产业转移、环境规制与碳排放
|
摘要
自20世纪80年代Water和Ugelow提出著名的“污染避难所”理论假说以来，污染产业跨区域转移的地缘现象一直是学术领域与政府决策机构的关注焦点。传统主流经济学中的贸易理论、内部化理论、产品周期理论与生态经济理论均在比较优势内核的基础上，将环境因素纳入到主流经济学理论的一般均衡分析框架之中，在解释地区间的环境规制势差驱动污染产业转移和激发企业的“环境寻求”（environmental-sourcing）行为机制上取得了一定成果。然而，已有的污染产业转移理论与实证研究更多地停留在解释发达国家贸易利益与投资利益，对中国所处的垂直化专业化分工背景认识不足，忽略了以中间产品投入为载体污染产业“隐性”转移机制。与此同时，鉴于全球变暖的严重性已受到各界人士认同，碳排放的区域转移问题对传统污染产业转移研究领域也提出了新的课题，而系统地分析低碳背景下污染产业转移相关问题的研究还鲜有涉足。经验性直觉越来越多地告诉我们：在多轮气候谈判开展的情况下，中国如何争取主动地位、公平合理地承担国际气候责任，除了关注碳排放总量、人均碳排放量与历史碳排放量以外，隐含碳排放转移问题也必须重视。强大的现实需求促使学界为其注入新的理论支撑与实证经验。为此，本文通过理论分析、统计核算与实证研究，探寻以中间产品贸易为渠道的污染“隐性”转移机制。这项研究将不仅拓宽传统污染产业转移的发生机制，而且为决策机构明确国际间、区域间气候生态责任、分配合理的碳减排指标、引导产业有序转移提供理论基础与实证依据。
本文在系统综述和比较分析经典污染产业转移理论的基础上,有别于传统理论中定义的污染企业整体外迁式的“显性”污染转移，以国际垂直化分工背景为新的切入点，将中间产品流动在污染产业转移中的隐形载体作用纳入melitz（2003）厂商投资与贸易理论的分析框架，分析环境规制作用于企业生产成本产生的比较优势，阐明“隐蔽型”污染产业转移的微观发生机制，并分析异质性企业的环境寻求行为，对污染避难所现象做一个更客观、全面的理论阐述。通过理论推导证明：在全球垂直化分工不断演化的背景下，地区之间的环境控制成本差异引致的比较优势会使污染密集型生产环节从环保标准高的地区转移到环保标准低的地区，并依托污染密集型中间产品进口对本国肮脏生产工序进行替代，产生“隐性”污染避难所效应，尤其是资本密集度大的企业发生“隐性”污染转移的可能性更大。
依据理论中分析的中间产品流动在污染产业转移中的隐形载体作用，本文从中间产品投入的视角重新定义产业转移的概念，依托区域间投入产出表的核算对我国国际和区际尺度上碳排放转移的整体格局进行可视化处理。国际产业转移的研究结果表明：中国与OECD国之间碳排放转移的载体产业是多元化的，中国承接的产业中既有碳排放系数较高的污染型产业，也有清洁型产业。总体上，国际产业转移通过产业外逃的方式向中国输入了大量碳排放，中国在国际碳排放转移中显示出较强的收入效应，形成了“国外消费、国内污染”的不利局面。另一方面，对我国区际碳排放转移的分析结果表明：八大区域间的碳排放状况存在着明显的区域失衡，区域碳排放转移格局呈现出“北移”与“西进”的态势。东北地区、北部沿海地区、中西部地区已经成为区域产业转移中淘汰高能耗、高排放产业的“避难所”，而经济较为发达的京津地区、东部沿海地区、南部沿海地区是高能耗、高排放产业的转出地。
鉴于国际与区域间大规模的碳转移排放格局，本文尝试检验理论分析中的污染转移机制，即对环境规制引致的“隐性”污染避难所效应进行实证检验。由于国际尺度与区域尺度样本数据可得性的差异，在国际尺度上，本文选用连续性应变量和联立方程模型，对FDI路径下的“隐性”污染避难所效应进行经验分析。在中国区域尺度上，本文选择新建企业选址的离散型因变量和单方程模型考察区域环境规制差异下的“隐性”碳污染避难所效应。实证分析中均采用“出口中间品碳排放”和“资本密度”两个指标对样本做分类处理。研究表明，外商直接投资并没有表现出整体外迁式的“显性”污染避难所效应，而对出口中间产品高排放组别的检验结果让我们获取了“隐性”污染避难所效应的经验证据，说明国际产业转移路径下以中间产品为载体的“隐性”污染转移是存在的。以资本密度作为指标对行业分组，研究结论证实资本密集度越高的产业环境寻求的动机更强，更有可能产生“隐性”污染避难所效应。另一方面，区际产业转移中Poisson面板数据回归模型的分析结果表明：“隐性”和“显性”碳污染避难所效应是共同存在，研究结论同样证实资本密集度越高的产业更有可能产生“隐性”污染避难所效应。因此，国际与区际尺度的产业转移都印证了理论分析中的两个主要结论。进一步对比外资与内资新建企业选址对环境规制的敏感度，研究发现：环境规制强度的增加更容易导致一些对环境成本较为敏感的内资企业整体迁移，起到“防火墙”的作用，而外资企业却更善于通过污染密集型中间品的替代作用将碳排放隐蔽地转移出去。
鉴于我国碳排放转移的基本格局以及污染避难所效应的现实状况，本文利用方向性距离函数就环境规制级差下我国各地区碳排放的成本差异进行情景范式下的分析，并以情景式分析的结论为依据，提出适宜区域协调与低碳化发展的碳规制级差梯度设定。研究结果表明，东部沿海地区、京津地区、北部沿海地区、东北地区采用严格环境规制政策；中西部地区采用一般性环境规制。在环境规制级差下，碳排放由东部沿海地区、京津地区、北部沿海地区、东北地区向中西部地区转移的格局是最合理和高效率的，政府决策机构可利用适宜的环境级差设定引导产业有序转移与区域低碳化发展。
最后，基于理论分析、统计测算与实证研究，本文就如何合理引导区域低碳化发展、实现产业有序转移、争取国际气候谈判主动权等方面的影响提出一些相关的政策建议：以精确核算碳排放转移量为突破口，积极争取国际气候谈判主动地位，构建公平的碳减排责任分担指标体系，积极争取国际资金补偿和节能技术援助；分类别监管节能减排的“关键性”行业，以中间产品碳排放为基础，密切关注“隐性”污染转移；提高门槛，重点监管碳排放系数高的传统污染型行业；加强内、外资分类监管；多渠道提升环境生产技术水平促进产业结构升级，包括鼓励本土企业以污染密集型中间产品实施进口替代、以清洁产业的技术溢出，提升环境生产技术水平、鼓励发展清洁产业，增强自主创新能力；设定适宜的区域环境规制级差，引导产业有序转移;构建区域碳转移标准核算制度，合理分配区域减排指标，建立区域碳转移的补偿机制。
Since the1980s when Water and Ugelow put forward the famous “PollutionHaven hypothesis”, the geographical phenomenon of pollution industry transfer hasalways been the focus of academic sector and government policy-making bodies.Based on the core of comparative advantages, traditional mainstream economics havesucceed in involving environmental factors into the analysis framework of generalequilibrium to explain the potential difference of environmental regulation amongregions, pollution industries’ transfer, and enterprises’ environmental-sourcingbehavior mechanism. However, most existing theories and empirical studies onpollution industries’ transfer pay attention to explaining the developed countries’trade benefits and investment gains, but fail to provide a sufficient knowledge ofChina’s background–the vertically specialized labor division and overlook “implicit”transfer mechanism of pollution industries which take the input of intermediateproducts as their carrier. In the meantime, given that the serious global warming hasreceived approval of people from all walks of life, a new subject of regional carbonemission transfer has been raised in the field of research on traditional pollutionindustries’ transfer, but there are few studies on issues related to systematic analysisof pollution industries’ transfer under low-carbon background. More and moreempirical intuition tells people: in the case of multiple rounds of climate negotiation,China should strive for active status to fairly and reasonably take the responsibility ofinternational climate, i.e. in addition to focusing on total carbon emission, per capitacarbon emission, and historical carbon emission, it must pay attention to the implicitcarbon emission transfer. The strong realistic demand promotes academic sector tooffer new theoretical support and empirical experience. Thus, based on theoreticalanalysis, statistical accounting and empirical research, this paper aims at exploringthe “implicit” transfer mechanism of pollution channeled through intermediateproduct trade. This research will not only broaden the occurrence mechanism oftraditional pollution industries’ transfer, but also provide theoretical foundation andempirical basis for decision-making bodies to specify international and interregionalclimate and ecological responsibilities, distribute reasonable carbon emissionreduction target, and guide ordered industrial transfer.
