国有企业如何拖累了经济增长：理论与中国的经验证据

【作者】 刘瑞明；

【导师】 石磊；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 产业组织学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 这是一项旨在探索国有企业拖累经济增长可能途径的研究。在我们看来,国有企业的效率损失应该包含两个层面：一是国有企业本身的效率损失,二是由这种效率损失进一步带来的其他效率损失。传统观点强调国有企业本身的效率损失而忽略了第二种效率损失。我们认为,正是这种忽略使得人们在国有企业效率损失的认识方面受到了限制,也使得人们难以回答改革中诸多现象产生的原因。本文的意图就是重新界定国有企业效率损失的内涵,探索国有企业损害经济增长的可能途径,为诸多的改革现象提供逻辑一致的解释,从而拓展人们的认识,并且纠正改革过程中存在的一些认识误区。国有企业相对于其他所有制企业的低效率特征已经被大量文献所证实,为了维护低效率国有企业的生存,政府一直在提供种类繁多的保护和救助措施。这些保护和救助措施使得国有企业对经济增长产生了各种各样的负面效应。本文的主旨在于回答“国有企业如何拖累了经济增长”这一问题。为达到这一目的,我们基于事实观察梳理出国有企业拖累经济增长的五条途径：第一,软预算约束下的国有企业会发生道德风险导致效率低下,并挤出税收和公共服务,从而使得民营企业发展受到拖累,最终损害整体经济发展；第二,为了对无效率的国有企业进行隐性补贴,从而维持其生存,中国施行了损害经济增长的金融压抑和所有制歧视政策；第三,地方保护和市场分割也扮演了对国有企业进行隐性补贴的作用,国有企业比重越高的地方,出于地方企业利益的考虑,地方政府很可能出台种种措施以对本地国有企业施行保护,从而地方保护和市场分割的程度相应地也越大。第四,政府通过维持要素市场的垄断,加大上游要素市场的垄断力量和加成定价对国有企业进行保护和补贴,要素市场中的国有企业垄断地位妨碍了经济增长。第五,在向市场化转型的过程中,地区的所有制结构禀赋有可能令初始国有比重较高的地区陷入历史锁定效应,而令初始国有比重较低的地区快速发展,出现极化效应并导致增长差异和地区差距的不断扩大。通过一系列的研究,我们认为,所有制结构在整个国民经济运行中扮演了极其重要的角色。在国有企业本身效率低下的条件下,其通过我们所揭示的种种途径损害了民营企业的发展和整体经济增长。就此而言,我们的政策含义非常鲜明,要想实现健康快速的经济发展,必须坚定不移地在公平、公开、公正的透明机制下进行国企改革。而且,从我们的角度看,进行国企改革不仅仅只是起到效率提升的作用,而且可以为放松金融管制、消除市场分割、削弱要素垄断和平衡地区经济发展创造有利的条件,实现经济增长的良性发展。我们所能给出的指向性导引是：中国要想顺利实现向成熟市场经济的过渡,就必须以国企改革为中心,带动整体的经济改革和发展。更多还原

【Abstract】 This paper aims to explore possible ways in which state-owned enterprises(SOEs) drag on economic growth. In our view, the SOEs’efficiency loss can be divided into two categories:First is the efficiency loss of the SOEs, Second is the further efficiency loss brought about by the SOEs’efficiency loss itself. Traditional view stresses the first efficiency loss of SOEs and ignores the second one. On the basis of the survive predicament of the SOEs, this paper introduces a new concept of "Economic growth cumbrance" to investigate the SOEs’efficiency loss again.We believe that the old definition of SOEs’efficiency loss not only limits people’s knowledge, but also makes it difficult to answer the causes of many phenomena in the reform. The intention of this paper is to redefine the meaning of SOEs’efficiency loss, and explore possible ways how SOEs damage the economic growth. We provide logical explanations for many phenomena and correct some misunderstandings in the reform process.The feature of low efficiency of SOEs relative to other ownership of enterprises has been confirmed by literature. In order to safeguard the survival of inefficient SOEs, the government has been providing a wide range measures of protection and assistance. The protection and assistance measures have a variety of negative effects on the economic growth. The main objective of this paper, is to answer this problem: How the SOEs drag on economic growth?Based on practical observation, we have found that there are five main ways: First, the soft budget constraints of SOEs lead to moral hazard and inefficiencies, and crowd out the taxation and public services, so that the private enterprise development is dragged, and ultimately undermine the overall economic development; Second, in order to provide hidden subsidies to inefficient SOEs, Chinese goverments take the policies of financial repression and bank discrimination, which is damage to economic growth; Third, in the process of economic transformation, market segmentation plays the role of a kind of hidden subsidy to SOEs. The state-owned share of a region determines the extent of implicit subsidies, and further determines the degree of market segmentation; Fourth, SOEs in the factor market charge the product market enterprises an implicit tax through factor monopoly, so that the SOEs’ profit is equivalent to a kind of hidden financial subsidies; Fifth, in the process of transition to the market, regions with high proportion of initial state-owned economy may lock into "historical lock-in effect", while regions with low proportion of initial state-owned economy may grow rapidly. There will lead to a polarization effect among regional competition and widening regional disparities.Through a series of studies, we show that the ownership structure plays a very important role in the entire national economy. Inefficient SOEs hurt the development of private enterprises and overall economic growth through various ways. Our policy meaning is very clear:in order to achieve healthy and fast economic development, we must unswervingly carry out reform of SOEs. Moreover, from our point of view, the SOEs reform is not just to highlight the enterprises’efficiency, but also create favorable conditions for financial deregulation, elimination of market segmentation, weaken factor market monopoly, and balanced regional economic development. The direction we indicate is that:If China wants to achieve a smooth transition to mature market economies, it is necessary to take SOEs reform as the center to spur the overall economic reform and development.更多还原