本文選題：省級(jí)政府債務(wù) + 面板效應(yīng)��； 參考：《南京大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：政府債務(wù)長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)一直是熱點(diǎn)問(wèn)題,政府債務(wù)對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的影響也始終是國(guó)家和央行在管理債務(wù)規(guī)模的首要考慮。在中國(guó),國(guó)家債務(wù)而非地方債務(wù)被給予太多關(guān)注。事實(shí)上,從2008年金融危機(jī)導(dǎo)致的經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展減緩以來(lái),中央政府實(shí)施的4萬(wàn)億刺激計(jì)劃中只有1萬(wàn)億是由中央政府提供的,而剩余的資金都必須由地方政府籌措。龐大的資金需求以及隨后的地方發(fā)債合法化使得地方政府通過(guò)借債融資有了必要性和合理性。迅速擴(kuò)張的地方政府債務(wù)規(guī)模要求對(duì)地方債務(wù)對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的影響進(jìn)行進(jìn)一步研究。本文應(yīng)用凱恩斯的有效需求理論、哈羅德-多瑪模型和新古典經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)理論來(lái)分析地方政府債務(wù)對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的影響傳導(dǎo)機(jī)制。此外,在數(shù)據(jù)處理的過(guò)程中發(fā)現(xiàn)存在門(mén)檻效應(yīng),因此進(jìn)行了包括門(mén)檻回歸等進(jìn)一步回歸分析。由于中國(guó)不同地區(qū)經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展水平的巨大差異,各省份被分組進(jìn)行面板回歸以弄清不同地區(qū)不同債務(wù)水平對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的不同影響。本文實(shí)證分析基于30個(gè)省份從2010到2015這六年的數(shù)據(jù)。本文第一章是導(dǎo)論,介紹了研究背景、研究目的以及研究方法。第二章先對(duì)過(guò)去政府債務(wù)的定義以及形成的研究進(jìn)行回顧,隨后對(duì)地方政府債務(wù)和經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的關(guān)系進(jìn)行了文獻(xiàn)回顧。第三章分析了政府債務(wù)對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的影響機(jī)制。第四章主要是計(jì)量模型的建立以及數(shù)據(jù)來(lái)源的介紹。第五章進(jìn)行了包括相關(guān)分析、平穩(wěn)性檢驗(yàn)、面板回歸分析、門(mén)檻面板分析以及按地區(qū)回歸分析等實(shí)證研究。最后一張得出結(jié)論,在合理范圍內(nèi)的地方政府債務(wù)能推動(dòng)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng),但是推動(dòng)作用在不同地區(qū)隨著債務(wù)水平的不同有所區(qū)別。本文研究的主要結(jié)論有:(1)通過(guò)描述性統(tǒng)計(jì)分析和相關(guān)性分析,30個(gè)地區(qū)2010-2015年六年時(shí)間地方GDP年度增長(zhǎng)率均值為12.869%,地方政府債務(wù)率均值為41.13%。通過(guò)相關(guān)性分析,可知在0.05水平下被解釋變量經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)率與解釋變量債務(wù)率中度正相關(guān),與控制變量城市化率弱度負(fù)相關(guān),與控制變量對(duì)外貿(mào)易總額中度正相關(guān),與控制變量人口增長(zhǎng)率無(wú)顯著關(guān)系;(2)通過(guò)Hausman檢驗(yàn)結(jié)果可知選擇固定效應(yīng)進(jìn)行面板回歸分析,可知0.01的顯著性水平下地方政府債率水平可以促進(jìn)地方經(jīng)濟(jì)的增長(zhǎng)。同時(shí),通過(guò)設(shè)置地方政府債務(wù)率為門(mén)檻變量進(jìn)行門(mén)檻回歸分析可知,在0.01顯著性水平下當(dāng)?shù)胤秸畟鶆?wù)率低于1.1745時(shí),債務(wù)率水平與地方經(jīng)濟(jì)呈正相關(guān),這說(shuō)明地方政府債務(wù)增加不但沒(méi)有縮小同等條件下經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的差距,反而加劇了差距影響;當(dāng)?shù)胤秸畟鶆?wù)率高于1.1745時(shí),債務(wù)率水平與地方經(jīng)濟(jì)仍然呈正相關(guān)但影響系數(shù)縮小了,即債務(wù)水平提高對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的正向作用降低了;(3)30地區(qū)整體固定效應(yīng)回歸分析中地方政府債務(wù)率與地方經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的回歸系數(shù)為0.0181。通過(guò)對(duì)東中西三個(gè)地區(qū)的面板數(shù)據(jù)分別進(jìn)行回歸分析,東部地區(qū)兩者的回歸系數(shù)大于整體系數(shù),說(shuō)明東部地區(qū)地方政府債務(wù)率對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的促進(jìn)作用要高于全國(guó)平均水平;西部地區(qū)兩者的回歸系數(shù)為小于整體系數(shù),說(shuō)明西部地區(qū)地方政府債務(wù)率對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的促進(jìn)作用要低于全國(guó)平均水平。
[Abstract]:Government debt has been a hot issue for a long time. The impact of government debt on economic growth has always been the primary consideration by the state and central bank in managing debt. In China, national debt rather than local debt is given too much attention. In fact, since the economic development of the financial crisis slowed in 2008, the central government has implemented 40 thousand Only 1 trillion of the billion stimulus plans are provided by the central government, and the remaining funds must be raised by local governments. The huge demand for funds and the subsequent legalization of local government debt make it necessary and reasonable for local governments to borrow from debt. The rapid expansion of local government debt demands the economy of local debt to the