本文關(guān)鍵詞：政府主導(dǎo)投資行為的經(jīng)濟(jì)效應(yīng)研究　出處：《西安理工大學(xué)》2016年博士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 政府主導(dǎo)投資行為 效應(yīng) 政府投資 企業(yè)

【摘要】：上世紀(jì)80年代,我國開始由計(jì)劃經(jīng)濟(jì)向市場經(jīng)濟(jì)逐漸過渡,雖然至今已經(jīng)歷了三十多年的歷程,但是政府卻成為市場的主要參與者和投資主體,其對經(jīng)濟(jì)的影響也越來越大。2008年全球金融危機(jī)爆發(fā)時(shí)期,我國政府提出了“4萬億”的經(jīng)濟(jì)刺激計(jì)劃,地方政府的各種投資計(jì)劃紛紛跟進(jìn),通過財(cái)政撥款和銀行的信貸資金,以固定資產(chǎn)投資作為政府宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)調(diào)控的重要手段,為我國對抗金融風(fēng)險(xiǎn)穩(wěn)定經(jīng)濟(jì)起到重要作用。然而,在我國的財(cái)政體制尚未健全、投資體制尚不完善的情況下,經(jīng)濟(jì)運(yùn)行也出現(xiàn)了一些結(jié)構(gòu)性問題,對我國經(jīng)濟(jì)的可持續(xù)發(fā)展形成阻礙。作為在我國經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展中起關(guān)鍵因素的投資和我國目前重要的投資主體政府,其作用不可忽視。因此,在這一背景下從實(shí)證層面探究政府主導(dǎo)投資行為的經(jīng)濟(jì)效應(yīng),明確政府在資源配置中應(yīng)扮演什么樣的角色,對于規(guī)范政府行為,充分發(fā)揮市場作用,促進(jìn)我國經(jīng)濟(jì)持續(xù)穩(wěn)定增長具有重要意義。本文的主要發(fā)現(xiàn)為:(1)政府投資對于經(jīng)濟(jì)增長具有一定的拉動(dòng)效應(yīng),但這種作用比較有限。政府主導(dǎo)投資行為中政府投資對于經(jīng)濟(jì)增長起到了積極的作用,使經(jīng)濟(jì)增長一定程度上得到提高,但這種作用是短暫的、低效的,影響力度有限,政府投資與經(jīng)濟(jì)增長之間并不具有長期均衡關(guān)系。政府投資更適用于應(yīng)急措施,往往只能取得短期效應(yīng),這種高投入、低增長模式是一種非優(yōu)的和不可持續(xù)的模式。(2)政府投資對居民消費(fèi)具有抑制效應(yīng)。政府進(jìn)入競爭領(lǐng)域投資和對市場資源的損耗,導(dǎo)致民營資本的進(jìn)入空間被擠占,民營資本投入減少,居民收入受損,結(jié)果政府投資支出與居民消費(fèi)支出呈反向變動(dòng)。政府投資、居民消費(fèi)、政府消費(fèi)支出、政府保障支出、金融發(fā)展程度之間具有著長期穩(wěn)定的均衡關(guān)系。政府投資對居民消費(fèi)的抑制效應(yīng)需要一定的時(shí)滯才能體現(xiàn)出來。由于政府投資項(xiàng)目具有周期長、見效慢的特點(diǎn),因而這種抑制效應(yīng)對居民消費(fèi)的影響需要較長時(shí)期才能體現(xiàn)出來。(3)政府投資的增長會引起固定資產(chǎn)投資的國內(nèi)貸款額度增加,因此政府投資對固定資產(chǎn)投資的國內(nèi)貸款額度具有擴(kuò)張效應(yīng)。政府投資和固定資產(chǎn)投資的國內(nèi)貸款之間是單向引導(dǎo)關(guān)系,并不具有相互反饋的關(guān)系。隨著時(shí)間的增長,政府投資、通貨膨脹水平對固定資產(chǎn)投資的國內(nèi)貸款額度的影響越來越顯現(xiàn)出來,除了自身的影響外,政府投資對固定資產(chǎn)投資的國內(nèi)貸款額度的影響最大。(4)政府投資會對民間投資產(chǎn)生影響,且總體上呈現(xiàn)負(fù)向關(guān)系。政府投資會擠出民間投資,造成民間投資的減少。在宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)波動(dòng)較大的時(shí)期,中國政府積極的財(cái)政政策和寬松貨幣政策對民間投資具有明顯的拉動(dòng)效應(yīng),民間投資在積極的財(cái)政政策下由于經(jīng)濟(jì)增長的提高而變得活躍,但是隨之而來的是被政府在寬松的貨幣政策下更多的信貸優(yōu)勢擠出,因此政府投資對民間投資兼具拉動(dòng)和擠出效應(yīng),但長期表現(xiàn)為擠出效應(yīng);而穩(wěn)健的財(cái)政和貨幣政策,則會使政府投資對民間投資具有拉動(dòng)后保持穩(wěn)態(tài)的作用。(5)政府投資對城鄉(xiāng)居民收入差距具有顯著的拉大效應(yīng),政府投資行為所蘊(yùn)含的資金、政策支持和發(fā)展機(jī)會的不均等帶來的壟斷利潤導(dǎo)致了城鄉(xiāng)收入差距的持續(xù)擴(kuò)大。通過對政府投資、固定資產(chǎn)投資的城鄉(xiāng)差異、城鄉(xiāng)居民收入差距之間建立的向量自回歸模型進(jìn)行協(xié)整分析,證明三者之間存在長期均衡關(guān)系,政府投資會引起城鄉(xiāng)居民收入差距、固定資產(chǎn)投資的城鄉(xiāng)差異的擴(kuò)大。(6)政府的干預(yù)會對企業(yè)的投資機(jī)會產(chǎn)生影響,但在現(xiàn)有的財(cái)政體制下,最高層級的央企和最低層級的縣以下政府的這種干預(yù)對企業(yè)投資機(jī)會的影響并不顯著,而省、市一級政府對企業(yè)的介入干預(yù),則會明顯提高企業(yè)的投資機(jī)會,尤其是在制度環(huán)境差、市場發(fā)育落后的情況下,這種提高尤為明顯;因?yàn)槭袌霭l(fā)育越完善,地方政府的行政力量和資源優(yōu)勢反而越得不到發(fā)揮。而在這種省、市級政府的介入干預(yù)起到積極作用的同時(shí),也會導(dǎo)致發(fā)展機(jī)會的不平等和資源獲取的不均衡。(7)在已經(jīng)投資過度的情況下,民營企業(yè)高管具有政治關(guān)系與企業(yè)的投資績效具有負(fù)相關(guān)關(guān)系。原因在于董事會高管人員的政治關(guān)系作為一種特殊的手段會影響企業(yè)的資源配置和生產(chǎn)經(jīng)營,自上而下的政府干預(yù)會為民營企業(yè)繼續(xù)投資提供更多資金支持和便利條件,使企業(yè)在已經(jīng)過度投資的情況下沒有及時(shí)調(diào)整投資決策,導(dǎo)致企業(yè)的投資績效降低。然而如果投資適度,民營企業(yè)高管人員具有政治關(guān)系會促進(jìn)企業(yè)的運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn),提高民營企業(yè)的投資績效。
