检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:杨骞[1]
出 处:《当代财经》2010年第4期87-93,共7页Contemporary Finance and Economics
基 金:教育部哲学社会科学研究重大课题攻关项目"转轨经济中的反行政垄断与促进竞争政策研究"(06JZD0015)
摘 要:烟草产业行政垄断造成巨大的社会成本,其中行业管理部门对烟草制品的限产限价不仅导致生产过剩,而且所导致的无谓损失远大于垄断条件下单纯限制产量的无谓损失;不通过市场交换的投入要素是导致我国烟草产业×一低效率最重要的原因之一;行政垄断下烟草产业的高额垄断利润导致非生产性寻租。通过估算,1998-2008年中国烟草产业行政垄断所造成的社会总成本在15126.39亿元至26818.6亿元之间,占GDP的0.867%-1.54%。The administrative monopoly in China's tobacco industry has brought enormous social cost. The limits on production and pricing of tobacco products imposed by industrial authorities not only lead to overproduction, but also deadweight loss much greater than that caused by pure output restrictions under conditions of monopoly. The input element not through market exchange is one of the most important reasons for X-inefficiency of China's tobacco industry; the high monopoly profits under the administrative monopoly inevitably lead to unproductive rent-seeking. It is estimated that the total social cost caused by administrative monopoly in China's tobacco industry from 1998 to 2008 is around 1.512639 trillion to 2.68186 trillion, accounting for 0.867%-1.54% of GDP.
分 类 号:F062.9[经济管理—政治经济学]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:3.129.71.225