中国的产能过剩:程度测算与行业分布
|
摘要
企业的生产过程是一个跨期动态决策过程,传统效率评价方法(非参数前沿面分析方法和随机前沿面分析方法)只应用初始投入和最终产出计算效率值,而忽视企业生产过程中的跨期经营活动,从而可能错误估计中国的产能过剩程度。为此,本文拓展了Tone&Tsutsui(2010)提出的DSBM模型,采用基于冗余的DSBM模型重新测度了中国省际工业产能利用率。研究表明:(1)静态DEA方法与动态DEA方法测度的产能利用率存在显著差异。静态方法由于忽略企业的动态决策过程,倾向于低估产能利用率、高估产能过剩以及产生产能利用率过度波动的假象。而本文动态方法测度的我国平均产能利用率为60.68%,确实存在严重的产能过剩问题,并具有明显的顺周期特征。(2)基于注册类型、轻重行业以及规模的动态分析发现,产能过剩问题在各个层面均存在。国有企业产能利用率高于其他注册类型企业;重工业产能利用率低于轻工业产能利用率;大规模企业产能利用率低于中小规模企业。(3)东部地区不存在产能过剩问题,而中部、西部以及东北均存在严重的产能过剩问题,这种现象在不同注册类型、行业以及规模层面均存在,说明根植于不同地区的市场化水平、开放程度以及产权保护力度等因素可能是解释产能过剩地区差异的终极原因。
Overcapacity,local government debt,and the real estate bubble are three major threats to the Chinese economy. The chronic problem of overcapacity has plagued the Chinese economy for many years and has been the focus of macro control. The literature on this topic emphasizes the causes rather than the measurement of overcapacity; and the methods used( investigation method,trend-through-peak method,production function method,and data envelopment analysis method) are static; they overlook the inter temporal decision procedure of firms. We argue that overcapacity is a byproduct of firms' market decision and that it is necessary to incorporate firms' multi-stage input-output procedure into the model to measure overcapacity in China. We thus extend the DSBM model proposed by Tone & Tsutsui( 2010) and use inventory as a carry-over activity to re-estimate provincial industrial capacity utilization in China. Our sample covers 30 Chinese provinces and municipalities in 2001-2011,and the input and output data are from China Industry Economy Statistical Yearbooks.Our major findings are as follows.( 1) There is a significant difference between the static DEA method and the dynamic DEA method in measuring capacity utilization. The static method tends to underestimate capacity utilization and overestimate the excess capacity and the excess volatility of capacity utilization. The results of the dynamic method show that the average capacity utilization rate is 60. 68%; thus,there is a serious problem of excess capacity and an obvious procyclicality property.(2) The dynamic analysis of register type,industrial type,and firm scale indicates that the problem of excess capacity exists at all levels. The capacity utilization of SOEs is higher than that of other types of enterprises,the utilization of heavy industry capacity is lower than that of light industries,and the utilization of large enterprises is lower than that of small and medium enterprises.(3) The eastern region of China does not have the problem of excess capacity,while the central,western,and northeast regions have serious overcapacities. This phenomenon exists in terms of different property rights,industrial types,and scales,which shows that the marketization level,the degree of openness,efforts to protect property rights,and other factors rooted in different regions are the ultimate causes of regional differences in overcapacity. Thus,we suggest that excess short-run micro-policy interventions should be avoided and that the long-run effectiveness of the market competition environment should be enhanced.We extend the literature in the following ways.(1) We measure technological rather than economic capacity,which is more suitable given the development stage and transformation of the Chinese economy: we take inventory as a carry-over activity to model the intertemporal decision-making procedures of firms,which makes our model closer to the real production procedure.(2) We use a slack-based model rather than a radial model to estimate industrial capacity utilization because it can overcome the problem of overestimation when there are slacks in input or output.( 3) Because economic development shows great heterogeneity at the provincial level,capacity utilization may also exhibit large differences between regions. Therefore,we discuss capacity utilization in three dimensions,"register type","light and heavy industry",and"firm scale",to enhance our understanding of overcapacity in China.
