第三产业份额提升是结构红利还是成本病  

Is the Rising Proportion of Tertiary Industry Cost Disease or Structure Bonus?

作　　者：李翔[1] 刘刚[1,2] 王蒙[1] 

机构地区：[1]曲阜师范大学 [2]中国人民大学经济学院

出　　处：《统计研究》2016年第7期46-54,共9页Statistical Research

基　　金：国家社会科学基金一般项目"马克思地租理论视野下‘中国制造’新优势研究"(13BJL004);国家社会科学基金一般项目"土地人口红利视角下改革开放前后两个三十年的关系研究"(14BKS010);国家社会科学基金青年项目"产业文化与‘中国制造’融合发展研究"(12CJL031);教育部人文社会科学研究一般项目"文化知识产权与产业竞争优势的政治经济学研究"(14YJC790030);教育部人文社会科学基金一般项目"跨越‘中等收入陷阱’产业升级战略政治经济学研究"(11YJC790100)资助

摘　　要：经济"新常态"下,结构与速度的关系引发广泛关注。本文尝试回答以下"结构—速度"命题:第三产业份额提升究竟是提高经济增长速度的结构红利,还是降低增长速度的"成本病"?具体而言,本文利用既有的"偏离份额法"公式,将经济增长速度分解为"产业内技术进步"、"产业结构变迁"和"生产要素扩张"三部分,将经济总体划分为第一、二产业和第三产业,分别用劳动生产率和全要素生产率指标量化经济增长速度与产业结构调整之间的关系,分析第三产业份额提升对增长速度的影响。结果表明:第三产业份额提升对增长速度的影响,分别在1994年和2001年经历了从结构红利向成本病的转变。结构红利和鲍莫尔成本病这两个看似矛盾的假说并不矛盾,传统研究得出的"矛盾"结论是统计和核算口径不一致造成的。就第三产业的份额而言,至少在2001年之后经济增长与结构调整之间已经存在明显的"负相关"关系,将结构调整与增速放缓相联系的观点,在经济"新常态"下具有理论合理性和现实必然性。Under the ＂new normal＂of economy,the relationship between structure and speed attracts wide public concerns. This article tries to answer the following question relating to ＂structure-speed＂： whether there is structure bonus that speeds up economic growth or cost disease that slows down the growth in the rising proportion of tertiary industry？Specifically,in order to explore the effects of the proportional increase of tertiary industry on economic growth,this article adopts the shift-share method and decomposes the speed of economic growth into three parts,which are＂industrial technical progress＂,＂industrial structure change＂and＂accumulation of factors of production＂. The whole economy is assumed to be made up of two sections,the primary and secondary industries together as one section while the tertiary industry as the other section. This article measures the effects of industrial structure adjustment on the speed of economic growth based respectively on labor productivity indicators and total factor productivity indicators. The results show that the effects of the proportional increase of the tertiary industry on economic growth shift from structure bonus to cost disease in 2001 and 1994,respectively under the labor productivity indicators and total factor productivity indicators. The two hypotheses,Structure Bonus and Baumol Cost Disease,which seemly contradict with each other,do not conflict actually. The confliction of them in the previous studies probably resulted from inconsistent statistics and business accounting. As far as the proportion of tertiary industry is concerned,there has been an obvious negative correlation between the speed of economic growth and the industrial structure adjustment,since the year no later than 2001. Under the＂new normal＂of economy,the opinions of linking industry structure adjustment with economy slowdown are rational in theory and necessary in reality.

关 键 词：第三产业份额提升 结构红利 鲍莫尔成本病 偏离份额分析法 

分 类 号：C812[社会学—统计学]