重工业与经济发展：计划经济时代再考察  

Heavy Industry and Economic Development: The Chinese Planning Economy Revisited

作　　者：姚洋[1] 郑东雅[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京大学中国经济研究中心

出　　处：《经济研究》2008年第4期26-40,共15页Economic Research Journal

基　　金：教育部人文和社会科学重点研究基地项目“中国制度转型研究”(项目编号04JJD790002)的资助

摘　　要：改革开放初期,学术界和政策界对重工业优先发展战略几乎彻底否定。本文的出发点是,由于投入要素的迂回生产提高轻工业的效率,重工业的发展具有正的外部性,因此必要的补贴有利于整个经济的发展。在一个动态一般均衡模型的基础上,本文研究了重工业优先发展的最优补贴期限和补贴率。本文对中国的数据进行了校准,然后做了两个政策实验,一是中国实行平衡发展战略,二是中国实行适当重工业优先发展的赶超战略,并将其和实际结果进行比较。我们发现,实际结果下居民的效用贴现和低于平衡战略下的效用贴现和;但是,如果我们实行最优赶超战略,那么,实行补贴的时间短于实际发生的情形,而且补贴率低于实际水平,同时,居民的效用贴现和比平衡战略下的还要高。China＇s heavy-industry development strategy was heavily criticized since the end of the 1970s. This paper starts with the premise that heavy industry has significant positive externalities by contributing to the round-about production of light products so subsidizing heavy industry is worthwhile for the economy. Based on a dynamic general equilibrium model, we study the optimal term and rate of subsidy for the heavy-industry development strategy. We calibrate the model with the Chinese data, and then make two policy experiments. One is the market-based strategy without any subsidy, and the other is the heavy-industry development strategy with optimal term and rate of subsidy. The results are then compared with the performance of what had actually happened in China in terms of the sum of discounted utility of all the residents. We find that the result of the actual Chinese practice is indeed worse than the result of the market-based strategy. However, the optimal heavy-industry development strategy yields a smaller rate and a much shorter term of subsidy than the actual figures, and its result is even better than that of the market-based strategy.

关 键 词：重工业优先发展战略 转型 两阶段最优控制法 校准 

分 类 号：F424[经济管理—产业经济]