产业结构调整机制研究

【作者】 康珂；

【导师】 王东京；

【作者基本信息】 中共中央党校 ， 政治经济学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 产业结构调整是目前我国学术界十分关注的问题。然而，现有研究产业结构调整的文献大多集中在变量关系或数据分析、对策研究领域，为数不多的对产业结构调整进行学理分析的文献多局限于新古典经济学框架，缺乏从真实市场过程深入探讨产业结构调整机制的理论性文献。本文拟弥补现有文献这方面的不足，跳出新古典经济学机械的分析框架，以奥地利学派知识分立、市场过程、企业家、动态效率等理论为分析工具，以一个新的思路，从一个更贴近真实市场运行的视角，对产业结构调整机制进行深入的理论分析。产业结构调整有两种机制，一是政府主导机制，二是市场主导机制。本文首先提出主导产业结构调整应具备的三个条件，从知识的性质、政府的理性与自负、产业结构变动的微观法则、效果与效率之辨等角度对政府主导产业结构调整效果不佳的原因作出解释：一是政府不能事前预知最优产业结构；二是政府官员不会比企业家更关注市场和尊重市场规律；三是行政手段之“效”是效果而非效率。由此作者指出，产业结构调整应以市场为主导，充分发挥市场机制的作用。其次，在构建产业结构调整过程数学模型的基础上，深入分析市场主导产业结构调整之机理。经济问题由变化引起，产业结构调整的根本问题是知识问题，这一问题只有在竞争的市场过程中才能解决。竞争的意义在于它是一个发现和利用知识的过程，价格机制在本质上是一种使用知识的有效制度，知识问题决定了非均衡状态是现实经济的常态，产业结构的每个缺口都会通过非均衡价格以纯利润的方式表现出来，由此形成对企业家的“激励”，促成竞争性的企业家发现过程。在这个过程中，随着无知的逐渐驱散，市场的非均衡状态得到纠正，产业结构趋于协调。这一过程是政府无法模拟和替代的。再次，重新认识产业结构调整过程中的“市场失灵”问题，指出市场有效调节产业结构绝不依赖于完全竞争或一般均衡理论脱离现实的假设条件。竞争情况下常常出现重复性生产的“浪费”是市场协调必须的、不可避免的代价，政府主导不仅不能避免资源浪费，而且会恶化知识问题，造成更大损失。产业结构调整过程不存在“市场失灵”。所谓信息不完全和不对称、外部性和垄断问题实际上是人们基于静态观点对真实市场过程的误解，不能成为政府主导产业结构调整的理由。然后，分析产业结构调整背景下政府应发挥的作用，力图厘清政府和市场的边界。产业结构调整本身是一个市场可以有效发挥作用的领域。作为一种自发秩序，市场机制具有天然的活力，但它有效运行需要一定的制度前提，这些制度应由政府来保障。为维护和促进市场调节产业结构，政府应致力于完善市场体系的制度建设，增进市场机能，在以下三个领域更好地发挥作用：一是制度供给，二是公共物品，三是宏观政策。日本在二战后成功调整产业结构的历程经常被一些学者引述为政府主导产业结构调整或直接干预型产业政策有效的证据，作者在本文最后一章对此提出质疑。通过重新考察和评价日本战后各时期的产业政策，指出日本成功的原因不是政府主导，而是市场主导。产业政策的作用没有人们想象中那么大。日本的案例不仅不能作为反驳作者观点的论据，事实上反而验证了作者的观点。总而言之，本文的核心观点可概括为：政府不具备主导产业结构调整的条件，不宜成为调结构的主体。市场主导产业结构调整可以借助价格机制，激励企业家精神，通过竞争有效地解决知识问题这一根本经济问题，促进市场实现自我修正、产业结构趋于协调。这一过程不存在“市场失灵”。本文可能的创新之处有以下五点：一是选题的创新。产业结构调整是一个热点问题，但目前缺乏对产业结构调整机制进行深入理论分析的文献，本文弥补了这方面的不足。二是研究视角的创新，采用一个不同于长期流行的新古典经济学的理论框架对产业结构调整机制进行学理性分析。三是试图澄清人们长期以来形成的认识误区，运用一系列理论工具对市场机制有效运行的条件、市场的“盲目性”、“市场失灵”、日本的产业政策等作出新的解读，提出了一些具有创新性的观点。四是为我国反思产业结构调整，推进经济结构战略性调整，促进经济转型提供一个新的理论思路。五是以产业结构调整为载体，尝试回答如何处理好政府和市场的关系这一经济体制改革的核心问题，为我国全面深化改革提供新的理论支持。本文的主要研究方法有：文献研究法、理论分析法、动态分析法、数理分析法以及案例分析法。更多还原

