中国全要素生产率估算与分析.ppt

中国全要素生产率估算与分析 Measurement and Analysis of TFP in China,郑京海 哥德堡大学经济系（瑞典） Jinghai Zheng Department of Economics Gothenburg University Sweden,内容提要,生产率概念的由来 全要素生产率的估算与拆分 全要素生产率与企业改革 全要素生产率与可持续经济增长 中国省际全要素生产率增长变化的实证分析 前苏联和亚洲四小龙的案例 影响全要素生产率增长的因素 中国经济增长模式的转变,一、生产率概念的由来: (1) 投入产出率,Total factor productivity is the average product of all inputs, it is the ratio of the output to an index of inputs. Let the index of inputs be denoted as X. Then total factor productivity (TFP) is TFP=y/X Differentiating both sides logarithmically with respect to time gives,以成本份额加权平均,If define,Notice,以成本在产值中的比重加权： Divisia index,(2) 生产函数与技术进步,A stable relationship between output, inputs, and time exists:,Rate of technical change is defined as:,Divisia indexes and rate of technical change,Total differentiation of,with respect to time yields,Dividing through by y gives,Under profit maximization, output elassticity equals input Shares in total revenue:,or,Divisia input index,应用实例：技术进步与总量生产函数 (Solow, 1957),增长核算公式,Technical change is a shift in the production function,(3) 管理（技术）效率与全要素生产率,Farrell (1957)技术效率度量 一般化的Farrell技术效率度量 (Frsund & Hjalmarsson, 1979) 数据包络分析(DEA)模型 CCR 模型 （Charnes, Cooper, & Rhodes, 1978） BCC 模型（Banker, Charnes, & Cooper, 1984） ADD 模型 （Charnes, et al, 1985）,DEA模型与回归模型的比较,The CCR ratio model (input oriented, 1978),The linear transformation of the CCR ratio,for a representative solution,The dual to the linear transformation,Envelopment surface for the input-oriented CCR model,The Output-Oriented CCR model,Suporting hyperplane for the output-oriented CCR model,Restrictions on parameters in DEA,CRS: no restrictions VRS: Nonincreasing returns to scale (NIRS):,CRS, NIRS, and VRS,General statistics about the DEA bibliography database (Tavaresa, 2002).,DEA publications number by type.,DEA publications number by year,Author statistics,二、全要素生产率的估算与拆分,增长核算法 (Devisia Index) 生产函数估算法 平均生产函数法（技术进步） 前沿生产函数法（技术效率） Malmquist 指数法拆分(panel data) 技术进步 技术效率改善 规模效率变化,技术效率、距离函数、 DEA、和 Malmquist生产率指数之间的关系,Technical efficiency (Farrell, 1957) Technical progress (Sollow, 1957) Distance function (Shephard, 1970) DEA (Charnes, Cooper, & Rhodes, 1978). TFP decomposition (Nishimizu & Page, 1982) Malmquist index (Caves, et. al, 1982) Malmquist TFP index decomposition (Fre et al, 1994),Technical Efficiency (1957),Technical Progress (1957),Distance Function (1970),DEA (1978),Trnqvist Index (1976),Geometric Mean of Malmquist Indexes (1982),Malmquist Index (1982),TFP Decomposition (1982),Malmquist TFP Index decomposition (1992,1994),Devisia index,Farrell measure,Shephard,CCR,Diewert,CCD,Nishimizu & Page,Fre et al (FGNZ),CCD,Panel data,Stochastic frontier,Deterministic parametric frontier,Time trend,a road map,Malmquist 生产率指数的定义,Malmquist 生产率指数的拆分,The Malmquist output-based index of total factor productivity and output distance functions,生产率拆分的几何意义,经验估算的实施（线性规划）模型 1,经验估算的实施（线性规划）模型 2,三、全要素生产率与企业改革 （Zheng, Liu, & Bigsten, 2003),六百多家国有企业（1980-1994） 采用Malmquist指数法拆分生产率 样本企业的技术效率普遍较低（50-70%） 尽管生产率增长显著，但以技术进步为主 大型国企技术进步率明显高于其他企业 最佳实践企业多位于沿海地区 工资激励和职工学历对生产率有促进作用,Model Selection Process,Determinants of technical efficiency and best practice (Zheng, Liu, & Bigsten, 2003),Determinants of productivity growth, efficiency change, and technical progress,Probability of productivity growth, efficiency change, and technical progress,四、全要素生产率与可持续经济增长,Solow增长模型显示在推动人均GDP增长的两个要素，资本和生产率之间，资本驱动型的增长是不可持续的。也就是说，在资本劳动比达到一定水平后，人均GDP的增长会出现停滞。尽管进一步增加储蓄率可以打破这一停滞，但经过一个时期后仍会在另一个人均GDP水平上出现新的停滞。这是由于在此类模型中人们通常假定资本的边际产出率递减。更为主要的是储蓄率不可能无限地增加。而由不断地提高生产率来带动的增长则是可持续性的。这是因为从理论上讲生产率的提高可以是无限的。