劳动力错配、结构演变及其对技术进步技能偏向性的影响研究
|
摘要
改革开放30年来我国持续的经济改革取得伟大成就，但非完全市场经济环境下要素错配和无效配置现象普遍，尤其是要素流动障碍已阻碍宏观经济结构优化和可持续增长，对于人口众多的中国而言，劳动力结构优化更是决定经济可持续发展的关键，其错配水平越高经济效率损失越大，即优化劳动力配置对于经济增长作用越明显。而经济高速稳定增长不仅需要改善要素配置效率，同时还应当关注要素流动对技术进步的影响。为此，本文考察我国劳动力错配、结构变迁及其对技术进步技能偏向性的影响效应，主要研究内容如下：
首先，本文提出研究背景、研究意义、研究方法、研究创新点以及论文框架，回顾劳动力错配、技术进步技能偏向性以及劳动力结构对技术进步技能偏向性影响相关文献，总结现有研究的特点及局限性。通过引进非劳动力错配市场约束，构建理论模型考察劳动力结构对技术进步技能偏向性的影响效应，结果显示技术进步技能偏向性方向及其偏向性水平取决于劳动力替代弹性与劳动力结构，当技能劳动与非技能劳动互补时，技能与非技能劳动相对供给增速加快或降速减缓将增大技术进步技能偏向性指数，即技术进步偏向于技能劳动的程度将增强或偏向于非技能劳动的程度将减弱，反之则反是；当技能劳动与非技能劳动呈替代关系时，结论相反。
其次，在劳动力错配市场条件下构建理论模型，考察劳动力错配以及劳动力结构对技术进步技能偏向性的影响效应，比较分析非错配与错配模型的异同。结果发现，技术进步技能偏向性方向及其偏向性水平取决于劳动力替代弹性、劳动力错配水平以及劳动力结构，当劳动力错配水平降速加快或增速减缓时技术进步技能偏向性指数将减小，即技术进步偏向于技能劳动的程度将减弱或偏向于非技能劳动的程度将增强，反之反是。当技能劳动与非技能劳动互补时，若技能与非技能劳动相对供给增速加快或降速减缓，则技术进步技能偏向性指数将增大，即技术进步偏向于技能劳动的程度将增强或偏向于非技能劳动的程度将减弱，反之相反；当技能劳动与非技能劳动替代时，结论相反。可以看出，非错配模型忽视劳动力错配对技术进步技能偏向性的影响，并且在劳动力错配水平呈下降趋势时，其高估了技术进步技能偏向性指数，反之则低估了技术进步技能偏向性指数。
再次，构建劳动力错配指数考察我国、七大区域以及各省域劳动力错配水平，构建计量模型考察我国劳动力错配水平的影响因素，实证结果显示样本期内我国劳动力错配水平不断优化且优化速度较快；华北、华东、华中、华南以及西南区域劳动力错配水平也不断优化，而样本期内东北与西北区域劳动力错配水平变化比较复杂；各省域劳动力错配水平存在明显差异，但多数省域劳动力错配水平得到明显优化，发达省域劳动力错配水平相对较低而欠发达省域劳动力错配水平相对较高。劳动力错配影响因素计量分析结果显示我国劳动力错配水平变化依赖于市场化水平以及税收政策的变化。同时，构建劳动力结构指数考察我国、七大区域以及各省域劳动力结构变迁，构建计量模型考察我国劳动力结构的影响因素，实证结果显示样本期内我国劳动力结构逐年优化，但其劳动力结构失衡情况始终比较严重；与全国数据类似七大区域劳动力结构也逐年优化；各省域劳动力结构存在明显差异，但各省域劳动力结构均得到明显优化，且发达省域劳动力结构优化程度一般高于欠发达省域劳动力结构优化程度。劳动力结构影响因素计量分析结果显示我国劳动力结构变迁依赖于劳动力错配水平、产业结构以及人均教育经费投入的变化，当劳动力错配水平降低时我国技能与非技能劳动相对供给将升高，反之相反。
最后，本文基于标准化系统对我国总体经济、七大区域以及各省域双层嵌套CES生产函数进行估计，根据估计结果测度技术进步技能偏向性指数，发现样本期内我国技术进步偏向于技能劳动但其偏向于技能劳动程度逐年减弱。样本期内各区域的技术进步技能偏向性水平差距较大，但各区域技术进步技能偏向性水平不断趋同，其中华北、华东以及华南区域技术进步表现出偏向于技能劳动的特征但其偏向性水平不断减弱，华中区域技术进步偏向于技能劳动且其偏向性水平不断增强，说明华北、华东、华南以及华中区域的技术进步更有利于提升技能劳动边际产出，东北、西北以及西南区域的技能偏向性表现出非稳态特征。省域测度结果显示样本期内各省域技术进步技能偏向性趋势差异明显，但多数发达省域技术进步技能偏向性指数呈逐年下降趋势，而多数欠发达省域技术进步技能偏向性指数呈逐年上升趋势。同时，本文构建计量模型验证我国劳动力错配以及劳动力结构对技术进步技能偏向性的影响，结果发现，当我国劳动力错配水平降速加快或增速减缓时，技术进步技能偏向性指数将减小，即技术进步偏向于技能劳动的程度将减弱或偏向于非技能劳动的程度将增强，反之相反，该结论与模型推导结果一致。而劳动力结构影响效应模型计量分析结果显示，当我国技能与非技能劳动相对供给增速加快或降速减缓时，技术进步技能偏向性指数将减小，即技术进步偏向于技能劳动的程度将减弱或偏向于非技能劳动的程度将增强，反之也反是，该结论也与模型推导结果一致。
Thirty years since the reform and opening up policy, China’s continued economic reform hasmade great achievements, but there are universal phenomenons of factor misallocation andineffective factor allocation based on the imperfect market, the barriers of factor mobility hashindered the optimization of the macroeconomic structure and the sustainable growth ofmacroeconomic. The optimization of labor structure in China with a large population is critical forsustainable economic development. The higher the level of labor misallocation is, the larger theeconomic efficiency loss is, which means the lager the effect of labor allocation on economicgrowth is. We need to improve the factor allocation efficiency and focus on the effect of factormobility on technical change. Based on this, the paper studies the change of China’s labormisallocation, labor structure and their effects on skill-biased technical change, the main studiesare as follows:
Firstly, the paper raises the research background, significance, methods, innovations andframeworks, reviews the relevant literature on labor misallocation, skill-biased technical changeand the effect of labor structure on skill-biased technical change, and summarizes thecharacteristics and limitations of the studies. Then builds a theoretical model based on thenon-labor-misallocation market and studies the effect of labor structure on skill-biased technicalchange, results show that the direction and level of skill-biased technical change depend on theelasticity of substitution of labor and the labor structure. When skilled labor and unskilled laborare gross complements, if the relative supply of skilled labor and unskilled labor increases fasteror decreases more slowly, the skill-biased technical change index will increase, the skill-biasedlevel will rise or the unskill-biased level will decline, otherwise the opposite. When the twofactors are gross substitutes, the conclusion is opposite.
