本文選題：跨國(guó)公司 + 出口平臺(tái)型FDI生產(chǎn)率悖論��； 參考：《南開大學(xué)》2013年博士論文

【摘要】：國(guó)際間的技術(shù)外溢一直被認(rèn)為是發(fā)展中國(guó)家技術(shù)進(jìn)步的主要來源之一(Grossman和Helpman,1991),有經(jīng)驗(yàn)研究表明FDI進(jìn)入會(huì)給東道國(guó)帶來顯著的技術(shù)溢出效應(yīng)(Javorcik,2004; Blalock和Gertler,2007),但是這一證據(jù)主要來自對(duì)發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家的經(jīng)驗(yàn)研究,而對(duì)發(fā)展中國(guó)家的FDI溢出實(shí)證研究卻不支持這一觀點(diǎn)。對(duì)比FDI技術(shù)溢出在發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家和發(fā)展中國(guó)家兩種不同的表現(xiàn),可以發(fā)現(xiàn),除了二者的技術(shù)差距、人力資本等東道國(guó)本身的消化吸收能力存在差異外,FDI在兩類國(guó)家本身就存在差異：投資發(fā)展中國(guó)家跨國(guó)公司享有更大的優(yōu)惠政策,且投資方式以出口平臺(tái)型FDI為主。以中國(guó)為例,縱觀外商直接投資在中國(guó)的發(fā)展,可以發(fā)現(xiàn)兩個(gè)明顯的特征：一是外商投資企業(yè)享有各種優(yōu)惠政策,即所謂的“超國(guó)民待遇”；二是外商直接投資與加工貿(mào)易緊密相連,形成所謂的出口平臺(tái)型FDI。按照新新貿(mào)易理論的思想,過度的優(yōu)惠政策將會(huì)降低FDI進(jìn)入東道國(guó)的生產(chǎn)率門檻,同時(shí),優(yōu)惠政策對(duì)低技術(shù)水平的出口平臺(tái)型FDI更具吸引力,這也將改變FDI進(jìn)入東道國(guó)的構(gòu)成。因此,中國(guó)各級(jí)政府引資競(jìng)爭(zhēng)中的一系列“超國(guó)民待遇”優(yōu)惠政策以及加工貿(mào)易方式的出口導(dǎo)向型發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略,既是外商直接投資企業(yè)在中國(guó)得以蓬勃發(fā)展的重要原因,也是FDI技術(shù)溢出、“市場(chǎng)換技術(shù)”分析中不應(yīng)忽視的兩大關(guān)鍵因素。 現(xiàn)有FDI技術(shù)溢出研究文獻(xiàn)基本上都沿襲了傳統(tǒng)的將FDI視為外生的、同質(zhì)的,強(qiáng)調(diào)的是東道國(guó)的消化吸收能力,少有考慮東道國(guó)政策對(duì)異質(zhì)型FDI進(jìn)入中國(guó)的市場(chǎng)選擇及其技術(shù)溢出效果影響的研究。本文從異質(zhì)型FDI這一新的視角將新新貿(mào)易理論思想首次引入FDI技術(shù)溢出效應(yīng)研究,通過拓展新新貿(mào)易理論,構(gòu)造了一個(gè)生產(chǎn)率異質(zhì)性企業(yè)在出口、出口平臺(tái)型FDI與市場(chǎng)型FDI間自我選擇的模型,以研究東道國(guó)的優(yōu)惠政策對(duì)異質(zhì)型FDI質(zhì)量與技術(shù)溢出效應(yīng)的影響。 第三章拓展了HMY模型和Yeaple模型,將新新貿(mào)易理論對(duì)FDI的研究從水平型FDI擴(kuò)展到所有FDI類型。具體地,我們構(gòu)造了一個(gè)生產(chǎn)率異質(zhì)性企業(yè)在出口、出口平臺(tái)型FDI與市場(chǎng)型FDI間自我選擇的模型,首次從理論上分析了異質(zhì)型FDI生產(chǎn)率進(jìn)入門檻及其溢出效應(yīng)差異。第三章的模型表明,東道國(guó)稅收減免等FDI激勵(lì)政策降低了外資進(jìn)入的生產(chǎn)率門檻,在吸引更多外資的同時(shí)卻犧牲了外資質(zhì)量,進(jìn)而弱化了FDI技術(shù)溢出效應(yīng)。此外,東道國(guó)出口退稅政策、母國(guó)效應(yīng)以及運(yùn)輸技術(shù)的發(fā)展等因素降低了FDI返銷母國(guó)或第三國(guó)的運(yùn)輸成本,在一定條件下將導(dǎo)致出口平臺(tái)型FDI進(jìn)入東道國(guó)的生產(chǎn)率門檻低于市場(chǎng)型FDI的進(jìn)入門檻。而對(duì)于一定規(guī)模的FDI市場(chǎng)份額,其溢出效應(yīng)是企業(yè)生產(chǎn)率的增函數(shù),因此,較之于市場(chǎng)型FDI,生產(chǎn)率較低的出口平臺(tái)型FDI的技術(shù)溢出效應(yīng)更弱。 基于中國(guó)工業(yè)企業(yè)的大樣本微觀數(shù)據(jù),第四章、第五章、第六章和第七章分別進(jìn)行了相應(yīng)的經(jīng)驗(yàn)檢驗(yàn)。第四章的研究表明,FDI企業(yè)中確實(shí)均存在出口生產(chǎn)率悖論,即出口企業(yè)生產(chǎn)率低于內(nèi)銷企業(yè)。這與第三章理論模型部分的結(jié)論相符。第四章進(jìn)一步反過來考察FDI企業(yè)進(jìn)入中國(guó)市場(chǎng)是否存在自我選擇效應(yīng)。統(tǒng)計(jì)發(fā)現(xiàn),完全出口的FDI中,每年約有20%-27%的比例進(jìn)入中國(guó)市場(chǎng)；而回歸結(jié)果表明,生產(chǎn)率與沉淀成本是決定FDI企業(yè)進(jìn)入中國(guó)市場(chǎng)的關(guān)鍵因素,FDI企業(yè)進(jìn)入中國(guó)市場(chǎng)存在自我選擇效應(yīng)。第六章則對(duì)出口平臺(tái)型FDI與市場(chǎng)型FDI的技術(shù)溢出效果差異進(jìn)行檢驗(yàn),結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn),雖然出口平臺(tái)型FDI與市場(chǎng)型FDI的技術(shù)溢出效應(yīng)均為負(fù),但前者的技術(shù)溢出效果更弱。這一結(jié)論基本不因內(nèi)資企業(yè)的行業(yè)類型以及外商資本是否來自港澳臺(tái)地區(qū)而改變。 在第三章理論分析與第四章和第六章經(jīng)驗(yàn)分析的基礎(chǔ)上,第五章與第七章對(duì)“招商引資”優(yōu)惠政策的實(shí)施效果進(jìn)行檢驗(yàn)。結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn),一方面,無論是出口平臺(tái)型FDI還是市場(chǎng)型FDI,稅收優(yōu)惠均降低了其生產(chǎn)率并弱化了其技術(shù)溢出,這說明,東道國(guó)的稅收優(yōu)惠降低了跨國(guó)公司子公司的邊際成本,這降低了兩種類型的FDI進(jìn)入的生產(chǎn)率門檻,從而不利于其技術(shù)溢出；另一方面,稅收優(yōu)惠對(duì)出口平臺(tái)型FDI和市場(chǎng)型FDI技術(shù)溢出的影響存在差異,對(duì)前者技術(shù)溢出效應(yīng)的阻礙作用更為明顯。這是東道國(guó)招商引資過程中值得注意的地方。
[Abstract]:International technological spillover has been considered as one of the main sources of technological progress in developing countries (Grossman and Helpman, 1991). Empirical studies have shown that FDI entry will bring significant technical spillovers to host countries (Javorcik, 2004; Blalock and Gertler, 2007), but this evidence mainly comes from the experience of developed countries. The empirical study of FDI spillovers in developing countries does not support this view. Compared to the two different manifestations of FDI technology spillovers in developed and developing countries, it is found that, in addition to the differences in the technological gap between the two and the host countries, such as human capital, there are differences in the FDI itself in the two countries: Investment The multinational corporations in developing countries enjoy greater preferential policies, and the investment mode is dominated by export platform type FDI. Taking China as an example, looking at the development of foreign direct investment in China, two obvious characteristics can be found: first, foreign invested enterprises enjoy a variety of preferential policies, that is, the so-called "super national treatment", and the two is foreign direct investment. It is closely linked with the processing trade, forming the so-called export platform type FDI. in accordance with the new theory of trade theory. Excessive preferential policies will reduce the productivity threshold of FDI entering the host country. At the same time, the preferential policy is more attractive to the low technology level export platform type FDI, which will also change the composition of FDI into the host country. Therefore, China A series of preferential policies of "super national treatment" and the export oriented development strategy of processing trade are the important reasons for the flourishing development of foreign direct investment enterprises in China. It is also the two key factor that should not be ignored in the analysis of FDI technology spillover and the analysis of "market exchange technology".
