中国11个五年计划绩效定量评估

A Quantitative Survey on China's 11 Five Year Plans

本文从目标完成率、目标偏离度、计划期发展情况三个维度构建五年计划绩效指数,首次对我国已经实施的11个五年计划的绩效进行了定量评估。评估数据来源于343个五年计划主要指标完成情况以及若干重要发展指标的核算。评估结果表明,计划经济时期,"一五"计划的绩效最高,"二五"计划绩效最低,随后有所回升,但总体仍然不高;改革开放以后,五年计划的绩效明显提高,"六五"出现历史上的第二个峰值,"七五"为改革开放以来最低值,"八五"、"九五"不断提高,"十五"略有下降,到"十一五"时期,达到历史最高水平。

Since 1953, China has implemented 11 Five-Year plans （FYPs） during past 6 decades. The first 5FYPs took place in the planned economy ; while the following 5 FYPs, from the 6th to the 11 th, happened in China＇s transition and market economy period. The FYPs implemented during the planned economy period, mainly rely on mandatory instructions to plan economic activities at all-levels, ensuring the initial establishment of industrial system in national economy under extremely tough conditions. Since the implementation of the reform and opening-up poli- cies, mandatory plans gradually turn into guidance plans. Although FYPs have served as important development tools in China, the Chinese government has never systematically evaluated the FYPs. This situation didn＇t change until the last two FYPs. Due to most literatures in the post-evaluation of the FYPs were qualitative discusses, this paper may be the first systemic quantitative study on China＇s all previous 11 FYPs. This paper adopts quanutauve approach to evaluation, constructing a quantitative assessment of the performance index, which composed of three dimensions： goal implement, goal irrelevance and development performance, goal implement is measured by the implement ratio of plans goals, and goal irrelevance is measured the deviation value of the implement, while development perform- ance refer to the economic and social development in the plan era. , we calculate the actual completion status of quantitative targets＇ implementation to decide the consistency level of target＇s implantation relating to expected value of target, thus comparing and analyzing the implementation status of FYPs at different periods. Data used in this re- search are firstly the target values of all the F＇YPs. Since usually there＇s no specific target system for FYPs, we use the quantitative targets in the FYP documents as our evaluation objects. Qualitative targets were excluded due to dif- ficulty of evaluating them quantitatively, and this might lead to deviations from the real status. Fortunately, the quan- titative targets are generally important restrictive targets, and can largely reflect the main targets of the plan. The main sources of these information come from official data published by National Bureau of Statistics of China. Due to this research＇s evaluation results, the 11 FYPs are individually ranked as following： the 1 l th, the 6th, the 9th, the 8th, the 1 st, the 10th, the 7th, the 5th, the 3rd, the 4th, the 2nd FYP. The performance of Five-Year Plan has been improved after 1980, compare to the plan economic era. Before 1980 ,As the 1st FYP was the first golden age, the 2nd was the worthiest one ,while the 3rd- the 5th were acceptable. Since 1980, the performance curve reach a new high level in the 6th,then stepped down in the 7th, turn up steadily in the 8th and the 9th,stepped down a little again in the 10th, and been great improved ,reached the highest level in history by the llth. The main findings upon comparing the performance of FYPs in the market economy period to the planned econ- omy period are as following. Firstly, the FYPs＇ implementation performance in transition and market economy period is generally much better than that in the planned economy period. , with average completion rate of the former at 78% and only 40% for the latter. The four plans during the planned economy period,excluding the 1st FYP,are all among the worst completed plans. Secondly, under the market economy conditions, either the formulation or the im- plementation of FYPs would face greater challenges. This shows that it will be more difficult to foresee economic so- cial development under market economy, causing the reduced predictability in plan formulation and increased diffi- culty of plan implementation. This shows that it will be more difficult to foresee economic social development under market economy, causing the reduced predictability in plan formulation and increased difficulty of plan implementa- tion. ＇ Plans can never catch up with changes＇ is not only a problem for mid-long term program under planned econo- my conditions, but also for current market economy. Thirdly, The quantitative results also showed that, accuracy rates in transition and market economy period decreased, further proving the predictability of plans during plans＇ formula- tion had decreased and the regulative ability of targets during plan implementation became weaker.