,The Solow-Swan 经济增长模型 （with technical change）,人均资本装备率的动态方程,稳态人均收入取决于技术进步率(TFP),集约型与粗放式增长模式的区别,A few clarifications on the concept of TFP(G),TFP growth occurs when technology progresses and efficiency improves. The former is usually a long-run concept in the context of growth theory, and the latter can be a short-run phenomenon. A high TFP growth is not necessarily profitable. TFP growth should not be used as a target in economic planning, but might be estimated for forecasting purpose. A high TFP growth may not be always desirable, but one should be definately worried with a sustained period of low or negative growth in TFP.,五、中国省际全要素生产率的实证分析,改革时期的省际数据（1979-2001） Malmquist指数法 197895年间为省际TFP高增长期（4.6%） 技术进步为主 199601年期出现省际TFP低增长期（0.6%） 技术进步速度减慢、技术效率有所下降,总体经济效率：工业中存在的问题,Policy burdens Sub-optimal scale in production Limited capacity to innovate Weak financial discipline Sheltered firms vs. Less favored firms,总体经济效率：金融系统存在的问题,Credit is insufficiently allocated Lack of external discipline It is still mostly state owned Large proportion of Non-performing loans A vicious circle: SOEfinancial sectorSOEfinancial sector,总体经济效率：省际生产的政治经济因素,Twenty years of economic reform in the PRC have resulted in a fragmented internal market with fiefdoms controlled by local officials whose economic and political ties to protected industry resemble those of the Latin American economies of past decades. (Young, 2000),The “Discovery” of Recent Productivity Slow Down (Source：Hu & Zheng，State of the Nation Reprot, 2004) Unit：%,TFP Growth and its Components during Different Periods,Best Practice Provinces over Time (1979-2001),Shifts of frontiers and changes in the distribution of capital-labor ratios,Regional Efficiency distribution in China (1979),Regional Efficiency distribution in China(1990),Regional Efficiency distribution in China(2001),六、前苏联和亚洲四小龙的案例： 粗放型增长方式与衰退性经济危机,粗放经营的最严重后果是社会生产效率低并不断下降，使整个国民经济变成一种“耗费型”经济。戈尔巴乔夫承认，“就工业生产效率来说，苏联比美国落后3/5，就农业生产效率来说，苏联比美国落后4/5。” 这就是说，苏联的工业生产效率只及美国的40%，农业生产效率只及美国的20%。 苏联解体前的30年，社会生产效率的重要指标基金产值率明显下降，1960年每卢布固定生产基金生产的国民收入为72戈比，1988年降为36戈比，下降50%。投资效率也呈现同样的趋势，每卢布基本建设投资的工业产值增长额，19611965年为1.04卢布，19711975年降为83戈比，19811985年又降为44戈比。 这些数字表明，在苏联要获得同样的产出，80年代比60年代需要加倍的投入才能达到，社会生产的单位增长须靠投资的加倍增长来维持。这种不断扩大的倍增的耗费是任何经济都承受不起的，总有一天当投资不能相应加倍增长时，或投资减少时，生产就会减速、停滞以至负增长。 摘自超级大国的崩溃苏联解体原因探析作者：许新等,1. Soviet Economic Growth: 1928-1985 (Ofer, 1987),Growth records compared (annual growth rates),Explaining growth in Soviet Union (1928-85),Soviet growth is generated by high rises in inputs and declining growth of overall input productivity. During the entire period inputs grew at 3.2% and contributed 76% of total GNP growth. Factor productivity grew 1.1% a year, acccounting for only 24% of total growth. The relative contribution of inputs to growth grew to 80 percent in the postwar period and became its sole component from 1970 on, when productivity completely stagnated or even retreated.,Extensive growth and productivity,The pattern of Soviet growth is called extensive growth in the Soviet and Western literature. Its main characteristic is in generating growth mostly through the expansion of inputs and only marginally through rises in productivity. Emphasis on input growth has been a stratgic decision of Soviet policy makers from the beginning. the relatively small contribution of productivity growth, is clearly an undesirable and unintended outcoome.,2. The East Asian productivity debate (Krugman, 1994),The newly industrializing countries of Asia, like the Soviet Union of the 1950s, have achieved rapid growth in large part through an astonishing mobilization of resources. Once one accounts for the role of rapidly growing inputs in thse countries growth, one finds little left to explain. Asian growth, like that of the Soviet