美国技术进步偏向性及其对要素收入分配的作用研究

发布时间：2018-08-02 07:28

【摘要】：技术进步偏向性的本质是技术进步引起其偏向要素相对边际产出的增加,同时获得相应更高的报酬,进而导致收入分配差距拉大。回顾已有文献发现,技术进步在理论研究和估计方法等方面已经取得了很大的进展,在中性技术进步、资本体现式技术进步等技术进步类型的研究基础上,技术进步偏向性逐步受到广大学者的关注。多数学者认为目前发达国家的技术进步更多是偏向于资本或技能型劳动要素的,那么,发达国家和发展中国家的情况是相同的吗?另一方面,技术进步的偏向性问题也被引入分析经济增长、要素资源配置、就业结构、技能溢价等主要经济发展问题。特别是技术进步偏向性对要素收入份额的影响研究成为研究的焦点。技术进步偏向于资本要素或偏向于技能型劳动要素是导致劳动收入占比下降或技能溢价的原因吗?带着这样的问题本文分析研究技术进步偏向性及其对要素收入分配的作用机制,能够为经济可持续发展、完善收入结构、缩小收入分配差距等问题的解决起到积极的促进作用。本文的主要研究内容是在梳理技术进步和要素收入分配等相关文献的基础上,尝试构建多部门经济数理模型,区分资本与劳动、技能与非技能型劳动力两组生产要素,进而分析技术进步偏向性在不同生产要素之间的形成机制,及其对要素收入分配的作用。在实证分析中,首先根据已构建的理论模型设计技术进步偏向性的指数,用以估计美国的技术进步偏向性特征,并测度资本与劳动要素、技能与非技能型劳动要素的收入分配格局,再基于结构分解法构建费雪指数分别考察技术进步偏向性对资本与劳动、技能与非技能型劳动要素收入分配的作用关系。最后将以上研究方法应用于中国的实际情况,考察中国的技术进步偏向型及其对要素收入分配的影响,并将美国和中国的相关结果进行比较分析,希望通过对美国技术进步偏向性及要素收入分配问题的研究能够对中国的经济发展,以及有效解决收入分配的问题起到参考和借鉴的作用。本文的主要研究结论如下：第一,经过对技术进步研究文献的阅读和分析,发现研究学者从中性技术进步、资本体现式技术进步以及技术进步偏向性等不同视角进行分类研究,而技术进步偏向性的存在、偏向的程度以及影响作用等内容都成为研究的重点。其中,技术进步偏向性的理论研究发展大致可分为三个时期：第一时期,技术进步偏向性概念的提出,但该观点因缺乏微观基础而受到批判和质疑。第二时期,20世纪60年代以后,通过创新可能性前沿的引入而使技术进步偏向性问题受到研究学者的关注,并深入研究引致技术创新以及技术进步偏向性问题。但由于微观基础的匮乏、对中性技术进步的推崇、“Kaldor事实”以及研究方法的局限等原因,技术进步偏向性问题仍未受到足够重视。第三时期,20世纪90年代以后,Acemoglu的系列研究为技术进步偏向性理论的发展奠定了微观基础,也能够解释对‘'Kaldor事实”的违背和技能溢价的现象,并在许多领域得到广泛应用。第二,技术进步不仅存在偏向性特征,还具有不同偏向性类型。其中,技术进步的相对偏向性和绝对偏向性分别反映了技术进步的偏向性特征对生产要素的边际产出的相对值和水平值的影响。而强弱技术进步偏向性的区别则在于考察技术进步偏向性和要素供给作用传导方面的差异,是考虑技术进步偏向性的对要素边际产出作用是否能够超过要素供给变化对它的作用。第三,在资本与劳动要素的技术进步内生化模型表明,技术进步的资本偏向性最终会导致资本相对于劳动要素边际产出的增加,且技术进步是偏向于丰富要素的。无论生产要素间存在相互替代关系还是互补关系,资本与劳动要素相对供给的增加都会通过影响相对技术的变动而导致其相对边际产出得到提高。在技能与非技能型劳动要素之间,当两类劳动要素相互替代且替代弹性足够大时,要素相对供给的增加和技术水平的提高则会导致相对报酬和收入份额的提高。第四,针对资本与劳动要素,结合1971-2011年美国的相关数据,发现在不同要素替代弹性的条件下,美国技术进步总体呈资本偏向性特征,技术进步朝向有利于提高资本要素的相对边际产出的方向发展,从而提高资本与劳动要素的相对收入份额,这与美国资本与劳动要素收入分配格局的变动是一致的。美国技术进步的技能偏向性特征显示,在替代弹性的不同取值下,2000-2013年美国技术进步总体上是偏向于技能型劳动要素的。同时存在技能溢价,且可能随着技术进步偏向技能型劳动程度的加深,技能溢价也得到不断深化,技能与非技能型劳动要素的相对收入份额也得到一定的增加。而中国分别在1978-2011年和2000-2011年两个观测时期内总体上也呈现资本偏向型技术进步和技能偏向型技术进步。第五,通过对美国和中国的要素收入分配格局的测算,两国的资本要素收入份额都有增长的趋势,但不同于中国劳动收入份额偏低,美国劳动收入在要素收入分配格局中占比较大。另一方面,经过对比可知,美国的资本收入水平和劳动收入水平整体都是高于中国的,且差距不断加大,仅在2007年美国次债危机之后,中美两国的要素收入差距有所缩小。而在技能与非技能型劳动要素的考察发现,中美两国劳动要素的相对收入份额在波动中均呈上升态势,但前者缓慢而后者陡峭,同时两国的技能型劳动收入均高于各自的非技能劳动收入,且存在技能溢价。第六,利用结构分解方法考察技术进步偏向性对不同要素收入分配的贡献作用。其中,美国技术进步偏向性特征对资本与劳动、技能与非技能型劳动要素的相对收入份额变化的贡献始终都是呈现正向的贡献作用,即技术进步的资本偏向性会有利于提高资本相对于劳动的收入份额,技能偏向性则有利于提高技能型劳动相对收入份额。而中国的技术进步偏向性同样对要素收入分配份额有着正向的贡献作用,但各个时期技术进步偏向性特征对要素收入份额的变动影响与美国有较大差别。综合说明,在美国和中国,技术进步的资本偏向或技能偏向都有利于提高资本要素或技能型劳动要素的收入份额,且技术进步偏向型的贡献不断增强。
[Abstract]:The essence of the bias of technological progress is that technological progress has caused the increase of relative marginal output of its biased elements and the corresponding higher remuneration, which leads to the widening of the income distribution gap. On the basis of the research on the technological progress and other types of technological progress, the bias of technological progress has gradually attracted the attention of the majority of scholars. Most scholars believe that the technological progress of the developed countries is more biased towards capital or skilled labor elements. Then, is the situation in the developed countries and the developing countries the same? On the other hand, The bias of technological progress has also been introduced to the main economic development problems, such as economic growth, factor resource allocation, employment structure, skill premium and so on. In particular, the research on the influence of technical progress bias on factor income share has become the focus of research. Is the reason of the decline in the ratio of movable income or the premium of skill? With this question, this paper analyzes the bias of technological progress and the mechanism of the distribution of factors income, which can play a positive role in promoting the sustainable development of the economy, improving the income structure and reducing the gap of income distribution.
