241 2015 8 1002-2031 2015 08-0045 - 08 DOI 10. 13239 /j. bjsshkxy. cswt. 150807 287 1994-2012 F299. 232 A 1978 1. 73 7. 12 17. 92% 52. 57% 2006-2020 2020 585 18 2000-2012 1. 66 1984 13BJY091 2015-01 - 07 2015-03 - 10 45
2015 8 2009 13538. 5 203077 0. 101 1. 52 1996 0. 106 1. 59 8 Bartelsman Jeong 3. 38 13 Townsend Alfaro 4178 Hsieh Klenow Buera 9-13 Dowrick Gemmel 14-27 Dollar Wei Brandt 3-7 Restuccia Rogerson 28-29 30-34 2% - 8% 35 1 2. 1989-2003 Banerjee Duflo 14. 24% 3. 66% 2 1. 36 Melitz Moll Epifani Gancia Wexler Curuk 46
2015 8 45 37 30 38 39 31 Charnes 40 37 42-43 46-47 t LR 41 36 48 287 42 1994-2012 36 16 Y it = f X it t exp v it - u it 1 1Y it i t f x 43-44 X it i = 1 2 n t = 1 2 T v it - u it v it v it ~ N 0 σ 2 v u it u it ~ N + u σ 2 u 1 lny it = lnf x it t + v it - u it 2 TFP Chenery Syrquin TFP it = y it - n φ ijt x ijt 3 Aoki 47
2015 8 3 y it i t β 9 lnl it lns it + v it - u it 6 y it = Y it - Y i t -1 /Y i t -1 x ijt i 6 x j t x ijt = X ijt - X ij t -1 /X ij t -1 φ ijt i x j t k λ ijt - φ ijt x ijt = λ ikt - φ ikt k it + φ ijt = x ijt / n λ ilt - φ ilt l it + λ ist - φ ist s it = x ijt β Kumbhakar 1 / 3 β i - φ ikt k it + β 2 / 3 β i - φ ilt l it + i = 1 i = 1 49 TFP it = lnf x it - u β 3 / 3 β i - φ ist s it 7 it i = 1 + t t 7λ k ε ijt - 1 k λ ijt x ijt + k ijt = ε ijt / k ε ijt x j λ ijt - s ijt x ijt 4 ε ijt 4ε ijt = lnf x ijt i λ ijt = φ ijt lnx ijt k x j t ε ijt = ε ijt / k TEC- u it SE t k ε ijt 1 k λ ijt x ijt AE k λ ijt φ ijt x ijt - - C - D CES 1994-2012 50 51 1996-2000 lny it = β 0 + β j lnx ijt + 1 2 β jl lnx ijt lnx ilt + v it - u it 5 j l 5β j l j l 2. lny it = β 0 + β 1 lnk it + β 2 lnl it + β 3 lns it + β 4 lnk it 2 + β 5 lnl it 2 + β 6 lns it 2 + β 7 lnk it lnl it + β 8 lnk it lns it + λ ijt ε ijt x j 1. TC lnf x it t 1952-2004 287 1994 1994-1999 48
2015 8 0. 18 λ west_s = 0. 10 x j t φ ijt Hausman 1994-2012 14. 6% Wooldridge Pesaran 26. 4% Wald 1994 28. 0% 2012 25. 3% 53. 9% 1994 31. 6% 2001 45. 3% 1 2012 44. 5% 1 1994-2012 5. 24 8. 76 lny lny lny lny 11. 92 12. 71 13. 84 beta1_lnk_ 0. 524 *** 0. 832 *** 0. 477 *** 0. 496 *** 10. 79 8. 87 9. 89 6. 23 14. 45 14. 80 15. 97 beta2_lnl_ 0. 364 *** 0. 240 0. 341 *** 0. 503 *** 16. 39 16. 54 6. 52 1. 95 5. 30 5. 92 51. 77 beta3_lns_ 0. 316 0. 519 ** 0. 182 * 0. 113 0. 52 2. 73 2. 08 0. 77 49. 73 47. 50 46. 00 beta7_lnklnl_ -0. 0500 *** -0. 110 *** -0.0339 *** - 0. 105 * 43. 68 42. 79 42. 63-4. 29-4. 34-3. 67-2. 51 39. 36 30. 72 29. 97 beta8_lnklns_ 0. 0415 *** 0. 0534 *** 0. 0368 *** 0. 0477 * 4. 35 3. 54 3. 54 2. 25 1994-2012 beta9_lnllns_ 0. 0421 *** 0. 0824 ** - 0. 00776-0. 0133 20 _cons 3. 37 2. 88-0. 51-0. 46-0. 13-0. 09-0. 08 0. 589 *** 1. 194 *** 1. 173 *** 0. 277 3. 46 3. 44 5. 80 1. 04-0. 07 1. 82 1. 94 5227 2145 2020 1062 3. 18 3. 21 4. 29 4. 47 * p < 0. 05 p < 0. 01 p < 0. 001 4. 62 5. 24 5. 24 5. 47 5. 49 5. 55 5. 81 6. 00 6. 18 6. 84 3. 20 1 beta1_lnk_ beta2_lnl_ beta3_lns_ 88. 19 86. 64 74. 85 61. 11 61. 02 60. 36 58. 76 58. 42 58. 30 58. 07 57. 94 57. 74 56. 34 56. 16 55. 79 λ nation_s = 0. 26 55. 33 55. 17 53. 53 51. 88 50. 84 λ east_s = 0. 33 λ middle_s = 49
2015 8 1994-2012 1994-2012 52 53-55 1999-2012 18 50
2015 8 4Abhijit V. Banerjee 7Malik Curuk. TradeTechnology Diffusion and Misallocation Center for Econom- NBER Working Paper No. 17175 2011 Trade Partner Matters J. Tilburg University ic Research Discussion Paper with Number 2012046 8Diego Restuccia of Economic Dynamics 2008 4 707-720 9Eric J. Bartelsman sons from Longitudinal Microdata J Abstract This essay conducts study on the efficiency of the spatial allocation of urban construction land and provides the theoretical support on the allocation of the construction land quotas. Using the panel data and the trans - logarithm production function of stochastic frontier model this essay makes the research of the efficiency of the spatial allocation of urban construction land. The results show that there is an obvious regional difference on the misallocation of the urban construction land and it also shows the homogeneity and heterogeneity between the region actual output and the utilization efficiency of the urban construction land. The circulation