This paper systematically summarizes and comparatively analyzes the theory ofclassic pollution industries’ transfer, which is different from the entire-relocation“explicit” pollution transfer of polluting enterprises in traditional theory. By takingthe background of international vertical labor division as a new breakthrough, thepaper brings the role of implicit carrier of intermediate product flow in pollutionindustries transfer into the analysis framework of melitz (2003) manufacturerinvestment and trade theory, to analyze the comparative advantages of environmentalregulation to enterprises’ production costs, illustrate the micro occurrence mechanismof “implicit” pollution industries’ transfer, probe into the heterogeneous enterprises’environmental-sourcing behavior, and provide a more objective and comprehensivetheoretical elaboration for the phenomenon of “pollution haven”. The theoreticalderivation proves such a result, i.e. under the background of constantly evolvingglobal vertical labor division, the comparative advantages caused by the difference inenvironmental control costs among regions enables pollution-intensive production totransfer from regions with high environmental protection standard to regions with lowenvironmental protection standard and helps to replace domestic dirty productionprocesses by importing pollution-intensive intermediate products, so as to produce“implicit” pollution haven effect, and in particular, enterprises with large capitaldensity would be more likely to produce “implicit” pollution transfer.
According to the implicit carrier role of intermediate product flow in pollutionindustries’ transfer in theoretical analysis, the paper redefines the concept ofindustrial transfer from the perspective of the input of intermediate products andcarries out visibility processing for the overall pattern of China’s international andinterregional carbon emission transfer by relying on the calculation of input-outputtable among regions. Results of research on international industrial transfer indicatethat the industrial carrier of carbon emission transfer between China and members ofthe OECD is diversified and industries undertaken by China include both pollutingindustries with high coefficient on carbon emission and clean industries. On the whole,the international industrial transfer causes large amounts of carbon emissions to Chinaby means of industrial flight and China obtains strong income effect frominternational carbon emission transfer, to form into an adverse situation of“consuming at home and polluting abroad”. For another, results of analyzing China’sinterregional carbon emission transfer indicate that obvious regional imbalance existsin carbon emission among eight major regions and a trend of “moving northward” and“heading westward” is presented to regional carbon emission transfer. In China, the northeast regions, northern coastal regions, and central and western regions havebecome the “haven” to weed out industries with energy-extensive consumption andhigh emission in regional industrial transfer, while economically developedBeijing-Tianjin regions, eastern coastal regions, and southern coastal regions areplaces to transfer industries with energy-extensive consumption and high emissionout.
In consideration of the large-scale international and interregional carbonemission transfer, this paper tries to test the pollution transfer mechanism mentionedin theoretical analysis, i.e. it carries out an empirical test of the “implicit” pollutionhaven caused by environmental regulation. Due to the difference in availability ofsample data between international standard and interregional standard, in terms ofinternational standard, the paper selects continuous dependent variables andsimultaneous equation model to make an empirical analysis of “implicit” pollutionhaven effect under the path of FDI; in terms of China’s interregional standard, thepaper selects discrete dependent variables and single equation model for newenterprises’ site selection to investigate the “implicit” pollution haven effect based onthe difference in regional environmental regulation. In empirical analysis, both“exported intermediate product carbon emission” and “capital density” have beenadopted for classified processing of samples. Researches show that foreign directinvestment fails to reflect entire-relocation “explicit” pollution haven effect, and thetest results of exported intermediate product groups with high emission help people toobtain the empirical evidence of “implicit” pollution haven effect, to indicate that the“implicit” pollution haven taking intermediate product as carrier exists based on thepath of international industrial transfer. Through grouping industries by taking capitaldensity as index, the research results confirm that industries with larger capitaldensity have stronger environmental-sourcing motivation and they are more likely toproduce “implicit” pollution haven effect. For another, the analysis results of Poissonpanel data regression model in interregional industrial transfer show that “implicit”and “explicit” carbon pollution haven effect co-exist, and the research results alsoprove that industries with larger capital density are more likely to produce “implicit”pollution haven effect. Therefore, industrial transfer by both international andinterregional standard confirms two major conclusions in theoretical analysis.Through further comparing the sensitivity of foreign-funded and domestic-fundednew enterprises’ site selection, the research finds that strengthening environmentalregulation is more likely to cause the entire transfer of some domestic-funded enterprises that are sensitive to environmental costs, so as to play a role of “firewall”;while foreign-funded enterprises are more adept at transferring carbon emission out inan implicit way by giving play to the substitution function of pollution-intensiveintermediate products.
In light of the basic pattern of carbon emission transfer and practical condition ofpollution haven effect in China, this paper makes use of directional distance functionto have a situational analysis of cost difference in carbon emission in each region ofChina based on the environmental regulation difference. Besides, on the basis of theconclusion reached by situational analysis, the paper proposes setting differencegradient of carbon regulation difference suitable for regional coordination andlow-carbon development. Research results indicate that strict environmentalregulation policy should be adopted in eastern coastal regions, Beijing-Tianjin regions,northern coastal regions and northern regions of China; while general environmentalregulation policy should be adopted in central and western regions of China. Based onthe environmental regulation difference, it is the most reasonable and efficient totransfer carbon emission from eastern coastal regions, Beijing-Tianjin regions,northern coastal regions and northern regions to central and western regions, andgovernment decision-making bodies can make use of appropriate environmentaldifference setting to guide ordered industrial transfer and regional low-carbondevelopment.
At last, based on theoretical analysis, statistical accounting and empiricalresearch, the paper makes some policy proposals for reasonably guiding regionallow-carbon development, achieving ordered industrial transfer, and striving forinitiative of international climate negotiation. These proposals are as follows: bytaking accurately calculating the volume of transferred carbon emissions asbreakthrough, the government should positively strive for an active status ofinternational climate negotiation, construct fair responsibility sharing target system ofcarbon emission reduction, and actively compete for international fund compensationand energy conservation technology assistance; it should carry out classifiedsupervision of critical industries with an aim of energy conservation and emissionreduction and pay close attention to “implicit” pollution transfer based on carbonemission of intermediate products; it should raise the standard and focus onsupervising traditional pollution-intensive industries with high coefficient of carbonemission; it should enhance classified supervision of domestic and foreign capitals; itshould improve environment and production technology through multiple channels to promote upgrading of industrial structure, including encouraging local enterprises toimplement import substitution with pollution-intensive intermediate products,enhancing environment and production technology with technology spillover of cleanindustries, inspiring them to develop clean industries, and intensifying their capabilityof independent innovation; it should set appropriate regional environmental regulationdifference and lead ordered industrial transfer; besides, it should construct standardaccounting system of regional carbon transfer, reasonably distribute regional emissionreduction targets and establish compensation mechanism of regional carbon transfer.
本文在系统综述和比较分析经典污染产业转移理论的基础上,有别于传统理论中定义的污染企业整体外迁式的“显性”污染转移，以国际垂直化分工背景为新的切入点，将中间产品流动在污染产业转移中的隐形载体作用纳入melitz（2003）厂商投资与贸易理论的分析框架，分析环境规制作用于企业生产成本产生的比较优势，阐明“隐蔽型”污染产业转移的微观发生机制，并分析异质性企业的环境寻求行为，对污染避难所现象做一个更客观、全面的理论阐述。通过理论推导证明：在全球垂直化分工不断演化的背景下，地区之间的环境控制成本差异引致的比较优势会使污染密集型生产环节从环保标准高的地区转移到环保标准低的地区，并依托污染密集型中间产品进口对本国肮脏生产工序进行替代，产生“隐性”污染避难所效应，尤其是资本密集度大的企业发生“隐性”污染转移的可能性更大。
依据理论中分析的中间产品流动在污染产业转移中的隐形载体作用，本文从中间产品投入的视角重新定义产业转移的概念，依托区域间投入产出表的核算对我国国际和区际尺度上碳排放转移的整体格局进行可视化处理。国际产业转移的研究结果表明：中国与OECD国之间碳排放转移的载体产业是多元化的，中国承接的产业中既有碳排放系数较高的污染型产业，也有清洁型产业。总体上，国际产业转移通过产业外逃的方式向中国输入了大量碳排放，中国在国际碳排放转移中显示出较强的收入效应，形成了“国外消费、国内污染”的不利局面。另一方面，对我国区际碳排放转移的分析结果表明：八大区域间的碳排放状况存在着明显的区域失衡，区域碳排放转移格局呈现出“北移”与“西进”的态势。东北地区、北部沿海地区、中西部地区已经成为区域产业转移中淘汰高能耗、高排放产业的“避难所”，而经济较为发达的京津地区、东部沿海地区、南部沿海地区是高能耗、高排放产业的转出地。
鉴于国际与区域间大规模的碳转移排放格局，本文尝试检验理论分析中的污染转移机制，即对环境规制引致的“隐性”污染避难所效应进行实证检验。由于国际尺度与区域尺度样本数据可得性的差异，在国际尺度上，本文选用连续性应变量和联立方程模型，对FDI路径下的“隐性”污染避难所效应进行经验分析。在中国区域尺度上，本文选择新建企业选址的离散型因变量和单方程模型考察区域环境规制差异下的“隐性”碳污染避难所效应。实证分析中均采用“出口中间品碳排放”和“资本密度”两个指标对样本做分类处理。研究表明，外商直接投资并没有表现出整体外迁式的“显性”污染避难所效应，而对出口中间产品高排放组别的检验结果让我们获取了“隐性”污染避难所效应的经验证据，说明国际产业转移路径下以中间产品为载体的“隐性”污染转移是存在的。以资本密度作为指标对行业分组，研究结论证实资本密集度越高的产业环境寻求的动机更强，更有可能产生“隐性”污染避难所效应。另一方面，区际产业转移中Poisson面板数据回归模型的分析结果表明：“隐性”和“显性”碳污染避难所效应是共同存在，研究结论同样证实资本密集度越高的产业更有可能产生“隐性”污染避难所效应。因此，国际与区际尺度的产业转移都印证了理论分析中的两个主要结论。进一步对比外资与内资新建企业选址对环境规制的敏感度，研究发现：环境规制强度的增加更容易导致一些对环境成本较为敏感的内资企业整体迁移，起到“防火墙”的作用，而外资企业却更善于通过污染密集型中间品的替代作用将碳排放隐蔽地转移出去。
