选择性产业政策与产能过剩:来自中国准自然实验的证据

IF 2.8 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Economic Systems Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ecosys.2024.101191
{"title":"选择性产业政策与产能过剩:来自中国准自然实验的证据","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ecosys.2024.101191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Overcapacity has long been a \"chronic problem affecting China's economic development.\" Why is China's overcapacity intractable? This study takes the \"Revitalization Plans of Ten Industries\" (the RPTI) issued by the Chinese government in 2009 as a quasi-natural experiment. It deploys the data of China's A-share listed enterprises and the difference-in-differences (DID) model to investigate the impact of the selective industrial policy on enterprise overcapacity. The results show that the policy has a significant and persistently negative effect on the capacity utilization rate of the treated group. Mechanistic studies reveal that policy-induced overcapacity is caused by increasing government subsidies for the treated group, depressing corporate investment efficiency, and growing capital misallocation. After considering zombie enterprises, we find that the policy mainly leads to the overcapacity of regular enterprises but has no negative impact on zombie enterprises, and zombie enterprises crowd out the capacity utilization rate of regular enterprises in the same industry. This study indicates that a selective industrial policy that prevents the market elimination mechanism from functioning is an underlying cause of overcapacity in China. The study's findings reveal why the administrative de-capacity policies enacted by the Chinese government have failed to eliminate backward capacity but rather created a new overcapacity issue.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51505,"journal":{"name":"Economic Systems","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Selective industrial policy and overcapacity: Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecosys.2024.101191\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Overcapacity has long been a \\\"chronic problem affecting China's economic development.\\\" Why is China's overcapacity intractable? This study takes the \\\"Revitalization Plans of Ten Industries\\\" (the RPTI) issued by the Chinese government in 2009 as a quasi-natural experiment. It deploys the data of China's A-share listed enterprises and the difference-in-differences (DID) model to investigate the impact of the selective industrial policy on enterprise overcapacity. The results show that the policy has a significant and persistently negative effect on the capacity utilization rate of the treated group. Mechanistic studies reveal that policy-induced overcapacity is caused by increasing government subsidies for the treated group, depressing corporate investment efficiency, and growing capital misallocation. After considering zombie enterprises, we find that the policy mainly leads to the overcapacity of regular enterprises but has no negative impact on zombie enterprises, and zombie enterprises crowd out the capacity utilization rate of regular enterprises in the same industry. This study indicates that a selective industrial policy that prevents the market elimination mechanism from functioning is an underlying cause of overcapacity in China. The study's findings reveal why the administrative de-capacity policies enacted by the Chinese government have failed to eliminate backward capacity but rather created a new overcapacity issue.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51505,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economic Systems\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economic Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S093936252400013X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economic Systems","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S093936252400013X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

长期以来,产能过剩一直是 "影响中国经济发展的痼疾"。中国的产能过剩问题为何难以解决?本研究以中国政府 2009 年发布的《十大产业振兴规划》(RPTI)为准自然实验。它利用中国 A 股上市企业的数据和差分(DID)模型,研究了选择性产业政策对企业产能过剩的影响。结果表明,该政策对被处理组的产能利用率有显著且持续的负面影响。机理研究表明,政策导致的产能过剩是由政府增加对被处理组的补贴、压低企业投资效率和加剧资本配置不当造成的。在考虑僵尸企业后,我们发现政策主要导致了正规企业的产能过剩,但对僵尸企业没有负面影响,僵尸企业挤占了同行业正规企业的产能利用率。本研究表明,阻碍市场淘汰机制发挥作用的选择性产业政策是中国产能过剩的根本原因。研究结果揭示了为什么中国政府制定的行政性去产能政策未能淘汰落后产能,反而造成了新的产能过剩问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Selective industrial policy and overcapacity: Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China

Overcapacity has long been a "chronic problem affecting China's economic development." Why is China's overcapacity intractable? This study takes the "Revitalization Plans of Ten Industries" (the RPTI) issued by the Chinese government in 2009 as a quasi-natural experiment. It deploys the data of China's A-share listed enterprises and the difference-in-differences (DID) model to investigate the impact of the selective industrial policy on enterprise overcapacity. The results show that the policy has a significant and persistently negative effect on the capacity utilization rate of the treated group. Mechanistic studies reveal that policy-induced overcapacity is caused by increasing government subsidies for the treated group, depressing corporate investment efficiency, and growing capital misallocation. After considering zombie enterprises, we find that the policy mainly leads to the overcapacity of regular enterprises but has no negative impact on zombie enterprises, and zombie enterprises crowd out the capacity utilization rate of regular enterprises in the same industry. This study indicates that a selective industrial policy that prevents the market elimination mechanism from functioning is an underlying cause of overcapacity in China. The study's findings reveal why the administrative de-capacity policies enacted by the Chinese government have failed to eliminate backward capacity but rather created a new overcapacity issue.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Economic Systems
Economic Systems ECONOMICS-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
83
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: Economic Systems is a refereed journal for the analysis of causes and consequences of the significant institutional variety prevailing among developed, developing, and emerging economies, as well as attempts at and proposals for their reform. The journal is open to micro and macro contributions, theoretical as well as empirical, the latter to analyze related topics against the background of country or region-specific experiences. In this respect, Economic Systems retains its long standing interest in the emerging economies of Central and Eastern Europe and other former transition economies, but also encourages contributions that cover any part of the world, including Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, or Africa.
期刊最新文献
Regional (economic) integration, political stability uncertainty and (intra-African) exports Editorial Board US uncertainty shocks on real and financial markets: A multi-country perspective Geographic complexity and bank risk: Evidence from cross-border banks in Africa Supporting African union: Do macroeconomic fluctuations matter?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1