Overcapacity,local government debt,and the real estate bubble are three major threats to the Chinese economy. The chronic problem of overcapacity has plagued the Chinese economy for many years and has been the focus of macro control. The literature on this topic emphasizes the causes rather than the measurement of overcapacity; and the methods used( investigation method,trend-through-peak method,production function method,and data envelopment analysis method) are static; they overlook the inter temporal decision procedure of firms. We argue that overcapacity is a byproduct of firms' market decision and that it is necessary to incorporate firms' multi-stage input-output procedure into the model to measure overcapacity in China. We thus extend the DSBM model proposed by Tone & Tsutsui( 2010) and use inventory as a carry-over activity to re-estimate provincial industrial capacity utilization in China. Our sample covers 30 Chinese provinces and municipalities in 2001-2011,and the input and output data are from China Industry Economy Statistical Yearbooks.Our major findings are as follows.( 1) There is a significant difference between the static DEA method and the dynamic DEA method in measuring capacity utilization. The static method tends to underestimate capacity utilization and overestimate the excess capacity and the excess volatility of capacity utilization. The results of the dynamic method show that the average capacity utilization rate is 60. 68%; thus,there is a serious problem of excess capacity and an obvious procyclicality property.(2) The dynamic analysis of register type,industrial type,and firm scale indicates that the problem of excess capacity exists at all levels. The capacity utilization of SOEs is higher than that of other types of enterprises,the utilization of heavy industry capacity is lower than that of light industries,and the utilization of large enterprises is lower than that of small and medium enterprises.(3) The eastern region of China does not have the problem of excess capacity,while the central,western,and northeast regions have serious overcapacities. This phenomenon exists in terms of different property rights,industrial types,and scales,which shows that the marketization level,the degree of openness,efforts to protect property rights,and other factors rooted in different regions are the ultimate causes of regional differences in overcapacity. Thus,we suggest that excess short-run micro-policy interventions should be avoided and that the long-run effectiveness of the market competition environment should be enhanced.We extend the literature in the following ways.(1) We measure technological rather than economic capacity,which is more suitable given the development stage and transformation of the Chinese economy: we take inventory as a carry-over activity to model the intertemporal decision-making procedures of firms,which makes our model closer to the real production procedure.(2) We use a slack-based model rather than a radial model to estimate industrial capacity utilization because it can overcome the problem of overestimation when there are slacks in input or output.( 3) Because economic development shows great heterogeneity at the provincial level,capacity utilization may also exhibit large differences between regions. Therefore,we discuss capacity utilization in three dimensions,"register type","light and heavy industry",and"firm scale",to enhance our understanding of overcapacity in China.
引文
程俊杰,2015:《转型时期中国地区产能过剩测度---基于协整法和随机前沿生产函数法的比较分析》,《经济理论与经济管理》第4期。
董敏杰、梁泳梅、张其仔,2015:《中国工业产能利用率:行业比较、地区差距及影响因素》,《经济研究》第1期。
韩国高、高铁梅、王立国、齐鹰飞、王晓姝,2011:《中国制造业产能过剩的测度、波动及成因研究》,《经济研究》第12期。
林毅夫,2007:《潮涌现象与发展中国家宏观经济理论的重新构建》,《经济研究》第1期。
林毅夫、巫和懋、邢亦青,2010:《“潮涌现象”与产能过剩的形成机制》,《经济研究》第10期。
卢锋,2010:《治理产能过剩》,天则经济研究所,399次学术报告会纪要。
徐海洋、陈乐天和罗美思,2013:《“合意”的产能利用率是多少》,日信证券产能过剩系列研究报告之二。
王文甫、明娟、岳超云,2014:《企业规模、地方政府干预与产能过剩》,《管理世界》第10期。
杨帅羽、向洪金、戴志洋,2015:《政府补贴、国企国有化系数与中国企业的产能过剩》,《经济数学》第2期。
张少华、蒋伟杰,2014:《中国全要素生产率的再测度与分解》,《统计研究》第3期。
张少华、张天华,2015:《中国工业企业动态演化效率研究:所有制视角》,《数量经济技术经济研究》第3期。
周劲、付保宗,2011:《产能过剩的内涵、评价体系及在我国工业领域的表现特征》,《经济学动态》第10期。
钟春平、潘黎,2014:《“产能过剩”的误区---产能利用率及产能过剩的进展、争议及现实判断》,《经济学动态》第3期。
Bain,J.S.,1962,Barriers to New Competition,their Character and Consequences in Manufacturing Industries,Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
Blinder,A.,1986,“Can the Production Smoothing Model of Inventory Be Saved?”,Quarterly Journal of Economics,56(5):56-57.