economy. The effect of growth is further studied. This paper applies Keynes's effective demand theory, Harold - dom model and neoclassical economic growth theory to analyze the transmission mechanism of the influence of local government debt on economic growth. In addition, the threshold effect is found in the process of data processing. Stepwise regression analysis. Due to the huge difference in economic development level in different regions of China, each province is grouped by panel regression to understand the different effects of different debt levels on economic growth in different regions. This paper is based on the data of the six years from 30 provinces from 2010 to 2015. The first chapter is the introduction, the research background, and the research background. The second chapter reviews the definition and formation of government debt in the past, and then reviews the relationship between local government debt and economic growth. The third chapter analyzes the influence mechanism of government debt on economic growth. The fourth chapter is the establishment of the measurement model and the data source. The fifth chapter includes the correlation analysis, the stability test, the panel regression analysis, the threshold panel analysis and the regional regression analysis. The final conclusion is that the local government debt in a reasonable range can promote economic growth, but the role is different in different regions as the level of debt is different. The main conclusions of this study are as follows: (1) through descriptive statistical analysis and correlation analysis, the average annual growth rate of local GDP is 12.869% in 2010-2015 years and six years in 30 regions, and the local government debt rate is 41.13%. through correlation analysis. It can be seen that the economic growth rate and the explanatory variable debt rate are moderate at the 0.05 level. Positive correlation, negative correlation with control variable urbanization rate, moderate positive correlation with control variable foreign trade total, and no significant relationship with control variable population growth rate. (2) through the Hausman test results, we know that the fixed effect is selected to carry on the panel regression analysis, we can see that the level of local government debt rate can promote the local level under the explicit level of 0.01. At the same time, by setting the threshold regression analysis of the local government debt rate as a threshold variable, we know that the debt rate is positively related to the local economy when the local government debt rate is below 1.1745 under the 0.01 significant level, which indicates that the increase of local government debt does not narrow the gap of economic growth under the same conditions. However, when the local government debt rate is higher than 1.1745, the debt rate is still positively related to the local economy but the influence coefficient is reduced, that is, the positive effect of the debt level on the economic growth is reduced; (3) the return of local government debt and local economic growth in the 30 region's overall fixed effect regression analysis The coefficient is 0.0181. through the regression analysis of the panel data in three East and west regions. The regression coefficient of the eastern region is greater than the overall coefficient, indicating that the local government debt rate in the eastern region is higher than the national average. The regression coefficient of the western region is less than the overall coefficient, indicating that the west is less than the whole factor. The role of local government debt ratio in economic growth is lower than the national average.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：F812.5;F124.1
，

本文編號(hào)：1848214