生产者支持对农产品竞争力的影响及其机理——基于面板分位数回归的实证
|
摘要
农业支持政策持续发力对提升农产品竞争力、拓展农业生存空间有着重要的现实意义。依据竞争优势理论选取模型变量,运用面板分位数回归模型,探讨生产者支持对不同产品竞争力水平的影响及作用机制。研究结果表明:在中低分位数上,生产者支持对竞争力提升产生正向影响,而在高分位数上,影响为负。农产品产出规模对竞争力影响系数为正,影响程度逐渐减小。从影响机理看,在中低分位数上,农产品价格高企削弱了生产者支持的正向效应。产出规模削弱了生产者支持对竞争力的正向效应,从而形成挤出效应。但在高分位数上,却放大了对竞争力的正向效应。人均国民收入、农业劳动力占比、人均耕地面积与竞争力水平正相关。而汇率、净资本存量、进口关税则与竞争力水平负相关。实证研究为构建竞争力导向的农业支持政策体系提供了支撑。
Agricultural support policy has practical significance to enhance competitiveness and expand survival space for agriculture. Based on the theory of competitive advantage, this paper selects factor to construct the unbalanced panel data of 12 agricultural products in 24 countries from 1995 to 2014. Panel quantile regression model is used to investigate the effect of producer support estimate(PSE) on competitiveness and its mechanism. The results show that PSE has a positive impact on the international competitiveness of agricultural products at low and mid quantile, but high price weakens the positive effect of PSE. At high quantile, the coefficient of PSE is negative. The coefficient of agricultural output is positive, but its degree is gradually decreasing. The growth of output has weakened the positive effect of PSE on low-and-medium competitive products. This indicates that policy intervention has formed extrude effect on competitiveness, while it magnifies positive effect on highly competitive products. For control variables, national income per capita, agricultural labor ratio, and cultivated land per capita are positively correlated with competitiveness. Exchange rate, net capital stock and import tariff are negatively correlated with competitiveness. For different quantiles, the coefficient varies greatly. The empirical research provides support to construct a system of competitiveness-oriented agricultural producer support policy.
Agricultural support policy has practical significance to enhance competitiveness and expand survival space for agriculture. Based on the theory of competitive advantage, this paper selects factor to construct the unbalanced panel data of 12 agricultural products in 24 countries from 1995 to 2014. Panel quantile regression model is used to investigate the effect of producer support estimate(PSE) on competitiveness and its mechanism. The results show that PSE has a positive impact on the international competitiveness of agricultural products at low and mid quantile, but high price weakens the positive effect of PSE. At high quantile, the coefficient of PSE is negative. The coefficient of agricultural output is positive, but its degree is gradually decreasing. The growth of output has weakened the positive effect of PSE on low-and-medium competitive products. This indicates that policy intervention has formed extrude effect on competitiveness, while it magnifies positive effect on highly competitive products. For control variables, national income per capita, agricultural labor ratio, and cultivated land per capita are positively correlated with competitiveness. Exchange rate, net capital stock and import tariff are negatively correlated with competitiveness. For different quantiles, the coefficient varies greatly. The empirical research provides support to construct a system of competitiveness-oriented agricultural producer support policy.
引文
[1]陈锡文. 深入推进农业供给侧结构性改革着力提升农业综合效益和农产品竞争力[J]. 中国经贸导刊, 2017,(9):22-23.
[2]党国英. 中国农业发展的战略失误及其矫正[J]. 中国农村经济, 2016,(7):2-14.
[3]全世文, 于晓华. 中国农业政策体系及其国际竞争力[J]. 改革, 2016,(11):130-138.
[4]伍振军.改革农业支持政策提升农业竞争力[J].发展研究,2017,(9):21-25.
[5]顾和军. 农业税减免、粮食直接补贴政策对我国主要农产品国际竞争力的影响[J]. 国际贸易问题, 2008, 308(8):42-48.