【Abstract】 Industrial restructuring is a central issue which attracts great attention fromscholars in China at present. However, most documents about industrial restructuringpay close attention to the variables or data analysis and countermeasure research. Andfew theoretical analyses about this issue are limit in the frame of neoclassicaleconomics theories. It is short of theoretical documents which deeply search themechanism of industrial restructuring from the real market process. This doctoraldissertation is going to make up this deficiency by breaking through the framework ofneoclassical economics, and to do a theoretical and deep analysis of industrialrestructuring using the Austria School’s analyzing measures such as the division ofknowledge, marketing process, entrepreneur, dynamic efficiency from a view which ismore close to the real market.Industrial restructuring can be realized in two ways: the mechanism leaded bythe government and the mechanism leaded by the market. Firstly this paper proposesthe three conditions about the subject should have who can lead the industrialrestructuring effectively. It also explain why the government is failed to successfullylead the industrial restructuring from the prospective of the nature of knowledge, thebounded rationality and self-conceited of government, micro law of the change ofindustrial structure, and the dialectical difference between effect and efficiency. Thereasons are:(1) government does not have the ability to foresee the optimal industrialstructure;(2) the government officials do not pay more attention to the market thanentrepreneurs;(3) the administrative measures produce effect but not efficiency. Sothe author points out that industrial restructuring should be dominated by the market,and make full use of the function of the market mechanism.Secondly, this paper builds a mathematical model about industrial restructuringand analyzes the mechanism of the market dominating industrial restructuring deeply.The economic problems are caused by the changes, and the fundamental problem ofindustrial restructuring is the problem of knowledge. It can be solved only throughrival process in market. The meaning of market competition is that it is a procedure ofdiscover and use the knowledge. In essentially, price mechanism is an effectivesystem to use knowledge. The problem of knowledge decides that non-equilibrium state is the normal state of real economy. Every industrial structure gap will show itthrough the non-equilibrium price in the form of net profit, which constructs anincentive to entrepreneurs and contributes to the formation of emulativeentrepreneur’s procedure of discovery. In this process, as the ignorance beingeliminated, the non-equilibrium state of marketing is corrected and the industrialstructure tends to be harmonious. It is a process that the government cannot simulateor duplicate.Thirdly, the author re-recognizes the “marketing failure” in the process ofindustrial restructuring, and point out that the effective industrial restructuring neverdepend on the perfect competition or the assumptions of general equilibrium theory.In the market competition, the “waste” of repetitive manufacturing is the necessaryand irresistible cost of market regulation. The domination of government is not onlyfailed to avoid the “waste”, but also exacerbate the problem of knowledge and willmake greater losses. In the process of industrial restructuring, there is no marketfailure exists. In fact, the so-called “information incompletion and asymmetry”,external and monopolistic problems are people’s misunderstandings based on thestatic views to the process of real market. It cannot be the reason to supportgovernment to lead the industrial restructuring.Then, this paper analyzes the role of government under the background ofindustrial restructuring, and strives to clarify the boundary between government andmarket. The industrial restructuring itself is a filed in which the market can effectivelyregulate. As a kind of spontaneous order, marketing mechanism has born vitality. Toget effective marketing operation, it needs some systematic preconditions which needguarantees from the government. To maintain and promote the market to regulate theindustrial restructuring, government should devote itself to perfect the rule of market,to promote the function of market, and play a better role in three fields:(1) systemsupplies;(2) public goods;(3) macro policies.After the Second World War, Japan’s successful adjustment of industrialstructure process often quoted by some scholars as the evidence of the success ofgovernment leading industrial restructuring or intervenes directly in industrial policy.In the final of this paper, it was refuted through the review and evaluation of Japan’spost-war period of the industrial policy, and the author points out that the reasons forthe success of Japan is not the government leading, but the market leading. The case of Japan is not only failed to refute the author’s view in the paper, but also verified it.To sum up, the core idea of this doctoral dissertation can be summarized as:government does not have the conditions to lead the industry structure adjustment,and it should not intervene directly in industry development. Market leading industrialrestructuring can solve the fundamental economic problem: the knowledge problemeffectively by using the price mechanism, encouraging entrepreneurship and marketcompetition. This process will promote market self-correcting, and the industrialstructure tending to be coordinated. During this process, there is no “market failure”exist.In this doctoral dissertation, the possible innovation placed in five aspects: firstone is the innovation of the topic selection. Industrial restructuring is a central issue inChina. But it is short of theoretical documents which deeply search the mechanism ofindustrial restructuring. This paper is going to make up this deficiency. The secondpoint is the innovation of the research perspective, for using a different theoreticalframework from neoclassical economics to analyze the industrial restructuringmechanism. The third one is that this paper is trying to clarify the misunderstandingwhich formed by people for a long time, and using a series of theoretical tool to newlyclarify the effective conditions of the market mechanism, the “blindness” of market,“market failure”, Japan’s industrial policy and so on, then puts forward someinnovative ideas. The forth one is to provide a new theoretical thinking pattern forrethinking of our country’s industrial restructuring, promoting strategic adjustment ofeconomic structure and economic transformation. The fifth one is by using theadjustment of industrial structure as the carrier, trying to answer how to deal with thecore issue of the economic system reform: the relationship between government andmarket, and provide a new theoretical support for the comprehensively deepen reformof China.The main research methods in the dissertation are: the method of literatureresearch, theoretical analysis, dynamic analysis, mathematical analysis and caseanalysis.更多还原