Coelli,T.,Grifell-Tatje,E.,and Perelman,S.,2002,“Capacity Utilisation and Profitability:A Decomposition of Shortrun Profit Efficiency”,International Journal of Production Economics,79(3):261-278.
Davidson,C.,and Deneckere,R.,1990,“Excess Capacity and Collusion”,International Economic Review:521-541.
Fre,R.,Grosskopf,S.,and Kokkelenberg,E.C.,1989,“Measuring Plant Capacity,Utilization and Technical Change:ANonparametric Approach”,International Economic Review:655-666.
Fre,R.,Grosskopf,S.,and Whittaker,G.,2000,“Network Dea”,Socio-Economic Planning Sciences,34:35-49.
Hsieh,Chang-Tai,and Song,Zheng,2015,“Grasp the Large,Let Go of the Small:The Transformation of the State Sector in China”,Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,ol(1):295-366.
Kamien,M.I.,and Schwartz,N.L.,1972,“Uncertain Entry and Excess Capacity”,American Economic Review,62(5):918-927.
Pindyck,R.S.,1988,“Irreversible Investment,Capacity Choice,and the Value of the Firm”,American Economic Review:969-985.
Sahoo,B.K.,and Tone,K.,2009,“Decomposing Capacity Utilization in Data Envelopment Analysis:An Application to Banks in India”,European Journal of Operational Research,195(2):575-594.
Tone,K.,and Tsutsui,M.,2010,“Dynamic DEA:A Slacks-based Measure Approach”,Omega,38(3):145-156.
(1)2007-2014年历年召开的年度中央经济工作会议就是一个佐证,因为历年会议都将限制和控制产能过剩作为来年的关键任务,但最终并未取得重大突破。
(1)Tone&Tsutsui(2010)定义了四种类型的延续性活动:好的、坏的、自由的以及固定的。本文认为存货应该属于自由的延续性活动,因为存货易于调整,且其增大或减少在经济意义上没有明确的好坏之分。
(2)由于《中国工业经济统计年鉴》从2011年开始不再报告“工业总产值”数据,故本文的样本期到2011年为止。同时,由于西藏的数据缺失严重,本文在计算产能利用率时将其剔除。
(1)产能过剩的判断标准存在差异,国家发改委曾经表示,产能利用率超过80%-85%的幅度比较合理。纪志宏(2015)研究发现,从美国、欧洲、新兴经济体看,不同国家产能利用率大体在81%-82%之间。还有学者将低于79%作为产能过剩判断标准(韩国高等,2011)。本文采用徐海洋等(2013)的判断标准基于两点理由:一是他们的估计考虑了经济发展阶段、消费结构与水平以及产业组织结构等因素;二是样本期与本文正好一致。
(1)其中,东北地区包括黑龙江、吉林、辽宁;东部地区包括北京、天津、河北、上海、江苏、浙江、福建、山东、广东、海南;中部地区包括山西、安徽、江西、河南、湖北、湖南;西部地区包括四川、重庆、贵州、云南、陕西、甘肃、宁夏、青海、广西、新疆、内蒙古。
董敏杰、梁泳梅、张其仔,2015:《中国工业产能利用率:行业比较、地区差距及影响因素》,《经济研究》第1期。
韩国高、高铁梅、王立国、齐鹰飞、王晓姝,2011:《中国制造业产能过剩的测度、波动及成因研究》,《经济研究》第12期。
林毅夫,2007:《潮涌现象与发展中国家宏观经济理论的重新构建》,《经济研究》第1期。
林毅夫、巫和懋、邢亦青,2010:《“潮涌现象”与产能过剩的形成机制》,《经济研究》第10期。
卢锋,2010:《治理产能过剩》,天则经济研究所,399次学术报告会纪要。
徐海洋、陈乐天和罗美思,2013:《“合意”的产能利用率是多少》,日信证券产能过剩系列研究报告之二。
王文甫、明娟、岳超云,2014:《企业规模、地方政府干预与产能过剩》,《管理世界》第10期。
杨帅羽、向洪金、戴志洋,2015:《政府补贴、国企国有化系数与中国企业的产能过剩》,《经济数学》第2期。
张少华、蒋伟杰,2014:《中国全要素生产率的再测度与分解》,《统计研究》第3期。
张少华、张天华,2015:《中国工业企业动态演化效率研究:所有制视角》,《数量经济技术经济研究》第3期。
周劲、付保宗,2011:《产能过剩的内涵、评价体系及在我国工业领域的表现特征》,《经济学动态》第10期。
钟春平、潘黎,2014:《“产能过剩”的误区---产能利用率及产能过剩的进展、争议及现实判断》,《经济学动态》第3期。
Bain,J.S.,1962,Barriers to New Competition,their Character and Consequences in Manufacturing Industries,Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
Blinder,A.,1986,“Can the Production Smoothing Model of Inventory Be Saved?”,Quarterly Journal of Economics,56(5):56-57.
