【作者】 徐永利；

【导师】 张玉柯；

【作者基本信息】 河北大学 ， 世界经济， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 20世纪90年代以来,以中国、巴西、印度、俄罗斯“金砖四国”为代表的新兴大国迅速崛起,对现有世界政治和经济格局产生了深远而重要的影响,新兴大国正在成为世界经济增长的重要推动力量,对全球经济增长的贡献和世界经济的影响力与日俱增。2009年6月“金砖四国”领导人举行首次正式会晤,强调四国对话与合作不仅符合新兴市场国家和发展中国家的共同利益,而且有利于建设一个持久和平、共同繁荣的和谐世界。近年来,随着世界经济局势的变化,针对中国、俄罗斯、印度、巴西等“新兴大国”的研究在国内外学术界,也已经成为热题。“金砖四国”有很多相似的地方,都是人口和资源大国,也是发展中的大国,但却以不同的发展模式走向经济振兴之路。四国目前处于工业化进程的不同阶段,印度步入工业化初级阶段,中国进入工业化中期加速阶段,而巴西和俄罗斯已发展到工业化后期阶段。“金砖四国”产业结构与世界经济的关联程度日渐紧密,目前中国习惯上被称为“世界工厂”,印度被称为“世界办公室”,俄罗斯和巴西分别被称为“世界加油站”和“世界原料基地”,这在一定程度上是由四国不同比较优势下的产业结构所决定的。金融危机中四国受到了不同程度的影响,体现出了不同的抗风险能力,与四国经济结构和产业结构的差异也存在较大的关系。因此,深入研究“金砖四国”的产业结构及其变化,从中汲取经验与教训,对中国经济可持续发展提供必要的借鉴,具有重要的现实意义。本文的基本研究思路是：从产业结构的相关理论梳理入手,比较四国产业结构的形成机理、三次产业结构现状、产业结构对经济增长的影响和作用、分析产业结构存在的问题,提出对中国产业结构调整与升级的对策建议。论文的主要研究内容和观点如下：1、相关理论阐释：对产业结构和经济增长的影响机制进行梳理,对产业结构的演变、分类进行理论归纳。在产业结构理论中,相关的阶段理论着重探讨了产业结构的演变规律,是分析“金砖四国”产业结构的主要理论依据。2、四国产业结构的形成机理：从内部和外部的角度分析了四国产业结构形成的影响因素。内部方面：四国不同的自然条件和资源禀赋形成了各自的比较优势,不同的经济政策和产业政策也影响了各自的产业发展。外部方面：随着经济全球化进程的加快,特别是国际生产转移,给四国产业结构调整带来了机会,四国基于各自的比较优势选择了不同的路径,例如,中国参与国际制造业分工带来了工业经济的巨大发展,印度通过参与世界软件外包带动了服务业的发展。3、四国三次产业结构现状比较：从产业结构顺序上来看,巴西和俄罗斯第三产业产值已经超过了其他产业的总和,三次产业结构顺序与发达国家一致。中国第二产业占主要地位,第三产业比重较低但已经呈现不断上升的趋势。印度经济结构并没有按照发达国家的“农业—工业—服务业”的递进模式演进,而是形成了第三产业的跳跃式发展格局,出现了“逆工业化”的特征,这种不平衡式发展的可持续性还有待验证。根据目前印度制造业的追赶速度,未来应该会继续沿着工业化的轨道发展。从四国三次产业的内部结构来看,农业方面存在地域性差别。巴西农业构成相对均衡,种植业和畜牧业比较发达,俄罗斯畜牧业波动较大,印度和中国以种植业为主,但是中国的畜牧和水产业占农业份额明显增加。四国拥有各自的优势农产品品种。在工业内部结构方面,巴西以矿产资源作为主要驱动因素,带动冶金、航空和制造业的发展,机械电子设备的制造能力已具备相当基础,轻重工业比较均衡；俄罗斯以能源为主,形成了以石油、天然气开采和出口为基础的经济增长模式,将资源潜力转化为国家竞争优势；印度则在传统工业发展的同时,加快了制药和信息产业的发展并已经具有了一定的产业竞争力；中国以丰富廉价的劳动力,大量引进外资,发展加工制造业,带动了经济繁荣。在服务业内部结构方面,四国目前依然都是传统的消费者服务占主导,而新兴的现代服务模式并没有形成规模。通过行业内部结构的进一步分析,四国产业竞争力也存在一定差异,在产业集中度方面比较明显,如中国的汽车企业在规模优势上还有待加强。4、四国产业结构变化对经济增长的影响：从三次产业在经济中的作用和对经济增长的贡献来看,四国都存在一定差别。农业在四国产业结构中的比重都是最低的,但是作为重要的基础产业,在四国经济结构中,特别是印度和中国目前依然占据重要地位。工业在四国经济结构中都处于主导地位,巴西和俄罗斯的工业产值占经济总量的比重20年来一直高于农业而低于服务业,印度工业发展缓慢,一直低于农业,21世纪以来才逐渐超过农业。中国与印度相反,工业一直占据第一的位置,对经济的拉动和贡献作用在四国中最高,近年来随着服务业产值的上升,工业产值所占的比重有所下降,但是依然高于服务业和农业。服务业在巴西和俄罗斯经济中占绝对的主导地位,印度服务业近年来发展较快,特别是由软件外包服务带动的新兴服务业,促进了印度的产业结构升级,而中国服务产业则相对落后,对经济增长的贡献程度明显低于其他三国。此外四国产业结构和就业结构存在不同程度的偏离,中国和印度比较明显,一定程度上也会影响经济增长的效果。不同的产业结构和驱动因素使得四国经济增长有了不同的结果。相对均衡的模式使得巴西经济增长比较平稳；能源驱动的经济模式给俄罗斯带来了财富,也带来了结构失衡和经济增长的不确定性；印度服务业拉动的模式由于缺乏工业支撑,经济增长的后劲还需要制造业的发展来弥补；中国以工业制造业为主导的模式,极大地促进了经济增长,也为服务业的升级发展提供了必要的物质基础。5、从产业结构面临的问题与调整来看：四国基于各自不同的比较优势,选择了不同的经济增长路径,在产业结构方面,不论是三次产业之间的比例关系,还是三次产业内部结构,四国既有相似的地方,也存在许多差异,都存在脱节与不合理之处,需要进行产业结构调整,尤其是印度和中国,产业结构还有待于进一步合理化和高度化。四国产业结构存在很强的互补性,有利于开展互补贸易和经济合作。产业结构调整既要考虑国情也要有利于可持续发展,应该通过提高竞争优势来弥补比较优势的不断弱化。此外,农业产业在国民经济中的比重并非越低越好,比重降低是有限度的,应该建立在保证满足国家对农业的基本需要和国民经济总量不断上升的前提下,农业在经济中的作用不可替代。而没有制造业的良好基础,工业化进程是无法实现的,促进制造业发展是工业化的必由之路,试图绕过制造业和工业而直接发展第三产业的做法,并不利于经济的长远发展。“金砖四国”产业结构研究具有很强的现实性,本论文没有局限于某一理论模型,而是采用定性分析与定量分析相结合、图表分析与归纳总结相结合、历史分析和现实检验相结合、横向比较与纵向比较相结合的研究方法,以一定的时间跨度和一定的地域空间,从多层面进行比较研究。创新之处主要包括以下几点：本文以一个多维分析框架,从纵向和横向对“金砖四国”产业结构的形成、状态、影响、问题与调整等进行多纬度比较,分析四国产业结构之间的均衡差异、不同作用和存在的问题并提出建议,弥补了目前学术界对四国产业结构研究的欠缺和不足；通过对拉动率、贡献率和增长率差异度等的比较分析,结果显示三次产业对四国经济增长的作用存在较大差异；通过对四国产业结构与就业结构的偏离度进行计算比较,结果表明四国产业结构存在不同程度的脱节现象,中国和印度比较明显。更多还原

【Abstract】 The rapid rise of the "BRIC"(China, Brazil, India, Russia)since 90’s of the 20th century, a typical representative of emerging powers, had a profound and important influence to current world political and economic situation. The emerging power is becoming a major driving force and contributor in world economic growth. The academic research at home and abroad, about China, Russia, India, Brazil and other "emerging power", has become a hot topic."BRIC" have many similarities, are powers of population and resources, also big developing countries, but with different patterns of growth and development of the road towards economic recovery. Through the comparative analysis of formation mechanism, present status, influence on economic growth and the problems of the industrial structure in four countries, we can see the "BRIC" at different stages of the process of industrialization. India just entered the initial stage of industrialization. China began to enter the acceleration phase of mid-industrialization, while Brazil and Russia have developed to an advanced stage of industrialization."BRIC" industrial structure associated closely with the world economy growing. China used to be called "world factory", India is known as the "world office", Russia and Brazil are called "world stations" and "World raw material base", which to some extent by the industrial structure of the four countries under different comparative advantage. The four countries affected by Subprime crisis in different levels, reflecting the different anti-risk ability from different economic structure and industrial structure. Therefore, the in-depth study of "BRIC" industrial structure and change, learn from experiences and lessons, has important practical significance to provide the necessary reference for sustainable development of the Chinese economy.The basic idea of this study are:the theory of industrial structure from the start, analysis and comparison the formation mechanism of the industrial structure, three industry structure, impact on economic growth and the role of industrial structure, problems of four countries, find out the differences and put forward suggestions on industry structural adjustment and upgrade. The main research content and views are as follow:1. The theory interpretation:to sort out the evolution of industrial structure and classification theory on the industrial structure and economic growth mechanism. The related stage theory focuses on the evolution of industrial structure is the main theoretical basis for the industrial structure analysis of the "BRIC ".2. The formation mechanism of the four countries industrial structure:analyses the industrial structure factors of the four countries from the perspective of inside and outside. Internal aspects:the four countries with different natural conditions and natural resources to form their own comparative advantages, different economic policies and industrial policies also affected their respective industries. External aspects:the acceleration of economic globalization, particularly international transfer of production, brought opportunity to the four countries on industrial structure adjustment. The four countries selected, based on their respective comparative advantages, the different paths. For example, China’s participation in the international manufacturing division lead to the enormous development of the industrial economy, by participating in the world’s software outsourcing in India led the development of the service industry.3. The status of the internal structure of industries:Brazil and Russia services industry, more than the sum of other industries, is in the same order as the industrial structure of developed countries. China dominated by the secondary industry, service industry has shown a low but rising trend. India’s economic structure has not developed in accordance with the "agricultural-industrial-services" mode of evolution, but form a services development by leaps and bounds in a "reverse industrialization" feature. The unbalanced sustainability of development remains to be verified. According to the current catch rate of the manufacturing sector in India, the future should be continued along the track of industrial development.About the internal structure of each industry, there is regional difference in the agriculture of four countries. Brazilian agriculture constitutes more developed farming and animal husbandry, animal husbandry volatile in Russia. In China, mainly in farming, the share of animal husbandry and aqua products in total agricultural is significantly increased. BRICs have their own advantages in agricultural products. The internal structure of the industry in Brazil, more balanced light and heavy industries, driven by mineral resources, promote metallurgy aviation and manufacturing industry, machinery and electronic equipment manufacturing capacity already have a solid foundation. Russia formed an energy-based economic growth model. India, while in the traditional industrial development, speed up the development of pharmaceutical and information industries and already has some of the industrial competitiveness. China, as a "world factory", has abundant cheap labor and a large number of foreign investments, the development of processing industry lead to economic prosperity. In internal structure in the service sector, the four countries at present are still dominated by traditional consumer services.4. Influence on Economic Growthof the four co untries Industrial Structure: There is a certain gap between four countries industrial structure from the role and the contribution to economic