论文部分内容阅读
文章利用WWZ模型和WIOT数据,对比分析了中美服务业参与全球价值链(GVC)分工程度与地位的演变情况。研究表明:(1)中美服务业都已成为GVC分工的重要受益者,但中国服务业出口贸易中的国内增加值占比显著低于美国,表明中国服务业出口获益能力相对较弱。(2)中美服务业中以最终服务环节出口的国内增加值占比下降,而以中间服务环节出口的国内增加值占比上升,表明中美服务业参与GVC分工地位在不断攀升。(3)中国服务业前向垂直专业化程度明显低于美国,但其后向垂直专业化程度却明显高于美国,表明中国服务业参与GVC分工地位较低。(4)中国服务业中来自于国外账户的纯重复计算部分占比明显小于美国,表明中国服务业的价值链较短,延伸不足。(5)中国服务业中来自于国内账户的纯重复计算部分占比和增幅显著高于美国,表明中国较好地实现了国内生产分工与合作。(6)中国服务业参与GVC分工地位低于美国,且其间接增加值贡献也明显小于美国,表明中国服务业处于GVC分工下游位置。(7)中国服务业参与GVC分工的地位指数具有明显的阶段性特征,并呈现出显著的上升趋势。
Using the WWZ model and WIOT data, the article analyzes the evolution of the degree and position of the service industry participating in the global value chain (GVC) division of labor. The results show that: (1) Sino-U.S. Service industry has become an important beneficiary of GVC’s division of labor. However, the proportion of domestic value added in China’s service export trade is significantly lower than that of the United States, indicating that China’s service export is relatively weaker. (2) The share of domestic value-added in the final service segment of the Sino-U.S. Service sector decreased while the share of domestic value-added exports in the intermediate service segment increased, indicating that the position of Sino-U.S. Service industry in participating in GVC’s division of labor has been on the rise. (3) The degree of vertical specialization in service industry in China was significantly lower than that in the United States, but the degree of vertical specialization was significantly higher than that in the United States afterwards, indicating that the service industry in China had a lower position in GVC’s division of labor. (4) The proportion of purely double-counting in the Chinese service industry from foreign accounts is significantly smaller than that in the United States, indicating that the value chain of China’s service industry is short and under-extended. (5) The proportion and growth of purely double-counting of China’s domestic service accounts from domestic accounts are significantly higher than that of the United States, indicating that China has better realized the division of labor and cooperation in domestic production. (6) China’s service sector participation in GVC is lower than that of the United States in terms of its division of labor, and its indirect contribution to added value is also significantly smaller than that of the United States, indicating that China’s service sector is in a position downstream of GVC’s division of labor. (7) The status index of China’s service industry participating in GVC’s division of work has obvious stage characteristics and shows a significant upward trend.