Coelli,T.,Grifell-Tatje,E.,and Perelman,S.,2002,“Capacity Utilisation and Profitability:A Decomposition of Shortrun Profit Efficiency”,International Journal of Production Economics,79(3):261-278.
Davidson,C.,and Deneckere,R.,1990,“Excess Capacity and Collusion”,International Economic Review:521-541.
Fre,R.,Grosskopf,S.,and Kokkelenberg,E.C.,1989,“Measuring Plant Capacity,Utilization and Technical Change:ANonparametric Approach”,International Economic Review:655-666.
Fre,R.,Grosskopf,S.,and Whittaker,G.,2000,“Network Dea”,Socio-Economic Planning Sciences,34:35-49.
Hsieh,Chang-Tai,and Song,Zheng,2015,“Grasp the Large,Let Go of the Small:The Transformation of the State Sector in China”,Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,ol(1):295-366.
Kamien,M.I.,and Schwartz,N.L.,1972,“Uncertain Entry and Excess Capacity”,American Economic Review,62(5):918-927.
Pindyck,R.S.,1988,“Irreversible Investment,Capacity Choice,and the Value of the Firm”,American Economic Review:969-985.
Sahoo,B.K.,and Tone,K.,2009,“Decomposing Capacity Utilization in Data Envelopment Analysis:An Application to Banks in India”,European Journal of Operational Research,195(2):575-594.
Tone,K.,and Tsutsui,M.,2010,“Dynamic DEA:A Slacks-based Measure Approach”,Omega,38(3):145-156.
(1)2007-2014年历年召开的年度中央经济工作会议就是一个佐证,因为历年会议都将限制和控制产能过剩作为来年的关键任务,但最终并未取得重大突破。
(1)Tone&Tsutsui(2010)定义了四种类型的延续性活动:好的、坏的、自由的以及固定的。本文认为存货应该属于自由的延续性活动,因为存货易于调整,且其增大或减少在经济意义上没有明确的好坏之分。
(2)由于《中国工业经济统计年鉴》从2011年开始不再报告“工业总产值”数据,故本文的样本期到2011年为止。同时,由于西藏的数据缺失严重,本文在计算产能利用率时将其剔除。
(1)产能过剩的判断标准存在差异,国家发改委曾经表示,产能利用率超过80%-85%的幅度比较合理。纪志宏(2015)研究发现,从美国、欧洲、新兴经济体看,不同国家产能利用率大体在81%-82%之间。还有学者将低于79%作为产能过剩判断标准(韩国高等,2011)。本文采用徐海洋等(2013)的判断标准基于两点理由:一是他们的估计考虑了经济发展阶段、消费结构与水平以及产业组织结构等因素;二是样本期与本文正好一致。
(1)其中,东北地区包括黑龙江、吉林、辽宁;东部地区包括北京、天津、河北、上海、江苏、浙江、福建、山东、广东、海南;中部地区包括山西、安徽、江西、河南、湖北、湖南;西部地区包括四川、重庆、贵州、云南、陕西、甘肃、宁夏、青海、广西、新疆、内蒙古。