The Effectiveness of Industrial Policy in Promoting Global Value Chain Upgrading: Based on the Quasi-Experiment of Chinese Export Processing Zones
ZHANG Pengyang, XU Jiajun, LIU Huizheng
College of Economics and Management, Beijing University of Technology; Institute of New Structural Economics, National School of Development, Peking University; Research Base of Beijing Modern Manufacturing Development
Summary:
This study examines the conditions under which industrial policy can effectively promote the upgrading of the global value chain (GVC). Industrial policy has returned to the agenda of international development, as industrialization and economic structural transformation is at the heart of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that succeeded the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Although there is a basic consensus on the need for industrial policy given the market failures, researchers disagree on how to implement such a policy. The Chinese government has proactively deployed its own industrial policy to enhance exports by implementing the Leading Industries Support (LIS) policy in export processing zones (EPZs) since 2000. Against the background of stagnant global trade growth and China's industrial transformation, changing the role of enterprises in the international division and continuously upgrading the GVC has become increasingly prominent and important. This policy serves as a quasi-experiment enabling us to explore the effectiveness of an industrial policy that promotes GVC upgrading. We analyze this quasi-experiment using the difference-in-differences method, taking enterprises supported by the LIS policy as the experimental group and those without such support as the control group. To measure the production chain position of export enterprises (i.e., the GVC position) we use the method of Chor et al. (2014). Our empirical data comes from four main sources: (1) the official list of Chinese economic and development zones; (2) China's Industrial Enterprise Database; (3) Chinese customs data; and (4) the World Input-Output Table. Our key findings are as follows. (1) The LIS policy for the EPZ negatively affects the GVC upgrading of export enterprises, and this finding holds after rigorous robustness checks. (2) Delving deeper into the effect of the LIS policy on heterogeneous firms, we find that the negative impact on GVC upgrading is greater for heavy industry enterprises and enterprises with a large share of state-owned capital. (3) Inspired by the new structural economics, we further test whether the effectiveness of the industrial policy hinges on the alignment of prioritized sectors with comparative advantages. We find that the LIS policy has little negative effect on industries in line with their comparative advantages and even has some positive effect on industries that are better aligned with comparative advantages. We also find that the negative effect of the LIS policy on GVC upgrading is almost insignificant in industries with low resource misallocation. Our study makes three original contributions. First, we extend the analysis of the effectiveness of Chinese industrial policy from the sector to the GVC level. Second, methodologically we use a quasi-natural experiment to explore the impact of industrial policy on GVC upgrading, which can contribute to a better understanding of the disputed effects of industrial policy. Finally, our study explores the effectiveness of industrial policy depends on the degree of alignment of the prioritized sectors with comparative advantages and resource (mis)allocation. Regarding policy implications, our findings imply that the government should act to promote GVC upgrading, but not in an unlimited way; that is, industrial policy should be precisely positioned for the comparative advantage of industries, but also premised on avoiding the mismatching of resources. Therefore, this study provides a reference for the government when implementing future industrial policy. From the overall perspective, there should be a boundary in policy implementation. While it should take advantage of situations to guide the industry with comparative advantages, it should be limited on the premise of not causing a mismatch of industry resources. In terms of specific industrial policies, the EPZ policies targeted at expanding exports in the early years are obviously difficult to adapt to the current demand for GVC upgrading of export enterprises. Therefore, the integration of export processing zones into Free Trade Zones (FTZs) will become an important direction in promoting GVC upgrading in the future.
张鹏杨, 徐佳君, 刘会政. 产业政策促进全球价值链升级的有效性研究——基于出口加工区的准自然实验[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 467(5): 76-95.
ZHANG Pengyang, XU Jiajun, LIU Huizheng. The Effectiveness of Industrial Policy in Promoting Global Value Chain Upgrading: Based on the Quasi-Experiment of Chinese Export Processing Zones. Journal of Financial Research, 2019, 467(5): 76-95.