Secondly, it builds theoretical a model based on the labor-misallocation market, studies theeffects of labor misallocation and labor structure on skill-biased technical change, and analyzesthe differences and similarities between the non-labor-misallocation model and thelabor-misallocation model comparatively. The results show that the direction and level ofskill-biased technical change depend on the elasticity of substitution between labor, the labormisallocation and the labor structure. When the level of labor misallocation decreases faster orincreases more slowly, the skill-biased technical change index will decrease, the skill-biased levelwill decline or the unskill-biased level will rise, otherwise the opposite. When skilled labor andunskilled labor are gross complements, if the relative supply of skilled labor and unskilled labor increases faster or decreases more slowly, the skill-biased technical change index will increase,the skill-biased level will rise or the unskill-biased level will decline, otherwise the opposite.When the two factors are gross substitutes, the conclusion is opposite. It is observed thatnon-labor-misallocation model neglects the effect of labor misallocation on skill-biased technicalchange, when the level of labor misallocation is decreasing, the model overestimates theskill-biased technical change index, otherwise the model underestimates the index.
Thirdly, it builds labor misallocation index to investigate the labor misallocation level ofChina, seven regions and provinces, and builds econometric models to analyze the factors whichinfluencing China’s labor misallocation level. The empirical results show that during the sampleperiod China’s labor misallocation level has been improved at a high speed. During the sampleperiod the labor misallocation level of north China, east China, central China, south China andsouthwest China have also been improved, but the change of labor misallocation level of northeastChina and northwest China are complex. The labor misallocation level of provinces aresignificantly different, most provinces have improved their labor misallocation level, the labormisallocation level of developed provinces are relatively low and the labor misallocation level ofless developed provinces are relatively high. The econometric results of the factors whichinfluencing labor misallocation level show that the change of China’s labor misallocation leveldepends on the change of marketization level and tax policy. The paper builds labor structureindex to investigate the labor structure change of China, seven regions and provinces, and buildseconometric models to analyze the factors which influencing China’s labor structure. Theempirical results show that during the sample period China’s labor structure has been optimizedwith years, but the imbalanced situation between skilled labor and unskilled labor is alwaysobvious. Similar to the data of China the labor structure of every region has been optimized withyears. The labor structure of provinces are significantly different, but every province hasoptimized its labor structure, and the optimization level of developed provinces’ labor structuregenerally exceeds the optimization level of less developed provinces’ labor structure. Theeconometric results of the factors which influencing labor structure show that China’s laborstructure change depends on the change of labor misallocation level, industrial structure andper-capita education spending, an decrease in the labor misallocation level will raise the relativesupply of skilled labor and unskilled labor, otherwise the opposite.
Finally, the paper estimates double nested CES production function of China, seven regionsand provinces based on the normalized system, and measures the skill-biased technical changeindex according to the estimation results. It is found that China’s technical change is skill-biased,but the biased level declines with years. There are obvious differences among the level ofskill-biased technical change of regions, but the level of skill-biased technical change of regions are changing with converge. The technical change of north China, east China and south China areskill-biased, but the biased level decline, the technical change of central China is skill-biased, andthe biased level rises, which means the technical change of north China, east China, south Chinaand central China are more conducive to raise the marginal product of skilled labor. Theskill-biased technical change in northeast China, northeast China and southwest China display anunsteady state. The results of provinces show that there are obvious differences among thevariation trend of skill-biased technical change of provinces, but most skill-biased technicalchange index of developed provinces display a declining trend year by year, while mostskill-biased technical change index of less developed provinces display a rising trend year by year.And the paper builds econometric models to verify the effects of labor misallocation and laborstructure on skill-biased technical change, the results show that when China’s labor misallocationlevel decreases faster or increases more slowly, the skill-biased technical change index willdecrease, the skill-biased level will decline or the unskill-biased level will rise, otherwise theopposite, which is consistent with the theoretical results. The results of effect of labor structureshow that when China’s relative supply of skilled labor and unskilled labor increases faster ordecreases more slowly, the skill-biased technical change index will decrease, the skill-biased levelwill decline or the unskill-biased level will rise, otherwise the opposite, which is also consistentwith the theoretical results.
首先，本文提出研究背景、研究意义、研究方法、研究创新点以及论文框架，回顾劳动力错配、技术进步技能偏向性以及劳动力结构对技术进步技能偏向性影响相关文献，总结现有研究的特点及局限性。通过引进非劳动力错配市场约束，构建理论模型考察劳动力结构对技术进步技能偏向性的影响效应，结果显示技术进步技能偏向性方向及其偏向性水平取决于劳动力替代弹性与劳动力结构，当技能劳动与非技能劳动互补时，技能与非技能劳动相对供给增速加快或降速减缓将增大技术进步技能偏向性指数，即技术进步偏向于技能劳动的程度将增强或偏向于非技能劳动的程度将减弱，反之则反是；当技能劳动与非技能劳动呈替代关系时，结论相反。
其次，在劳动力错配市场条件下构建理论模型，考察劳动力错配以及劳动力结构对技术进步技能偏向性的影响效应，比较分析非错配与错配模型的异同。结果发现，技术进步技能偏向性方向及其偏向性水平取决于劳动力替代弹性、劳动力错配水平以及劳动力结构，当劳动力错配水平降速加快或增速减缓时技术进步技能偏向性指数将减小，即技术进步偏向于技能劳动的程度将减弱或偏向于非技能劳动的程度将增强，反之反是。当技能劳动与非技能劳动互补时，若技能与非技能劳动相对供给增速加快或降速减缓，则技术进步技能偏向性指数将增大，即技术进步偏向于技能劳动的程度将增强或偏向于非技能劳动的程度将减弱，反之相反；当技能劳动与非技能劳动替代时，结论相反。可以看出，非错配模型忽视劳动力错配对技术进步技能偏向性的影响，并且在劳动力错配水平呈下降趋势时，其高估了技术进步技能偏向性指数，反之则低估了技术进步技能偏向性指数。
再次，构建劳动力错配指数考察我国、七大区域以及各省域劳动力错配水平，构建计量模型考察我国劳动力错配水平的影响因素，实证结果显示样本期内我国劳动力错配水平不断优化且优化速度较快；华北、华东、华中、华南以及西南区域劳动力错配水平也不断优化，而样本期内东北与西北区域劳动力错配水平变化比较复杂；各省域劳动力错配水平存在明显差异，但多数省域劳动力错配水平得到明显优化，发达省域劳动力错配水平相对较低而欠发达省域劳动力错配水平相对较高。劳动力错配影响因素计量分析结果显示我国劳动力错配水平变化依赖于市场化水平以及税收政策的变化。同时，构建劳动力结构指数考察我国、七大区域以及各省域劳动力结构变迁，构建计量模型考察我国劳动力结构的影响因素，实证结果显示样本期内我国劳动力结构逐年优化，但其劳动力结构失衡情况始终比较严重；与全国数据类似七大区域劳动力结构也逐年优化；各省域劳动力结构存在明显差异，但各省域劳动力结构均得到明显优化，且发达省域劳动力结构优化程度一般高于欠发达省域劳动力结构优化程度。劳动力结构影响因素计量分析结果显示我国劳动力结构变迁依赖于劳动力错配水平、产业结构以及人均教育经费投入的变化，当劳动力错配水平降低时我国技能与非技能劳动相对供给将升高，反之相反。
最后，本文基于标准化系统对我国总体经济、七大区域以及各省域双层嵌套CES生产函数进行估计，根据估计结果测度技术进步技能偏向性指数，发现样本期内我国技术进步偏向于技能劳动但其偏向于技能劳动程度逐年减弱。样本期内各区域的技术进步技能偏向性水平差距较大，但各区域技术进步技能偏向性水平不断趋同，其中华北、华东以及华南区域技术进步表现出偏向于技能劳动的特征但其偏向性水平不断减弱，华中区域技术进步偏向于技能劳动且其偏向性水平不断增强，说明华北、华东、华南以及华中区域的技术进步更有利于提升技能劳动边际产出，东北、西北以及西南区域的技能偏向性表现出非稳态特征。省域测度结果显示样本期内各省域技术进步技能偏向性趋势差异明显，但多数发达省域技术进步技能偏向性指数呈逐年下降趋势，而多数欠发达省域技术进步技能偏向性指数呈逐年上升趋势。同时，本文构建计量模型验证我国劳动力错配以及劳动力结构对技术进步技能偏向性的影响，结果发现，当我国劳动力错配水平降速加快或增速减缓时，技术进步技能偏向性指数将减小，即技术进步偏向于技能劳动的程度将减弱或偏向于非技能劳动的程度将增强，反之相反，该结论与模型推导结果一致。而劳动力结构影响效应模型计量分析结果显示，当我国技能与非技能劳动相对供给增速加快或降速减缓时，技术进步技能偏向性指数将减小，即技术进步偏向于技能劳动的程度将减弱或偏向于非技能劳动的程度将增强，反之也反是，该结论也与模型推导结果一致。
Thirty years since the reform and opening up policy, China’s continued economic reform hasmade great achievements, but there are universal phenomenons of factor misallocation andineffective factor allocation based on the imperfect market, the barriers of factor mobility hashindered the optimization of the macroeconomic structure and the sustainable growth ofmacroeconomic. The optimization of labor structure in China with a large population is critical forsustainable economic development. The higher the level of labor misallocation is, the larger theeconomic efficiency loss is, which means the lager the effect of labor allocation on economicgrowth is. We need to improve the factor allocation efficiency and focus on the effect of factormobility on technical change. Based on this, the paper studies the change of China’s labormisallocation, labor structure and their effects on skill-biased technical change, the main studiesare as follows:
