2010 4 4 ( 265 ) China Industrial Economics Apr. 2010 No.4 ( 361005) [ ] Combes et al.(2007) 16 13 19 1994 2007 : 1990 ; ; [ ] ; ; ; [ ]F124.1 [ ]A [ ]1006-480X(2010)04-0035-11 [ ] 2010-03-15 (J. Gottmann)1957 ( ) ( ) 21 ( 2009)? 20 90 [ ] ( 70772095); ( 111090) [ ] (1977 ) 35
( 1 2 ) 2001 2000 ( ) 90000 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 1995 1996 1997 1 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 ( ) 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2 : (Agglomeration Effect) 1. (Agglomeration) : 1898 (A. Marshell) ;1998 (Porter) (Porter1998) 1948 (Hoover) 20 90 (Krugman) (Fujita Krugman and Venables1999) : ; 36
2. (Briant Combes & Lafourcade2007) Combes et al.(2007) i y i : y i =A i k iα l i 1-α k i l i A i (TFP) r! " α 1-α i :w i =(1-α) α A r i :lnw i =C+ 1 1-α lna i (2) C (2) ( ) : ln i A=X a(i) φ+μ i X a(i) (3) (2) : lnw i =C+ 1 1-α (X a(i)φ+μ i ) (4) (4) Combes et al.(2007) (5) (6) : lnw a t = C+X a t φ W +μ a t W (5) lntfp a t =C+X a t φ TFP +μ a t TFP (6) W TFP X a t (Employment Density) (Market Potential) 3. Combes et al.(2007) GDP Combes et al.(2007) (4) : 1 1-α (1) (3) 37
lnw it =α i +βlnx it +μ W i i X i i Combes et al.(2007) 1990 2001 : 1. 1994 2007 16 13 19 : (1) 16 : ; 13 : ; 19 (2) 1994 2007 14 1994 20 90 1992 ; 1994 (3) 1 ( 2008) 2 GDP Head and Mayer(2002) :MP j = i 准 μ Y MP j ; ij i i j 准 =d ij ij δ d ij j i δ d ij -1 准 ij 1/d ij ; μ i Y i i μ Y ; Google earth (2001) ; GDP 38 (7)
2. (GLS) (8) 1 : lnwage it =α i +β 1 lnem it +β 2 lnfoin it +β 3 lnhm it +μ it (8) t=12 T i=12 N lnwage it lnem it lnhm it lnfoin it GDP β 1 1 :1 2 (1.1680) (0.4375) (0.3976) 3 (0.4089); GDP 0.1052; ; (0.0618) ( ) 1 5.2172***(0.4400) -0.7389(0.5851) 4.5156***(0.3735) (em) 0.4375***(0.0475) 1.1680***(0.1172) 0.3976***(0.0605) (hm) 0.3589***(0.0373) 0.3533***(0.0464) 0.4089***(0.0217) (foin) 0.1052***(0.0354) -0.0356(0.0331) 0.0618**(0.0238) :1 ;2*** ** * 1% 5% 10% ;3 Hausman (1994 2000 2 2001 2007 ) ( 2) 1 : 1994 2000 1.9955 2001 2007 0.3823; 1994 2000 0.8923 2001 2007 1.0772 2 1994 2000 (1.9955) (0.8923) (0.1880); 2001 2007 (1.0772) (0.3823) (0.1298) 1 2 Eviews5.1 2000 1 2 39
; ; ; 2 1994 2000 2001 2007-2.8715***(0.9629) -0.1621(1.4561) 6.2693***(0.5851) (em) 1.9955***(0.1795) 0.8923***(0.2709) 0.1880***(0.0649) (hm) 0.0657(0.0451) 0.5488***(0.1110) 0.1969***(0.0360) (foin) -0.0041(0.0205) 0.0555(0.0414) -0.0291(0.0264) R 2 0.8836 0.9852 0.7219 5.5628***(1.0799) -0.9143*(0.5040) 5.9934***(0.5755) (em) 0.3823***(0.0999) 1.0772***(0.0859) 0.1298*(0.0664) (hm) 0.3494***(0.0900) 0.4794***(0.0346) 0.4337***(0.0361) (foin) 0.0222**(0.0101) -0.0261(0.0318) 0.0540**(0.0218) R 2 0.4261 0.9974 0.4868 :1 ;2*** ** * 1% 5% 10% ;3 Hausman ( ) 3. (Market Potential) (GLS) (9) : lnwage it =α i +β 1 lnem it +β 2 lnfoin it +β 3 lnhm it +β 4 lnmp it +μ it (9) t=12 T; i=12 N lnmp it β 4 (8) 3 3 8.1575***(0.4987) 7.7459***(0.8385) 7.8713***(0.3261) (em) 0.1158**(0.0512) 0.1673*(0.0932) 0.0815*(0.0478) (foin) -0.0369(0.0296) 0.0140(0.0257) 0.0283***(0.0107) (hm) 0.0263(0.0468) 0.1100**(0.0526) 0.0009(0.0181) (mp) 0.5031***(0.0540) 0.8763***(0.0731) 0.7104***(0.0230) R 2 0.6683 0.9885 0.9570 40 :1 ;2*** ** * 1% 5% 10% ;3 Hausman ( )
