Impact of institution quality on China’s evolution in global value chain
(2.Nanjing Audit University Library)
【Abstract】Much research on how to escalate to a higher end of the global value chain (GVC) focuses on the impacts of improving local factors quality, cultivating advanced factors and developing advanced producer-service industry. This article argues that compared with traditional labor division divided by final products, in the GVC characterized by “added value” institution quality is much more important especially in determining comparative advantages, and the higher end of GVC is particularly more sensitive to institution quality. From the point of labor division evolution, this article presents a theoretical analysis on the micro mechanism of institution quality impact on GVC, on the basis of which an empirically statistical analysis using OLS, TSLS and systematic GMM methods is further conducted based on regional static and dynamic panel data of China between 1993 and 2010. The ensued econometrical test results are a strong support for the theoretical conclusion that institution quality significantly and positively affects China' s position on GVC. In addition, econometrical results also suggest that other factors including openness, human capital, organic composition of capital, infrastructure and FDI, all are positively correlated with China's evolution in GVC. Based on this, improvements in institution quality in accordance with requirements of open economy in the process of further opening-up help to accelerate China's evolution in GVC.
【Keywords】 institution quality; global value chain; evolution of labor division; transaction cost;
(Translated by YI Ran)
. ①Considering data continuity and their shares in global trade, when calculating value of TSI, we sample 46 countries and regions, including the US, China, Hong Kong, China, Japan, Germany, Republic of Korea, the Netherlands, Singapore, India, the UK, France, Malaysia, Australia, Italy, Brazil, Mexico, Canada, Indonesia, Thailand, Russia, Spain, Turkey, Hungary, Iran, the Czech Republic, Poland, the Philippines, Belgium, Finland, Egypt, Pakistan, Sweden, Denmark, Greece, Argentina, Chile, Switzerland, Ireland, Portugal, Austria, New Zealand, Israel, Colombia, Sri Lanka, Ukraine and Venezuela. [^Back]
. ②Integrated Risk Index released by ICRG is based on weighted calculation of 22 quantitative indicators under three broad categories, including political risk, financial risk and economic risk. It can reflect the quality of a country's external institution quality in general. The higher the index is, the more perfect the external quality system will be, and vice versa. In this index, the risk score ranging between 0 and 49.5 means great risk or poor external system, and the score ranging between 80 and 100 means minimal risk and excellent external institutional quality. [^Back]
Oliver, Williamson. Handbook of Industrial Organization (经济工作者学习资料)，(50) (1987).
Chen, M., Gui, Q., Lu, M. et al. China Economic Quarterly (经济学(季刊)), 7(1) (2007).
Chen, Y., Li, Y. & Zhou, S. Economic Research Journal (经济研究), (7) (2012).
FANG Yong, DAI Xiang, ZHANG Erzhen,（2012） “Theory on Division of Factor". Jianghai Academic Journal. Vol.7.Fang, Y., Dai, X. & Zhang, E. Jianghai Tribune, (7) (2012).
Jin, X., Ru, Y. & Wu, H. Management World (管理世界), (11) (2008).
Liu, Z. Academic Monthly (学术月刊), (2) (2007).
Liu, Z. & Zhang, J. Economic Research Journal (经济研究), (8) (2009).
Tang, H. & Zhang, H. Economic Research Journal (经济研究), (9) (2009).
Wang, X. & Fan, G. Economic Research Journal (经济研究), (1) (2004).
Wang, Y., Sheng, D., Shi, B. et al. Economic Research Journal (经济研究), (7) (2010).
ZHANG Erzhen, FANG Yong, (2005) "Division of Factor and Strategic Choice of China's Open Strategy," Nankai Journal, Vol.6.
Zhang, J., Li, Y. & Liu, Z. The Journal of World Economy (世界经济), (2) (2010)..
Zhang, J., Zhang, P. & Huang, T. Economic Research Journal (经济研究), (8) (2010).
Zhong, C., Li, F. & Wang, L. The Journal of Quantitative & Technical Economics (数量经济技术经济研究), (11) (2006).
Zhu, X., Jin, R. & Luo, D. Economic Research Journal (经济研究), (12) (2005).
Antràs, P. and E. Helpman, (2004) “Global Sourcing,” Journal of Political Economy 112(3), 552-580.
Bernard, A. B. , J. B. Jensen, S. J. Redding and P. K. Schott, (2010) “Intra-Firm Trade and Product Contractibility, ” American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings 100(2), 444-448.
Corcos, G. , D. Irac, G. Mion and T. Verdier, (2009) “The Determinants of Intra-Firm Trade, ” EFIGE Working Paper 14.
Deardorff, Alan V, (2004) “Ricardian Comparative Advantage with Intermediate Inputs, ” North American Journal of Economics and Finance 16, March 2005, 11-34.
Defever, Fabrice, and Farid Toubal, (2007) “Productivity and the Sourcing Modes of Multinational Firms: Evidence from French Firm-Level Data, ” Centre for Economic Performance, Discussion Paper 0842.
Grossman, S. J. and O. D. Hart, (1986) “The Costs and Benefits of Ownership:A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration, ” Journal of Political Economy 94(4), 691-719.
Hart, O. and J. Moore, (1990) “Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm, ” Journal of Political Economy 98(6), 1119-58.
Julan Du, (2011) “Do Domestic and Foreign Exporters Differ in Learning by Exporting?Evidence from China, ” Paper for CEDR-HSE 4th Joint Conference.
Levchenko, A., (2007) “Institutional Quality and International Trade, ” Review of Economic Studies 74(3), 791-819.
Ngo Van Long, Raymond Riezman, Antoine Soubeyran, (2007) “Trade, Wage Gaps, and Specific Human Capital Accumulation, ” Review of International Economics 15, 75-92.
R. Hausmann, Y. Huang, and D. Rodrik, (2005) “What You Export Matters, ” NBER Working Paper No. 11905.
Williamson, O. E. , (1985) The Economic Institutions of Capitalism, New York, The Free Press.
Yeaple, Stephen Ross, (2006) “Offshoring, Foreign Direct Investment, and the Structure of U. S. Trade, ” Journal of the European Economic Association 4(2-3): 602-11.