Firstly, the paper raises the research background, significance, methods, innovations andframeworks, reviews the relevant literature on labor misallocation, skill-biased technical changeand the effect of labor structure on skill-biased technical change, and summarizes thecharacteristics and limitations of the studies. Then builds a theoretical model based on thenon-labor-misallocation market and studies the effect of labor structure on skill-biased technicalchange, results show that the direction and level of skill-biased technical change depend on theelasticity of substitution of labor and the labor structure. When skilled labor and unskilled laborare gross complements, if the relative supply of skilled labor and unskilled labor increases fasteror decreases more slowly, the skill-biased technical change index will increase, the skill-biasedlevel will rise or the unskill-biased level will decline, otherwise the opposite. When the twofactors are gross substitutes, the conclusion is opposite.
Secondly, it builds theoretical a model based on the labor-misallocation market, studies theeffects of labor misallocation and labor structure on skill-biased technical change, and analyzesthe differences and similarities between the non-labor-misallocation model and thelabor-misallocation model comparatively. The results show that the direction and level ofskill-biased technical change depend on the elasticity of substitution between labor, the labormisallocation and the labor structure. When the level of labor misallocation decreases faster orincreases more slowly, the skill-biased technical change index will decrease, the skill-biased levelwill decline or the unskill-biased level will rise, otherwise the opposite. When skilled labor andunskilled labor are gross complements, if the relative supply of skilled labor and unskilled labor increases faster or decreases more slowly, the skill-biased technical change index will increase,the skill-biased level will rise or the unskill-biased level will decline, otherwise the opposite.When the two factors are gross substitutes, the conclusion is opposite. It is observed thatnon-labor-misallocation model neglects the effect of labor misallocation on skill-biased technicalchange, when the level of labor misallocation is decreasing, the model overestimates theskill-biased technical change index, otherwise the model underestimates the index.
Thirdly, it builds labor misallocation index to investigate the labor misallocation level ofChina, seven regions and provinces, and builds econometric models to analyze the factors whichinfluencing China’s labor misallocation level. The empirical results show that during the sampleperiod China’s labor misallocation level has been improved at a high speed. During the sampleperiod the labor misallocation level of north China, east China, central China, south China andsouthwest China have also been improved, but the change of labor misallocation level of northeastChina and northwest China are complex. The labor misallocation level of provinces aresignificantly different, most provinces have improved their labor misallocation level, the labormisallocation level of developed provinces are relatively low and the labor misallocation level ofless developed provinces are relatively high. The econometric results of the factors whichinfluencing labor misallocation level show that the change of China’s labor misallocation leveldepends on the change of marketization level and tax policy. The paper builds labor structureindex to investigate the labor structure change of China, seven regions and provinces, and buildseconometric models to analyze the factors which influencing China’s labor structure. Theempirical results show that during the sample period China’s labor structure has been optimizedwith years, but the imbalanced situation between skilled labor and unskilled labor is alwaysobvious. Similar to the data of China the labor structure of every region has been optimized withyears. The labor structure of provinces are significantly different, but every province hasoptimized its labor structure, and the optimization level of developed provinces’ labor structuregenerally exceeds the optimization level of less developed provinces’ labor structure. Theeconometric results of the factors which influencing labor structure show that China’s laborstructure change depends on the change of labor misallocation level, industrial structure andper-capita education spending, an decrease in the labor misallocation level will raise the relativesupply of skilled labor and unskilled labor, otherwise the opposite.
Finally, the paper estimates double nested CES production function of China, seven regionsand provinces based on the normalized system, and measures the skill-biased technical changeindex according to the estimation results. It is found that China’s technical change is skill-biased,but the biased level declines with years. There are obvious differences among the level ofskill-biased technical change of regions, but the level of skill-biased technical change of regions are changing with converge. The technical change of north China, east China and south China areskill-biased, but the biased level decline, the technical change of central China is skill-biased, andthe biased level rises, which means the technical change of north China, east China, south Chinaand central China are more conducive to raise the marginal product of skilled labor. Theskill-biased technical change in northeast China, northeast China and southwest China display anunsteady state. The results of provinces show that there are obvious differences among thevariation trend of skill-biased technical change of provinces, but most skill-biased technicalchange index of developed provinces display a declining trend year by year, while mostskill-biased technical change index of less developed provinces display a rising trend year by year.And the paper builds econometric models to verify the effects of labor misallocation and laborstructure on skill-biased technical change, the results show that when China’s labor misallocationlevel decreases faster or increases more slowly, the skill-biased technical change index willdecrease, the skill-biased level will decline or the unskill-biased level will rise, otherwise theopposite, which is consistent with the theoretical results. The results of effect of labor structureshow that when China’s relative supply of skilled labor and unskilled labor increases faster ordecreases more slowly, the skill-biased technical change index will decrease, the skill-biased levelwill decline or the unskill-biased level will rise, otherwise the opposite, which is also consistentwith the theoretical results.
引文
[1] Acemoglu D. Changes in Unemployment and Wage Inequality: An Alternative Theory andSome Evidence[R]. NBER Working Paper,1998, No.6658.
[2] Acemoglu D. Deunionization, Technical Change and Inequality[J]. Carnegie-RochesterConference Series on Public Policy,2001,55(1):229-264.
[3] Acemoglu D. Directed Technological Change[J]. Review of Economic Studies,2002,69:781-809.
[4] Acemoglu D. Equilibrium Bias of Technology[J]. Econometrica,2007,75:1371-1409.
[5] Acemoglu D. Technical Change, Inequality, and the Labor Market[J]. Journal of EconomicLiterature,2002,40:7-72.
[6] Acemoglu D. Patterns of Skill Premia[J]. Review of Economic Studies,2003,70(2):199-230.
[7] Acemoglu D. Why Do New Technologies Complement Skills? Directed Technical Changeand Wage Inequality[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1998,113:1055-1089.
[8] Acemoglu D, Zilibotti F. Productivity Differences[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,2001,116:563-606.
