中国省际高质量发展的测度及时空特征
|
摘要
基于2012—2016年省际面板数据,构建高质量发展综合评价体系,测度中国省际高质量发展水平,并采用地理信息系统与探索性空间数据分析相结合方法,考察其时空格局演变,结果表明:样本期间内中国省际高质量发展呈现不断上升趋势,但省际差异较大;从空间格局的演变过程看,省际高质量发展水平在空间上有明显的集聚效应,且有所加强;高质量发展水平呈现明显的空间分布差异,高水平的高质量发展集中分布在沿海地带,总体呈现"东高西低,南高北低"的布局;从五大发展维度看,五大发展维度之间存在差异,创新与开放对于经济高质量发展贡献率最高,而协调、绿色与共享的贡献率相对偏低;在样本期间内,五大维度发展都呈现上升趋势,在空间上呈现由东部沿海地区向内陆地区扩散的趋势。为此,中国要通过发挥高质量发展区域的空间溢出效应,大力推进结构性改革力度,制定差异化发展战略等,协同推进高质量发展。
Based on the provincial panel data collected between 2012—2016,this paper aims to quantitatively measure the interprovincial high-quality development in China through the construction of aggregative indicator system of the high-quality development and explore its spatial-temporal evolution by using the geographic information system and ESDA analysis methods.The results show that the overall level index of the high-quality development is increasing rise during the sample period, but existing obvious differences among provinces. From the perspective of the evolution of spatial pattern, there are apparent agglomeration effect in space of the high-quality development with an increasing tendency. The high-quality development shows obvious spatial distribution differences, and high level of the high-quality development is concentrated in coastal areas of China.The overall distribution is that the eastern areas are higher than the west, and northern parts are lower than the south. From the perspective of the five development dimensions, there also exist differences which are manifested in that the innovation and openness development have the highest contribution rate to high-quality economic development, while the contribution rate of coordination, green and sharing development are being relatively at low level; the five developments show an upward trend in time and a tendency to spread from the eastern coastal areas to the inland areas in space during the sample period. Therefore, measures in China must be taken like exerting the spatial spillover effects of the high-quality development, vigorously promoting the structural reforms, formulating differentiated development strategies and so on to cooperatively push forward the high-quality development.
Based on the provincial panel data collected between 2012—2016,this paper aims to quantitatively measure the interprovincial high-quality development in China through the construction of aggregative indicator system of the high-quality development and explore its spatial-temporal evolution by using the geographic information system and ESDA analysis methods.The results show that the overall level index of the high-quality development is increasing rise during the sample period, but existing obvious differences among provinces. From the perspective of the evolution of spatial pattern, there are apparent agglomeration effect in space of the high-quality development with an increasing tendency. The high-quality development shows obvious spatial distribution differences, and high level of the high-quality development is concentrated in coastal areas of China.The overall distribution is that the eastern areas are higher than the west, and northern parts are lower than the south. From the perspective of the five development dimensions, there also exist differences which are manifested in that the innovation and openness development have the highest contribution rate to high-quality economic development, while the contribution rate of coordination, green and sharing development are being relatively at low level; the five developments show an upward trend in time and a tendency to spread from the eastern coastal areas to the inland areas in space during the sample period. Therefore, measures in China must be taken like exerting the spatial spillover effects of the high-quality development, vigorously promoting the structural reforms, formulating differentiated development strategies and so on to cooperatively push forward the high-quality development.
引文
[1]迟福林.以高质量发展为核心目标建设现代化经济体系[J].行政管理改革,2017(12).
[2]王珺.以高质量发展推进新时代经济建设[J].南方经济,2017(10).
[3]刘友金,周健.“换道超车”:新时代经济高质量发展路径创新[J].湖南科技大学学报(社会科学版),2018(1).
[4]林兆木.关于我国经济高质量发展的几点认识[N].人民日报,2018-01-17.
[5]张军扩.高质量发展怎么看、怎么干?[N].经济日报,2018-02-01.
[6]冯俏彬.我国经济高质量发展的五大特征与五大途径[J].中国党政干部论坛,2018(1).
[7]金碚.关于“高质量发展”的经济学研究[J].中国工业经济,2018(4).
[8]任保平,李禹墨.新时代我国高质量发展评判体系的构建及其转型路径[J].陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2018(3).
[9]陈昌兵.新时代我国经济高质量发展动力转换研究[J].上海经济研究,2018(5).
[10]任保平,韩璐,崔浩萌.进入新常态后中国各省区经济增长质量指数的测度研究[J].统计与信息论坛,2015(8).
