【摘要】：本文從上海、香港的產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)和貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)現(xiàn)狀出發(fā),選用相關(guān)指標(biāo),比較兩地產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)和貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)的發(fā)展特征。進一步的,通過建立數(shù)學(xué)模型,研究產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)與貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)的相互關(guān)系。 首先,本文第二、三章分別就兩個地方的貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)和產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)的發(fā)展現(xiàn)狀進行了比較。研究結(jié)果表明：第一、上海、香港的貿(mào)易商品結(jié)構(gòu)類似,但是貿(mào)易方式結(jié)構(gòu)有較大差異。第二,產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)比較結(jié)果顯示：(1)香港的產(chǎn)業(yè)高度化程度優(yōu)于上海,主要表現(xiàn)在香港的第三產(chǎn)業(yè)比重高于上海；(2)霍夫曼工業(yè)化指數(shù)計算結(jié)果表明,上海已經(jīng)處于工業(yè)化程度的第四階段,而香港還處于第二階段。第三、由上述結(jié)果推斷,上海為“腹地型”貿(mào)易中心城市,香港為“轉(zhuǎn)口型”貿(mào)易中心城市。 然后,本文選用錢納里(1975)提出的數(shù)學(xué)模型,對該模型進行了必要的修正,以對上海、香港產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)與貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)互動關(guān)系予以實證分析。結(jié)果表明,上海、香港的要素稟賦是有所區(qū)別的,上海的要素稟賦主要集中于勞動力資源和工業(yè)化體系,香港的要素稟賦則在于其優(yōu)越的地理位置。但是,這些結(jié)論無法系統(tǒng)地反應(yīng)產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)與貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)的關(guān)系,因而需要進一步從整體上對兩個結(jié)構(gòu)綜合效應(yīng)的互動關(guān)系進行研究。 本文第五章構(gòu)建了上海、香港產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)和貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)的結(jié)構(gòu)優(yōu)化指數(shù)體系。其中,產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)優(yōu)化指數(shù)選擇結(jié)構(gòu)高度化指數(shù)和結(jié)構(gòu)協(xié)調(diào)度指數(shù)為目標(biāo)指數(shù)；貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)優(yōu)化指數(shù)則包括了商品結(jié)構(gòu)、方式結(jié)構(gòu)、區(qū)域結(jié)構(gòu)和服務(wù)貿(mào)易比重四個緯度的指標(biāo)。然后,使用灰靶理論計算出貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)優(yōu)化指數(shù)的靶心度。最后,運用Johansen協(xié)整檢驗和格蘭杰因果關(guān)系檢驗對兩個結(jié)構(gòu)綜合指數(shù)的變化關(guān)系進行檢驗,進而比較研究兩地產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)與貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)綜合效應(yīng)。結(jié)果表明,出口導(dǎo)向型戰(zhàn)略引起上海產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)與貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)的關(guān)系調(diào)整,而香港則通過調(diào)整產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu),正在從“去工業(yè)化”進程中走出來。這個結(jié)論很好的驗證了之前通過各個方面數(shù)據(jù)所做出的推測。 第六章中,以上述研究成果為基礎(chǔ),構(gòu)建了產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)與貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)關(guān)系的調(diào)整模型,并總結(jié)了滬港兩地在產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)與貿(mào)易機構(gòu)調(diào)整過程中存在的四個不同之處：(1)先導(dǎo)政策不同；(2)主導(dǎo)性貿(mào)易方式不同；(3)生產(chǎn)要素的重新配置對兩地的出口貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)的影響途徑不同；(4)生產(chǎn)要素配置對產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)調(diào)整的響應(yīng)路徑不同。進而通過考察香港在處理產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)與貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)關(guān)系中的經(jīng)驗與教訓(xùn),并結(jié)合之間的研究成果,提出上海優(yōu)化產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)與貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)關(guān)系的四點建議：(1)以產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)優(yōu)化為核心目標(biāo),防止貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)對產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)的反制；(2)提高生產(chǎn)要素配置對產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)調(diào)整的響應(yīng)能力；(3)合理配置貿(mào)易方式結(jié)構(gòu),推進三次產(chǎn)業(yè)協(xié)調(diào)發(fā)展；(4)培育潛在要素稟賦,預(yù)防結(jié)構(gòu)失衡。
[Abstract]:Based on the present situation of industrial structure and trade structure in Shanghai and Hong Kong, this paper compares the development characteristics of industrial structure and trade structure between Shanghai and Hong Kong. Furthermore, the relationship between industrial structure and trade structure is studied by establishing mathematical model. Firstly, the second and third chapters compare the present situation of trade structure and industrial structure of the two places. The results show that: first, the structure of trade commodities in Shanghai and Hong Kong is similar, but the structure of trade mode is quite different. Second, the results of industrial structure comparison show that: (1) the degree of industrial upgrading in Hong Kong is higher than that in Shanghai, mainly in the proportion of tertiary industry in Hong Kong is higher than that in Shanghai; (2) the results of Hoffman industrialization Index calculation show that Shanghai is in the fourth stage of industrialization, while Hong Kong is in the second stage. Thirdly, it is inferred from the above results that Shanghai is a "hinterland" trade center city and Hong Kong is a "entrepot" trade center city. Then, this paper selects the mathematical model proposed by Chennari (1975), and makes a necessary revision to the model to make an empirical analysis of the interaction between industrial structure and trade structure in Shanghai and Hong Kong. The results show that the factor endowments of Shanghai and Hong Kong are different, that of Shanghai is mainly concentrated on labor resources and industrialization system, and that of Hong Kong lies in its superior geographical position. However, these conclusions can not systematically reflect the relationship between the industrial structure and the trade structure, so it is necessary to further study the interaction between the two structures as a whole. The fifth chapter constructs the index system of industrial structure and trade structure of Shanghai and Hong Kong. Among them, the industrial structure optimization index selects the structural high-grade index and the structural coordination index as the target index, and the trade structure optimization index includes the index of the commodity structure, the mode structure, the regional structure and the proportion of service trade. Then, the target center of trade structure optimization index is calculated by grey target theory. Finally, Johansen cointegration test and Granger causality test are used to test the relationship between the two structural composite indices, and then compare the industrial structure and trade structure of the two places. The results show that the export-oriented strategy leads to the adjustment of the relationship between the industrial structure and the trade structure of Shanghai, while Hong Kong is emerging from the process of "deindustrialization" through the adjustment of the industrial structure. This conclusion is very good to verify the previous data from various aspects of the speculation. In the sixth chapter, based on the above research results, we construct the adjustment model of the relationship between industrial structure and trade structure, and summarize the four differences between Shanghai and Hong Kong in the process of industrial structure and trade organization adjustment: (1) different guiding policies; (2) the dominant trade mode is different; (3) the reconfiguration of production factors has different influence on the export trade structure of both places; (4) the response path of production factor allocation to industrial structure adjustment is different. Then, by examining the experience and lessons of Hong Kong in dealing with the relationship between industrial structure and trade structure, and combining the research results between them, Four suggestions are put forward to optimize the relationship between industrial structure and trade structure in Shanghai: (1) taking industrial structure optimization as the core goal to prevent the trade structure from counteracting the industrial structure; (2) improving the response ability of production factor allocation to the adjustment of industrial structure; (3) reasonable allocation of trade mode structure, promotion of coordinated development of three industries, (4) cultivation of potential factor endowment and prevention of structural imbalance.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：東華大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：F727;F127;F224

