差别定价的产业用地供应策略对产业结构升级的影响——基于中国277个城市的实证分析

doi:10.18402/resci.2020.03.13

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

“以地谋发展”模式下,地方政府主导土地配置,采取“低工业、高商住”的产业用地出让策略,实现了产业结构升级和经济增长的目标。然而,中国经济转型期,曾经推动产业结构升级的供地策略可能不再适应新时期发展要求。本文从理论出发,剖析地方政府供地逻辑,分析差别定价的产业用地供应策略在不同经济发展水平下对产业结构升级的影响差异,提出相应假说,基于门槛回归模型,并利用2011—2016年中国277个城市产业用地供应数据进行实证检验。结果表明,产业用地价格差异对产业结构升级的影响会随经济发展水平不同呈非线性关系,随着经济发展水平的提高,差别定价的产业用地供应策略对产业结构升级的影响效应将由正转负;产业用地供应向商住用地倾斜而产生的产业用地结构错配会显著抑制产业结构升级;提高土地出让市场化程度,降低土地财政依赖则有利于提升产业结构。据此本文建议,地方政府在制定产业用地供应策略时,要充分考虑所处的社会经济环境,而在参与土地市场活动时,要明确自身干预经济的局限性,更多地培育有效市场,注重提高土地市场化程度,避免过度依赖土地财政。

关键词: 土地出让, 供地策略, 政府干预, 产业结构升级, 发展水平差异, 门槛回归

Abstract:

Under the land-based development mode, local governments dominate land allocation and adopt the strategy of “low price for industrial land, high price for commercial and residential land” in land transfer, which has achieved the goal of industrial structure upgrading and economic growth in China. However, during China’s economic transition, the land supply strategy that once promoted the upgrading of industrial structure may no longer meet the development requirements of the new era. Through the theoretical analysis of governments’ land supply logic and the effects of differential pricing strategy in land supply on the upgrading of industrial structure at different economic development levels, this study came up with hypotheses and then based on the threshold regression model made an empirical test by using the data of land supply in 277 cities of China from 2011 to 2016. The results show that the influence of land price difference on the upgrading of industrial structure is non-linear due to different economic development levels. The effect of the differential pricing strategy in land supply on the upgrading of industrial structure changes from positive to negative with the improvement of economic development level, and the mismatch of land supply structure caused by inclined supply of commercial and residential land significantly restrains the upgrading of industrial structure, whereas enhancing the marketization of land transfer and lowering the dependence on land finance will promote it. Therefore it is suggested that local governments should fully consider the socioeconomic environment in which they operate when formulating land supply strategies, and identify the limitations of their intervention in the economy, pay attention to cultivating more effective markets, improve the degree of land marketization, and avoid excessive reliance on land finance when participating in land market activities.

Key words: land transfer, land supply strategy, government intervention, upgrading of industrial structure, developmental differences, threshold regression

唐宇娣, 朱道林, 程建, 李瑶瑶, 宋洋. 差别定价的产业用地供应策略对产业结构升级的影响——基于中国277个城市的实证分析[J]. 资源科学, 2020, 42(3): 548-557.

TANG Yudi, ZHU Daolin, CHENG Jian, Li Yaoyao, SONG Yang. Impact of differential pricing strategy of land supply on the upgrading of industrial structure:A study based on the empirical analysis of 277 cities in China[J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(3): 548-557.

图/表 7

图1

表1

核心解释变量计算方式"

变量	符号	指标内涵	计算方式
产业用地价格差异指数	lp	反映商住用地与工业用地价格差异	$P sz, i, t / P gy, i, t$
产业用地结构错配指数	ls	反映商住用地与工业用地供应数量差异	$Q sz, i, t / Q gy, i, t$
土地出让市场化程度	lm	反映土地出让的市场化程度	招拍挂出让面积/出让总面积
土地财政依赖度	lf	反映地方政府对土地财政的依赖程度	土地一级市场总收入/一般财政预算收入

表1

表2

表3

表4

图2

表5

单一门槛下固定效应回归结果"