[Abstract]:In 80s, China began to gradually transition from planned economy to market economy, although it has experienced thirty years of history, but the government has become a major player in the market and the investment subject, its impact on the economy is also growing.2008 global financial crisis period, the Chinese government put forward the "4 trillion" the economic stimulus plan, various local government investment plans have followed by financial allocations and bank credit funds, with fixed assets investment as an important means of economic regulation, China's financial risks against economic stability play an important role. However, in China's financial system is not perfect, the investment system is not under perfect conditions, economic operation there are some structural problems, the sustainable development of China economy. As hinder the formation in China's economic development plays a key factor of investment Capital and investment in China is an important subject of government, its role can not be ignored. Therefore, research on the economic effect of government investment behavior from the empirical level in this context, make it clear that the government should play what role in the allocation of resources, to regulate the behavior of the government, give full play to the role of the market, which is of great significance to continue steady economic growth in China. The main findings of this paper is: (1) government investment has a certain pulling effect on economic growth, but this effect is limited. The government led investment in government investment played a positive role in economic growth, the economic growth to some extent can be improved, but this effect is short, inefficient, impact is limited, does not have a long-term equilibrium relationship between government investment and economic growth. Government investment is more suitable for emergency measures, often only have short-term effects, this High input, low growth mode is a kind of non optimal and sustainable model. (2) the government investment has inhibitory effect on consumption. The government entered the field of competition on the market investment and resource consumption, leading to private capital into the space occupied, private capital investment to reduce the income of residents, damaged, the government investment expenditure and consumer spending showed the reverse changes. Government investment, consumption, government consumption expenditure, government expenditure, a long-term stable equilibrium relationship between the degree of financial development. With the inhibitory effect of government investment on consumption need to delay certain reflected. Because of the government investment project has the characteristics of long cycle and slow effect. The effects of inhibition effect on consumption needs a longer period can be reflected. (3) the government investment growth will lead to investment in fixed assets in the amount of loans Therefore, the government increased investment in fixed asset investment in domestic loans. The expansionary effect between government investment and investment in fixed assets of domestic loans is a one-way causal relationship, does not have the relations of mutual feedback. With the increase of time, government investment, inflation level of investment in fixed assets of domestic loans appear more and more in addition, their effects, effects of government investment on fixed assets investment in the domestic loan amount is the largest. (4) the government investment will have an impact on private investment, and generally