On the basis of combing the related literature of technological progress and factor income distribution, this paper tries to build a multi sector economic mathematical model to distinguish two groups of production factors between capital and labor, skill and non skilled labor force, and then analyze the formation mechanism of technical progress bias between different production factors, and it is necessary to analyze the formation mechanism of the technical progress bias between different production factors. In the empirical analysis, we first design the index of technical progress bias based on the established theoretical model to estimate the bias characteristic of technological progress in the United States, and measure the income distribution pattern of capital and labor factors, skills and unskilled labor factors, and then construct the Fisher index based on structural decomposition method. Do not examine the relationship between technological progress bias and the income distribution of capital and labor, skill and unskilled labor factors. Finally, the above research methods are applied to the actual situation in China, and the impact of China's technological progress bias and its influence on the distribution of factor income is investigated, and the related results of the United States and China are compared and analyzed. It is hoped that the research on the bias of technological progress and the distribution of factor income can serve as a reference and reference for China's economic development and the effective solution of income distribution. The main conclusions of this paper are as follows:
First, through the reading and analysis of the research literature on technological progress, it is found that researchers have classified the research from different perspectives, such as the progress of neutral technology, the technological progress of capital and the bias of technological progress, and the focus of the research on the existence, the degree of bias and the effect of the influence of the technical progress. The theoretical research development of the progressive deviation can be roughly divided into three periods: the first period, the concept of technical progress bias was put forward, but the view was criticized and questioned because of the lack of microcosmic basis. In the second period, after 1960s, the bias of technological progress was studied through the introduction of the frontier of innovation possibility. The attention of the people, and the in-depth study of the technical innovation and the bias of technological progress. However, due to the lack of microcosmic foundation, the respect for the progress of neutral technology, the "Kaldor fact" and the limitations of the research methods, the problem of the bias of technical progress is still not considered enough. In the third period, after 1990s, the Acemoglu Department Column studies have laid a microcosmic foundation for the development of the theory of technical progress bias, and can also explain the violation of "'Kaldor facts" and the phenomenon of skill premium, and have been widely used in many fields.