变量	（9） FE	（10） FE	（11） FE	（12） FE
lp( $q i, t$ <γ)	0.046***	0.044***	0.045***	0.046***
	(2.82)	(2.72)	(2.75)	(2.81)
lp( $q i, t$ ≥γ)	-0.026*	-0.027*	-0.026*	-0.025*
	(-1.87)	(-1.96)	(-1.94)	(-1.85)
ls	—	-0.058***	-0.058***	-0.057***
	—	(-3.26)	(-3.26)	(-3.24)
lm	—	—	0.442	0.464
	—	—	(0.75)	(0.79)
lf	—	—	—	-0.086
	—	—	—	(-0.66)
human_re	-1.540	-1.842	-1.861	-1.866
	(-0.77)	(-0.92)	(-0.93)	(-0.93)
lnroad	0.166	0.166	0.164	0.159
	(0.64)	(0.64)	(0.63)	(0.61)
lnpatent	-0.513***	-0.500***	-0.509***	-0.509***
	(-3.01)	(-2.95)	(-2.99)	(-2.99)
open	1.708**	1.691**	1.666**	1.655**
	(2.18)	(2.16)	(2.13)	(2.11)
finacial	-1.454***	-1.484***	-1.468***	-1.472***
	(-5.32)	(-5.44)	(-5.37)	(-5.38)
时间效应	控制	控制	控制	控制
Constant	226.2***	226.3***	226.0***	226.1***
	(108.61)	(109.03)	(106.26)	(106.14)
城市数	277	277	277	277
观察值	1662	1662	1662	1662
R²	0.772	0.773	0.774	0.774
F	386.7	360.3	334.5	312.1

