劳动份额波动的区域差异与下一步  

Regional Differences in Labor Share Volatility and Its Next Step

作　　者：邹燕[1] 宋一淼 

机构地区：[1]中央财经大学经济学院,北京100081

出　　处：《改革》2014年第11期54-62,共9页Reform

基　　金：国家社会科学基金青年项目"劳动报酬比重的决定因素和变动机理研究"(批准号:12CJL003)

摘　　要：从我国各区域劳动份额变动的产业分解可以发现,1995-2007年,西部、中部、东部的产业间效应和产业内效应同向作用,共同拉低了总体劳动份额。其中,产业间效应或产业结构变动的影响更大。只有东北地区1995-2003年出现了产业间效应和产业内效应反向变动、相互抵消。各区域的结构变动在2003年之前是相同的,即第一产业比重下降、第三产业比重提高;但在2004年之后表现出差异性,即东部以外的三大区域在一、三产业比重下降的同时,第二产业的比重大幅上升。2007年以来,这一趋势在中西部得到延续,但产业间效应导致劳动份额下降的作用减缓。各区域的产业内效应由负变正,抵消掉了负的产业间效应,导致总体劳动份额回升。根据2004年以来的结构变化,还不能说明第三产业已经成为经济增长的新引擎。此外,各区域尤其是第三产业比重较高的东部地区,二、三产业劳动份额差距不明显,因此,总体劳动份额在持续下降后的回升,不能认为是“库兹涅茨事实”下劳动份额U型变动规律的体现。The decomposition of industry data of China＇s four regions shows that industry structure change is the main reason for the fall of aggregate labor＇s share during 1995-2003 and 2004-2007. The only exception happened in northeastern region during 1995-2003 where the effects within industries and between industries cancelled out each other. One difference between the two periods is that structure change to the former is the fall of the proportion of primary industry and the rise of the proportion of third industry, whereas change to the latter is the fall of the primary and the third industries and the rise of the second industry except eastern region. Since 2007, other than the decrease of effects between industries, effects within industries became positive, so aggregate labor＇s share began to rise. But based on the recent change of regional industry structure, we cannot say the third industry has become the new engine of economic growth. In addition, labor＇s shares are very close between the second and the third industries in China. So we can not consider the new change of aggregate labor＇s share as the display of U-shaped evolution induced by industry structure change.

关 键 词：劳动份额 区域经济发展 产业结构调整 

分 类 号：F124.8[经济管理—世界经济]