growth. The agriculture proportion is the lowest, but as an important base in four countries economic structure, especially in India and China, agriculture is still occupied important position. Meanwhile Industry in the four countries is in a dominant position. In Brazil and Russia, industrial output share in GDP has been higher than agriculture but less than the service sector in 20years. The slow development of Indian industry has been less than agriculture until the new century. Industry in China, has occupied the first position, is even the highest in the four countries on the role and contribution in boosting the economy. With the services industry increase in the proportion of GDP output in recent years, the industry has declined, but still higher than the service sector and agriculture in China. Service in Brazil and the Russian economy is in the absolute dominance. Service in India developed rapidly in recent years, especially driven by the emerging software outsourcing, promoted the upgrading of industrial structure in India. But China’s service industry is relatively backward. The contribution to economic growth was significantly lower than the other three countries.Different industry structure and economic growth in the four countries have made different results. Relatively balanced pattern of growth in the Brazilian economy is relatively stable. Energy-driven economy has brought wealth to Russia, also brought structural imbalance and uncertainty. Service-pulling mode in India, due to lack of industry support, the staying power of economic growth needed to make up by the development of the manufacturing sector. China’s manufacture-leading model, which greatly promoted economic growth, also provided the necessary physical infrastructure for the services upgrading and development.5. from the view of problems of industrial structure and adjustment:BRICs, based on different comparative advantages, chose different path of economic growth. In the industrial structure, whether it is a proportional relationship between the three industries, or the internal structure of three industries, here are also many similarities and differences between the four countries. The unreasonable industrial structure, especially in India and China, needs to be further rationalized and restructure.Complementary industrial structure in four countries is favorable to carry out complementary trade and economic cooperation. The four countries economic models need adjustment. The continuous weakening of comparative advantages should be made up by increasing the competitive advantage. Industrial restructure in BRICs have to consider not only national conditions but also conducive to sustainable development. Meanwhile, not as low as possible, the agriculture’s share of industry in national economy is limited, should be established to meet the state in ensuring the basic needs of agriculture and increasing the total national economy. The role of agriculture in the economy can not be replaced. Without good basis of the manufacturing sector, the process of industrialization can not be achieved, for the manufacturing industry is the only way of industrialization. Trying to circumvent manufacturing and industry, with a directly development of service industry, is not conducive to long-term economic development.This paper is not restricted to a particular model, using qualitative and quantitative analysis, chart analysis and summarizes, the combination of historical and reality, combination of vertical and horizontal comparison study, to a certain time span and a certain geographical space, from the multi-level comparative analysis. Innovations include the following:a multidimensional analysis framework to study the formation of industrial structure, state, impact, problems and adjustments, the more latitude comparison and analysis the industrial structure balance and different roles and problems between the four countries, and make recommendations; By calculation of pulling rate, contribution rate and growth rates, to identify different role of industries in the four countries economic growth:calculated the deviation between industrial structure and employment structure of the four countries, concluded that there are different levels of disconnect in the four countries industrial structure, China and India obviously.更多还原