The existing research literature on FDI technology spillovers has basically followed the traditional FDI as an exogenous and homogeneous, emphasizing the digestion and absorption capacity of the host country, and less consideration of the influence of the host country policy on the market choice of heterogeneous FDI entering China and the effect of its technological spillover. The FDI technology spillover effect is first introduced into the theory of easy theory. By expanding the new trade theory, a model of self selection between the productivity heterogeneity enterprise in export, the export platform type FDI and the market type FDI is constructed to study the influence of the preferential policies of the host country on the quality of heterogeneous FDI and the effect of technology spillover.
The third chapter extends the HMY model and the Yeaple model, and extends the new trade theory to the FDI research from the horizontal FDI to all FDI types. Specifically, we construct a model for the self selection between the productivity heterogeneity enterprise in export, the export platform type FDI and the market FDI, and the first analysis of the heterogeneous FDI productivity entry. The model of the third chapter shows that the FDI incentive policy of the host country's tax reduction and other incentives reduces the productivity threshold of foreign investment, at the same time it has sacrificed the quality of foreign capital while attracting more foreign investment, and then weakened the FDI technology spillover effect. In addition, the export tax rebate policy, the home country effect and the development of transportation technology in the host country. The other factors reduce the transportation cost of FDI return home country or third country. Under certain conditions, the productivity threshold of the export platform type FDI will be lower than the entry threshold of the market type FDI. For a certain scale of FDI market share, the spillover effect is an increasing function of the enterprise productivity, so the productivity is compared to the market FDI, productivity. The technology spillover effect of the lower export platform FDI is even weaker.
Based on the large sample microdata of Chinese industrial enterprises, the fourth chapter, the fifth chapter, the sixth chapter and the seventh chapter respectively carry out the corresponding empirical test. The study of the fourth chapter shows that the export productivity paradox does exist in the FDI enterprise, that is, the productivity of the export enterprise is lower than the domestic enterprise. This is in accordance with the conclusion of the theoretical model of the third chapters. Fourth The chapter further examines whether there is a self selection effect on the entry of FDI enterprises into the Chinese market. It is found that the proportion of 20%-27% in the total export FDI enters the Chinese market every year; and the regression results show that the productivity and the cost of precipitation are the key factors to determine the entry of FDI enterprises into the Chinese market, and FDI enterprises enter the Chinese market. In the sixth chapter, the sixth chapter examines the difference between the export platform type and the market type FDI. The results show that the technical spillover effect of the export platform type FDI and the market type FDI is negative, but the former is less effective in technology spillover. This conclusion is basically not due to the industry type and foreign capital of domestic enterprises. Whether or not it is from Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan.
On the basis of the third chapter theoretical analysis and the empirical analysis of the fourth and the sixth chapters, the fifth and the seventh chapters test the implementation effect of the preferential policy for "investment investment". The results show that, on the one hand, both the export platform type FDI or the market type FDI, the tax preference reduces its productivity and weakens its technology spillover. The host country's tax incentives reduce the marginal cost of the multinational subsidiary companies, which reduces the productivity threshold of the two types of FDI entry, which is unfavorable to its technical spillover; on the other hand, the impact of tax incentives on the export platform type FDI and market FDI technology spillovers is different, and is more impeded by the former technology spillover effect. Obviously, this is a noteworthy place in host country's investment promotion process.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南開大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：F832.6;F276.7