[1]陈钊和熊瑞祥,2015,《比较优势与产业政策效果》,《管理世界》第8期,第67~80页。 [2]戴觅、余淼杰和Madhura Maitra,2014,《中国出口企业生产率之谜:加工贸易的作用》,《经济学(季刊)》第2期,第675~698页。 [3]龚关和胡关亮,2013,《中国制造业资源配置效率与全要素生产率》,《经济研究》第4期,第4~15页。 [4]郭晔、程玉伟和黄振,2018,《货币政策、同业业务与银行流动性创造》,《金融研究》第5期,第65~81页。 [5]江小涓,1993,《中国推行产业政策中的公共选择问题》,《经济研究》第6期,第3~18页。 [6]江飞涛和李晓萍,2010,《直接干预市场与限制竞争: 中国产业政策的取向与根本缺陷》,《中国工业经济》第9期,第26~36页。 [7]林毅夫,2014,《新结构经济学: 反思经济发展与政策的理论框架》,北京大学出版社。 [8]林毅夫、向为和余淼杰. 2018《区域型产业政策与企业生产率》,《经济学(季刊)》第2期,第781~800页。 [9]李力行和申广军,2015,《经济开发区, 地区比较优势与产业结构调整》,《经济学 (季刊)》第3期,第886~910页。 [10]李系、刘学文和王勇,2014,《一个中国经济发展的模型》,《经济学报》第4期,第1~48页。 [11]宋凌云和王贤彬,2013,《重点产业政策, 资源重置与产业生产率》,《管理世界》第12期,第63~77页。 [12]唐宜红和张鹏杨,2017,《FDI, 全球价值链嵌入与出口国内附加值》,《统计研究》第4期,第36~49页。 [13]唐宜红和张鹏杨,2018,《中国企业嵌入全球生产链的位置及变动机制研究》,《管理世界》第5期,第28~46页。 [14]徐朝阳和林毅夫,2011,《发展战略, 休克疗法与经济转型》,《管理世界》第1期,第6~19页。 [15]赵卿和曾海舰,2016,《国家产业政策, 信贷资源配置与企业业绩》,《投资研究》第3期,第58~72页。 [16]Antràs P, Chor D, Fally T, et al. 2012 “Measuring the Upstreamness of Production and Trade Flows. ” The American Economic Review, 102(3): 412~416. [17]Akinci G, Crittle J. 2008 “Special Economic Zones: Performance, Lessons Learned, and Implications for Zone Development. ” Washington DC: The World Bank. [18]Amador, João, Cabral, Sónia 2014.“Global Value Chains: Surveying Drivers and Measures” Working Paper. [19]Brandt L, Hsieh C T, Zhu X. 2008 “Growth and Structural Transformation in China” China’s Great Economic Transformation, 683~728. [20]Blonigen B A. 2016 “Industrial Policy and Downstream Export Performance”.The Economic Journal 126(595): 1635~1659. [21]Chor D, Manova K, Yu Z. 2014 “The Global Production Line Position of Chinese Firms” Industrial Upgrading and Urbanization Conference, Stockholm. 28: 29. [22]Farole T. 2011 “Special Economic Zones in Africa: Comparing Performance and Learning From Global Experiences”World Bank Publications,. [23]Hsieh C T, Song Z M. 2015 “Grasp the Large, Let Go of the Small: The Transformation of the State Sector in China” National Bureau of Economic Research. [24]Hsieh C T, Klenow P J. 2009 “Misallocation and Manufacturing TFP in China and India.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(4): 1403~1448. [25]Kline P, Moretti E. 2013 “Local Economic Development, Agglomeration Economies, and the Big Push: 100 Years of Evidence from the Tennessee Valley Authority” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129(1): 275~331. [26]Krueger A O, Tuncer B. 1982 “An Empirical Test of the Infant Industry Argument” The American Economic Review, 72(5): 1142~1152. [27]Krugman P R. 1983 “Targeted Industrial Policies: Theory and Evidence”. Industrial Change and Public Policy, 123~155. [28]Kee H L, Tang H. 2016, “Domestic Value Added in Exports: Theory and Firm Evidence From China”, The American Economic Review, 106(6):1402~1436. [29]Lin J Y. 2011 “New Structural Economics: A Framework for Rethinking Development”. The World Bank Research Observer, 26(2): 193~221. [30]Neumark D, Kolko J. 2010 “Do Enterprise Zones Create Jobs? Evidence from California’s Enterprise Zone Program” Journal of Urban Economics, 68(1): 1~19. [31]Wang J. 2013 “The Economic Impact of Special Economic Zones: Evidence from Chinese Municipalities”. Journal of Development Economics, 101: 133~147. [32]Wei S J. 1995 “The Open Door Policy and China's Rapid Growth: Evidence From City-Level Data”Growth Theories in Light of the East Asian Experience, NBER-EASE Volume 4. University of Chicago Press, 73~104. [33]Zheng S , Sun W , Wu J , et al. 2017 “The Birth of Edge Cities in China: Measuring the Effects of Industrial Parks Policy”. Journal of Urban Economics,100:80~103.