技术进步和能源消耗强度的相关性研究2000-2007

【作者】 林峰；

【导师】 伍华佳；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 产业经济学， 2010， 硕士

【摘要】 改革开放三十年来,我国经济迅速增长,与此同时能源消耗也迅猛上升,到2009为止,我国已经成为仅次于美国的世界第二大能源消费大国；而且从能源来源上,对外依赖程度越来越高,2009年我国累计进口原油2.04亿吨,首次超过50%的警戒线,如此高能耗高排放的背后是我们粗放的经济增长模式。在哥本哈根气候峰会上,就中国的减排目标问题,国际社会施加了巨大的压力,提出了碳关税的政策以及实施的时间表。但反观我们自己,我们还是发展中国家,以人均标准指标来看,我们与世界先进水平依然有很大的差距,那么是不是发展就意味着我们继续要高耗能高排放,然后在出口上受到发达国家的打压?如果经济不能高速增长,中国的社会将会出现很大的问题。有没有比较好的解决方案,使得我们在发展前进中既解决排放问题,又使得我们中国产业的竞争力得以增强?我们从自身的角度出发,找到了技术进步这一个关键变量。改革开放三十年,在市场改革方面,我们更多地是强调了在现有技术水平基础上改变所有制结构所带来的激励机制变革；而在对外开放中,以市场换技术的战略没有取得多大的成效,造成总体的技术进步速度不能另人满意,那在我国工业各行业的能耗当中,从纵向的时间上来看,技术进步与能源消耗强度的下降是不是相关就成为本文研究的核心问题。而从决策者的角度来看,就目前的研究成果而言,影响能耗的因素可能会有多个,在多个因素上下功夫解决问题,会带来资源的分散和执行力的弱化,所以从执行的角度来看,最好是集中所有的资源和精力重点解决某个核心问题,这又为我们研究提出了另外的一个要求,是不是中国工业各个行业的能源消耗强度下降只与技术进步相关,而与其他因素无关呢?从理论上来看,研究能源消耗强度主要有两种分析框架,一种基于全要素生产率的框架,另外一种是单要素生产率的框架。全要生产率框架是在劳动、资本和能源可以自由替代的假设下进行分析的,而中国由于能源价格受到管制,特别是电力价格受到严格管制,价格不能由市场供需自由决定,因此其适用性可能打折扣；因此,在回顾中国能源消耗的情况后,本文采用单要素生产率的分析框架,在前人的成果上,从中国工业各行业出发,把2000年-2007年中国工业各个行业能源消耗强度作为被解释变量,将技术进步作为解释变量,而将市场化改革和对外开放作为控制变量引入,进行实证研究。通过加入控制变量的固定效应变截距模型面板数据回归,发现只有技术进步显著,而市场改革和对外开放都不显著,印证了能源消耗强度只与技术进步负相关的假设；接着,放弃控制变量,只加入技术进步这个解释变量,再一次用固定效应变截距模型做面板数据回归,发现技术进步显著,并得到其相关系数为-0.77,模型拟合程度很好。接着我们就技术进步和技术创新方面给出了如何降低能源消耗强度的政策建议；在文章的最后,提出了本文研究的不足之处和改进的地方。更多还原

【Abstract】 During the past 30 years, we have great achievement in economic growth, but with high consumption of energy. Till 2009, China has become the second largest country in energy consumption, of course the USA is the largest one. As comes to say the source of energy,we are deeply dependent in the foreign market. In 2009, we have imported 204 million ton of oil, passed the line of 50%. Under the high consumption of energy lies our extensive growth pattern of economics. In the Climate Change conference of Copenhagen, the developed countries gave us great pressure to improved the efficient of energy using. Futhermore, they set the time to levy carbon tarrif on our products in their market. Then we have a look about our domestic condition, we are a developing country in everywhere. There is large distance between USA and us. We must developed thus is it mean that we must continue the old way we developed and have the great pressure that the developed country levy carbon tarrif on us? Or is there a better way that when we can continue to develop without the problem of energy consumption and harming the competence of our products? When we view through the path we developed, we found the key——technology progress that may solve the plight. During the last 30 years, in the market reform, we focus on the ownship structure reform that brings the new incentive, in the open-out policy, we hoped that as the foreign companies came in to the domestic market, the would transferred the new techonoly to us, at last, they did not transferred much techonology to us but some old equipment. in all, we did not have great progress in techonology in the last 30 years. So as we come back to the industries of our economics from 2000 to 2007, the relationship between the efficiency of energy consumption and the techology progress is essential. As we view from the governers, there might be several factors have influence on the energy consumption, if the governers have do things in different aspect, the result will not be good as we predict, if there is only one factor has influence on the energy consumption, they could concentrate resource on it thus the reuslt will be very good. Under this consideration, we must have further step to prove that only techonology progress has influence in energy consumption and have no relationship with other factors.From the theory, there are two ways to do the research, one way is the single efficiency factor framework, the full efficiency factor framework. In the condition of energy price controlled by the government,especially the price of electricity is controlled by the government, the full efficiency facor framework may not suit the reality well for the full efficiency factor framework goes well under the assumption that the labor, capital and energy price is free setteled by the demand and supply. After the review of the macro energy consumption, we take the single efficiency factor framework, from2000 to 2007, putting the energy consumption as the dependent variable, techonology progress as the independent variable, aslo we introduced two controlled variables, they are market reform step and the extent of opening. Our data is on the industry level.Through the panel regression that involved the control variable, we discover that only the technology progress is significant, the market reform step and the extent of opening is not significant under the 5% rule. this do proved the assumption that the energy consumption is only related to the technology. Then, we did the same model only to the energy consumption and technology progress, we discover the regression is very good, and energy consumption and technology progress is minus related, their coefficience is -0.77. Then we give our suggestion about how to improve the efficiency of energy consumption through the technology progress. At last,we give the shortage of the this paper and the space of improvement.更多还原