Union in its high-growth era, seems to be driven by extraordinary growth in inputs like labor and capital rather than by gains in efficiency.,The East Asian cases (Young, 1995) Hong Kong (1961-1991),Singapore (1966-1990),TFP growth: South Korea (1960-1990),TFP growth: Taiwan (1966-1990),Youngs conclusion,Once one accounts for the dramatic rise in factor inputs, one arrives at estimated total factor productivity growth rates that are closely approximated by the historical performance of many of the OECD and Latin American economies. While the growth of output and manufacturing exports in the newly industrializing countries of East Asia is virtually unprecedented, the growth of total factor productivity in these economies is not.,3. China (World Bank, 1997),Three features of Chinas rapid growth The first is its regional dimention The second is the sharp cyclical pattern of economic growth. The third noteworth feature of Chinas growth since 1978 is its reliance on productivity growth.,China 2020 (World Bank, 1997),Relative to other rapidly growing Asian economies, Chinas growth has been less dependent on volume increases in inputs of capital and labor. Consider, for example, growth in the stock of pysical capital. In most countries growth in capital inputs exceeds GDP growth, often by a substantial margin. In China the reverse occurred, suggesting that factors other than capital accumulation have been important determinants of GDP growth.,Accounting for Chinas growth,Young (2003),Accepting all the numbers the statisticians of the PRC produce, but making systematic adjustments using their own data, I show that one can a) Reduce the growth rate during the reform period to levels previously experienced by other rapidly growing economies, so that b) Once one takes into account rising labor force participation, the transfer of labor out of agriculture, and improvements in educational attainment, TFP growth in the non-agricultural economy is found to be 1.4% per year; a respectable performance, but by no means extraordinary. (Young, 2003),Chinese growth rates, 1978-1998,Source: Young (2003),Total factor productivity change in Chinas farming sector: 1952-1989 (Wen, 1993),Five studies were involved Tang (1982) Lin (1990) Hayami & Ruttan (1985) Wiens (1982) Wong (1986) Factor shares & TFP estimates were compared.,Chinas agriculture (Wen 1993),Productivity in Chinese industry (1980-1996) (Jeffeson, et al, 2000),Long-term productivity increase, with growth rates declining during the 1990s. Productivity outcomes outside the state and collective sectors are modest, with sharholding enterprises suffering productivity declines.,Average annual growth of TFP (1980-1996),胡鞍钢：近年来“资本深化”加速,在1995-2001年间，中国GDP年增长率为8.2%，低于1978-1995年的增长率（9.8%）； 人均GDP增长率为7.3%，也低于1978-1995年期间的水平（8.4%）； 劳动生产率年增长率为7.0%，略低于前一时期（7.2%）；资本存量增长率为11.8%，明显高于前一时期（9.3%）； 就业增长为1.2%，更是低于前一时期（2.4%）； 人力资本（指15岁以上人口受教育年限）为2.8%，略高于前一时期（为2.2%）； 资本生产率为负增长（-3.6%），而前一时期为0.5%； 人均劳动力占资本存量年增长率为10.6%，为建国以来最高、最快，说明“资本深化”过程加速。,张军：过度投资和过度竞争导致低效率,中国经济在经历了20世纪80年代的增长和1992-1994年的超常规增长之后，资本形成中所累积的一系列低效率问题就开始显露端倪。导致这个结果出现的主要原因是那个众所周知的过度投资和过度竞争的混合型转轨体制。由于过度的投资和过度的竞争，企业的技术选择显示出资本替代劳动的偏差，使技术路径逐步偏离了要素的自然结构，资本-劳动比率持续上升，加快了资本的深化过程，导致了投资收益率的持续而显著的恶化。 认为中国改革期间导致了国内市场分割，地区经济生产已经背离了自身的比较优势（Yang2000)。,Chinas productivity slowdown,Evidence from provincial data (1979-2001): TFP growth and its components,Source: Zheng & Hu (2004), Means are weighted averages,七、影响全要素生产率增长的因素,Physical capital Human capital Labor force reallocation Economic reform Openness Social capital Infrastructure Finance,Research and Development FDI Public health Industrial structure Ownership structure Environmental policy Government e