|
宜賓翻譯公司關鍵字：The analytical framework of institutional change theory scholars that institutional change is China's rapid economic growth since the reform and opening up the main source. In the model, because the system can not be measured, generally are looking for an agent variable, but the use of proxy variables is varied. Such as Wang Wenbo et al (2002) with changes in property rights system, market-oriented, distribution pattern, the degree of opening up the system to quantify the four factors described. Liu et al (2001) that China is an important feature of institutional change is the proportion of state ownership decreased the proportion of state ownership rather than increased. Some people believe that system and the relationship between economic growth is a direct drive system on economic growth of technology, manpower, capital and other factors have a major impact (eg, Han Jing and Zhu Hongquan, 2000). Li Ping (2001) that institutional change is the restructuring and transformation. The biggest problem with such studies exist in the model of the system positioning, and some for the correlation analysis (eg, Wang Wenbo, 2002), while others are building a production function (eg, Shu Yuan, 2002). But whether institutional factors as an explanatory variable into the production function is a debatable issue, it is a system of how to quantify the insurmountable technical problems. Quantification of the system, many people are looking for agent variables, had constantly to "the concept of" conversion, or "concept" simplification (reduction or extension of meaning poor). The system into the production function as an explanatory variable, the Shu Yuan and Xu Xian-Xiang (2002) carried out a bold attempt, but there also exists the quantification of the system (and whether our system can enter the production function as an explanatory variable), so Their article on other models for hypothesis testing, is unable to establish their own to "explore suitable for China's economic construction road" as the explanatory variable "AK model" for testing.Strictly with the endogenous growth theory literature of China's economic growth is also unusual. Cheung Shu Yuan and Xu are the establishment of "AK" model can be said that an attempt in this regard, but on the author's ideas to see where the "K" is a system variable, rather than endogenous technology, but also non-human capital. Therefore, the K - "to explore the economic construction of China's national conditions for the road" as an economic development engine. Different from others, Shu-yuan, ruled out the technological progress is the engine of economic growth, so in its establishment of the AK model, the engine of economic growth, institutional change is only a. And Bun and Zhao Dali (2001) is the use of existing endogenous growth models to analyze economic growth in China, has been the contribution of human capital, the contribution rate of technological progress. As a result, the fact that the Chinese economy are not consistent, but also with the results of Shu-yuan, and completely different. Liang Chao (2000) results much the same. With endogenous growth theory is that the difficulties of China's economic growth, human capital and endogenous technology is difficult to measure, it is generally had to use China's science and technology investment and investment in education as a proxy variable, so that the reliability of the results to be affected.
|