Hill.
[94]Kemp,M.,and Wan,H.,1976, "An Elementary Proposition Concerning the Formation of Custom Unions," Journal of International Economics
[95]Krishna,P.,and Panagariya,A.,2002, "On Necessarily Welfare-Enhancing Free Trade Areas." Journal of Internatrional Economics 57:353-67
[96]Krugman,P.,1991. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography,". Journal of Political Economy,99:483-499.
[97]Krugman,P.,1993, "On the Number and Location of Cities," [J] European Economic Review 37:293-298
[98]Lancaster, K.J.,1979, Variety, Equity, and Efficienty. NY:Columbia Univ. Press.
[99]Losch,A.,1940, The Economics of Location. CT:Yale University Press,1954.
[100]Magee,C.,2008, "New Measures of Trade Creation and Trade Diversion, Journal of International Economics,75:340-362
[101]McCallum, John.1995. "National Borders Matter." American Economic Review 85:615-23
[102]Nitsch, V.,2000. "National borders and international trade:evidence from the European Union," Canadian Journal of Economics,22(4):1091-1105.
[103]Ohlin, B.,1933,1967. Interregional and International Trade, Harvard University Press, Cambridge,Massachusetts.
[104]Ohmae, K.,1990, The Border World:Power and Strategy in the Interlinked Economy. London:William Collins & Co.
[105]Rauch, James E.,1991 "Comparative Advantage, Geographic Advantage and the Volume of Trade," [J] Economic Journal,101:1230-44
[106]Romalis,J.,2007,NAFTA's and CUSFTA's effects on International Trade,Review of Economics and Statistics,89(3),pp416-435.
[107]Samulson,Paul A.,1952, "The Transfer Problem and Transport Costs:The Terms of Trade When Impediments are Absent." Economic Journals 62:278-304
[108]Scotchmer, S., and Thisse, J.F.,1992, "Space and Competition:A Puzzle" Annual of Regional Science 26:269-286
[109]Spence,M.,1976, "Product Selection, Fixed Costs and Monopolistic Competition". Review of Economic Studies,37:341-359
[110]Stilwell, F.J.B.,1969, "Regional Growth and Structural Adaption," Urban Studies 6:162-178
[111]Trefler,D.,2004, "The Long and the Short of the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement," American Economic Review,94:870-895
[112]Van Houtum,H.,2000. "Introduction:Current Issues and Debates on Borders and Border Regions in European Regional Science," in:M. Velde (eds) Borders, Regions and People, European Research in Regional science, No.10, Pion, London, pp.1-11.
[113]Venables, A.J.,1996. "Equilibrium Locations of Vertically Linked Industries,' in:International Economic Review,37(2):341-359.
[114]Viner,J.,1950,The Customs Unions Issue, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, New York.
[115]Wei,Shang-jin. "Intra-national Versus Inter-national Trade:How Stubborn are Nations in Global Inregration?" National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No.5531, April 1996
[116]Wilson, T.M., and Donna, H.,1998, Border Identities, Nation and State at International Frontiers. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press
[117]Yeats,A.,1998,"Does MERCOSUR's Trade Performance Raise Concerns about the Effects of Regional Trade Agreements?" The world Bank Economic Review,Vol.12,(1),pp1-28