[9] Alfaro L, Charlton A, Kanczuk F. Plant-Size Distribution and Cross-country IncomeDifferences[R]. NBER Working Paper,2008, No.14060.
[10] Almut B, Thijs V R. Skill-Biased Technological Change and the Business Cycle[J]. KielWorking Paper,2012, No.1775.
[11] Aoki S. A Simple Accounting Framework for the Effect of Resource Misallocation onAggregate Productivity[J]. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies,2012,26:473-494.
[12] Aoki S. Was the Barrier to Labor Mobility an Important Factor for the Prewar JapaneseStagnation?[R]. MPRA Paper,2008, No.8178.
[13] Autor D H, Katz L F, Kearney M S. Trends in U.S. Wage Inequality: Revising theRevisionists[J]. Review of Economics and Statistics,2008,90(2):300-323.
[14] Balleer A, Rens T V. Cyclical Skill-biased Technological Change[R]. IZA Discussion Papers,2009, No.4258.
[15] Baltagi B H, Rich D P. Skill-Biased Technical Change in US Manufacturing: A Geneal IndexApproach[J]. Journal of Econometrics,2005,126:549-570.
[16] Bartel A P, Sicherman N. Technological Change and Wages: An Inter-industry Analysis[R].NBER Working Paper,1997, No.5941.
[17] Bartelsman E, Haltiwanger J, Scarpetta S. Cross Country Differences in Productivity: TheRole of Allocative Efficiency[J]. American Economic Review,2013,103(1):305-334.
[18] Berman E, Bound J, Machin S. Implications of Skill-biased Technological Change:International Evidence[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1998,113(4):1245-1279.
[19] Berman E, Machin S. Skill-Biased Technology Transfer: Evidence Factor BiasedTechnological Change in Developing Countries[M]. Oxford Univ Press,2000.
[20] Berman E, Somanathan R, Tan H W. Is Skill-biased Technological Change Here Yet?:Evidence from Indian Manufacturing in the1990’s[R]. NBER Working Paper,2005, No.5110.
[21] Bratti M, Matteucci N. Is there Skill-biased Technological Change in Italian Manufacturing?Evidence from Firm-level Data[J]. Brussels Economic Review,2005,48:153-182.
[22] Brown C, Campbell B A. The Impact of Technological Change in Work and Wages[J].Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society,2002,41(1):1-33.
[23] Box G E P，Cox D R. An Analysis of Transformations[J]. Journal of the Royal StatisticalSociety，1964，26（2）：211-252.
[24] Busso M, Madrigal L, Pages C. Productivity and Resource Misallocation in LatinAmerica[R]. IDB Working Paper,2012, No.IDB-WP-306.
[25] Camacho A, Conover E. Misallocation and Productivity in Colombia’s ManufacturingIndustries[R]. IDB Working Paper,2010, No.IDB-WP-123.
[26] Card D, DiNardo J E. Skill Biased Technological Change and Rising Wage Inequality: SomeProblems and Puzzles[R]. NBER Working Paper,2002, No.8769.
[27] Caselli F. Accouting for Cross-Country Income Differences[R]. CEP Discussion Paper,2005,No.667.
[28] Cazzavillan G, Olszewski K. Skill-Biased Technological Change, Endogenous Labor Supplyand Growth: A Model and Calibration to Poland and the US[J]. Reaserch in Economics,2011,65:124-136.
[29] Chari V V, Kehoe P J, McGrattan E. Accounting for the Great Depression[J]. AmericanEconomic Review,2002,92:22-27.
[30] Chennells L, Reenen J V. Has Technology Hurt Less Skilled Workers? An EconometricSurvey of the Effects of Tchnical Change on the Structure of Pay and Jobs[R]. The Institutefor Fiscal Studies Working Papei,1999, No. W99/27.
[31] de Melo J A P. Distortions in the Factor Market: Some General Equilibrium Estimates[J].Review of Economics and Statistics,1977,59:398-405.
[32] Esquivel G, Roddriguez-Lopez J A. Technology, Trade, and Wage Inequality in Mexicobefore and after NAFTA[J]. Journal of Development Economics,2003,72(2):543-565.
[33] Foster L, Haltiwanger J, Syverson C. Reallocation, Firm Turnover, and Efficiency: Selectionon Productivity or Profitability?[R]. IZA Discussion Papers,2005, No.1705.
[34] Funk P, Vogel T. Endogenous Skill Bias[J]. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control,2004,28(11):2155-2193.
[35] Galor O, Moav O. Ability-biased Technological Transition, Wage Inequality, and EconomicGrowth[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,2000,115(2):469-497.
[36] Greiner A, Rubart J, Semmler W. Economic Growth, Skill-Biased Technical Change andWage Inequality: A Model and Estimations for the US and Europe[J]. Journal ofMacroeconomics,2004,26(4):597-621.
[37] Gorg H, Strobl E. Relative Wages, Openness and Skill-Biased Technological Change[R].IZA Discussion Paper,2002, No.596.
[38] Gould E D, Moav O, Weinberg B A. Precautionary Demand for Education, Inequality, andTechnological Progress [J]. Journal of Economic Growth,2001,6(4):285-315.
[39] Harberger A C. Using the Resourses at Hand More Effectively[J]. American EconomicReview,49(2):134-146.
[40] Hayashi F, Prescott E C. The Depressing Effect of Agricultural Institutions on the PrewarJapanese Economy[R]. NBER Working Paper,2006, No.12081.
[41] Hicks J R. The Theory of Wages[M]. London: Macmillan,1932.
[42] Hijzen A. International Outsourcing, Technological Change, and Wage Inequality[J]. Reviewof International Economics,2007,15(1):188-205.
[43] Hornstein A. The Effect of Technical Change on Labor Market Inequalities[J]. Handbook ofEconomic Growth,2005,1(B):1275-1370.
[44] Hsieh CT, Klenow P J. Misallocation and Manufacturing TFP in China and India[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,2009,4:1403-1448.
[45] Jones C I. Misallocation, Economic Growth, and Input-Output Economics[R]. NBERWorking Paper,2011, No.16742.
[46] Jones R W. Distortion in Factor Markets and the General Equilibrium Model[J]. Journal ofPolitical Economy,1971,79:437-459.
[47] Katz L F, Autor D H. Changes in the Wage Structure and Earnings Inequality[J]. Handbookof Labor Economics,1999,3(A):1463-1555.
[48] Kijima Y. Why did Wage Inequality Increase? Evidence from Urban India1983-99[J].Journal of Development Economics,2006,81(1):97-117.
[49] Kiley M T. The Supply of Skilled Labour and Skill-Biased Technological Progress[J].Economic Journal,1999,109(458):708-724.
[50] Klump R, McAdam P, Willman A. Factor Substitution and Factor-Augmenting TechnicalProgress in the United States: A Normalized Supply-Side System Approch[J]. Review ofEconomics and Statistics,2007,89(1):183-192.
[51] Lagos R. A Model of TFP[J]. Review of Economic Studies,2006,73(4):983-1007.
[52] Leibenstein H. Allocative Effeciency vs.“X-Efficiency”[J]. American Economic Review,1966,56(3):392-415.
[53] Lu D. Sectoral Factor Reallocation and Productivity Growth: Rencent Trends in the ChineseEconomy[J]. Journal of Economic Development,2002,27(2):95-111.
[54] Machin S, Reenen V J. Changes in Wage Inequality[R]. Centre for Economic PerformanceSpecial Paper,2008, No. CEPSP18.
[55] Machin S, Reenen J V. Technology and Changes in Skill Structure: Evidence from SevenOECD Countries[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1998,113(4):1215-1244.