表5

参考文献 31

[1]	干春晖, 郑若谷, 余典范 . 中国产业结构变迁对经济增长和波动的影响[J]. 经济研究, 2011,46(5):4-16.
	[ Gan C H, Zheng R G, Yu D F . An empirical study on the effects of industrial structure on economic growth and fluctuations in China[J]. Economic Research Journal, 2011,46(5):4-16.]
[2]	郭克莎 . 中国产业结构调整升级趋势与“十四五”时期政策思路[J]. 中国工业经济, 2019, ( 7):24-41.
	[ Guo K S . The trend of industrial structure adjustment and upgrading in China and the thoughts of policy adjustment during the “14th Five-Year Plan”[J]. China Industrial Economics, 2019, ( 7):24-41.]
[3]	孔祥斌, 张凤荣, 李玉兰 , 等. 区域土地利用与产业结构变化互动关系研究[J]. 资源科学, 2005,27(2):59-64.
	[ Kong X B, Zhang F R, Li Y L , et al. Interactive relationship between land use change and industrial change[J]. Resources Science, 2005,27(2):59-64.]
[4]	张颖, 王群, 王万茂 . 中国产业结构与用地结构相互关系的实证研究[J]. 中国土地科学, 2007,21(2):4-11.
	[ Zhang Y, Wang Q, Wang W M . Study on the relationship between industrial structure and land structure in China[J]. China Land Science, 2007,21(2):4-11.]
[5]	杨亚平, 周泳宏 . 成本上升、产业转移与结构升级: 基于全国大中城市的实证研究[J]. 中国工业经济, 2013, ( 7):147-159.
	[ Yang Y P, Zhou Y H . Costs rising, industrial transfer and structural upgrading: Empirical research based on the Chinese cities data[J]. China Industrial Economics, 2013, ( 7):147-159.]
[6]	王媛, 杨广亮 . 为经济增长而干预: 地方政府的土地出让策略分析[J]. 管理世界, 2016, ( 5):18-31.
	[ Wang Y, Yang G L . Intervention for economic growth: Analysis of land transfer strategies of local governments[J]. Management World, 2016, ( 5):18-31.]
[7]	金媛 . 市场分割与土地出让: 效率与公平[M]. 北京: 经济科学出版社, 2015.
	[ Jin Y. Research on Market Segmentation and Land Transfer: Efficiency and Equity[M]. Beijing: Economic Science Press, 2015.]
[8]	梅林, 席强敏 . 土地价格、产业结构与城市效率: 基于中国城市面板数据的经验分析[J]. 经济科学, 2018,40(4):61-74.
	[ Mei L, Xi Q M . Land price, industrial structure and urban efficiency: An empirical analysis based on China’s urban panel data[J]. Economic Science, 2018,40(4):61-74.]
[9]	高波, 陈健, 邹琳华 . 区域房价差异、劳动力流动与产业升级[J]. 经济研究, 2012,47(1):66-79.
	[ Gao B, Chen J, Zou L H . Housing price’ regional differences, labor mobility and industrial upgrading[J]. Economic Research Journal, 2012,47(1):66-79.]
[10]	刘程, 王仁曾 . 房价上涨会抑制地区产业结构升级吗?[J]. 产业经济研究, 2019, ( 2):102-113.
	[ Liu C, Wang R Z . Does rising housing prices impede regional industrial upgrading?[J]. Industrial Economics Research, 2019, ( 2):102-113.]
[11]	中国经济增长前沿课题组. 城市化、财政扩张与经济增长[J]. 经济研究, 2011,46(11):4-20.
	[ Research Group on China’s Economic Growth. Urbanization, fiscal expansion and economic growth[J]. Economic Research Journal, 2011,46(11):4-20.]
[12]	Zhu J M . The impact of industrial land use policy on industrial change[J]. Land Use Policy, 2000,17(1):21-28.
[13]	黄金升, 陈利根, 张耀宇 , 等. 中国工业地价与产业结构变迁互动效应研究[J]. 资源科学, 2017,39(4):585-596.
	[ Huang J S, Chen L G, Zhang Y Y , et al. The relationship between industrial land price and industrial structure change[J]. Resources Science, 2017,39(4):585-596.]
[14]	黄金升, 陈利根, 赵爱栋 . 工业地价上涨、地方政府供地行为与产业转移[J]. 上海财经大学学报, 2017,19(5):4-14.
	[ Huang J S, Chen L G, Zhao A D . Industrial land price rise, local government land supply behavior and industrial transfer[J]. Journal of Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, 2017,19(5):4-14.]
[15]	Chen W, Shen Y, Wang Y N , et al. How do industrial land price variations affect industrial diffusion? Evidence from a spatial analysis of China[J]. Land Use Policy, 2018,71:384-394.
[16]	张琳, 黎小明, 刘冰洁 , 等. 土地要素市场化配置能否促进工业结构优化: 基于微观土地交易数据的分析[J]. 中国土地科学, 2018,32(6):23-31.
	[ Zhang L, Li X M, Liu B J , et al. Can land marketization promote the industrial structure optimization: Based on the analysis of micro land transfer data[J]. China Land Science, 2018,32(6):23-31.]
[17]	席强敏, 梅林 . 工业用地价格、选择效应与工业效率[J]. 经济研究, 2019,54(2):102-118.
	[ Xi Q M, Mei L . Industrial land price, selection effect and industrial efficiency[J]. Economic Research Journal, 2019,54(2):102-118.]
[18]	雷潇雨, 龚六堂 . 基于土地出让的工业化与城镇化[J]. 管理世界, 2014, ( 9):29-41.
	[ Lei X Y, Gong L T . Industrialization and urbanization based on land transfer[J]. Management World, 2014, ( 9):29-41.]
[19]	陶然, 陆曦, 苏福兵 , 等. 地区竞争格局演变下的中国转轨: 财政激励和发展模式反思[J]. 经济研究, 2009,44(7):21-33.
	[ Tao R, Lu X, Su F B , et al. China’s transition and development model under evolving regional competition patterns[J]. Economic Research Journal, 2009,44(7):21-33.]
[20]	李勇刚, 罗海艳 . 土地资源错配阻碍了产业结构升级吗?来自中国35个大中城市的经验证据[J]. 财经研究, 2017,43(9):110-121.
	[ Li Y G, Luo H Y . Does land resource misallocation hinder the upgrading of industrial structure? Empirical evidence from Chinese 35 large and medium-sized cities[J]. Journal of Finance and Economics, 2017,43(9):110-121.]
[21]	Huang Z H, Du X J . Government intervention and land misallocation: Evidence from China[J]. Cities, 2017,60:323-332.
[22]	赖敏 . 土地要素错配阻碍了中国产业结构升级吗?基于中国230个地级市的经验证据[J]. 产业经济研究, 2019, ( 2):39-49.
	[ Lai M . Does the mismatch of land factors hinder the optimization and upgrading of China’s industrial structure? Empirical evidence based on 230 prefecture-level cities in China[J]. Industrial Economics Research, 2019, ( 2):39-49.]
[23]	赵祥, 曹佳斌 . 地方政府 “两手” 供地策略促进产业结构升级了吗? 基于105个城市面板数据的实证分析[J]. 财贸经济, 2017,38(7):64-77.
	[ Zhao X, Cao J B . Dose local government’s “two-way” land supply strategy help urban industrial structure upgrade: An empirical study based on panel data of 105 cities in China[J]. Finance & Trade Economics, 2017,38(7):64-77.]
[24]	陈玮, 耿曙 . 政府介入与发展阶段: 发展策略的新制度分析[J]. 政治学研究, 2017, ( 6):103-114.
	[ Chen W, Geng S . Developmental state and the stages of development: A neo-institutional analysis of the strategies of economic development[J]. CASS Journal of Political Science, 2017, ( 6):103-114.]
[25]	赵爱栋, 马贤磊, 曲福田 . 市场化改革能提高中国工业用地利用效率吗?[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2016,26(3):118-126.
	[ Zhao A D, Ma X L, Qu F T . Does market reform increase industrial land use efficiency in China?[J]. China Population Resources and Environment, 2016,26(3):118-126.]
[26]	叶初升 . 中等收入阶段的发展问题与发展经济学理论创新: 基于当代中国经济实践的一种理论建构性探索[J]. 经济研究, 2019,54(8):167-182.
	[ Ye C S . The development problem in the middle-income stage and the innovation of development economics: An exploration of theoretical constructions based on contemporary China’s economic practices[J]. Economic Research Journal, 2019,54(8):167-182.]
[27]	Hansen B E . Threshold effects in non-dynamic panels: Estimation, testing, and inference[J]. Journal of Econometrics, 1999,93(2):345-368.
[28]	袁航, 朱承亮 . 国家高新区推动了中国产业结构转型升级吗[J]. 中国工业经济, 2018, ( 8):60-77.
	[ Yuan H, Zhu C L . Do National High-Tech Zones promote the transformation and upgrading of China’s industrial structure[J]. China Industrial Economics, 2018, ( 8):60-77.]
[29]	徐升艳, 陈杰, 赵刚 . 土地出让市场化如何促进经济增长[J]. 中国工业经济, 2018, ( 3):44-61.
	[ Xu S Y, Chen J, Zhao G . How does the land leasing marketization affect the economic growth[J]. China Industrial Economics, 2018, ( 3):44-61.]
[30]	王志强, 孙刚 . 中国金融发展规模、结构、效率与经济增长关系的经验分析[J]. 管理世界, 2003, ( 7):13-20.
	[ Wang Z Q, Sun G . An empirical analysis of the relationship between economic growth and the growth scale, structure, efficiency in China’s finance[J]. Management World, 2003, ( 7):13-20.]
[31]	王定祥, 吴代红, 王小华 . 中国金融发展与产业结构优化的实证研究: 基于金融资本视角[J]. 西安交通大学学报(社会科学版), 2013,33(5):1-6.
	[ Wang D X, Wu D H, Wang X H . Empirical study on financial development and optimization of industrial structure: A financial capital perspective[J]. Journal of Xi’an Jiaotong University (Social Sciences), 2013,33(5):1-6.]