鉴于我国碳排放转移的基本格局以及污染避难所效应的现实状况，本文利用方向性距离函数就环境规制级差下我国各地区碳排放的成本差异进行情景范式下的分析，并以情景式分析的结论为依据，提出适宜区域协调与低碳化发展的碳规制级差梯度设定。研究结果表明，东部沿海地区、京津地区、北部沿海地区、东北地区采用严格环境规制政策；中西部地区采用一般性环境规制。在环境规制级差下，碳排放由东部沿海地区、京津地区、北部沿海地区、东北地区向中西部地区转移的格局是最合理和高效率的，政府决策机构可利用适宜的环境级差设定引导产业有序转移与区域低碳化发展。
最后，基于理论分析、统计测算与实证研究，本文就如何合理引导区域低碳化发展、实现产业有序转移、争取国际气候谈判主动权等方面的影响提出一些相关的政策建议：以精确核算碳排放转移量为突破口，积极争取国际气候谈判主动地位，构建公平的碳减排责任分担指标体系，积极争取国际资金补偿和节能技术援助；分类别监管节能减排的“关键性”行业，以中间产品碳排放为基础，密切关注“隐性”污染转移；提高门槛，重点监管碳排放系数高的传统污染型行业；加强内、外资分类监管；多渠道提升环境生产技术水平促进产业结构升级，包括鼓励本土企业以污染密集型中间产品实施进口替代、以清洁产业的技术溢出，提升环境生产技术水平、鼓励发展清洁产业，增强自主创新能力；设定适宜的区域环境规制级差，引导产业有序转移;构建区域碳转移标准核算制度，合理分配区域减排指标，建立区域碳转移的补偿机制。
Since the1980s when Water and Ugelow put forward the famous “PollutionHaven hypothesis”, the geographical phenomenon of pollution industry transfer hasalways been the focus of academic sector and government policy-making bodies.Based on the core of comparative advantages, traditional mainstream economics havesucceed in involving environmental factors into the analysis framework of generalequilibrium to explain the potential difference of environmental regulation amongregions, pollution industries’ transfer, and enterprises’ environmental-sourcingbehavior mechanism. However, most existing theories and empirical studies onpollution industries’ transfer pay attention to explaining the developed countries’trade benefits and investment gains, but fail to provide a sufficient knowledge ofChina’s background–the vertically specialized labor division and overlook “implicit”transfer mechanism of pollution industries which take the input of intermediateproducts as their carrier. In the meantime, given that the serious global warming hasreceived approval of people from all walks of life, a new subject of regional carbonemission transfer has been raised in the field of research on traditional pollutionindustries’ transfer, but there are few studies on issues related to systematic analysisof pollution industries’ transfer under low-carbon background. More and moreempirical intuition tells people: in the case of multiple rounds of climate negotiation,China should strive for active status to fairly and reasonably take the responsibility ofinternational climate, i.e. in addition to focusing on total carbon emission, per capitacarbon emission, and historical carbon emission, it must pay attention to the implicitcarbon emission transfer. The strong realistic demand promotes academic sector tooffer new theoretical support and empirical experience. Thus, based on theoreticalanalysis, statistical accounting and empirical research, this paper aims at exploringthe “implicit” transfer mechanism of pollution channeled through intermediateproduct trade. This research will not only broaden the occurrence mechanism oftraditional pollution industries’ transfer, but also provide theoretical foundation andempirical basis for decision-making bodies to specify international and interregionalclimate and ecological responsibilities, distribute reasonable carbon emissionreduction target, and guide ordered industrial transfer.
This paper systematically summarizes and comparatively analyzes the theory ofclassic pollution industries’ transfer, which is different from the entire-relocation“explicit” pollution transfer of polluting enterprises in traditional theory. By takingthe background of international vertical labor division as a new breakthrough, thepaper brings the role of implicit carrier of intermediate product flow in pollutionindustries transfer into the analysis framework of melitz (2003) manufacturerinvestment and trade theory, to analyze the comparative advantages of environmentalregulation to enterprises’ production costs, illustrate the micro occurrence mechanismof “implicit” pollution industries’ transfer, probe into the heterogeneous enterprises’environmental-sourcing behavior, and provide a more objective and comprehensivetheoretical elaboration for the phenomenon of “pollution haven”. The theoreticalderivation proves such a result, i.e. under the background of constantly evolvingglobal vertical labor division, the comparative advantages caused by the difference inenvironmental control costs among regions enables pollution-intensive production totransfer from regions with high environmental protection standard to regions with lowenvironmental protection standard and helps to replace domestic dirty productionprocesses by importing pollution-intensive intermediate products, so as to produce“implicit” pollution haven effect, and in particular, enterprises with large capitaldensity would be more likely to produce “implicit” pollution transfer.
According to the implicit carrier role of intermediate product flow in pollutionindustries’ transfer in theoretical analysis, the paper redefines the concept ofindustrial transfer from the perspective of the input of intermediate products andcarries out visibility processing for the overall pattern of China’s international andinterregional carbon emission transfer by relying on the calculation of input-outputtable among regions. Results of research on international industrial transfer indicatethat the industrial carrier of carbon emission transfer between China and members ofthe OECD is diversified and industries undertaken by China include both pollutingindustries with high coefficient on carbon emission and clean industries. On the whole,the international industrial transfer causes large amounts of carbon emissions to Chinaby means of industrial flight and China obtains strong income effect frominternational carbon emission transfer, to form into an adverse situation of“consuming at home and polluting abroad”. For another, results of analyzing China’sinterregional carbon emission transfer indicate that obvious regional imbalance existsin carbon emission among eight major regions and a trend of “moving northward” and“heading westward” is presented to regional carbon emission transfer. In China, the northeast regions, northern coastal regions, and central and western regions havebecome the “haven” to weed out industries with energy-extensive consumption andhigh emission in regional industrial transfer, while economically developedBeijing-Tianjin regions, eastern coastal regions, and southern coastal regions areplaces to transfer industries with energy-extensive consumption and high emissionout.
In consideration of the large-scale international and interregional carbonemission transfer, this paper tries to test the pollution transfer mechanism mentionedin theoretical analysis, i.e. it carries out an empirical test of the “implicit” pollutionhaven caused by environmental regulation. Due to the difference in availability ofsample data between international standard and interregional standard, in terms ofinternational standard, the paper selects continuous dependent variables andsimultaneous equation model to make an empirical analysis of “implicit” pollutionhaven effect under the path of FDI; in terms of China’s interregional standard, thepaper selects discrete dependent variables and single equation model for newenterprises’ site selection to investigate the “implicit” pollution haven effect based onthe difference in regional environmental regulation. In empirical analysis, both“exported intermediate product carbon emission” and “capital density” have beenadopted for classified processing of samples. Researches show that foreign directinvestment fails to reflect entire-relocation “explicit” pollution haven effect, and thetest results of exported intermediate product groups with high emission help people toobtain the empirical evidence of “implicit” pollution haven effect, to indicate that the“implicit” pollution haven taking intermediate product as carrier exists based on thepath of international industrial transfer. Through grouping industries by taking capitaldensity as index, the research results confirm that industries with larger capitaldensity have stronger environmental-sourcing motivation and they are more likely toproduce “implicit” pollution haven effect. For another, the analysis results of Poissonpanel data regression model in interregional industrial transfer show that “implicit”and “explicit” carbon pollution haven effect co-exist, and the research results alsoprove that industries with larger capital density are more likely to produce “implicit”pollution haven effect. Therefore, industrial transfer by both international andinterregional standard confirms two major conclusions in theoretical analysis.Through further comparing the sensitivity of foreign-funded and domestic-fundednew enterprises’ site selection, the research finds that strengthening environmentalregulation is more likely to cause the entire transfer of some domestic-funded enterprises that are sensitive to environmental costs, so as to play a role of “firewall”;while foreign-funded enterprises are more adept at transferring carbon emission out inan implicit way by giving play to the substitution function of pollution-intensiveintermediate products.
In light of the basic pattern of carbon emission transfer and practical condition ofpollution haven effect in China, this paper makes use of directional distance functionto have a situational analysis of cost difference in carbon emission in each region ofChina based on the environmental regulation difference. Besides, on the basis of theconclusion reached by situational analysis, the paper proposes setting differencegradient of carbon regulation difference suitable for regional coordination andlow-carbon development. Research results indicate that strict environmentalregulation policy should be adopted in eastern coastal regions, Beijing-Tianjin regions,northern coastal regions and northern regions of China; while general environmentalregulation policy should be adopted in central and western regions of China. Based onthe environmental regulation difference, it is the most reasonable and efficient totransfer carbon emission from eastern coastal regions, Beijing-Tianjin regions,northern coastal regions and northern regions to central and western regions, andgovernment decision-making bodies can make use of appropriate environmentaldifference setting to guide ordered industrial transfer and regional low-carbondevelopment.