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 趙沖;劉向麗;于左;;FDI流入的產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)對我國出口貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)的影響[J];財經(jīng)問題研究;2010年07期

2 顧清峰;;競爭優(yōu)勢理論對我國貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)的重新審視[J];重慶科技學(xué)院學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2007年01期

3 周建華;;對外貿(mào)易、產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)與經(jīng)濟增長——基于中國和印度的比較[J];東南亞南亞研究;2010年04期

4 尹翔碩;中國出口制成品結(jié)構(gòu)與制造業(yè)生產(chǎn)結(jié)構(gòu)差異的分析[J];國際貿(mào)易問題;1997年04期

5 隋月紅;趙振華;;出口貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)的形成機理:基于我國1980-2005年的經(jīng)驗研究[J];國際貿(mào)易問題;2008年03期

6 劉兵權(quán);彭菲婭;;超額外匯儲備、貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)與產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)升級[J];國際貿(mào)易問題;2008年07期

7 林毅夫,孫希芳;經(jīng)濟發(fā)展的比較優(yōu)勢戰(zhàn)略理論——兼評《對中國外貿(mào)戰(zhàn)略與貿(mào)易政策的評論》[J];國際經(jīng)濟評論;2003年06期

8 文東偉;冼國明;馬靜;;FDI、產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)變遷與中國的出口競爭力[J];管理世界;2009年04期

9 王冉冉;;外貿(mào)結(jié)構(gòu)轉(zhuǎn)型與經(jīng)濟增長方式轉(zhuǎn)變的互動關(guān)系探討[J];廣州大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2008年05期

10 黃菁;楊三根;;中國加工貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)升級影響因素的實證分析[J];世界經(jīng)濟研究;2006年01期

，

本文編號：2149485