[56] Melitz M J. The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate IndustryProductivity[R]. NBER Working Paper,2002, No.8881.
[57] Murphy K M, Riddell W C, Romer P M. Wages, Skills, and Technology in the United Statesand Canada[R]. NBER Working Paper,1998, No.6638.
[58] Nakakuki M, Otani A, Shiratsuka S. Distortions in Factor Markets and Structral Adjustmentsin the Economy[J]. Monetary and Economic Studies,2004,5:71-100.
[59] Oberfield E. Productivity and Misallocation During a Crisis: Evidence from the ChileanCrisis of1982[J]. Review of Economic Dynamics,2013,16:100-119.
[60] Peters M. Heterogeneous Mark-Ups and Endogenous Misallocation[C]. Meeting Papers,2011.
[61] Poirson H. Factor Reallocation and Growth in Developing Countries[R]. IMF Working Paper,2000, No. WP/00/94.
[62] Restuccia D, Rogerson R. Policy Distortions and Aggregate Productivity with HeterogeneousPlants[J]. Review of Economic Dynamics,2008,11:707-720.
[63] Restuccia D, Rogerson R. Misallocation and Productivity[J]. Review of Economic Dynamics,2013,16:1-10.
[64] Restuccia D, Yang D T, Zhu X D. Agriculture and Aggregate Productivity: A QuantitativeCross-Country Analysis[J]. Journal of Monetary Economics,2008,55(2):234-250.
[65] Rogerson R. Structural Transformation and the Deterioration of European Labor marketOutcomes[R]. NBER Working Paper,2007, No.12889.
[66] Sala G. Approaches to Skills Mismatch in the Labour Market: A Literature Review[J].Papers,2011,96(4):1025-1045.
[67] Santis R A D. Intra-Industry Trade, Endogenous Technical Change, Wage Inequality andWelfare[J]. International Economic Journal,2002,16(3):59-79.
[68] Shimer R. Mismatch[R]. NBER Working Paper,2005, No.11888.
[69] Syrquin M. Productivity Growth and Factor Reallocation[M]. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press,1986.
[90] Temple J. Dual Economy Model: A Primer for Growth Economists[J]. The ManchesterSchool,73(4):435-478.
[71] Temple J. Dualism and Aggregate Productivity[R]. CEPR Discussion Paperm,2004, No.4387.
[72] Thoenig M, Verdier T. Trade Induced Technical Bias and Wage Inequlities: A Theory ofDefensive Innovation[R]. CEPR Working Paper,2000, No.2401.
[73] Violante G L. Skill-biased Technical Change[R]. CEPR Working Paper,2008.
[74] Vollrath D. How Important are Dual Economy Effects for Aggregate Productivity?[J].Journal of Development Economics,2009,88(2):325-334.
[75] Wei Z, Liu L, Zhuang Z Y. Skill Premium, Biased Technological Change and IncomeDifferences[J]. China and World Economy,2009,17(6):64-87.
[76] Weiss M, Garloff A. Skill-Biased Technological Change and Endogenous Benefits: TheDynamics of Unemployment and Wage Inequality[J]. Applied Economics,2011,43:1-11.
[77] Whalley J, Zhang S. A Numerial Simulation Analysis of (Hukou) Labour MobilityRestrictions in China[J]. Journal of Development Economics,2007,83(2):392-410.
[78] Xu N. The Choice of Technical Change Direction[J]. Energy Procedia,2011,5:1546-1552.
[79] Xu B. Factor Bias, Sector Bias, and the Effects of Technical Progress on Relative FactorPrices[J]. Journal of International Economics,2001,54(1):5-25.
[80] Xu B, Li W. Trade, Technology, and China’s Rising Skill Demand[J]. Economics ofTransition,2008,16(1):59-84.
[81] Yang M J. Micro-Level Misallocation and Selection: Estimation and AggregateImplications[R]. Working Paper,2012.
[82] Zeira J. Wage Inequality, Technology, and Trade[J]. Journal of Economic Theory,2007,137(1):79-103.
[83]柏培文.中国劳动要素配置扭曲程度的测量[J].中国工业经济,2012,10:19-31.
[84]毕先萍.技术进步的技能取向对大学生就业的影响[C].“十一五”与青少年发展研究报告—第二届中国青少年发展论坛暨中国青少年研究会优秀论文集,2006:527-535.
[85]曹玉书，楼东玮.资源错配、结构变迁与中国经济转型[J].中国工业经济,2012,10:5-18.
[86]陈永伟，胡伟民.价格扭曲、要素错配和效率损失[J].经济学（季刊）,2011,4:1401-1422.
[87]成艾华，敖荣军，韦燕生.中国工业行业技能偏向型技术变化的实证检验[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2012,5:108-113.
[88]董直庆，蔡啸.技术进步技能偏向性与技能溢价：一个理论模型和经验解释[J].求是学刊,2013,4:51-59.
[89]董直庆，陈锐.技术进步偏向性、要素结构变动和全要素生产率增长[R].经济研究工作论文,2013, No.WP446.
[90]董直庆，王芳玲.技能溢价源于技术进步偏向性吗？[J].统计研究,2013,30(6):37-44.
[91]董直庆，王林辉.劳动力市场需求分化和技能溢价源于技术进步吗？[J].经济学家,2011,8:75-82.
[92]董直庆，王林辉.要素错配、异质性要素发展和适宜性技术进步前沿文献述评[J].学术交流,2013,1:117-123.
[93]樊纲，王小鲁，朱恒鹏.中国市场化指数：各省域市场化相对进程2011年报告[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2011.
[94]郭克莎.我国资源总配置效应分析[J].经济研究,1992,9:30-45.
[95]胡永泰.中国全要素生产率：来自农业部门劳动力再配置的首要作用[J].经济研究,1998,3:31-39.
[96]黄乾.全球化、技术进步与就业技能结构：来自中国制造业的证据[J].劳动经济评论,2008,1:187-200.
[97]简泽.企业间的生产率差异、资源再配置与制造业部门的生产率[J].管理世界,2011,5:11-23.
[98]简泽.市场扭曲、跨企业的资源配置与制造业部门的生产率[J].中国工业经济,2011,1:58-68.
[99]李冰.“技能偏好型”技术进步与就业[J].重庆交通大学学报（社科版）,2009,10:57-61.
[100]李飞跃，葛玉好，黄玖立.技术技能结构、人力资本构成与中国省域经济差距[J].中国人口科学,2012,4:35-46.
[101]李静，彭飞，毛德凤.资源错配与中国工业企业全要素生产率[J].财贸研究,2012,5:46-53.
[102]李欣.技能溢价与工资差距：企业层面的证据[J].山东经济,2011,1:62-67.
[103]李秀敏.人力资本、人力资本结构与区域协调发展—来自中国省级区域的证据[J].华中师范大学学报（人文社会科学版）,2007,3:47-56.
[104]李扬洲.技术进步与收入分配——基于我国制造业的技能偏向性效应检验[J].消费导刊,2009,10:129.
[105]梁泳梅，李钢，董敏杰.劳动力资源与经济发展的区域错配[J].中国人口科学,2011,5:36-48,111.
[106]刘伟，张辉.中国经济增长中的产业结构变迁和技术进步[J].经济研究,2008,11:4-15.
[107]刘学军，赵耀辉.劳动力流动对城市劳动力市场的影响[J].经济学（季刊）,2009,2:693-710.
[108]茅于轼.经济增长根源在于提高资源配置效率[N].中国高新技术产业导报,2013-1-7,（A06）.