At last, based on theoretical analysis, statistical accounting and empiricalresearch, the paper makes some policy proposals for reasonably guiding regionallow-carbon development, achieving ordered industrial transfer, and striving forinitiative of international climate negotiation. These proposals are as follows: bytaking accurately calculating the volume of transferred carbon emissions asbreakthrough, the government should positively strive for an active status ofinternational climate negotiation, construct fair responsibility sharing target system ofcarbon emission reduction, and actively compete for international fund compensationand energy conservation technology assistance; it should carry out classifiedsupervision of critical industries with an aim of energy conservation and emissionreduction and pay close attention to “implicit” pollution transfer based on carbonemission of intermediate products; it should raise the standard and focus onsupervising traditional pollution-intensive industries with high coefficient of carbonemission; it should enhance classified supervision of domestic and foreign capitals; itshould improve environment and production technology through multiple channels to promote upgrading of industrial structure, including encouraging local enterprises toimplement import substitution with pollution-intensive intermediate products,enhancing environment and production technology with technology spillover of cleanindustries, inspiring them to develop clean industries, and intensifying their capabilityof independent innovation; it should set appropriate regional environmental regulationdifference and lead ordered industrial transfer; besides, it should construct standardaccounting system of regional carbon transfer, reasonably distribute regional emissionreduction targets and establish compensation mechanism of regional carbon transfer.
引文
[1] Pethig R． Pollution,Welfare and Environmental Policy in the Theory ofComparative Advantage. Journal of Environmental Economics andManagement,1976,(2):160-169
[2] Siebert H. Environmental Quality and the Gains from Trade. Kyklos,1977,30(4):657-673
[3] Walter I． The Pollution Content of American Trade. Western EconomicJournal,1973(11):61-70
[4] Walter I, Ugelow J. Environmental Policies in Developing Countries.Ambio,1979,8(23):102-109
[5] Baumol W J, Oates W E. The Theory of Environmental Policy.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1988
[6] Xing Y, Kolstad C D. Do lax environmental regulations attract foreigninvestment? Environmental and resource economics,1996,21:1-22
[7] Baumol W J, Oates W E. The Theory of Environmental Policy. Cambridge,Cambridge University Press,1998
[8] Long N V, Siebert H. Institutional Competition Versus ex-ante Harmonization:The Case of Environmental Policy. Journal of Institutional and TheoreticalEconomics,1991,147(2):296-311
[9] McGuire M C. Regulation, factor rewards, and international trade. Journal ofPublic Economics,1982,17(3):335-354
[10] Taylor S. The Economics of Pollution Havens. UK: Edward Elgar Publishers,2006
[11] Wheeler D. Racing to the bottom? Foreign investment and air quality indeveloping countries. J Environ,2001,10(6):1-23
[12] Bhagwati N. Trade and the Environment:Does Environmental Divers itsDetract from the Case for Free Trade,in Fair Trade and Harmonization.Cambridge: MIT Press,1993,101(4):159-223
[13] Pearce D, Turner W, Kerry R. Economics of natural resources and theenvironment. UK: Hopkins University Press,1990
[14] Daly H E. Beyond growth: the economics of sustainable development.Boston:Beacon Press,1997
[15] Paul H, Amory B. Lovins, L. Hunter Lovins. Natural capitalism: the nextindustrial revolution. London:Earthscan Publications,1999
[16] Casson M. The future of the multinational enterprise. London: Macmillan,1976
[17] Vernon R. International investment and international trade in the product cycle.The quarterly journal of economics,1966,80(2):190-207
[18]小岛清.对外贸易论.天津:南开大学出版社,1987
[19]刘淑琪.我国引进外资过程中的污染转移闰题研究.由东财政学院学报,2001,(1):28-33
[20]徐向红,杨占辉,黄波.山东省承接美国中小企业产业转移的考察研究.东岳论丛,2004,25(3):164-168
[21]陈林,朱卫平.广东省产业转移的发展现状与特征.国际经贸探索,2010,(1):24-28
[22]李国平,俞文华.产业国际转移中我国产业结构重组基本策略探讨.中国软科学,1999,(2):17-20
[23] Michael P,Linde C V. Toward a New Conception of the EnvironmentCompetitiveness Relatioship,Journal of Economic Perspective,1995,(4):97-118
[24] Porter M E. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. London:Macmillan,1991
[25] Ludema R, Wooton I. Cross border Externalities and Trade Liberalization:theStrategic Control of Pollution,Journal of Canada economics,1994,27:950-966
[26] Hatzipanayotou P,Michael M S．Foreign Aid and Public Goods. Journal ofDevelopment Economics,1995,47(3):455-467
[27] Grey K, Brank D.Environmental Issues in Policy-Based Competition forInvestment: A Literature Review. Envgsp,2002,(11):34-42
[28]王军.理解污染避难所假说．世界经济研究,2008,(1):57-72
[29] Rothman D S. Environmental Kuznets curves—Real progress or passing thebuck?: A case for consumption-based approaches. Ecological economics,1998,25(2):177-194
[30] Saint P G. Trade Patterns and Pollution,Working Paper, Fondazione EnricoMattei,1994, NO.4094
[31] Esty D, Gentry B. Foreign Investment, Globalization and the Environment,Globalization and the Environment. Paris: Organization for EconomicCooperation and Development press,1997
[32] Krueger G. Environmental Impact of North American Free Trade Agreement.Working Paper,NBER,1991,NO.3914
[33] Ahmad N, Wyckoff A. Carbon dioxide emissions embodied in internationaltrade of goods. London:OECD Publishing,2003
[34] Sánchez-Chóliz J, Duarte R. CO2emissions embodied in international trade:evidence for Spain. Energy Policy,2004,32(18):1999-2005
[35] Lenzen M, Murray S A. A modified ecological footprint method and itsapplication to Australia. Ecological Economics,2001,37(2):229-255
[36] Machado Q,Schaeffer R．and Worrel E. Energy and carbon embodied in theinternational trade of Brazil:an input-output approach．Ecological Economics,2001,(39):409-424
[37] McKibbin W J, Stegman A. Convergence and per capita carbon emissions.Brookings Discussion Papers in International Economics,2005,(2):167-176
[38] Peters G P, Hertwich E G. Pollution embodied in trade: The Norwegian case.Global Environmental Change,2006,16(4):379-387
[39] Peters G P,Hertwich E G. CO2embodied in international trade withimplications for global climate policy． Environmental Science andTechnology,2008,42(5):1401-1407
[40] Bang J H, Suslick K S. Dual Templating Synthesis of Mesoporous TitaniumNitride Microspheres. Advanced Materials,2009,21(31):3186-3190
[41] Nakano S, Okamura A, Sakurai N. The measurement of CO2embodiments ininternational trade: Evidence from the harmonised Input-Output and bilateraltrade database. London:OECD Publishing,2009
[42] Shui B, Harriss R. The Role of CO2Embodiment in US-China Trade. EnergyPolicy,2006,34(18),40634068
[43] Li Y, Hewitt C N．The effect of trade between China and the UK on nationaland global carbon dioxide emissions. Energy policy．2008,36(6):1907-1914
[44]张晓平.中国对外贸易产生的CO2排放区位转移分析.地理学报,2009,(2):65-76
[45] Xu M,Willianms E. Allenbyb．Assessing environmental impacts embodied inmanufacturing and labor input for the China-U.S. trade. EnvironmentalScience＆Technology,2010,44(2):567-573
[46]刘强,庄幸,姜克隽.中国出口贸易中的载能量及碳排放量分析．中国工业经济,2008,(8):46-55
[47]齐晔,李惠民,徐明.中国进出口贸易中的隐含碳估算.中国人口、资源与环境,2008,18(3):8-13
[48] Weber C L,Peters G P, Guan D．The contribution of Chinese exports to climatechange．Energy Policy,2008,36(9):3572-3577
[49]陈迎,潘家华,谢来辉．中国外贸进出口商品中的内涵能源及其政策含义．经济研究,2008,(7):11-25
[50] Yan L D, Yang L K．China’s foreign trade and climate change: a case study ofCO2emissions．Energy Policy,2010,38(1):350-356
[51]闫云凤,杨来科．中国出口隐含碳增长的影响因素分析.中国人口.资源与环境,2010,20(8):21-29
[52]刘海啸,张晓津,曲文静.燕山大学学报:哲学社会科学版,2011,(3):123-127
[53] Wei C, Ni J, Du L. Regional allocation of carbon dioxide abatement in China.China Economic Review,2011,(3):75-83
[54]李小平,卢现祥.国际贸易、污染产业转移和中国工业CO2排放,经济研究,2010,(1):15-26
