国际贸易问题
國際貿易問題
국제무역문제
Journal of International Trade
2014年
4期
3~13
,共null页
生产补贴 出口 广义倾向评分匹配 剂量反应函数
生產補貼 齣口 廣義傾嚮評分匹配 劑量反應函數
생산보첩 출구 엄의경향평분필배 제량반응함수
Production subsidies; Export; Generalized propensity score match-ing; Dose response function
摘要:本文以我国2005-2011年期间持续存在的微观企业为截面构建非平衡面板数据,以企业的人均受补贴强度作为连续处理变量,基于广义倾向评分匹配方法的剂量反应函数分析了政府生产补贴对企业出口的影响,结果发现政府生产补贴有助于我国企业出口的持续增长,但其促进作用总体上会随着人均受补贴强度的增加而呈下降趋势;分地区、分所有制、分企业资金来源、分要素密集程度不同的比较表明,对于同一政府补贴强度而言的企业出口的剂量反应函数值,东部企业大于中西部企业、外资企业大于内资企业、私营企业大于国有企业、资本密集型企业大于劳动密集型企业。上述结论的一个重要政策含义在于,政府在持续补贴的过程中需要慎重选择优先补贴的对象。
摘要:本文以我國2005-2011年期間持續存在的微觀企業為截麵構建非平衡麵闆數據,以企業的人均受補貼彊度作為連續處理變量,基于廣義傾嚮評分匹配方法的劑量反應函數分析瞭政府生產補貼對企業齣口的影響,結果髮現政府生產補貼有助于我國企業齣口的持續增長,但其促進作用總體上會隨著人均受補貼彊度的增加而呈下降趨勢;分地區、分所有製、分企業資金來源、分要素密集程度不同的比較錶明,對于同一政府補貼彊度而言的企業齣口的劑量反應函數值,東部企業大于中西部企業、外資企業大于內資企業、私營企業大于國有企業、資本密集型企業大于勞動密集型企業。上述結論的一箇重要政策含義在于,政府在持續補貼的過程中需要慎重選擇優先補貼的對象。
적요:본문이아국2005-2011년기간지속존재적미관기업위절면구건비평형면판수거,이기업적인균수보첩강도작위련속처리변량,기우엄의경향평분필배방법적제량반응함수분석료정부생산보첩대기업출구적영향,결과발현정부생산보첩유조우아국기업출구적지속증장,단기촉진작용총체상회수착인균수보첩강도적증가이정하강추세;분지구、분소유제、분기업자금래원、분요소밀집정도불동적비교표명,대우동일정부보첩강도이언적기업출구적제량반응함수치,동부기업대우중서부기업、외자기업대우내자기업、사영기업대우국유기업、자본밀집형기업대우노동밀집형기업。상술결론적일개중요정책함의재우,정부재지속보첩적과정중수요신중선택우선보첩적대상。
Based on unbalanced panel data of micro presence from 2005 to the government to the 2011 and taking the intensity of firms with continuous per capita subsidies of firms as the sequential treatment variable, this paper uses generalized propensity score matching method and dose response function to ana- lyze the impact of production subsidies on the export of firms. The results show that production subsidies can help promote export growth of firms, but the pro- moting effect declines with the increase in intensity of per capita production sub- sidies. A comparative study on the impact of production subsidies on the export of firms of different regions, ownerships, capital sources and factor intensive de- grees shows that that the promoting effect of the subsidies on export in eastern China is greater than those in central and western China, that on foreign enter- prises is greater than that on internal enterprises, that on the private sector is greater than that on state-owned enterprises, and that on capital-intensive firms are greater than that on labor-intensive firms. An important policy implication of the above conclusions is that the government needs to prudently choose the prior subject for continuous subsidies.