[6]BRINKMAN G L. The Competitive Position of Canadian Agriculture [J]. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2010, 35(2):263-288.
[7]KRUGMAN P. Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession [J]. Foreign Affairs, 1994, 73(2):28-44.
[8]BANSE M, GORTON M, HARTEL J, et al. The Evolution of Competitiveness in Hungarian Agriculture: from Transition to Accession [J]. Most Economic Policy in Transitional Economies, 1999, 9(3):307-318.
[9]PETERSON E W F, VALLURU S R K. Agricultural Comparative Advantage and Government Policy Interventions [J]. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2000, 51(3):371-387.
[10]李建萍, 乔翠霞.农业补贴对农产品国际竞争力的影响——基于OECD数据库的实证研究[J].山东农业大学学报:社会科学版, 2018,(1):59-65.
[11]朱满德, 程国强. 中国农业政策:支持水平、补贴效应与结构特征[J]. 管理世界, 2011,(7):52-60.
[12]JAMBOR A, BABU S. The Competitiveness of Global Agriculture [M]. Berlin:Springer International Publishing, 2016.
[13]陈卫平, 赵彦云. 中国区域农业竞争力评价与分析——农业产业竞争力综合评价方法及其应用[J]. 管理世界, 2005,(3):85-93.
[14]POWELL D, WAGNER J. The Exporter Productivity Premium Along the Productivity Distribution: Evidence from Quantile Regression with Nonadditive Firm Fixed Effects [J]. Review of World Economics, 2014, 150(4):763-785.
[15]BALASSA B. Trade Liberalization and “Revealed” Comparative Advantage [J]. Manchester School, 1965, 33(2):99-123.
[2]党国英. 中国农业发展的战略失误及其矫正[J]. 中国农村经济, 2016,(7):2-14.
[3]全世文, 于晓华. 中国农业政策体系及其国际竞争力[J]. 改革, 2016,(11):130-138.
[4]伍振军.改革农业支持政策提升农业竞争力[J].发展研究,2017,(9):21-25.
[5]顾和军. 农业税减免、粮食直接补贴政策对我国主要农产品国际竞争力的影响[J]. 国际贸易问题, 2008, 308(8):42-48.
[6]BRINKMAN G L. The Competitive Position of Canadian Agriculture [J]. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2010, 35(2):263-288.
[7]KRUGMAN P. Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession [J]. Foreign Affairs, 1994, 73(2):28-44.
[8]BANSE M, GORTON M, HARTEL J, et al. The Evolution of Competitiveness in Hungarian Agriculture: from Transition to Accession [J]. Most Economic Policy in Transitional Economies, 1999, 9(3):307-318.
[9]PETERSON E W F, VALLURU S R K. Agricultural Comparative Advantage and Government Policy Interventions [J]. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2000, 51(3):371-387.
[10]李建萍, 乔翠霞.农业补贴对农产品国际竞争力的影响——基于OECD数据库的实证研究[J].山东农业大学学报:社会科学版, 2018,(1):59-65.
[11]朱满德, 程国强. 中国农业政策:支持水平、补贴效应与结构特征[J]. 管理世界, 2011,(7):52-60.
[12]JAMBOR A, BABU S. The Competitiveness of Global Agriculture [M]. Berlin:Springer International Publishing, 2016.
[13]陈卫平, 赵彦云. 中国区域农业竞争力评价与分析——农业产业竞争力综合评价方法及其应用[J]. 管理世界, 2005,(3):85-93.
[14]POWELL D, WAGNER J. The Exporter Productivity Premium Along the Productivity Distribution: Evidence from Quantile Regression with Nonadditive Firm Fixed Effects [J]. Review of World Economics, 2014, 150(4):763-785.
[15]BALASSA B. Trade Liberalization and “Revealed” Comparative Advantage [J]. Manchester School, 1965, 33(2):99-123.