CAJ | 학술논문

论文基于中国各省级区域1997-2008年的数据,研究了R＆D投入及其溢出对TFP增长的贡献。与现有文献不同的是,我们将R＆D投入分解成不同类型：来自政府的投入和来自企业的投入,将区域技术成交额作为区域间R＆D溢出的测度。同时,通过Malmquist指数把TFP增长区分出来自于技术效率和来自技术进步率两个因素。结果发现,12年来我国各地区TFP平均增长0.2%。其中,技术进步的贡献为0.9%,而技术效率不仅没有带来TFP增长,反而造成了0.7%的TFP损失。不同类型的R＆D活动对TFP影响的程度和方向不同：企业R＆D投入对TFP作用的效果最大,且对于东部地区TFP的作用大于中、西部;R＆D溢出（技术交易）带来的TFP效应居其次,且对西部地区TFP的作用大于中部,对中部地区的作用大于东部;而政府R＆D投入的TFP弹性在三个地区均为负值。这些差异给区域科技政策的制定提供了参考依据。
논문기우중국각성급구역1997-2008년적수거,연구료R＆D투입급기일출대TFP증장적공헌。여현유문헌불동적시,아문장R＆D투입분해성불동류형：래자정부적투입화래자기업적투입,장구역기술성교액작위구역간R＆D일출적측도。동시,통과Malmquist지수파TFP증장구분출래자우기술효솔화래자기술진보솔량개인소。결과발현,12년래아국각지구TFP평균증장0.2%。기중,기술진보적공헌위0.9%,이기술효솔불부몰유대래TFP증장,반이조성료0.7%적TFP손실。불동류형적R＆D활동대TFP영향적정도화방향불동：기업R＆D투입대TFP작용적효과최대,차대우동부지구TFP적작용대우중、서부;R＆D일출（기술교역）대래적TFP효응거기차,차대서부지구TFP적작용대우중부,대중부지구적작용대우동부;이정부R＆D투입적TFP탄성재삼개지구균위부치。저사차이급구역과기정책적제정제공료삼고의거。
This paper, based on the data of the provincial regions of China for the year 1997 -2008, studied the spillover R＆D investment and its contribution to the growth of TFP. In this study, differing from the existing literatures, two types of R＆D investment were identified： one from the government investment and the other from enterprise investment; and at the same time the regional technology turnover was used as the index to measure the inter-regional R＆D spillover. The Mahnquist index was used to single out two factors causing the growth of TFP ： one from the technical efficiency and the other from technology progress rate. It was found that in the last 12 years the average growth rate of TFP of each region increased by 0.2% per year, to which technical progress made the contribution of 0.9% , while technical efficiency caused a loss of 0.7% of the TFP instead of bringing about TFP growth. The effects of different types of R＆D activities on TFP differ in degree and in direction： the corporate R＆D investment exerted the most significant influence on the TFP growth, and particularly more significant for the east regions than for the central and the west regions; the effects of R＆D spillover （technical trade） on TFP cornes next, though exercising greater influence on the west regions than on the central regions, and in turn greater on the central regions than for the east region ; while the TFP elasticity of the government R＆D investment is negative in the three regions. All these findings provide reference for making regional policies for science and technology.