This paper examines China’s flying geese paradigm that serves as a key driver of a new pattern of the country’s economic development.Our results suggest that such a major power’s flying geese paradigm has taken sha...This paper examines China’s flying geese paradigm that serves as a key driver of a new pattern of the country’s economic development.Our results suggest that such a major power’s flying geese paradigm has taken shape in the aftermath of the global financial crisis in 2008.However,this paradigm has provincial heterogeneity in that industrial relocation varies across provinces.For instance,China’s central and western regions have shown differences while serving as destinations for labor-intensive industries and processing trade.This flying geese paradigm evolves in a slow and nonlinear manner,and may be subject to stagnation and even reversal.展开更多
Based on trade in value-added, this paper has estimated the revealed comparative advantage （RCA） of China＇s various manufacturing sectors between 1995 and 2011 and compared with the RCA indexes measured using conve...Based on trade in value-added, this paper has estimated the revealed comparative advantage （RCA） of China＇s various manufacturing sectors between 1995 and 2011 and compared with the RCA indexes measured using conventional aggregate accounting approach. Results indicate that： （1） the RCA index measured using conventional aggregate accounting approach has underestimated China＇s comparative advantage of labor-intensive sectors but overestimated China＇s comparative advantage in capital, knowledge and technology-intensive manufacturing sectors, giving rise to a serious misjudgment. （2） The RCA measured using value-added approach shows that in the industry chain layout of global manufacturing sectors, China＇s comparative advantage is still concentrated in labor-intensive manufacturing sectors but has signs of weakening; in capital, knowledge and technology-intensive sectors, China is yet to develop any significant comparative advantage; there are signs that China is developing comparative advantage in capital-intensive sectors yet China＇s comparative disadvantage in knowledge and technology-intensive sectors has no significant tendency to improve. This result not only helps correct the misjudgment of China＇s competitiveness in manufacturing sectors based on conventional aggregate accounting approach but offers important policy implications for setting strategic directions and policies for China＇s manufacturing transition and upgrade.展开更多
文摘This paper examines China’s flying geese paradigm that serves as a key driver of a new pattern of the country’s economic development.Our results suggest that such a major power’s flying geese paradigm has taken shape in the aftermath of the global financial crisis in 2008.However,this paradigm has provincial heterogeneity in that industrial relocation varies across provinces.For instance,China’s central and western regions have shown differences while serving as destinations for labor-intensive industries and processing trade.This flying geese paradigm evolves in a slow and nonlinear manner,and may be subject to stagnation and even reversal.
基金Key Project of National Social Sciences Foundation"Transition and Upgrade of China’s Economic Structure under Global Value Chain"(11 AZD 002)Project of China Postdoctoral Science Foundation"Study on the Promotional Effect of Trade in Services on the Improvement of Status of China’s Yangtze River Delta Region in International Division of Labor"(Approval No.2013 M530809)
文摘Based on trade in value-added, this paper has estimated the revealed comparative advantage （RCA） of China＇s various manufacturing sectors between 1995 and 2011 and compared with the RCA indexes measured using conventional aggregate accounting approach. Results indicate that： （1） the RCA index measured using conventional aggregate accounting approach has underestimated China＇s comparative advantage of labor-intensive sectors but overestimated China＇s comparative advantage in capital, knowledge and technology-intensive manufacturing sectors, giving rise to a serious misjudgment. （2） The RCA measured using value-added approach shows that in the industry chain layout of global manufacturing sectors, China＇s comparative advantage is still concentrated in labor-intensive manufacturing sectors but has signs of weakening; in capital, knowledge and technology-intensive sectors, China is yet to develop any significant comparative advantage; there are signs that China is developing comparative advantage in capital-intensive sectors yet China＇s comparative disadvantage in knowledge and technology-intensive sectors has no significant tendency to improve. This result not only helps correct the misjudgment of China＇s competitiveness in manufacturing sectors based on conventional aggregate accounting approach but offers important policy implications for setting strategic directions and policies for China＇s manufacturing transition and upgrade.