[109]聂辉华，贾瑞雪.中国制造业企业生产率与资源误置[J].世界经济,2011,7:27-42.
[110]潘越，杜小敏.劳动力流动、工业化进行与区域经济增长—基于非参数可加模型的实证研究[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2010,5:34-48.
[111]盛丹，李坤望，王永进.劳动力流动会影响我国省域出口比较优势吗？—基于省区工业细分产业数据的实证研究[J].世界经济研究,2010,9:38-44,88.
[112]盛仕斌，徐海.要素价格扭曲的就业效应研究[J].经济研究,1999,5:66-72.
[113]宋冬林，王林辉，董直庆.技能偏向型技术进步存在吗？—来自中国的经验证据[J].经济研究,2010,5:68-81.
[114]苏永照.技术进步偏向对中国劳动力市场的影响[J].财贸研究,2010,1:17-23.
[115]王苍峰，司传宁.经济开放、技术进步与我国制造业的工资差距[J].南开经济研究,2011,6:41-54.
[116]王林辉，袁礼.技术进步技能偏向视角下的中国劳动力合意结构度量[J].求是学刊,2013,40(3):51-58.
[117]王永进，盛丹.要素积累、偏向型技术进步与劳动收入占比[J].世界经济文汇,2010,4:33-50.
[118]王争，郑京海，史晋川.中国省域工业生产绩效：结构差异、制度冲击及动态表现[J].经济研究,2006,11:48-59,71.
[119]王忠.技术进步的技能偏向性与工资结构宽化[J].中国劳动经济学,2006,4:64-85.
[120]解栋栋.中国经济结构变动与要素再配置研究[D].上海：复旦大学经济学院,2010.
[121]徐舒.技术进步、教育收益与收入不平等[J].经济研究,2010,9:79-92,108.
[122]许志成，闫佳.技能偏向性技术进步必然加剧工资不平等吗？[J].经济评论,2011,3:20-29.
[123]杨继军，张二震.风险偏好、内生技术进步与工资不平等[J].经济评论,2009,1:122-127.
[124]杨新铭，罗润东.技术进步条件下农村人力资本与收入差距的互动机制[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2008,1:74-84.
[125]姚先国，周礼，来君.技术进步、技能需求与就业结构—基于制造业微观数据的技能偏态假说检验[J].中国人口科学,2005,5:47-53.
[126]姚战琪.生产率增长与要素再配置效应：中国的经验研究[J].经济研究,2009,11:130-143.
[127]殷德生，唐海燕.技能型技术进步、南北贸易与工资不平衡[J].经济研究,2006,5:106-114.
[128]袁志刚，解栋栋.中国劳动力错配对TFP的影响分析[J].经济研究,2011,7:4-17.
[129]张军，吴桂英，张吉鹏.中国省际物质资本存量估算：1952-2000[J].经济研究,2004,10:35-44.
[130]郑毓盛，李崇高.中国地方分割的效率损失[J].中国社会科学,2003,1:64-72,205.
[131]钟笑寒.劳动力流动与工资差异[J].中国社会科学,2006,1:34-46,206.
[132]朱喜，史清华，盖庆恩.要素配置扭曲与农业全要素生产率[J].经济研究,2011,5:86-98.
[133]周喆，刘斌，刘志成.省域劳动力流动、资产专用性与劳动者报酬—基于中国分省分行业的经验研究.南开经济研究,2012,5:79-93.
[2] Acemoglu D. Deunionization, Technical Change and Inequality[J]. Carnegie-RochesterConference Series on Public Policy,2001,55(1):229-264.
[3] Acemoglu D. Directed Technological Change[J]. Review of Economic Studies,2002,69:781-809.
[4] Acemoglu D. Equilibrium Bias of Technology[J]. Econometrica,2007,75:1371-1409.
[5] Acemoglu D. Technical Change, Inequality, and the Labor Market[J]. Journal of EconomicLiterature,2002,40:7-72.
[6] Acemoglu D. Patterns of Skill Premia[J]. Review of Economic Studies,2003,70(2):199-230.
[7] Acemoglu D. Why Do New Technologies Complement Skills? Directed Technical Changeand Wage Inequality[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1998,113:1055-1089.
[8] Acemoglu D, Zilibotti F. Productivity Differences[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,2001,116:563-606.
[9] Alfaro L, Charlton A, Kanczuk F. Plant-Size Distribution and Cross-country IncomeDifferences[R]. NBER Working Paper,2008, No.14060.
[10] Almut B, Thijs V R. Skill-Biased Technological Change and the Business Cycle[J]. KielWorking Paper,2012, No.1775.
[11] Aoki S. A Simple Accounting Framework for the Effect of Resource Misallocation onAggregate Productivity[J]. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies,2012,26:473-494.
[12] Aoki S. Was the Barrier to Labor Mobility an Important Factor for the Prewar JapaneseStagnation?[R]. MPRA Paper,2008, No.8178.
[13] Autor D H, Katz L F, Kearney M S. Trends in U.S. Wage Inequality: Revising theRevisionists[J]. Review of Economics and Statistics,2008,90(2):300-323.
[14] Balleer A, Rens T V. Cyclical Skill-biased Technological Change[R]. IZA Discussion Papers,2009, No.4258.
[15] Baltagi B H, Rich D P. Skill-Biased Technical Change in US Manufacturing: A Geneal IndexApproach[J]. Journal of Econometrics,2005,126:549-570.
[16] Bartel A P, Sicherman N. Technological Change and Wages: An Inter-industry Analysis[R].NBER Working Paper,1997, No.5941.
[17] Bartelsman E, Haltiwanger J, Scarpetta S. Cross Country Differences in Productivity: TheRole of Allocative Efficiency[J]. American Economic Review,2013,103(1):305-334.
[18] Berman E, Bound J, Machin S. Implications of Skill-biased Technological Change:International Evidence[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1998,113(4):1245-1279.
[19] Berman E, Machin S. Skill-Biased Technology Transfer: Evidence Factor BiasedTechnological Change in Developing Countries[M]. Oxford Univ Press,2000.
[20] Berman E, Somanathan R, Tan H W. Is Skill-biased Technological Change Here Yet?:Evidence from Indian Manufacturing in the1990’s[R]. NBER Working Paper,2005, No.5110.
[21] Bratti M, Matteucci N. Is there Skill-biased Technological Change in Italian Manufacturing?Evidence from Firm-level Data[J]. Brussels Economic Review,2005,48:153-182.
[22] Brown C, Campbell B A. The Impact of Technological Change in Work and Wages[J].Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society,2002,41(1):1-33.
[23] Box G E P，Cox D R. An Analysis of Transformations[J]. Journal of the Royal StatisticalSociety，1964，26（2）：211-252.
[24] Busso M, Madrigal L, Pages C. Productivity and Resource Misallocation in LatinAmerica[R]. IDB Working Paper,2012, No.IDB-WP-306.
[25] Camacho A, Conover E. Misallocation and Productivity in Colombia’s ManufacturingIndustries[R]. IDB Working Paper,2010, No.IDB-WP-123.
[26] Card D, DiNardo J E. Skill Biased Technological Change and Rising Wage Inequality: SomeProblems and Puzzles[R]. NBER Working Paper,2002, No.8769.
[27] Caselli F. Accouting for Cross-Country Income Differences[R]. CEP Discussion Paper,2005,No.667.
[28] Cazzavillan G, Olszewski K. Skill-Biased Technological Change, Endogenous Labor Supplyand Growth: A Model and Calibration to Poland and the US[J]. Reaserch in Economics,2011,65:124-136.