of the quota of the urban construction land should be abided by the principle that the quota must be utilized in the region which made the land resources more efficiency than others. The quota inflowing region could develop the local economy and the quota out - flowing region might share the economic dividend. The trade of the quota crossing regions could make the Pareto improvement on the utilization of the urban construction land between cities. Key words endowment of the cultivated land construction land spatial misallocation Pareto improvement 2Abhijit V. BanerjeeEsther Duflo. Growth Theory through the Lens of Development Economics Handbook of economics growth 2005 1 473-552 3Marc J. Melitz. The Impact of Trade on Intra - Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity J. Econometrica 2003 6 1695-1725 Benjamin Moll. Why does Misallocation Persist JAmerican Economic Journal Macroeconomics 2010 1 189-206 5Paolo EpifaniGino Gancia. TradeMarkup Heterogeneity and Misallocations Journal of International Economics2011 83 1-13 6Allan Collard - Wexler John Asker and Jan De Loecker. Productivity Volatility and the Misallocation of Resources in Developing Economies London Centre for Economic Policy Research Richard Rogerson. Policy Distortion and Aggregate Productivity with Heterogeneous Establishments Review Mark Doms. Understanding Productivity Les-. Journal of Economic Literature 2000 3 569-594 10Hyeok Jeong Robert M. Townsend. Sources of TFP Growth Occupational Choice and Financial Deepening Economic Theory 2007 1 179-221 11Laura Alfaro Andrew Charlton and Fabio Kanczuk. Plant - Size Distribution and Cross - Country Income Differences NBER Working Paper No. 14060 2008 12Chang - tai Hsieh Peter J. Klenow. Misallocation and Manufacture TFP in China and India J. Quarterly Journal of Economics 2009 4 1403-1448 13Francisco J. Buera Joseph Kaboski and Yongseok Shin. Finance and Development A Tale of Two Sectors J. American Economic Review 2011 5 1964-2002 14Steve DowrickNorman Gemmell. IndustrializationCatching - up and Economic Growth A Comparative Study Across the World's Capitalist Economies The Economic Journal 1991 405 263-275 15. 1997 1133-49 16Angus Maddison. Chinese Economic Performances in the Long Run Development Centre Studies M. Development Center of the OECD 1998 17. J. 1998 331-39 18. 1999 1062-68 1. 19. 2012 105-18 2001 517-23 51
2015 8 20. 2002 514-21 21. 2005 461-68 85 22Yanrui Wu. China's Economic Growth A Miracle With Chinese Characteristics Routledge Studies on the Chinese Economy M. London and New York Routledge Curzon 2003 23Selin Ozyurt. Total Factor Productivity Growth in Chinese Industry 1952-2005 J. Oxford Development Studies 2009 1 1-17 46A. CharnesW. W. Cooper and E. Rhodes. Measuring the Effi- 24. ciency of Decision Making Units J. European Journal of Opera- J. 2005 339-43 25. J. 2011 4 1402-1422 26. TFP 48Dennis J. Aigner C. A. Knox Lovell and Peter Schmidt. Formula- 2011 74-17 tion and Estimation of Stochastic Frontier Production Function 27. Models J. Journal of Econometrics 1977 1 21-37 J. 2012 34-14 28David Dollar Shang - Jin Wei. Das Wasted Kapital Firm Ownership and Investment Efficiency in China NBER Working Paper No. 13103 2007 29Loren Brandt Johannes Van Biesebroeck and Yifan Zhang. Creative Accounting or Creative Destruction Firm - level Productivity Growth in Chinese Manufacturing J. Journal of Development E- conomics 2012 2 339-351 30. 53. J. 2005 34-15 31. 2008 317-20 2008 3 809-829 32. J. 2009 11130-143 33. 2009 652-64 34. 2011 727-42 35. 1999-2007 J. 2010 951-68 36. 2006 549-57 37. J. 2006 33-8 38. J. 2009 114-18 39. 2009 4 18-26 40. 31 J. 2010 424-28 41. 2004 1 229-248 42. J. 2004 837-42 43. 2009 44-16 44. 2010 192-95 45Shuhei Aoki. A Simple Accounting Framework for the Effect of Resource Misallocation on Aggregate Productivity Journal of the Japanese and International Economies 2012 4 473-494 tional Research 1978 6 429-444 47. 2006 1138-45 49Subal C. Kumbhakar C. A. Knox Lovell. Stochastic Frontier AnalysisM. Cambridge University Press 2000 50. 2006 10 52-61 51. 1952-2000 J. 2004 1035-44 52. J. 2010 2137-148 2008 5109-112 54. 55. 2009 319-23 52