3 (0.1673); (0.8763) : 1. Krugman(1991) Fujita Krugman and Venables(1999) ; ( 2008) ( ) ; 3 3 ( 2008) 41
2. 1 ( 4) 2000 2000 2 ( (%) 4) 8 7 6 5 4 ( ) 3 2 3 1 0 ; ; 4 1994 2007 : ( 5) 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 4 :% 2006 3.59 8.05 11.83 9.35 2.60 1.31 4.91 4.59 15.49 6.21 2007 3.70 8.30 12.72 9.90 2.77 1.47 4.96 4.72 16.02 6.29 : 42 5 2006 :% 0.5 3.8 5.2 1.8 12.1 6.3 0.7 4.4 8.0 0.4 5.8 4.5 1.9 9.5 5.0 1.0 4.1 6.6 0.25 4.0-0.31 5.0 - : 2007
2000 ( ) (FDI) FDI FDI Owen(2004) FDI FDI; FDI FDI FDI FDI FDI FDI FDI FDI 43
; 2002 0.7 0.91;2007 0.88 0.72 1 ; ( ) ; ( 2009) 1 44 :
1 Briant A. P. Combes and M. Lafourcade. Does the Size and Shape of Geographical Units Jeopardize Economic Geography Estimations[R]. Paris-jourdan Sciences Economiques 2007. 2 Combes P. G. Duranton L. Gobillon and S. Roux. Estimating Agglomeration Effects [R]. CEPR Discussion Paper 2007. 3 Fujita M. P. R. Krugman and A. J. Venables. The Spatial Economy: Cites Regions and International Trade [M]. Cambridge:The MIT Press 1999. 4 Krugman K. Increasing Returns and Economic Growth[J]. Journal of Political Economy 1991(99). 5 Head K. and T. Mayer. The Empirics of Agglomeration and Trade[R]. CEPR Discussion Paper 2002. 6 Owen C. H. Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment in China: A Sectoral Analysis [R]. Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the Association for Chinese Economics Studies2004. 7 Porter M. E. Clusters and the New Economics of Competitiveness[J]. Harvard Business Review 1998 76(6). 8. [J]. 2008(6). 9. : [J]. 2008(1). 10. [J]. 2001(5). 11. [J]. 2009(1). 12. [J]. 2008(12). 13. : [J]. 2009(2). Comparison of Economic Development of the Three Major Economic Regions Panel Data Analysis Based on the Agglomeration Effects of City and Region GUO Ye (School of Economics Xiamen University Xiamen 361005 China) Abstract: Using the panel data of 16 cities in Yangtze River Delta 13 cities in Pearl River Delta and 19 cities in Bo -sea Encirclement from 1994 to 2007 this paper compares the agglomeration effects of the three regions based on the method of Combes et al. (2007). It reaches three primary conclusions. First the city agglomeration effect of Pearl River Delta has been declining sharply since 2000 although it is the highest in the 1990 s and its region agglomeration effect is the lowest. Second the agglomeration effects of Yangtze River Delta are the highest and grow very fast in the resent years. Third the city agglomeration effect of Bo-sea Encirclement is the lowest however its region agglomeration effect is good. Finally the paper gives some suggestions including establishing industrial co-opetition mechanism and regional financial collaboration in order to make the three regions develop further in a harmonious way. Key Words: agglomeration effect; three major economic regions; panel data; comparison of economic development : 45