【作者】 余翔；

【导师】 陈仲常；

【作者基本信息】 重庆大学 ， 数量经济学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 在经济增长的同时,如何促进增长方式从粗放型到集约型的转变,使经济增长的资源消耗和环境代价更小,这一问题关系到了可持续发展的整体进程。为了提升经济增长的环境绩效,我们首先需要了解影响这一绩效的各个影响因素的作用。这种了解除了有利于理解已经发生的绩效变迁之外,还是改进未来环境绩效的关键。以往的研究关注了科技工艺、人均收入、资源价格、产业结构、外商投资、资源环境监督管理体系等因素的影响。这些研究大都有一个隐含的假设,那就是公共支出和金融发展没有对环境绩效产生影响。但事实是,大多数发展中国家的公共支出在经济发展中扮演着重要的角色,而且金融发展深刻地改变着这些国家的经济表现。所以,为了进一步深化对环境绩效影响因素的认识,推动相关理论的扩展和相关政策的制定,本文聚焦于分析公共支出和金融发展对经济增长资源利用效率和环境友好程度的影响。在理论上,公共支出和金融发展主要通过四条途径对经济增长的环境绩效发挥影响。首先,金融发展能够从缓解私人部门的融资约束和影响其研发投资偏好两个方面对技术创新活动产生影响,这一效应的总体方向为正,具体大小受投资边际收益变化情况的制约。而公共支出也会对私人部门的技术创新投资产生正向的杠杆效应、引入效应和负向的挤出效应,总的效应受到了公共支出规模和结构的制约。所以它们都具有对环境绩效的技术创新效应。其次,公共支出和金融发展能够通过影响节能减排投资和经济生产的资金或者资源密集化程度对经济增长的环境绩效发挥资金供给效应。这种效应有着正负两个方面的作用。其具体大小和方向受到了企业规模和投资行为的变化情况,以及公共支出规模和结构的制约。再次,公共支出和金融发展能够通过影响人均收入的增长趋势对环境绩效产生收入增长效应。这种效应植根于人均收入与环境绩效的倒U型关系之中,所以这一效应的方向和强度不但受到了金融发展程度、公共支出的结构和规模的制约,而且与环境Kuznets曲线的具体特征有关。最后,公共支出和金融发展都能够通过强化资源环境政策的效力,对经济增长的环境绩效发挥积极影响。除了公共支出的规模、结构以及金融发展的程度之外,资源环境政策与财政金融政策之间的结合程度也对这一政策强化效应的显著程度有着重要影响。运用区域层面的面板数据,本文实证检验了公共支出和金融发展对于环境绩效的影响。结合理论分析的结论,本文在实证分析中引入了公共支出规模、结构以及金融发展程度和金融服务结构等指标。动态面板数据广义矩估计结果表明:(1)公共支出的规模变化对经济增长的资源利用效率产生了显著的影响。为了确保经济增长和完善公共设施建设,公共支出相对规模的增长推动了能源消耗强度和煤炭资源消耗强度的显著上升。这种正相关关系在上行和下行两种经济形势下均没有发生显著变化。(2)工业污染治理财政资金补助的强度以及由此形成的公共支出相应结构的变化则对工业用水效率、化学需氧量水污染减排、环保产业的发展,以及污染治理投资发挥了积极的影响。因此,公共支出的规模和结构都对经济增长的环境绩效有着显著的影响。(3)在另一方面,金融发展对水资源利用效率和工业污染排放强度产生了显著的影响。由于金融发展改善了市场中资金的供给和配置,降低了融资成本,并且具有环境政策强化效应,它有力地推动了工业用水效率的提升,并且显著降低了多个方面的工业污染排放强度。(4)作为环保金融服务的代表,工业污染治理项目贷款也表现出了对工业化学需氧量水污染减排和污染治理投资的积极影响。而且,实证分析的结果还表明,当污染治理贷款发挥的作用较为弱小时,金融发展能够通过其他的效应途径对经济增长的环境绩效发挥积极影响。(5)因此,公共支出的规模、结构,金融发展的水平,以及金融服务的结构共同构成了对环境绩效的全面影响。(6)对各影响因素的比较分析还显示,环境管理政策体系的完善对于提升经济增长的环境绩效也有着显著的正向影响。由此进行的策略研究表明:(1)公共支出不但需要根据其资源和环境成本调整规模变化的路径,还需要对支出的结构进行调整,与资源环境政策相结合,充分地利用科学技术和环境保护支出等公共支出项目的积极影响,促进环境绩效的进一步提高。(2)通过在金融服务中倡导社会责任意识,引导金融服务与环境政策充分的结合,有利于更好地发挥金融发展在提升环境绩效方面的积极作用。与此同时,为了促进农村经济在增长过程中环境绩效的进一步提高,采取政策措施促进城乡金融协调发展也是很重要的。(3)更为重要的是,这些策略的选择不是排他性的,公共支出与金融发展策略完全可以相互配合、相互补充,并充分地与资源环境政策等相关政策相结合,从而更为有效地为提升经济增长的环境绩效发挥作用。更多还原

【Abstract】 In recent decades, China has tried to establish a high-quality legal framework for pursuing sustainable development and environmental progress. Nevertheless, the destruction of the environment is still one of the serious challenges China faces at present because of its rapid urbanization and economic growth. To formulate effective policies, the factors that influence environmental performance should be well studied. The previous literature has emphasized the importance of income and growth, technology, foreign direct investment, industrial structure, formal and informal regulations. Almost all the previous studies have the implicit premise that government expenditure doesn’t impact the environmental performance, and enterprises can get enough financial services to conduct environment-friendly production. Unfortunately, this assumption is challenged by the evidence from developing countries, in which government expenditure and financial development have profoundly changed their economic performance.Theoretically, government expenditure and financial development can facilitate the enterprises’investment, stimulate their R&D activities, constitute a mechanism for long-run growth, and strengthen the effects of environmental policies. They, therefore, have capitalization, technology, income, and regulation effects on the environmental performance of developing countries. Some of the effects are mixed according to the theoretical analysis, and thus the real effects can be either positive or negative.Using the provincial panel data of China, this paper examines the impacts of government expenditure and financial development on the resource use and pollution discharges. The analysis provides convincing evidence of a positive link between government expenditure and energy intensity in China. The expansion of government expenditure since Asian financial crisis has exerted a substantial influence on energy intensity. Further analysis demonstrates that government expenditure has more direct and larger effect on energy intensity in the crisis than that after economic recovery. However, an alteration in economic situation doesn’t greatly change such positive effects of government expenditure but just slightly reduces and delays its influence. Furthermore, the empirical results reveal that financial development tends to reduce the pollution intensities, though some of its capitalization effects are detrimental to the environment. In recent years, financial development has played an important role in improving the environmental performance of China. In addition, the environmental regulations are important as well, because they are also found to play a crucial rule in pollution control. If a sound framework of environmental protection comes into operation, the beneficial impacts of government expenditure and financial development on the environment can be strengthened considerably.These results offer new implications for policy makers in developing countries. To reduce the resource and environmental costs of economic growth, optimizing the relative scale and structure of government expenditure seems necessary. For example, the expenditure on science research and environmental protection can be increased to strengthen the beneficial effects of government expenditure. On the other hand, in order to improve the environmental performance of the whole country, policies are still needed to stimulate the financial development in some rural areas. More importantly, these policies can be combined with environmental policies and then yield more benefits to the environment.更多还原