[55] Jaffe A B, Peterson S R., Portney P R., Stavins R N. Environmental regulationand the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing: what does the evidence tellus?. J Econ Lit,1995,33(3):109-132
[56] Gentry B S．Private capital flows and the environment:lessons from LatinAmerica. Yale Centre for Environmental Law and Policy,1996,89:1089-1107
[57] Repetto R, Austin D. The Costs of Climate Protection. Washington, DC:World Resources Institute,1995,(4):20-28
[58] Repetto R. Jobs, Competitiveness, and Environmental Regulation. Workingpaper, world Resources Institute,1995, NO.7034
[59] Leonard H J. Pollution and the Struggle for the World Product:MultinationalCorporations,Environment and International Comparative Advantage.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1988
[60] Bouman M. Do Pollution Abatement Costs Induce Direct Foreign Investment?Evidence for Germany. Mimeograph,1996,89(4):178-198
[61] Ederington J, Mimer J．Is Environmental Policy a Secondary Trade Barrier?An Empirical Analyis,mimeo,2005,19(8):157-189
[62] Smarzynska B K, Wei S J. Pollution havens and foreign direct investment:dirty secret or popular myth?. Working paper, National Bureau of EconomicResearch,2001,NO.8465
[63] RodríguezBarroso M R, GarcíaMorales J L, Coello Oviedo M D. Anassessment of heavy metal contamination in surface sediment using statisticalanalysis. Environmental monitoring and assessment,2010,163(1):489-501
[64] Cole M A., Elliott R. FDI and the Capital Intensity of “Dirty” Sectors: AMissing Piece of the Pollution Haven Puzzle. Review of DevelopmentEconomics,2005,9(4):363-383
[65] Akbostanci E,Tuny G I,Tur-Asik S．Pollution Haven Hypothesis and the Roleof Dirty Industries in Turkey’S Exports,Environment and DevelopmentEconomics,2007(12):297-322
[66] Smarzynska B K, Wei S J. Pollution havens and foreign direct investment:dirty secret or popular myth? Contributions to Economic Analysis&Policy,2004,3(2):23-57
[67] Levinson A, Taylor M S. Unmasking the Pollution Haven Effect. InternationalEconomic Review,2008.49(1):121-143
[68] Eskeland G S, Harrison A E. Moving to greener pastures? Multinationals andthe pollution haven hypothesis. Journal of Development Economics,2003,70(1):877-908
[69] Xing Y Q,Charles D． Kolstad,DoLax Environmental Regulations AttractForeign Investment? World economics,2002,56:45-77
[70] Keller W, Levinson A. Pollution abatement costs and foreign direct investmentinflows to the U.S. states. Review of Economics and Statistics,2002,84(6):1375-1418
[71] Perkins A, Neumayer D. Fostering Environment-efficiency throughTransnational Linkages? Trajectories of CO2and SO2,1980-2000.Environment and Planning,2008,(40):2970-2989
[72] Perkins A, Neumayer D. Transnational Linkages and the Spillover ofEnvironment-efficiency into Developing Countries. Global EnvironmentalChange,2009,(19):375-383
[73] Dean J,Mary F. Foreign Direct Investment and Pollution Havens Evaluatingthe Evidence from China. Research economics,2004,3082:175-190
[74] Ljungwall C, Linde-Rahr M. Environmental policy and the location of foreigndirect investment in China. Working Papers, Governance,2005,NO.4407
[75] He J. Pollution Haven Hypothesis and Environmental Impacts of ForeignDirect Investment: The Case of Industrial Emission of Sulfur Dioxide inChinese Provinces. Ecological Economics,2006,(60):228-245
[76]杨涛.环境规制对中国对外贸易影响的实证分析.当代财经,2003,(10):103-105
[77]刘志忠、陈果环境管制与外商直接投资区位分布——基于城市面板数据的实证研究.国际贸易问题,2009,(3):61-69
[78]郭建万,陶峰.集聚经济、环境规制与外商直接投资区位选择.产业经济研究,2009,(4):29-37
[79] Motta M.Thiss I F. Does Environmental Dumping Lead to Dislocation,European Economic Review,1994,38:563-576
[80] Bartik T J．The Effects of Environmental Regulation on Business Location inthe United States,Growth and Change,1988,(19):22-44
[81] Wheeler D, Mody A. International investment location decisions: The case ofUS firms. Jour nal of International Economics,1992,33:57-76
[82] Olewiler N.Globalization, Economic Integration, and the Environment.2009,8(2):38-45
[83] List J A, McHone W, Millimet D L. Effects of environmental regulation onforeign and domestic plant births: is there a home field advantage? Journal ofUrban Economics,2004,56(3):77-109
[84] Dean J M. Are foreign investors attracted to weak environmental regulations?Evaluating the evidence from China. Journal of Development Economics,2009,90(2).:414-450
[85] Melitz M J. The impact of trade on itra-industry reallocations and aggregateindustru productivity. Econometrica,2003,71(6):1695-1725
[86] Nishimura K, Shimomura K. Trade and indeterminacy in a dynamic generalequilibrium mode. Nonlinear Dynamics in Equilibrium Models,2012,98(2):347-361
[87] Bernard A B, Redding S J, Schott P K. Comparative advantage andheterogeneous firms. The Review of Economic Studies,2007,74(1):31-66
[88]胡国珠,储丹萍,胡彩平.环境成本内部化对我国出口竞争力的影响研究.经济问题探索,2010,(9):124-128
[89]刘丽敏,杨淑娥.生产者责任延伸制度下企业外部环境成本内部化的约束机制探讨.河北大学学报:哲学社会科学版,2007,32(3):79-82
[90]钟有林,李霁友.区域经济非均衡发展理论的演变与创新.求索,2009(1):40-41
[91]吴晓波,张超群,窦伟.我国转型经济中技术创新与经济周期关系研究.科研管理,2011,32(1)
[92]王文峰.FDI理论研究综述.黑龙江对外经贸,2007,(1):45-47
[93]贾根良.美国学派的生态经济学先驱思想及对我国的启示.社会科学战线,2011,(10):33-38
[94]方大春,张敏新.低碳经济的理论基础及其经济学价值.中国人口.资源与环境,2011,(7):51-57
[95] Tybout J R, westbook M D. Trade liberalization and the dimensions ofefficiency change in Mexican manufacturing industries. Journal ofinternational economics,1995,39:53-78
[96] Bernard A B, Jensen J B. Exporters, jobs, and wages in US manufacturing.Microeconomics,1995,(7):67-119
[97] Bernard A B, Jensen J B. exceptional exporter performance: cause,effect orboth? Journal of international economics.1999,47:1-25
[98] Bernard A B, Eaton J, Jensen B, Kortum S. Plants and productivity ininternational trade. American economic review,2003,93:1268-1290
[99] AW B Y, Chuang S, Roberts M. productivity and turnover in the export market:micro evidence from Taiwan and South Korea. World band economic review,2000,14:65-90
[100] Pacnik N.Trade liberalization, exit and productivy improvements: evidencefrom Japanese manufacturers, journal of Japanese and international economics,2002,19:255-271
[101] Eaton J, Kortum S, Kramarz F. Dissecting trade: firms, industries and exportdestinations. American economic review papers and proceedings,2006,94:150-154
[102] Dixit A K, Norman V. Theory of International Trade. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1980
[103] Egger H, Egger P. International outsourcing and the productivity of lowskilled labor in the EU, Economic inquiry,2006,44(1):98-108
[104] Amiti M, Wei S J. Fear of service outsourcing: is ti justified? Economicpolicy,2005,20(42):308-347
[105] Amiti M, Wei S J. Service offshoring and productivity: evidence from the US.World economy,2009,32(2):203-220
[106]杨东平.中国环境发展报告.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2010
[107]陈建军.中国现阶段产业区域转移的实证研究——结合浙江105家企业的问卷调查报告的分析.管理世界,2002,(6):1-17
[108]芮明杰.产业经济学.上海:上海财经大学出版社,2005
[109]张公嵬,梁琦.出口与企业绩效:主要论题与最新进展.国际商务(对外经济贸易大学学报,2010,(1):72-80
[110] Hillberry R, Hummels D. Trade responses to geographic frictions: Adecomposition using micro-data. European Economic Review,2008,52(3):527-550
[111] Yi K M. Can multi-stage production explain the home bias in trade?Working papers, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia,2008, No.08-12
[112] Hillberry R, Hummels D.Trade responses to geographic frictions: adecomposition using micro-data, European Economic Review,2008,52(3):527-550
[113] Paul K, Anthony J. Venables. Globalization and the Inequality of Nations. TheQuarterly Journal of Economics,1995,110:857-880
[114]国家信息中心中国区域间投入产出表.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2005
[115]张亚雄,齐舒畅,王飞.我国非竞争型投入产出表编制及其应用分析.统计研究,2006,(5):89-97
[116]陈诗一.能源消耗、二氧化碳排放与中国工业的可持续发展.经济研究,2009,(4):41-55
[117]政府间气候变化专门委员会(IPCC).国家温室气体清单指南,2006
[118] Copeland B R, Taylor M S. Trade, Growth, and the Environment. Journal ofEconomic Literature,2004,42(1):98-108