Second, the technological progress is not only biased and biased, but the relative bias and absolute bias of technological progress reflect the influence of the biased characteristic of technological progress on the relative value and the level of the marginal output of the production factors, while the difference between the strong and weak technological progress is to examine the technique. The difference between the deviation of the progress and the transmission of the factor supply is the effect of the bias of the technological progress on whether the effect of the factor marginal output can exceed the change of the supply of factors.
Third, the biochemical model in the technological progress of capital and labor factors indicates that the capital bias of technological progress will eventually lead to the increase of capital relative to the marginal output of labor factors, and the technological progress is biased towards the rich elements. The increase in the supply will increase the relative marginal output by influencing the change of relative technology. Between the skills and the unskilled labor factors, when the two kinds of labor elements are replaced and the substitution of elasticity is large enough, the increase of relative supply of factors and the improvement of the technical level will lead to the increase of relative remuneration and the share of income.
Fourth, according to the factors of capital and labor and the relevant data of 1971-2011 years in the United States, it is found that under the conditions of the alternative elasticity of different elements, the technological progress of the United States is generally characterized by capital bias, and the technological progress towards the direction of relative marginal output which is beneficial to the improvement of the capital elements, thus improving the relative income of capital and labor factors. Share, which is consistent with the changes in the distribution pattern of American capital and labor factor income distribution. The technical bias of American technological progress shows that under the different values of substitution elasticity, American technological progress in 2000-2013 years is generally biased toward skilled labor elements. With the deepening of skilled labor, the skill premium has been deepened, and the relative income share of the skills and unskilled labor elements has also been increased. In the 1978-2011 and 2000-2011 years, China, respectively, has also presented capital biased technical progress and skill biased technological progress.
Fifth, through the calculation of the distribution pattern of factor income in the United States and China, the share of capital factor income of the two countries has a growing trend, but the share of the labor income in the United States is very low, and the labor income in the United States is relatively large in the distribution pattern of factor income. On the other hand, the capital income level and labor income of the United States are well known. The overall level of the entry level is higher than China, and the gap is increasing. After the US sub debt crisis in 2007, the gap between China and the United States has narrowed. While the study of the factors of skill and unskilled labor found that the relative income share of the labor elements between China and the United States is rising in the fluctuation, but the former is slow and the latter is the latter. At the same time, the skilled labor income of both countries is higher than their unskilled labor income, and there is a skill premium.
Sixth, the structural decomposition method is used to investigate the contribution of technological progress bias to the income distribution of different factors. The contribution of the American technical progress bias is always to contribute to the change of the relative income share of capital and labor, skills and unskilled labor elements, namely, the capital bias of technological progress. Sex will help improve the income share of capital relative to labor, and the bias of skill is beneficial to improving the relative income share of skilled labor. While China's technical progress bias also has a positive contribution to the share of factor income distribution, but the change of the partial characteristics of technological progress affects the change of the share of the factor income in each period. There are great differences between the United States and the United States. In the United States and China, in the United States and China, the capital bias or skill bias of technological progress can improve the income share of capital elements or skilled labor elements, and the contribution of technical progress bias is increasing.
【学位授予单位】：东北师范大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：F171.2

【参考文献】