has a negative relationship. The government investment will be crowding out private investment, resulting in reduced private investment. In the macro economic fluctuation period, China the government's proactive fiscal policy and loose monetary policy has obvious pull effect on private investment, private investment in the active fiscal policy due to economic growth To improve and become active, but the government is in the loose monetary policy more credit advantage of extrusion, therefore the government investment on private investment both stimulating and crowding out effect, but the long-term performance of crowding out effect; and prudent fiscal and monetary policies, will keep steady in the role of the government is pulling on the folk investment after the investment. (5) the government investment has significant effect on the widening income gap between urban and rural residents, which contains the behavior of government investment funds, policy support and development opportunities brought by unequal monopoly profits led to the urban-rural income gap continued to widen. The government investment, the difference between urban and rural investment in fixed assets, the establishment of vector the income gap between urban and rural residents of the auto regression model and cointegration analysis, prove that there is a long-term equilibrium relationship between the three, the government investment will cause the income gap between urban and rural residents, solid The difference between urban and rural areas to expand investment in fixed assets (6). The government intervention will impact on the investment opportunities, but in the present financial system, affecting the highest level of the central enterprises and the lowest level of the county government intervention in business investment opportunities is not significant, while the provincial, city level intervention on the enterprise, will significantly improve the enterprise investment opportunities, especially in the institutional environment, market development is backward, this improvement is remarkable; because the market development more perfect, the local government's administrative power and resources and is not play. In this province, the municipal government intervention to play a positive role at the same time, it will lead to the development of unequal opportunities and access to resources is not balanced. (7) in the already excessive investment case, private enterprise executives have political relationship with the company's performance is negative Related. Because the board of executives political relations as a special means will affect the resource allocation of the enterprise production and management, government intervention in the top-down will provide more financial support and facilities for private enterprises to continue to invest, to enable enterprises to adjust investment decisions without in case of excessive investment, resulting in the decrease of enterprises the performance of investment. However, if the investment is moderate, the executives of private enterprises with political relations will promote the operation of enterprises, improve the investment performance of private enterprises.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：西安理工大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：F812.45;F124.1
，

本文編號：1438614