[29] Chari V V, Kehoe P J, McGrattan E. Accounting for the Great Depression[J]. AmericanEconomic Review,2002,92:22-27.
[30] Chennells L, Reenen J V. Has Technology Hurt Less Skilled Workers? An EconometricSurvey of the Effects of Tchnical Change on the Structure of Pay and Jobs[R]. The Institutefor Fiscal Studies Working Papei,1999, No. W99/27.
[31] de Melo J A P. Distortions in the Factor Market: Some General Equilibrium Estimates[J].Review of Economics and Statistics,1977,59:398-405.
[32] Esquivel G, Roddriguez-Lopez J A. Technology, Trade, and Wage Inequality in Mexicobefore and after NAFTA[J]. Journal of Development Economics,2003,72(2):543-565.
[33] Foster L, Haltiwanger J, Syverson C. Reallocation, Firm Turnover, and Efficiency: Selectionon Productivity or Profitability?[R]. IZA Discussion Papers,2005, No.1705.
[34] Funk P, Vogel T. Endogenous Skill Bias[J]. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control,2004,28(11):2155-2193.
[35] Galor O, Moav O. Ability-biased Technological Transition, Wage Inequality, and EconomicGrowth[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,2000,115(2):469-497.
[36] Greiner A, Rubart J, Semmler W. Economic Growth, Skill-Biased Technical Change andWage Inequality: A Model and Estimations for the US and Europe[J]. Journal ofMacroeconomics,2004,26(4):597-621.
[37] Gorg H, Strobl E. Relative Wages, Openness and Skill-Biased Technological Change[R].IZA Discussion Paper,2002, No.596.
[38] Gould E D, Moav O, Weinberg B A. Precautionary Demand for Education, Inequality, andTechnological Progress [J]. Journal of Economic Growth,2001,6(4):285-315.
[39] Harberger A C. Using the Resourses at Hand More Effectively[J]. American EconomicReview,49(2):134-146.
[40] Hayashi F, Prescott E C. The Depressing Effect of Agricultural Institutions on the PrewarJapanese Economy[R]. NBER Working Paper,2006, No.12081.
[41] Hicks J R. The Theory of Wages[M]. London: Macmillan,1932.
[42] Hijzen A. International Outsourcing, Technological Change, and Wage Inequality[J]. Reviewof International Economics,2007,15(1):188-205.
[43] Hornstein A. The Effect of Technical Change on Labor Market Inequalities[J]. Handbook ofEconomic Growth,2005,1(B):1275-1370.
[44] Hsieh CT, Klenow P J. Misallocation and Manufacturing TFP in China and India[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,2009,4:1403-1448.
[45] Jones C I. Misallocation, Economic Growth, and Input-Output Economics[R]. NBERWorking Paper,2011, No.16742.
[46] Jones R W. Distortion in Factor Markets and the General Equilibrium Model[J]. Journal ofPolitical Economy,1971,79:437-459.
[47] Katz L F, Autor D H. Changes in the Wage Structure and Earnings Inequality[J]. Handbookof Labor Economics,1999,3(A):1463-1555.
[48] Kijima Y. Why did Wage Inequality Increase? Evidence from Urban India1983-99[J].Journal of Development Economics,2006,81(1):97-117.
[49] Kiley M T. The Supply of Skilled Labour and Skill-Biased Technological Progress[J].Economic Journal,1999,109(458):708-724.
[50] Klump R, McAdam P, Willman A. Factor Substitution and Factor-Augmenting TechnicalProgress in the United States: A Normalized Supply-Side System Approch[J]. Review ofEconomics and Statistics,2007,89(1):183-192.
[51] Lagos R. A Model of TFP[J]. Review of Economic Studies,2006,73(4):983-1007.
[52] Leibenstein H. Allocative Effeciency vs.“X-Efficiency”[J]. American Economic Review,1966,56(3):392-415.
[53] Lu D. Sectoral Factor Reallocation and Productivity Growth: Rencent Trends in the ChineseEconomy[J]. Journal of Economic Development,2002,27(2):95-111.
[54] Machin S, Reenen V J. Changes in Wage Inequality[R]. Centre for Economic PerformanceSpecial Paper,2008, No. CEPSP18.
[55] Machin S, Reenen J V. Technology and Changes in Skill Structure: Evidence from SevenOECD Countries[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1998,113(4):1215-1244.
[56] Melitz M J. The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate IndustryProductivity[R]. NBER Working Paper,2002, No.8881.
[57] Murphy K M, Riddell W C, Romer P M. Wages, Skills, and Technology in the United Statesand Canada[R]. NBER Working Paper,1998, No.6638.
[58] Nakakuki M, Otani A, Shiratsuka S. Distortions in Factor Markets and Structral Adjustmentsin the Economy[J]. Monetary and Economic Studies,2004,5:71-100.
[59] Oberfield E. Productivity and Misallocation During a Crisis: Evidence from the ChileanCrisis of1982[J]. Review of Economic Dynamics,2013,16:100-119.
[60] Peters M. Heterogeneous Mark-Ups and Endogenous Misallocation[C]. Meeting Papers,2011.
[61] Poirson H. Factor Reallocation and Growth in Developing Countries[R]. IMF Working Paper,2000, No. WP/00/94.
[62] Restuccia D, Rogerson R. Policy Distortions and Aggregate Productivity with HeterogeneousPlants[J]. Review of Economic Dynamics,2008,11:707-720.
[63] Restuccia D, Rogerson R. Misallocation and Productivity[J]. Review of Economic Dynamics,2013,16:1-10.
[64] Restuccia D, Yang D T, Zhu X D. Agriculture and Aggregate Productivity: A QuantitativeCross-Country Analysis[J]. Journal of Monetary Economics,2008,55(2):234-250.
[65] Rogerson R. Structural Transformation and the Deterioration of European Labor marketOutcomes[R]. NBER Working Paper,2007, No.12889.
[66] Sala G. Approaches to Skills Mismatch in the Labour Market: A Literature Review[J].Papers,2011,96(4):1025-1045.
[67] Santis R A D. Intra-Industry Trade, Endogenous Technical Change, Wage Inequality andWelfare[J]. International Economic Journal,2002,16(3):59-79.
[68] Shimer R. Mismatch[R]. NBER Working Paper,2005, No.11888.
[69] Syrquin M. Productivity Growth and Factor Reallocation[M]. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press,1986.
[90] Temple J. Dual Economy Model: A Primer for Growth Economists[J]. The ManchesterSchool,73(4):435-478.
[71] Temple J. Dualism and Aggregate Productivity[R]. CEPR Discussion Paperm,2004, No.4387.
[72] Thoenig M, Verdier T. Trade Induced Technical Bias and Wage Inequlities: A Theory ofDefensive Innovation[R]. CEPR Working Paper,2000, No.2401.
[73] Violante G L. Skill-biased Technical Change[R]. CEPR Working Paper,2008.
[74] Vollrath D. How Important are Dual Economy Effects for Aggregate Productivity?[J].Journal of Development Economics,2009,88(2):325-334.
[75] Wei Z, Liu L, Zhuang Z Y. Skill Premium, Biased Technological Change and IncomeDifferences[J]. China and World Economy,2009,17(6):64-87.
[76] Weiss M, Garloff A. Skill-Biased Technological Change and Endogenous Benefits: TheDynamics of Unemployment and Wage Inequality[J]. Applied Economics,2011,43:1-11.
[77] Whalley J, Zhang S. A Numerial Simulation Analysis of (Hukou) Labour MobilityRestrictions in China[J]. Journal of Development Economics,2007,83(2):392-410.