[119] Fredriksson P, List J A, Millimet D L. Bureaucratic corruption, environmentalpolicy, and inbound US FDI: theory and evidence. Journal of PublicEconomics,2003,87(6):1376-1399
[120] Antweiler W,Copeland B,Taylor S．Is Free Trade Good for the Environment?American Economic Review,2001,91(4):877-908
[121]郭红燕,韩立岩.外商直接投资、环境管制与环境污染,国际贸易问题,2008,(8):111-118
[122] Grossman G M, Krueger A. Economic growth and the environment. TheQuarterly Journal of Economics,1995,(2):353-377
[123] Blundell R, Bond S R. Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamicpanel data models. Journal of Econometrics,1998,(7):115-143
[124] Merican Y, Yusop Z, Noor Z M, Hook L S. Foreign Direct Investment and thePollution in Five ASEAN Nations. Journal of Economics and Management,2007,(1):245-261
[125] Acharkyya J. FDI, Growth and the Environment: Evidence from India on CO2Emission during the Last Two Decades.Journal of Economic Development,2009,(6):43-58
[126]张海洋. R&D两面性、外资活动与中国工业生产率增长.经济研究,2005,(5):107-117
[127]邱斌,杨帅,辛培江.FDI技术溢出渠道与中国制造业生产率增长研究:基于面板数据的分析.世界经济,2008,(8):20-31
[128] Becker R, Henderson V. Effects of Air Quality Regulations on PollutingIndustries. The Journal of Political Economy,2000,108(2):907-940
[129] Greenstone M. The Impacts of Environmental Regulations on IndustrialActivity: Evidence from the1970and1977Clean Air Act Amendments andthe Census of Manufactures. The Journal of Political Economy,2002,110(6):150-154
[130] Kellenberg D K. An empirical investigation of the pollution haven effect withstrategic environment and trade policy. Journal of International Economics,2009,78(2):23-46
[131] Wooldridge J M. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and PanelData.Cambridge:The MIT Press,2002
[132]王剑,徐康宁．FDI区位决策、产业集聚与产业异质．经济科学,2005,(4):7-16
[133] Kang S J, Lee H S. The determinants of location choice of South Korean FDIin China. Japan and the World Economy,2007,19(4):178-197
[134] Harris C. The Market as a factor in the localization of industry in united states.Annals of the asscociation of American geographers,1954,64:315-348
[135]张伎,李松志.产业区域转移形成的影响因素及模型探讨.经济问题探索,2008,(1):77-82
[136]梁琦,刘厚俊.空间经济学的渊源与发展.江苏社会科学,2002,(6):61-66
[137]郭利平.产业群落的空间演化模式研究.北京:经济管理出版社,2006
[138] Royall R M, Cumberland W G. The finite-population linear regressionestimator and estimators of its variance—an empirical study. Journal of theAmerican Statistical Association,1981,76(376):924-930
[139] Figueiredo O, Paulo G, Woodward D.Home field advantages:locationdecisions of Portuguese entrepreneurs. Journal of urban economics,2002,52:341-361
[140] Figlio D N, Blonigen B A．The effects of foreign direct investment on localcommunities. Journal of urban economics,2000,48:338-363
[141] Pittman R W. Multilateral productivity comparisons with undesirable outputs.The Economic Journal,1983,(2):883-891
[142] Hailu A, Veeman T. Non-parametric productivity analysis with undesirableoutputs: an application to Canadian pulp and paper industry. AmericanJournal of Agricultural Economics,2000,83(3):605-616
[143]王波,张群.环境约束下不同生产效率模型研究.系统工程理论与实践,2002,(1):1-8
[144] Seiford L M, Zhu J. Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation.European Journal of Operation al Research,2002,147(1):16-20
[145] Hua Z S, Bian Y W, Liang L. Ecoefficiency analysis of paper m ills along theHuai River: A n extended DEA app roach. Omega,2007,35(5):578-587
[146] Chung Y H, Fare R, Grosskopf S. Productivity and undesirable outputs: Adirectional distance function Approach. Journal of EnvironmentalManagement,1997,51(3):229-240
[147] Tyteca D. On the Measurement of the environmental performance of firm s: Aliterature review and a productive efficiency perspective. Journal ofEnvironmental Management,1996,46(3):281-308
[148] Zofio J L, Prieto A M. Environmental efficiency and regulatory standards: thecase of CO2emissions from OECD industries. Resource and EnergyEconomics,2001:23(1):63-83
[149] Zhou P, Ang B W, Poh K L. Slacks-based efficiency measures for modelingenvironmental performance. Ecological Economics,2006,60(1):111-118
[150] Zhou P, Ang B W, Poh K L. Measuring environmental performance underdifferent environmental DEA technologies. Energy Economics,2008a,30(1):1-14
[151] Zhou P, Ang B W. Linear programming models for measuring economy-w ide energy efficiency performance. Energy Policy,2008b,36(8):2911-2916
[152] Fare R, Grosskopf S, Pasurka C A. Environmental production functions andenvironmental directional distance functions. Energy,2007,32(7):1055-1066
[153]王兵,吴延瑞,颜鹏飞.环境管制与全要素生产率增长:APEC的实证研究.经济研究,2008,(5):2-15
[154]胡鞍钢,郑京海,高宇宁,张宁,许海萍.考虑环境因素的省级技术效率排名.经济学(季刊),2008,7(3):932-960
[155] Luenberger D G. Benefit functions and duality. Journal of mathematicaleconomics,1992,21(5):461-481
[156]张军,吴桂英,张吉鹏.中国省际物质资本存量估算:1952-2000.经济研究,2004,(10):35-44
[157]金碚.中国工业的转型升级.中国工业经济,2011,(7):5-11
[158]王淑新,何元庆,王学定.中国低碳经济演进分析:基于能源强度的视角.中国软科学,2010,(9):25-32
[159]王雪磊.后危机时代碳金融市场发展困境与中国策略.国际金融研究,2012,(2):77-84
[160]陈诗一.中国的绿色工业革命:基于环境全要素生产率视角的解释(1980～2008),经济研究,2010,(11):2l-35
[161]张成,陆砀,郭路,于同申．环境规制强度和生产技术进步.经济研究,2011,(2):113-124
[2] Siebert H. Environmental Quality and the Gains from Trade. Kyklos,1977,30(4):657-673
[3] Walter I． The Pollution Content of American Trade. Western EconomicJournal,1973(11):61-70
[4] Walter I, Ugelow J. Environmental Policies in Developing Countries.Ambio,1979,8(23):102-109
[5] Baumol W J, Oates W E. The Theory of Environmental Policy.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1988
[6] Xing Y, Kolstad C D. Do lax environmental regulations attract foreigninvestment? Environmental and resource economics,1996,21:1-22
[7] Baumol W J, Oates W E. The Theory of Environmental Policy. Cambridge,Cambridge University Press,1998
[8] Long N V, Siebert H. Institutional Competition Versus ex-ante Harmonization:The Case of Environmental Policy. Journal of Institutional and TheoreticalEconomics,1991,147(2):296-311
[9] McGuire M C. Regulation, factor rewards, and international trade. Journal ofPublic Economics,1982,17(3):335-354
[10] Taylor S. The Economics of Pollution Havens. UK: Edward Elgar Publishers,2006
[11] Wheeler D. Racing to the bottom? Foreign investment and air quality indeveloping countries. J Environ,2001,10(6):1-23
[12] Bhagwati N. Trade and the Environment:Does Environmental Divers itsDetract from the Case for Free Trade,in Fair Trade and Harmonization.Cambridge: MIT Press,1993,101(4):159-223
[13] Pearce D, Turner W, Kerry R. Economics of natural resources and theenvironment. UK: Hopkins University Press,1990
[14] Daly H E. Beyond growth: the economics of sustainable development.Boston:Beacon Press,1997
[15] Paul H, Amory B. Lovins, L. Hunter Lovins. Natural capitalism: the nextindustrial revolution. London:Earthscan Publications,1999
[16] Casson M. The future of the multinational enterprise. London: Macmillan,1976
[17] Vernon R. International investment and international trade in the product cycle.The quarterly journal of economics,1966,80(2):190-207
[18]小岛清.对外贸易论.天津:南开大学出版社,1987
[19]刘淑琪.我国引进外资过程中的污染转移闰题研究.由东财政学院学报,2001,(1):28-33
[20]徐向红,杨占辉,黄波.山东省承接美国中小企业产业转移的考察研究.东岳论丛,2004,25(3):164-168
[21]陈林,朱卫平.广东省产业转移的发展现状与特征.国际经贸探索,2010,(1):24-28
[22]李国平,俞文华.产业国际转移中我国产业结构重组基本策略探讨.中国软科学,1999,(2):17-20
[23] Michael P,Linde C V. Toward a New Conception of the EnvironmentCompetitiveness Relatioship,Journal of Economic Perspective,1995,(4):97-118
[24] Porter M E. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. London:Macmillan,1991
[25] Ludema R, Wooton I. Cross border Externalities and Trade Liberalization:theStrategic Control of Pollution,Journal of Canada economics,1994,27:950-966
[26] Hatzipanayotou P,Michael M S．Foreign Aid and Public Goods. Journal ofDevelopment Economics,1995,47(3):455-467
[27] Grey K, Brank D.Environmental Issues in Policy-Based Competition forInvestment: A Literature Review. Envgsp,2002,(11):34-42
[28]王军.理解污染避难所假说．世界经济研究,2008,(1):57-72
[29] Rothman D S. Environmental Kuznets curves—Real progress or passing thebuck?: A case for consumption-based approaches. Ecological economics,1998,25(2):177-194