变量名称	符号	平均值	标准差	最小值	最大值	单位
产业结构高级度	isad	225.66	14.12	183.12	279.72	%
产业用地价格差异指数	lp	9.293	6.987	0.764	106.648	—
产业用地结构错配指数	ls	1.373	3.397	0.057	124.911	—
产业用地供应市场化程度	lm	0.905	0.120	0.173	1.000	—
土地财政依赖度	lf	0.60	0.50	0.02	11.82	—
人均GDP	per_gdp	4.74	2.95	0.69	22.45	万元
劳动力素质水平	human_re	0.134	0.114	0.000	0.711	—
基础设施水平	lnroad	7.035	0.953	3.951	9.786	m²
技术创新水平	lnpatent	7.031	1.578	2.485	11.509	件
开放程度	open	0.124	0.231	0.000	1.859	—
金融配置状况	financial	1.643	0.493	0.178	6.578	—

变量	（1）	（2）	（3）	（4）	（5）一线	（6）二线	（7）三线	（8）四线
lp	0.000	-0.001	-0.001	-0.000	-0.035	0.008	0.025	0.030
	(0.012)	(0.012)	(0.012)	(0.013)	(0.040)	(0.016)	(0.032)	(0.025)
ls	—	-0.059**	-0.059**	-0.058**	0.022	0.128	-0.067***	0.036
	—	(0.018)	(0.018)	(0.018)	(0.257)	(0.231)	(0.020)	(0.061)
lm	—	—	0.380	0.398	0.840	3.929*	0.757	-0.0712
	—	—	(0.591)	(0.592)	(3.425)	(1.589)	(1.442)	(0.737)
lf	—	—	—	-0.068	0.664	0.044	-0.543	-0.071
	—	—	—	(0.132)	(0.982)	(0.508)	(0.490)	(0.151)
Controls	控制	控制	控制	控制	控制	控制	控制	控制
个体效应	控制	控制	控制	控制	控制	控制	控制	控制
时间效应	控制	控制	控制	控制	控制	控制	控制	控制
Constant	226.5***	226.6***	226.3***	226.4***	265.4***	235.7***	244.8***	217.6***
	(2.095)	(2.088)	(2.139)	(2.142)	(21.55)	(7.541)	(6.852)	(2.366)
观察值	1662	1662	1662	1662	114	174	420	954
城市数	277	277	277	277	19	29	70	159
豪斯曼检验值	185.18	208.61	217.06	230.40	50.18	12.54	66.71	16.55
Prob>chi²	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.251	0.000	0.085
R²	0.769	0.771	0.771	0.771	0.828	0.877	0.764	0.768
F	415.05	384.06	354.40	328.92	27.76	—	77.49	184.97

模型	F值	P值	BS次数	临界值			门槛估计值	95%置信区间
模型	F值	P值	BS次数	1%	5%	10%	门槛估计值	95%置信区间
单一门槛	22.691***	0.001	1000	15.846	9.368	6.254	5.899	[3.301,6.459]
双重门槛	8.436*	0.066	1000	19.366	10.014	6.873	3.301	[2.587,10.162]
双重门槛	8.436*	0.066	1000	19.366	10.014	6.873	5.918	[5.041,7.037]
三重门槛	2.881	0.235	1000	13.290	7.615	5.437	2.784	[1.814,10.323]