[78] Xu N. The Choice of Technical Change Direction[J]. Energy Procedia,2011,5:1546-1552.
[79] Xu B. Factor Bias, Sector Bias, and the Effects of Technical Progress on Relative FactorPrices[J]. Journal of International Economics,2001,54(1):5-25.
[80] Xu B, Li W. Trade, Technology, and China’s Rising Skill Demand[J]. Economics ofTransition,2008,16(1):59-84.
[81] Yang M J. Micro-Level Misallocation and Selection: Estimation and AggregateImplications[R]. Working Paper,2012.
[82] Zeira J. Wage Inequality, Technology, and Trade[J]. Journal of Economic Theory,2007,137(1):79-103.
[83]柏培文.中国劳动要素配置扭曲程度的测量[J].中国工业经济,2012,10:19-31.
[84]毕先萍.技术进步的技能取向对大学生就业的影响[C].“十一五”与青少年发展研究报告—第二届中国青少年发展论坛暨中国青少年研究会优秀论文集,2006:527-535.
[85]曹玉书，楼东玮.资源错配、结构变迁与中国经济转型[J].中国工业经济,2012,10:5-18.
[86]陈永伟，胡伟民.价格扭曲、要素错配和效率损失[J].经济学（季刊）,2011,4:1401-1422.
[87]成艾华，敖荣军，韦燕生.中国工业行业技能偏向型技术变化的实证检验[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2012,5:108-113.
[88]董直庆，蔡啸.技术进步技能偏向性与技能溢价：一个理论模型和经验解释[J].求是学刊,2013,4:51-59.
[89]董直庆，陈锐.技术进步偏向性、要素结构变动和全要素生产率增长[R].经济研究工作论文,2013, No.WP446.
[90]董直庆，王芳玲.技能溢价源于技术进步偏向性吗？[J].统计研究,2013,30(6):37-44.
[91]董直庆，王林辉.劳动力市场需求分化和技能溢价源于技术进步吗？[J].经济学家,2011,8:75-82.
[92]董直庆，王林辉.要素错配、异质性要素发展和适宜性技术进步前沿文献述评[J].学术交流,2013,1:117-123.
[93]樊纲，王小鲁，朱恒鹏.中国市场化指数：各省域市场化相对进程2011年报告[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2011.
[94]郭克莎.我国资源总配置效应分析[J].经济研究,1992,9:30-45.
[95]胡永泰.中国全要素生产率：来自农业部门劳动力再配置的首要作用[J].经济研究,1998,3:31-39.
[96]黄乾.全球化、技术进步与就业技能结构：来自中国制造业的证据[J].劳动经济评论,2008,1:187-200.
[97]简泽.企业间的生产率差异、资源再配置与制造业部门的生产率[J].管理世界,2011,5:11-23.
[98]简泽.市场扭曲、跨企业的资源配置与制造业部门的生产率[J].中国工业经济,2011,1:58-68.
[99]李冰.“技能偏好型”技术进步与就业[J].重庆交通大学学报（社科版）,2009,10:57-61.
[100]李飞跃，葛玉好，黄玖立.技术技能结构、人力资本构成与中国省域经济差距[J].中国人口科学,2012,4:35-46.
[101]李静，彭飞，毛德凤.资源错配与中国工业企业全要素生产率[J].财贸研究,2012,5:46-53.
[102]李欣.技能溢价与工资差距：企业层面的证据[J].山东经济,2011,1:62-67.
[103]李秀敏.人力资本、人力资本结构与区域协调发展—来自中国省级区域的证据[J].华中师范大学学报（人文社会科学版）,2007,3:47-56.
[104]李扬洲.技术进步与收入分配——基于我国制造业的技能偏向性效应检验[J].消费导刊,2009,10:129.
[105]梁泳梅，李钢，董敏杰.劳动力资源与经济发展的区域错配[J].中国人口科学,2011,5:36-48,111.
[106]刘伟，张辉.中国经济增长中的产业结构变迁和技术进步[J].经济研究,2008,11:4-15.
[107]刘学军，赵耀辉.劳动力流动对城市劳动力市场的影响[J].经济学（季刊）,2009,2:693-710.
[108]茅于轼.经济增长根源在于提高资源配置效率[N].中国高新技术产业导报,2013-1-7,（A06）.
[109]聂辉华，贾瑞雪.中国制造业企业生产率与资源误置[J].世界经济,2011,7:27-42.
[110]潘越，杜小敏.劳动力流动、工业化进行与区域经济增长—基于非参数可加模型的实证研究[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2010,5:34-48.
[111]盛丹，李坤望，王永进.劳动力流动会影响我国省域出口比较优势吗？—基于省区工业细分产业数据的实证研究[J].世界经济研究,2010,9:38-44,88.
[112]盛仕斌，徐海.要素价格扭曲的就业效应研究[J].经济研究,1999,5:66-72.
[113]宋冬林，王林辉，董直庆.技能偏向型技术进步存在吗？—来自中国的经验证据[J].经济研究,2010,5:68-81.
[114]苏永照.技术进步偏向对中国劳动力市场的影响[J].财贸研究,2010,1:17-23.
[115]王苍峰，司传宁.经济开放、技术进步与我国制造业的工资差距[J].南开经济研究,2011,6:41-54.
[116]王林辉，袁礼.技术进步技能偏向视角下的中国劳动力合意结构度量[J].求是学刊,2013,40(3):51-58.
[117]王永进，盛丹.要素积累、偏向型技术进步与劳动收入占比[J].世界经济文汇,2010,4:33-50.
[118]王争，郑京海，史晋川.中国省域工业生产绩效：结构差异、制度冲击及动态表现[J].经济研究,2006,11:48-59,71.
[119]王忠.技术进步的技能偏向性与工资结构宽化[J].中国劳动经济学,2006,4:64-85.
[120]解栋栋.中国经济结构变动与要素再配置研究[D].上海：复旦大学经济学院,2010.
[121]徐舒.技术进步、教育收益与收入不平等[J].经济研究,2010,9:79-92,108.
[122]许志成，闫佳.技能偏向性技术进步必然加剧工资不平等吗？[J].经济评论,2011,3:20-29.
[123]杨继军，张二震.风险偏好、内生技术进步与工资不平等[J].经济评论,2009,1:122-127.
[124]杨新铭，罗润东.技术进步条件下农村人力资本与收入差距的互动机制[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2008,1:74-84.
[125]姚先国，周礼，来君.技术进步、技能需求与就业结构—基于制造业微观数据的技能偏态假说检验[J].中国人口科学,2005,5:47-53.
[126]姚战琪.生产率增长与要素再配置效应：中国的经验研究[J].经济研究,2009,11:130-143.
[127]殷德生，唐海燕.技能型技术进步、南北贸易与工资不平衡[J].经济研究,2006,5:106-114.
[128]袁志刚，解栋栋.中国劳动力错配对TFP的影响分析[J].经济研究,2011,7:4-17.
[129]张军，吴桂英，张吉鹏.中国省际物质资本存量估算：1952-2000[J].经济研究,2004,10:35-44.
[130]郑毓盛，李崇高.中国地方分割的效率损失[J].中国社会科学,2003,1:64-72,205.
[131]钟笑寒.劳动力流动与工资差异[J].中国社会科学,2006,1:34-46,206.
[132]朱喜，史清华，盖庆恩.要素配置扭曲与农业全要素生产率[J].经济研究,2011,5:86-98.
[133]周喆，刘斌，刘志成.省域劳动力流动、资产专用性与劳动者报酬—基于中国分省分行业的经验研究.南开经济研究,2012,5:79-93.