[11]詹新宇,崔培培.中国省际经济增长质量的测度与评价——基于“五大发展理念”的实证分析[J].财政研究,2016(8).
[12]师博,任保平.中国省际经济高质量发展的测度与分析[J].经济问题,2018(4).
[13]熊晓琳,王丹.五大发展理念与中国特色社会主义[J].思想理论教育导刊,2016(1).
[14]陈金龙.五大发展理念的多维审视[J].思想理论教育,2016(1).
[15]任理轩.五大发展理念彰显科学方法论[N].人民日报,2016-01-18.
[16]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(5).
[17]程叶青,王哲野,张守志,等.中国能源消费碳排放强度及其影响因素的空间计量[J].地理学报,2013(10).
[18]骆永民,樊丽明.中国农村人力资本增收效应的空间特征[J].管理世界,2014(9).
[19]孟德友,沈惊宏,陆玉麒.中原经济区县域交通优势度与区域经济空间耦合[J].经济地理,2012(6).
[20]周扬,李宁,吴文祥,等.1982—2010年中国县域经济发展时空格局演变[J].地理科学进展,2014(1).
[21]程翔,王曼怡,田昕,等.中国金融发展水平的空间动态差异与影响因素[J].金融论坛,2018(8).
(1)考虑到原始数据的口径统一性与可得性问题,本研究选取样本时间为2012—2016年的样本数据。
(2)东部地区:北京、天津、河北、辽宁、上海、江苏、浙江、福建、山东、广东、海南;中部地区:山西、吉林、黑龙江、安徽、江西、河南、湖北、湖南;西部地区:内蒙古、广西、重庆、四川、贵州、云南、陕西、甘肃、青海、宁夏、新疆。
[2]王珺.以高质量发展推进新时代经济建设[J].南方经济,2017(10).
[3]刘友金,周健.“换道超车”:新时代经济高质量发展路径创新[J].湖南科技大学学报(社会科学版),2018(1).
[4]林兆木.关于我国经济高质量发展的几点认识[N].人民日报,2018-01-17.
[5]张军扩.高质量发展怎么看、怎么干?[N].经济日报,2018-02-01.
[6]冯俏彬.我国经济高质量发展的五大特征与五大途径[J].中国党政干部论坛,2018(1).
[7]金碚.关于“高质量发展”的经济学研究[J].中国工业经济,2018(4).
[8]任保平,李禹墨.新时代我国高质量发展评判体系的构建及其转型路径[J].陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2018(3).
[9]陈昌兵.新时代我国经济高质量发展动力转换研究[J].上海经济研究,2018(5).
[10]任保平,韩璐,崔浩萌.进入新常态后中国各省区经济增长质量指数的测度研究[J].统计与信息论坛,2015(8).
[11]詹新宇,崔培培.中国省际经济增长质量的测度与评价——基于“五大发展理念”的实证分析[J].财政研究,2016(8).
[12]师博,任保平.中国省际经济高质量发展的测度与分析[J].经济问题,2018(4).
[13]熊晓琳,王丹.五大发展理念与中国特色社会主义[J].思想理论教育导刊,2016(1).
[14]陈金龙.五大发展理念的多维审视[J].思想理论教育,2016(1).
[15]任理轩.五大发展理念彰显科学方法论[N].人民日报,2016-01-18.
[16]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(5).
[17]程叶青,王哲野,张守志,等.中国能源消费碳排放强度及其影响因素的空间计量[J].地理学报,2013(10).
[18]骆永民,樊丽明.中国农村人力资本增收效应的空间特征[J].管理世界,2014(9).
[19]孟德友,沈惊宏,陆玉麒.中原经济区县域交通优势度与区域经济空间耦合[J].经济地理,2012(6).
[20]周扬,李宁,吴文祥,等.1982—2010年中国县域经济发展时空格局演变[J].地理科学进展,2014(1).
[21]程翔,王曼怡,田昕,等.中国金融发展水平的空间动态差异与影响因素[J].金融论坛,2018(8).
(1)考虑到原始数据的口径统一性与可得性问题,本研究选取样本时间为2012—2016年的样本数据。
(2)东部地区:北京、天津、河北、辽宁、上海、江苏、浙江、福建、山东、广东、海南;中部地区:山西、吉林、黑龙江、安徽、江西、河南、湖北、湖南;西部地区:内蒙古、广西、重庆、四川、贵州、云南、陕西、甘肃、青海、宁夏、新疆。