去产能战略的影响评价及建议——基于动态CGE模型的研究
|
摘要
产能过剩一直是中国近年来挥之不去的"顽疾"。作为国家当前重大战略决策,虽然去产能的重要性和紧迫性已为全社会高度认可,但对于如何有序平稳化解过剩产能的现实问题,目前还鲜有系统深入的定量研究。本文基于动态CGE模型,从经济和社会角度对去产能的影响进行了系统考察。结果表明,去产能确实会导致GDP、行业产出、出口以及财政收入等增速下行,以及就业减少等各种"阵痛",但与此同时也会带来总体能源强度显著下降的积极效应。从影响大小和模式看,去产能对就业和出口的影响较大,对GDP和财政收入的影响相对较小,不同行业因去产能规模、产品特征以及产业关联等方面的差异,对各变量的影响存在较大的差别。
Overcapacity has long been a problem difficult to solve in China. As the major strategic decisions currently in China,the importance and urgency of overcapacity cutting has been highly recognized by the whole society,but how to cut overcapacity orderly and smoothly,there is a little systematic and quantitative research. In this paper,we investigate the impacts of overcapacity cutting from the perspective of economy and society. The results show that: overcapacity cutting will pull down the growth rate of GDP,export,and fiscal revenue,and employment opportunities will also be reduced. But at the same time,it also has a positive effect on the decline of energy intensity. From the size and mode,the impacts of overcapacity cutting on employment and exports are greater,and impacts on GDP and fiscal revenue are relatively small. Due to the differences in the scale of overcapacity cutting,product characteristics,and industry associations,there are obvious difference of overcapacity cutting impacts among different industries.
Overcapacity has long been a problem difficult to solve in China. As the major strategic decisions currently in China,the importance and urgency of overcapacity cutting has been highly recognized by the whole society,but how to cut overcapacity orderly and smoothly,there is a little systematic and quantitative research. In this paper,we investigate the impacts of overcapacity cutting from the perspective of economy and society. The results show that: overcapacity cutting will pull down the growth rate of GDP,export,and fiscal revenue,and employment opportunities will also be reduced. But at the same time,it also has a positive effect on the decline of energy intensity. From the size and mode,the impacts of overcapacity cutting on employment and exports are greater,and impacts on GDP and fiscal revenue are relatively small. Due to the differences in the scale of overcapacity cutting,product characteristics,and industry associations,there are obvious difference of overcapacity cutting impacts among different industries.
引文
[1]盛朝迅.化解产能过剩的国际经验与策略催生[J].改革,2013(8):94-99.
[2]史贞.产能过剩治理的国际经验及对我国的启示[J].经济体制改革,2014(4):154-158.
[3]刘建江,罗双成,凌四立.化解产能过剩的国际经验及启示[J].经济纵横,2015(6):111-114.
[4]王立国,高越青.建立和完善市场退出机制,有效化解产能过剩[J].宏观经济研究,2014(10):8-21.
[5]林柯,陆震.我国产能过剩背景下的产能退出机制研究[J].经济学家,2017(3):63-69.
[6]陈文玲.化解过剩产能需要新思路和新突破[J].经济研究参考,2014(7):94-96.
[7]张春宇,唐军.通过建立长效机制化解削减过剩产能措施的负面影响——以河北省为例[J].开发研究,2015(5):83-87.
[8]于立,张杰.中国产能过剩的根本成因与出路:非市场因素及其三步走战略[J].改革,2014(2):40-51.
[9]黄群慧.论中国工业的供给侧结构性改革[J].中国工业经济,2016(9):2-23.
[10]白让让.供给侧结构性改革下国有中小企业退出与“去产能”问题研究[J].经济学动态,2016(7):65-74.
[11]张军扩,赵昌文.当前中国产能过剩问题分析——政策、理论、案例[M].北京:清华大学出版社,2014.
[12]刘冰.抓住“去产能”的关键问题[J].宏观经济管理,2016(7):42-44.
[13]潘文轩.化解过剩产能引发负面冲击的总体思路与对策框架[J].财经科学,2016(5):63-73.
(1)限于篇幅,此处仅列出了2016-2020年期间去产能对各行业产出增速的平均影响。
(1)在计算单位GDP能耗的过程中,各类能源与标准煤之间的转换系数采用《中国能源统计年鉴》中公布的数值。
(2)2007年以来,中国能源消费结构逐年优化,煤炭在能源总消费中的比重明显降低,从2007年的72.5%下降到2015年的64.0%,年均降幅接近1个百分点。
[2]史贞.产能过剩治理的国际经验及对我国的启示[J].经济体制改革,2014(4):154-158.
[3]刘建江,罗双成,凌四立.化解产能过剩的国际经验及启示[J].经济纵横,2015(6):111-114.
[4]王立国,高越青.建立和完善市场退出机制,有效化解产能过剩[J].宏观经济研究,2014(10):8-21.
[5]林柯,陆震.我国产能过剩背景下的产能退出机制研究[J].经济学家,2017(3):63-69.
[6]陈文玲.化解过剩产能需要新思路和新突破[J].经济研究参考,2014(7):94-96.
[7]张春宇,唐军.通过建立长效机制化解削减过剩产能措施的负面影响——以河北省为例[J].开发研究,2015(5):83-87.
[8]于立,张杰.中国产能过剩的根本成因与出路:非市场因素及其三步走战略[J].改革,2014(2):40-51.
[9]黄群慧.论中国工业的供给侧结构性改革[J].中国工业经济,2016(9):2-23.
[10]白让让.供给侧结构性改革下国有中小企业退出与“去产能”问题研究[J].经济学动态,2016(7):65-74.
[11]张军扩,赵昌文.当前中国产能过剩问题分析——政策、理论、案例[M].北京:清华大学出版社,2014.
[12]刘冰.抓住“去产能”的关键问题[J].宏观经济管理,2016(7):42-44.
[13]潘文轩.化解过剩产能引发负面冲击的总体思路与对策框架[J].财经科学,2016(5):63-73.
(1)限于篇幅,此处仅列出了2016-2020年期间去产能对各行业产出增速的平均影响。
(1)在计算单位GDP能耗的过程中,各类能源与标准煤之间的转换系数采用《中国能源统计年鉴》中公布的数值。
(2)2007年以来,中国能源消费结构逐年优化,煤炭在能源总消费中的比重明显降低,从2007年的72.5%下降到2015年的64.0%,年均降幅接近1个百分点。