[30] Saint P G. Trade Patterns and Pollution,Working Paper, Fondazione EnricoMattei,1994, NO.4094
[31] Esty D, Gentry B. Foreign Investment, Globalization and the Environment,Globalization and the Environment. Paris: Organization for EconomicCooperation and Development press,1997
[32] Krueger G. Environmental Impact of North American Free Trade Agreement.Working Paper,NBER,1991,NO.3914
[33] Ahmad N, Wyckoff A. Carbon dioxide emissions embodied in internationaltrade of goods. London:OECD Publishing,2003
[34] Sánchez-Chóliz J, Duarte R. CO2emissions embodied in international trade:evidence for Spain. Energy Policy,2004,32(18):1999-2005
[35] Lenzen M, Murray S A. A modified ecological footprint method and itsapplication to Australia. Ecological Economics,2001,37(2):229-255
[36] Machado Q,Schaeffer R．and Worrel E. Energy and carbon embodied in theinternational trade of Brazil:an input-output approach．Ecological Economics,2001,(39):409-424
[37] McKibbin W J, Stegman A. Convergence and per capita carbon emissions.Brookings Discussion Papers in International Economics,2005,(2):167-176
[38] Peters G P, Hertwich E G. Pollution embodied in trade: The Norwegian case.Global Environmental Change,2006,16(4):379-387
[39] Peters G P,Hertwich E G. CO2embodied in international trade withimplications for global climate policy． Environmental Science andTechnology,2008,42(5):1401-1407
[40] Bang J H, Suslick K S. Dual Templating Synthesis of Mesoporous TitaniumNitride Microspheres. Advanced Materials,2009,21(31):3186-3190
[41] Nakano S, Okamura A, Sakurai N. The measurement of CO2embodiments ininternational trade: Evidence from the harmonised Input-Output and bilateraltrade database. London:OECD Publishing,2009
[42] Shui B, Harriss R. The Role of CO2Embodiment in US-China Trade. EnergyPolicy,2006,34(18),40634068
[43] Li Y, Hewitt C N．The effect of trade between China and the UK on nationaland global carbon dioxide emissions. Energy policy．2008,36(6):1907-1914
[44]张晓平.中国对外贸易产生的CO2排放区位转移分析.地理学报,2009,(2):65-76
[45] Xu M,Willianms E. Allenbyb．Assessing environmental impacts embodied inmanufacturing and labor input for the China-U.S. trade. EnvironmentalScience＆Technology,2010,44(2):567-573
[46]刘强,庄幸,姜克隽.中国出口贸易中的载能量及碳排放量分析．中国工业经济,2008,(8):46-55
[47]齐晔,李惠民,徐明.中国进出口贸易中的隐含碳估算.中国人口、资源与环境,2008,18(3):8-13
[48] Weber C L,Peters G P, Guan D．The contribution of Chinese exports to climatechange．Energy Policy,2008,36(9):3572-3577
[49]陈迎,潘家华,谢来辉．中国外贸进出口商品中的内涵能源及其政策含义．经济研究,2008,(7):11-25
[50] Yan L D, Yang L K．China’s foreign trade and climate change: a case study ofCO2emissions．Energy Policy,2010,38(1):350-356
[51]闫云凤,杨来科．中国出口隐含碳增长的影响因素分析.中国人口.资源与环境,2010,20(8):21-29
[52]刘海啸,张晓津,曲文静.燕山大学学报:哲学社会科学版,2011,(3):123-127
[53] Wei C, Ni J, Du L. Regional allocation of carbon dioxide abatement in China.China Economic Review,2011,(3):75-83
[54]李小平,卢现祥.国际贸易、污染产业转移和中国工业CO2排放,经济研究,2010,(1):15-26
[55] Jaffe A B, Peterson S R., Portney P R., Stavins R N. Environmental regulationand the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing: what does the evidence tellus?. J Econ Lit,1995,33(3):109-132
[56] Gentry B S．Private capital flows and the environment:lessons from LatinAmerica. Yale Centre for Environmental Law and Policy,1996,89:1089-1107
[57] Repetto R, Austin D. The Costs of Climate Protection. Washington, DC:World Resources Institute,1995,(4):20-28
[58] Repetto R. Jobs, Competitiveness, and Environmental Regulation. Workingpaper, world Resources Institute,1995, NO.7034
[59] Leonard H J. Pollution and the Struggle for the World Product:MultinationalCorporations,Environment and International Comparative Advantage.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1988
[60] Bouman M. Do Pollution Abatement Costs Induce Direct Foreign Investment?Evidence for Germany. Mimeograph,1996,89(4):178-198
[61] Ederington J, Mimer J．Is Environmental Policy a Secondary Trade Barrier?An Empirical Analyis,mimeo,2005,19(8):157-189
[62] Smarzynska B K, Wei S J. Pollution havens and foreign direct investment:dirty secret or popular myth?. Working paper, National Bureau of EconomicResearch,2001,NO.8465
[63] RodríguezBarroso M R, GarcíaMorales J L, Coello Oviedo M D. Anassessment of heavy metal contamination in surface sediment using statisticalanalysis. Environmental monitoring and assessment,2010,163(1):489-501
[64] Cole M A., Elliott R. FDI and the Capital Intensity of “Dirty” Sectors: AMissing Piece of the Pollution Haven Puzzle. Review of DevelopmentEconomics,2005,9(4):363-383
[65] Akbostanci E,Tuny G I,Tur-Asik S．Pollution Haven Hypothesis and the Roleof Dirty Industries in Turkey’S Exports,Environment and DevelopmentEconomics,2007(12):297-322
[66] Smarzynska B K, Wei S J. Pollution havens and foreign direct investment:dirty secret or popular myth? Contributions to Economic Analysis&Policy,2004,3(2):23-57
[67] Levinson A, Taylor M S. Unmasking the Pollution Haven Effect. InternationalEconomic Review,2008.49(1):121-143
[68] Eskeland G S, Harrison A E. Moving to greener pastures? Multinationals andthe pollution haven hypothesis. Journal of Development Economics,2003,70(1):877-908
[69] Xing Y Q,Charles D． Kolstad,DoLax Environmental Regulations AttractForeign Investment? World economics,2002,56:45-77
[70] Keller W, Levinson A. Pollution abatement costs and foreign direct investmentinflows to the U.S. states. Review of Economics and Statistics,2002,84(6):1375-1418
[71] Perkins A, Neumayer D. Fostering Environment-efficiency throughTransnational Linkages? Trajectories of CO2and SO2,1980-2000.Environment and Planning,2008,(40):2970-2989
[72] Perkins A, Neumayer D. Transnational Linkages and the Spillover ofEnvironment-efficiency into Developing Countries. Global EnvironmentalChange,2009,(19):375-383
[73] Dean J,Mary F. Foreign Direct Investment and Pollution Havens Evaluatingthe Evidence from China. Research economics,2004,3082:175-190
[74] Ljungwall C, Linde-Rahr M. Environmental policy and the location of foreigndirect investment in China. Working Papers, Governance,2005,NO.4407
[75] He J. Pollution Haven Hypothesis and Environmental Impacts of ForeignDirect Investment: The Case of Industrial Emission of Sulfur Dioxide inChinese Provinces. Ecological Economics,2006,(60):228-245
[76]杨涛.环境规制对中国对外贸易影响的实证分析.当代财经,2003,(10):103-105
[77]刘志忠、陈果环境管制与外商直接投资区位分布——基于城市面板数据的实证研究.国际贸易问题,2009,(3):61-69
[78]郭建万,陶峰.集聚经济、环境规制与外商直接投资区位选择.产业经济研究,2009,(4):29-37
[79] Motta M.Thiss I F. Does Environmental Dumping Lead to Dislocation,European Economic Review,1994,38:563-576
[80] Bartik T J．The Effects of Environmental Regulation on Business Location inthe United States,Growth and Change,1988,(19):22-44
[81] Wheeler D, Mody A. International investment location decisions: The case ofUS firms. Jour nal of International Economics,1992,33:57-76
[82] Olewiler N.Globalization, Economic Integration, and the Environment.2009,8(2):38-45
[83] List J A, McHone W, Millimet D L. Effects of environmental regulation onforeign and domestic plant births: is there a home field advantage? Journal ofUrban Economics,2004,56(3):77-109
[84] Dean J M. Are foreign investors attracted to weak environmental regulations?Evaluating the evidence from China. Journal of Development Economics,2009,90(2).:414-450
[85] Melitz M J. The impact of trade on itra-industry reallocations and aggregateindustru productivity. Econometrica,2003,71(6):1695-1725
[86] Nishimura K, Shimomura K. Trade and indeterminacy in a dynamic generalequilibrium mode. Nonlinear Dynamics in Equilibrium Models,2012,98(2):347-361
[87] Bernard A B, Redding S J, Schott P K. Comparative advantage andheterogeneous firms. The Review of Economic Studies,2007,74(1):31-66
[88]胡国珠,储丹萍,胡彩平.环境成本内部化对我国出口竞争力的影响研究.经济问题探索,2010,(9):124-128
[89]刘丽敏,杨淑娥.生产者责任延伸制度下企业外部环境成本内部化的约束机制探讨.河北大学学报:哲学社会科学版,2007,32(3):79-82
[90]钟有林,李霁友.区域经济非均衡发展理论的演变与创新.求索,2009(1):40-41