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李春頂;尹翔碩;;我國(guó)出口企業(yè)的“生產(chǎn)率悖論”及其解釋[J];財(cái)貿(mào)經(jīng)濟(jì);2009年11期

2 邵軍;徐康寧;;外商直接投資、人力資本與中國(guó)工業(yè)部門技術(shù)進(jìn)步——基于吸收能力的FDI技術(shù)外溢研究[J];東南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年05期

3 魏后凱;歐美日韓在華制造業(yè)投資的區(qū)位決定[J];中國(guó)工業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì);2000年11期

4 賀燦飛,魏后凱;信息成本、集聚經(jīng)濟(jì)與中國(guó)外商投資區(qū)位[J];中國(guó)工業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì);2001年09期

5 鄧煒,鄭兵云;外商在中西部直接投資的區(qū)位選擇——以安徽省為例的實(shí)證分析[J];華東經(jīng)濟(jì)管理;2004年03期

6 王立平;彭繼年;任志安;;我國(guó)FDI區(qū)域分布的區(qū)位條件及其地理溢出程度的經(jīng)驗(yàn)研究[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)地理;2006年02期

7 嚴(yán)兵;;外商直接投資行業(yè)內(nèi)溢出效應(yīng)及相關(guān)影響因素分析[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)評(píng)論;2006年01期

8 李春頂;石曉軍;邢春冰;;“出口-生產(chǎn)率悖論”:對(duì)中國(guó)經(jīng)驗(yàn)的進(jìn)一步考察[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)動(dòng)態(tài);2010年08期

9 孫俊;;中國(guó)FDI地點(diǎn)選擇的因素分析[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)(季刊);2002年02期

10 魏后凱,賀燦飛,王新;外商在華直接投資動(dòng)機(jī)與區(qū)位因素分析——對(duì)秦皇島市外商直接投資的實(shí)證研究[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)研究;2001年02期

，

本文編號(hào)：1977098