[91]吴晓波,张超群,窦伟.我国转型经济中技术创新与经济周期关系研究.科研管理,2011,32(1)
[92]王文峰.FDI理论研究综述.黑龙江对外经贸,2007,(1):45-47
[93]贾根良.美国学派的生态经济学先驱思想及对我国的启示.社会科学战线,2011,(10):33-38
[94]方大春,张敏新.低碳经济的理论基础及其经济学价值.中国人口.资源与环境,2011,(7):51-57
[95] Tybout J R, westbook M D. Trade liberalization and the dimensions ofefficiency change in Mexican manufacturing industries. Journal ofinternational economics,1995,39:53-78
[96] Bernard A B, Jensen J B. Exporters, jobs, and wages in US manufacturing.Microeconomics,1995,(7):67-119
[97] Bernard A B, Jensen J B. exceptional exporter performance: cause,effect orboth? Journal of international economics.1999,47:1-25
[98] Bernard A B, Eaton J, Jensen B, Kortum S. Plants and productivity ininternational trade. American economic review,2003,93:1268-1290
[99] AW B Y, Chuang S, Roberts M. productivity and turnover in the export market:micro evidence from Taiwan and South Korea. World band economic review,2000,14:65-90
[100] Pacnik N.Trade liberalization, exit and productivy improvements: evidencefrom Japanese manufacturers, journal of Japanese and international economics,2002,19:255-271
[101] Eaton J, Kortum S, Kramarz F. Dissecting trade: firms, industries and exportdestinations. American economic review papers and proceedings,2006,94:150-154
[102] Dixit A K, Norman V. Theory of International Trade. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1980
[103] Egger H, Egger P. International outsourcing and the productivity of lowskilled labor in the EU, Economic inquiry,2006,44(1):98-108
[104] Amiti M, Wei S J. Fear of service outsourcing: is ti justified? Economicpolicy,2005,20(42):308-347
[105] Amiti M, Wei S J. Service offshoring and productivity: evidence from the US.World economy,2009,32(2):203-220
[106]杨东平.中国环境发展报告.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2010
[107]陈建军.中国现阶段产业区域转移的实证研究——结合浙江105家企业的问卷调查报告的分析.管理世界,2002,(6):1-17
[108]芮明杰.产业经济学.上海:上海财经大学出版社,2005
[109]张公嵬,梁琦.出口与企业绩效:主要论题与最新进展.国际商务(对外经济贸易大学学报,2010,(1):72-80
[110] Hillberry R, Hummels D. Trade responses to geographic frictions: Adecomposition using micro-data. European Economic Review,2008,52(3):527-550
[111] Yi K M. Can multi-stage production explain the home bias in trade?Working papers, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia,2008, No.08-12
[112] Hillberry R, Hummels D.Trade responses to geographic frictions: adecomposition using micro-data, European Economic Review,2008,52(3):527-550
[113] Paul K, Anthony J. Venables. Globalization and the Inequality of Nations. TheQuarterly Journal of Economics,1995,110:857-880
[114]国家信息中心中国区域间投入产出表.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2005
[115]张亚雄,齐舒畅,王飞.我国非竞争型投入产出表编制及其应用分析.统计研究,2006,(5):89-97
[116]陈诗一.能源消耗、二氧化碳排放与中国工业的可持续发展.经济研究,2009,(4):41-55
[117]政府间气候变化专门委员会(IPCC).国家温室气体清单指南,2006
[118] Copeland B R, Taylor M S. Trade, Growth, and the Environment. Journal ofEconomic Literature,2004,42(1):98-108
[119] Fredriksson P, List J A, Millimet D L. Bureaucratic corruption, environmentalpolicy, and inbound US FDI: theory and evidence. Journal of PublicEconomics,2003,87(6):1376-1399
[120] Antweiler W,Copeland B,Taylor S．Is Free Trade Good for the Environment?American Economic Review,2001,91(4):877-908
[121]郭红燕,韩立岩.外商直接投资、环境管制与环境污染,国际贸易问题,2008,(8):111-118
[122] Grossman G M, Krueger A. Economic growth and the environment. TheQuarterly Journal of Economics,1995,(2):353-377
[123] Blundell R, Bond S R. Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamicpanel data models. Journal of Econometrics,1998,(7):115-143
[124] Merican Y, Yusop Z, Noor Z M, Hook L S. Foreign Direct Investment and thePollution in Five ASEAN Nations. Journal of Economics and Management,2007,(1):245-261
[125] Acharkyya J. FDI, Growth and the Environment: Evidence from India on CO2Emission during the Last Two Decades.Journal of Economic Development,2009,(6):43-58
[126]张海洋. R&D两面性、外资活动与中国工业生产率增长.经济研究,2005,(5):107-117
[127]邱斌,杨帅,辛培江.FDI技术溢出渠道与中国制造业生产率增长研究:基于面板数据的分析.世界经济,2008,(8):20-31
[128] Becker R, Henderson V. Effects of Air Quality Regulations on PollutingIndustries. The Journal of Political Economy,2000,108(2):907-940
[129] Greenstone M. The Impacts of Environmental Regulations on IndustrialActivity: Evidence from the1970and1977Clean Air Act Amendments andthe Census of Manufactures. The Journal of Political Economy,2002,110(6):150-154
[130] Kellenberg D K. An empirical investigation of the pollution haven effect withstrategic environment and trade policy. Journal of International Economics,2009,78(2):23-46
[131] Wooldridge J M. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and PanelData.Cambridge:The MIT Press,2002
[132]王剑,徐康宁．FDI区位决策、产业集聚与产业异质．经济科学,2005,(4):7-16
[133] Kang S J, Lee H S. The determinants of location choice of South Korean FDIin China. Japan and the World Economy,2007,19(4):178-197
[134] Harris C. The Market as a factor in the localization of industry in united states.Annals of the asscociation of American geographers,1954,64:315-348
[135]张伎,李松志.产业区域转移形成的影响因素及模型探讨.经济问题探索,2008,(1):77-82
[136]梁琦,刘厚俊.空间经济学的渊源与发展.江苏社会科学,2002,(6):61-66
[137]郭利平.产业群落的空间演化模式研究.北京:经济管理出版社,2006
[138] Royall R M, Cumberland W G. The finite-population linear regressionestimator and estimators of its variance—an empirical study. Journal of theAmerican Statistical Association,1981,76(376):924-930
[139] Figueiredo O, Paulo G, Woodward D.Home field advantages:locationdecisions of Portuguese entrepreneurs. Journal of urban economics,2002,52:341-361
[140] Figlio D N, Blonigen B A．The effects of foreign direct investment on localcommunities. Journal of urban economics,2000,48:338-363
[141] Pittman R W. Multilateral productivity comparisons with undesirable outputs.The Economic Journal,1983,(2):883-891
[142] Hailu A, Veeman T. Non-parametric productivity analysis with undesirableoutputs: an application to Canadian pulp and paper industry. AmericanJournal of Agricultural Economics,2000,83(3):605-616
[143]王波,张群.环境约束下不同生产效率模型研究.系统工程理论与实践,2002,(1):1-8
[144] Seiford L M, Zhu J. Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation.European Journal of Operation al Research,2002,147(1):16-20
[145] Hua Z S, Bian Y W, Liang L. Ecoefficiency analysis of paper m ills along theHuai River: A n extended DEA app roach. Omega,2007,35(5):578-587
[146] Chung Y H, Fare R, Grosskopf S. Productivity and undesirable outputs: Adirectional distance function Approach. Journal of EnvironmentalManagement,1997,51(3):229-240
[147] Tyteca D. On the Measurement of the environmental performance of firm s: Aliterature review and a productive efficiency perspective. Journal ofEnvironmental Management,1996,46(3):281-308
[148] Zofio J L, Prieto A M. Environmental efficiency and regulatory standards: thecase of CO2emissions from OECD industries. Resource and EnergyEconomics,2001:23(1):63-83
[149] Zhou P, Ang B W, Poh K L. Slacks-based efficiency measures for modelingenvironmental performance. Ecological Economics,2006,60(1):111-118
[150] Zhou P, Ang B W, Poh K L. Measuring environmental performance underdifferent environmental DEA technologies. Energy Economics,2008a,30(1):1-14
[151] Zhou P, Ang B W. Linear programming models for measuring economy-w ide energy efficiency performance. Energy Policy,2008b,36(8):2911-2916
[152] Fare R, Grosskopf S, Pasurka C A. Environmental production functions andenvironmental directional distance functions. Energy,2007,32(7):1055-1066
[153]王兵,吴延瑞,颜鹏飞.环境管制与全要素生产率增长:APEC的实证研究.经济研究,2008,(5):2-15
[154]胡鞍钢,郑京海,高宇宁,张宁,许海萍.考虑环境因素的省级技术效率排名.经济学(季刊),2008,7(3):932-960
[155] Luenberger D G. Benefit functions and duality. Journal of mathematicaleconomics,1992,21(5):461-481
[156]张军,吴桂英,张吉鹏.中国省际物质资本存量估算:1952-2000.经济研究,2004,(10):35-44
[157]金碚.中国工业的转型升级.中国工业经济,2011,(7):5-11
[158]王淑新,何元庆,王学定.中国低碳经济演进分析:基于能源强度的视角.中国软科学,2010,(9):25-32
[159]王雪磊.后危机时代碳金融市场发展困境与中国策略.国际金融研究,2012,(2):77-84
[160]陈诗一.中国的绿色工业革命:基于环境全要素生产率视角的解释(1980～2008),经济研究,2010,(11):2l-35
[161]张成,陆砀,郭路,于同申．环境规制强度和生产技术进步.经济研究,2011,(2):113-124